Craig Detweiler Reviews Paul Verhoeven’s “Jesus of Nazareth”

Last updated on: July 27, 2010 at 5:40 pm by David Charles

Craig Detweiler Reviews Paul Verhoeven’s “Jesus of Nazareth” 2010-07-27T17:40:14-06:00 David Charles

LOGO Patheos Explore the world's faith through different perspectives on religion and spirituality! Patheos has the views of the prevalent religions and spiritualities of the world.

**{Paul Verhoeven. Jesus of Nazareth. Seven Stories Press 2010. 304 pages. $23.95}**

Reviewed by Craig Detweiler

Imagine this movie trailer: from the director of ”Showgirls” and “Basic Instinct” comes his most revealing project yet—“RoboJesus.” One might expect such a seemingly absurd tagline from provocative Danish filmmaker, Paul Verhoeven. Instead, Verhoeven has written a smart, rigorous and accessible book about Jesus of Nazareth. While rooted in scientific skepticism, Verhoeven also adds a storyteller’s appreciation for Jesus’ subversive parables.

In 1986, Paul Verhoeven joined the Biblical scholars gathered for the Jesus Seminar with the idea of making a movie. He was surprised that during the process, “I had become more interested in Jesus himself than making a movie about him.” While Verhoeven occasionally indulges in the rhetoric equivalent of his Starship Troopers (like following a discussion of how Nazis viewed Hitler as a god, with a discussion of how we’ve inflated the legend around Jesus), his investigation of Jesus of Nazareth is utterly sincere. On MTV, Verhoeven even claimed his violent RoboCop is actually “about a guy that gets crucified after 50 minutes, then is resurrected in the next 50 minutes and then is like the super-cop of the world, but is also a Jesus figure as he walks over water at the end.” While marketers may pitch Jesus of Nazareth as controversial, it is a remarkably respectful and even admiring exploration of the historicity of Jesus. Instead of “RoboChrist,” we get “Jesus the Man,” separated from the supernatural.

This rigorous work draws upon the work of Bible scholars like Edward Schillebeeckx, Robert W. Funk, Jane Schabert and D. Adolf Julicher. It includes sixty pages of footnotes and a ten-page bibliography. Clearly, Verhoeven has done his homework. As a trained mathematician, he applies a scientific and cinematic test to the Gospel accounts, “If I think the scene could only be shot by manipulating the images or using special effects—I don’t believe it happened.” Like the Jesus Seminar, Verhoeven wants to separate Jesus from layers of spin added by early church fathers. Much of Verhoeven’s skepticism towards the Gospels comes from their dramatic throughline. As a filmmaker, he understands how to sequence a story for maximum emotional impact. He sees Matthew, Mark, Luke and John adopting cinematic plot devices and storytelling tricks.

Jesus of Nazareth begins with personal confessions. As a teenager in The Hague, Verhoeven was fascinated with black magic, UFO, and the Bible. He saw each as a form of occultism. At age 27, Verhoeven’s girlfriend (and later wife), Martine, got pregnant. He feared the unplanned pregnancy would jeopardize a budding film career. Amidst this emotional crisis, Verhoeven was invited to a Pentecostal church that featured ecstatic worship and speaking in tongues. While the worshippers were praying, Verhoeven felt the Holy Spirit descend upon him. He recalls, “It was an intense, physical sensation as if a laser beam was boring into my head. My heart also seemed to be on fire….Jesus was in that room. I could feel his presence.” Only in retrospect did Verhoeven decide his tears were triggered by manipulative music. Martine eventually aborted the baby. Verhoeven concludes, “I would like to believe in a divine Jesus, but my rational mind won’t let me.”

Yet, Verhoeven also departs from the Jesus Seminar in significant ways. He affirms church leaders’ exclusion of the Gnostic Gospels of Mary Magdalene or Judas from the canon. He doesn’t think Jesus ever had a sexual relationship with Mary Magdalene. Rather than seeing Jesus as a Cynic, Verhoeven views him as genuinely anticipating the arrival of the kingdom of God. Jesus turned the wrathful message of John the Baptist into a hopeful anticipation of God’s inclusive kingdom. As a director, he admires Jesus’ attention to behavior in parables like the Good Samaritan. He considers Jesus a model storyteller, better even than the Gospel writers’ suggest. Verhoeven’s experience with credit grabbing producers in Hollywood adds another layer of insight to Jesus’ parable of the dishonest manager in Luke 16:1-15.

So what draws Verhoeven to study the scriptures in such detail? He demonstrates a profound commitment to getting the narrative right. As a filmmaker, Verhoeven wants to understand the motivation behind Jesus’ moves—when and why did he travel to a new town? He tries to reconstruct timelines, suggesting that Jesus’ triumphal, palm-laden entry to Jerusalem makes more sense at Sukkot, the Jewish festival of palm-covered tabernacles rather than Passover. For his movie, Verhoeven would crosscut Jesus’ entry to coincide with Pilate’s; a dramatic contrast and political commentary.

In Jesus of Nazareth, Verhoeven uncovers a seditious rebel whose edges were softened by subsequent church leaders. He reads the rather favorable Gospel portrait of Pontius Pilate as an effort to soften Roman religious persecution of Christians. Verhoeven sees “Render unto Caesar” as a rejection of Roman authority rather than a call to pay your taxes. Verhoeven even compares Jesus’ retreats to the wilderness to Che Guevara’s flights to the jungle.

For all his skepticism, Verhoeven still believes that, “Jesus actually did cure people of blindness, deafness, certain symptoms of paralysis, and even psoriasis.” But as a rebel leader on the run, Jesus followed such healings with directions to keep it a secret. On screen, he would portray Jesus as frothing at the mouth in his violent wrestling with demons. Verhoeven also notes how Jesus follows powerful exorcisms by retreating to prayer. He concludes that Jesus must have been surprised and drained by his dramatic breakthroughs. Verhoeven does not see healings as brought about by “the finger of God,” but rather “the charismatic power of Jesus’ belief in the imminence of God’s kingdom.”

He suggests the Gospel writers’ masked politically dangerous truths by over-painting them with miracles. The feeding of the 5000 was just a memorable food giveaway by the fishing Apostles. The Garden of Gethsemane was not a moment of Christ-like resolve, but a moment of defeat rooted in divine silence. Jesus asks God for protection and gets arrested instead. Verhoeven sees Jesus’ naïve faith in the kingdom as a tragic flaw.

Verhoeven reconstructs Passion Week according to his own logic. He finds the accounts of Jesus’ arrest unreliable, concluding that the disciples were not there—they were not eyewitnesses. Verhoeven suggests that Jesus was crucified beside his fellow captured rebels. And the resurrection? In two scant pages, he concludes that the post-resurrection voice of Jesus, “Peace be with you,” bears almost no resemblance to the fiery rebel leader who died on a cross. Verhoeven’s Jesus of Nazareth concludes with a whimper rather than a bang.

Paul Verhoeven comes across as an active seeker, hungry for harmony amongst the Gospels. His devotion to studying the Bible challenges and humbles dedicated Christians. Verhoeven marvels that Jesus’ mistaken understanding of the imminent kingdom of God could inspire “the most significant ethical revival of the past two thousand years.” I encourage Verhoeven to try and solve that riddle. That’s a film I’d like to see.

Interview with Paul Verhoeven about “Jesus of Nazareth”

Filmmaker Craig Detweiler directs the Center for Entertainment, Media and Culture at Pepperdine University. His latest book is Halos and Avatars: Playing Video Games with God.

Previous Post

July 27, 2010

Elizabeth Scalia Reviews James Martin's "Jesuit Guide to (Almost) Everything"

Next Post

August 3, 2010 Star Foster Reviews Galina Krasskova, "Exploring the Northern Tradition"

Browse Our Archives

Select a Category Author Q&A Book Review Christian Living Church Leadership Stump a Scholar Theology Uncategorized

Select a Month June 2022 March 2021 October 2020 August 2020 February 2019 November 2017 July 2017 June 2017 May 2017 March 2017 February 2017 January 2017 November 2016 October 2016 August 2016 July 2016 June 2016 May 2016 April 2016 March 2016 February 2016 January 2016 November 2015 October 2015 September 2015 August 2015 July 2015 June 2015 May 2015 April 2015 March 2015 February 2015 January 2015 December 2014 November 2014 October 2014 September 2014 August 2014 July 2014 June 2014 May 2014 April 2014 March 2014 February 2014 January 2014 December 2013 November 2013 October 2013 September 2013 August 2013 July 2013 June 2013 May 2013 April 2013 March 2013 February 2013 January 2013 December 2012 November 2012 October 2012 September 2012 August 2012 July 2012 June 2012 May 2012 April 2012 March 2012 February 2012 January 2012 December 2011 November 2011 October 2011 September 2011 August 2011 July 2011 June 2011 May 2011 April 2011 March 2011 February 2011 January 2011 December 2010 November 2010 October 2010 September 2010 August 2010 July 2010 June 2010

TAKE THE

Religious Wisdom Quiz

What sign does Paul give in 2 Thessalonians as his authentic mark in every letter?

Select your answer to see how you score.

A special blessing His seal His signature His greeting in his own handwriting