What's the attitude toward "Passion" around here?

[shekina]

Alright, I know this movie has been around for some time, but I'm new here and I'd like to know what everybody thinks about it.

Myself, I think it's a great, best-picture worthy movie. As a Christian, it holds very special meaning to me. Too often people wanna skip Good Friday and go straight into Easter. For me, this movie shows exactly what Christ went through for my salvation(this is just what I believe, I ain't trying to convert anybody here). I didn't find the film to be anti-semitic. And so what if the Jews did kill Jesus? I mean, muslims killed 3000 Americans on 9/11 and do I hate them? No. Germans killedover 6 million Jews and do I hate them? No. That's absolutely silly. So overall, I think the movie is great, I think Mel Gibson is a great storyteller and has major cojones for making a film that could have ruined his career, and I'm glad people are at least talking about God again.

That's just my opinion, feel free to have your own:-)

[Skittles]

1. crap

nt

[shekina]

3. ok.....

that explains alot......

[Skittles]

7. Jesus would not have approved

of such an ugly, divisive movie. How's that?

[shekina]

13. ugly and divisive?

The whole crucifixion was "ugly". Look I'm sorry if there isn't enough "happy" moments in the movie, but there wasn't supposed to be.



p.s. Be real careful when you speak for Jesus.

[Skittles]

18. LOL

holy rollers every day speak for Jesus

[shekina]

24. What makes you see it that way

I'd like to know where you're coming from when you talk about this movie. Have you seen it? Honestly, I really do wanna hear what you have to say, lemme hear where you're coming from.

[YellowRubberDuckie]

134. What, so that makes it ok for you to speak for Him?

They're wrong. So do two wrongs make a right? NOPE
Duckie

[Skittles]

138. OK

actually I don't know what Jesus would think about a two-hour torture fest made by a homophobic, anti-Semitic creep.

[Lars39]

146. Also misogynist.

[Skittles]

153. thank you Lars

I will spare myself this cretin's version of "history". :puke:

[underpants]

2. Well..since you asked this should give you some idea

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=105&topic_id=818212

[shekina]

8. lol

some of those are actually pretty funny. Even though I love the movie, it is screaming to be parodied.

What, Christians can have a sense of humor too.

[truthspeaker]

4. I haven't seen it so I can't say much about it

I was going to see it, but then I heard it was mostly just the crucifixion in gory detail, and decided I wouldn't get much out of it. I already know that story.

[matcom]

5. uugggghhhh

another Passion thread. sorry, know your new but i'm not sure i can take another Passion flame fest.

welcome to DU anyway

[terrya]

6. Complete indifference.

I have no intention of ever seeing this movie...be it the theater, DVD or on cable.

Terry

[MissMillie]

76. Pretty much sums it up for me

I mean, this same story has been told in the movies several times. That it is now done more violently and in Aramaic (sp?) does not make me want to see it again.

[GOPisEvil]

9. It's one man's version of things.

A man with whom I do not share religious beliefs. In short, it has no effect on my life because I don't plan to see it.

I don't mind the movie so much, I have no problem with its production. But I do mind when it is held up as historically accurate, when in reality we don't know what happened. It's just one man's interpretation.

[shekina]

16. Not so much historical accuracy

Gibson was trying to be biblically accurate. Gibson didn't want another Last Temptation of Christ(I have no problem with that movie by the way.

[Sandpiper]

22. Not so much biblical accuracy either

Gibson's film was full of extra biblical events that are either found only in Catholic dogma, or were just plain made up.

[shekina]

28. didn't bother me

Mostly because the embellished parts of the story(satan in the garden, veronica's cloth, etc.) don't necessarily contradict scripture. Know what I mean?

[Sandpiper]

35. I'm not particularly religious

So, it doesn't really matter to me one way or the other. But a large source of Gibson's material were the visions of Mary of Agreda and Anne Catherine Emmerich rather than the bible.

In terms of accuracy though (biblical or historical) my biggest gripe was, why was Jesus a white guy? Why can't Jesus ever be shown as the brown skinned man that he actually was?

[Solomon]

168. Say. What the hell is

"biblical accuracy"?

[Sandpiper]

177. Following the text

n/t

[Aristus]

10. Personally, I don't need a blood-drenched, sadistic orgy of torture in

order to understand what Jesus went through for me. (Yes, I'm a Christian, too.) I got the lesson I needed when I was seven years old. My Sunday school teacher told us about the crucifixion, the humiliation, the scourging, the spikes in wrists and ankles. I went home and talked to my mother about it. "But it didn't hurt Him, right? He was the Son of God, so it wouldn't hurt him, right?" I asked my mom. "No." she said. "He was a human being, too. It hurt him just like it would hurt you or me." Well, that did it for me. I've been in awe of such willingness to be sacrificed ever since. I don't need the "Passion". Especially not with so many fundies going into ecstasies of rapture over it. Where were they when the beautiful, moving "Last Temptation of Christ" was on the screens? Why is sex so bad, but violence is good, hmm?

[shekina]

21. Well, try to understand

In Last Temptation, when they see Jesus having sex with Mary Magdalen, that is offensive to alot of them. To them it undermines both characters. Me, I have no problem with the film. I firmly believe that Martin Scorsesee had every right to make it. I haven't seen it yet, but I most definitely plan too.

And another thing, when did anybody start caring about violence in movies? Movies like Kill Bill and Texas Chainsaw Massacre can draw rave reviews, but as soon as a movie about the suffering of Jesus comes out, it's "Oh no! We can't have that. That's much too violent!"

[Aristus]

29. Well, I think the brouhaha is about the idea that this is some kind of

evangelical tool, and skads of people are going to see it, and bringing their children along. If it is to be used as a tool for Christian outreach, shouldn't the focus be on the teachings of Christ? His love, his forgiveness, his humanity? To focus on the torture, with oceans of blood, giggling legionaries, and greasy, hook-nosed Jewish charicatures smacks of heresy. As for the sex in "Last Temptation", the fundies focus on the act itself, rather than put it into context; Jesus wasn't being tempted by the idea of having sex. He was tempted by the idea of having what most other men have: the life of a husband, a father, and a respected member of the community. Who wouldn't rather have that than a hideous, agonizing death on a cross?

[shekina]

37. the thing is

Skads of people ARE going to see it. As for the teachings of Christ...come on now. Look, I believe firmly in them, but just about every single major religion on the planet teaches about love and forgiveness. What sets Christianity apart is the fact that our Savior died for us. Buddha didn't die for his followers, Mohammed didn't die for his followers....see my point. And if you were really all that interested in the teachings of Jesus, you'd go to Barnes and Noble and pick up a Bible for $6.


As for Last Temptation, I see what you're saying, but I can't pass judgment till I see the film

[Aristus]

48. If you meant ME personally, my family owns no fewer than five Bibles,

but that's not the point; I don't need an explanation of the teachings of Jesus; what I was saying was, if you're going to make a movie about Jesus in the hopes that it would be an instrument for evangelical outreach, wouldn't it make more sense to focus on say, the Sermon on the Mount? The rescue of the adulteress? The trouncing of the money-changers? The feeding of the five thousand? Focussing on a ghoulish execution makes "The Passion" no more than "Gladiator" with a halo.

[shekina]

52. i didn't mean you personally

And I haven't heard Mel say this was an instrument for outreach. This movie will primarily energize and deepen the faith of people who are already Christians more than it will cause people to turn to Christianity. If you want the teaching of Christ, I think a movie called The Gospel of John just came out one dvd, you can watch that.

[Aristus]

58. No, Mel didn't say that he intended to make it a gospel outreach film,

but a lot of the fundies I know expect that it is. (I'm a Methodist, but I attend my wife's church, which is an evangelical fundy church.) So my beef is with the fundies, not Mel. (At least not over this. Opus Dei and their ilk have a lot to answer for, but that's for another time...) Why would fundamentalists be so gleeful over two hours of mind-numbing bloodletting? Why aren't THEY saying, 'what Jesus lived for was just as important as what he died for'.? I imagine that Muslims would be upset at a film that focussed solely on Mohammed's marriage to a rich widow so he wouldn't have to work for a living. I imagine Buddhists might be a little upset if a film played up the fact that Siddhartha Gautama had the leisure to seek enlightenment because he was a pampered and perfumed Indian prince. See what I'm getting at here? The Romans killed the Messenger; should we ignore the Message?

[Hell Hath No Fury]

114. Actually he did...

state that his film had the potential to by the biggest film for gettiong the message out about Jesus ever.

He does have hopes of conversions.

[Aristus]

132. Oh. Okay. I stand corrected. Thanks, HHNF.

So if it IS the case that this is supposed to win converts, why dwell on the blood-drenched torture? Why not concentrate on the things one would normally expect a convert would want to grasp? Salvation, grace, love, acceptance, and forgiveness. You can go anywhere for blood, guts, laceration and mutilation.

[Hell Hath No Fury]

133. This is one of the primary reasons...

I decided not to go see the film. In seeing and reading the many interviews with Mel about the filming and his intentions with the film, I decided I really didn't need to view it.

I already have 12 years of Catholic school under my belt, I'm done. :)

[YellowRubberDuckie]

135. The purpose of the scene with Jesus and Mary Magdelene

Was the Devil tempting Christ, showing him the life he could have, if he'd just refuse to do what he was doing. I don't see it as a big deal...It was necessary to tempt the man...THe idea of living and having a happy life with a family? Who doesn't want a happy life?
Duckie

[gWbush is Mabus]

11. 4 things

1. all the talk of mel gibson should have done this or that is BS. the man made his own movie the way he wanted to. he is an artist.

2. i think we (as a country) would be less likely to go on these murderous crusades if LESS people were talking about god.

3. i find it ironic that Passion, with all its pornographic gore has become the new family movie while a partially covered 0.5 second partial exposure of part of the natural female anatomy is regarded as obscene.

4. i wish someone would make a movie about the teachings of jesus:
compassion, abhorrence of the love of money, helping the sick poor, etc.

[truthseeker1]

17. Good points. Nice and succint. eom

[supernova]

26. Sums it up perfectly

Mel made the movie he wanted. But I wouldn't call it "biblically accurate." It's only accurate to Mel's POV.

I don't plan to see it because I don't need a fictionalized gorefest to drive home the point that people die horrific deaths. I see it every day:

- death by electric chair
- death by AIDs and cancer
- death by war and famine.
- death by political dissappearance and torture.

In some ways, sadly, things haven't changed so much in 2000 years.

I'd personally like to see a movie that drives home the point that Jesus doesn't suffer forus so much as with us.

[Az]

12. It worries me

I am not at the point where I will run around outside its showing carrying a banner. But I am worried.

Our society is already under intense pressure due to culture clashes escalating. This movie has the potential to dump more fuel on the fire by seperating the camps even further. Its not antisemetic. Its anti"anybody that does not accept the suffering of Jesus".

It very deliberately focuses on the horrible treatment preported to have been visited on Jesus. It even draws on controvercial visions supposedly had much after the events it covers to increase the violence. No one can sit there who believes and not be insensed at those that do not accept this seeming sacrifice. It is called the Passion, and it inflames passions exactly as its name suggests. Simply look to history to see the effects of this passion in the past and then add the extra helping of violence this version brings.

[Mountainman]

14. My thoughts are, take Jesus out and replace with an ordinary man.

If the movie was about the torture death of some ordinary man I doubt anyone would want to see it because of the content. So I myself would not want to see it because of its content since I am not into the Jesus thing.

I did not see it and would never want to.

[Screaming Lord Byron]

15. Gibson took great liberties with his previous historical movies.

So I would have liked to have seen this particular film in the hands of a more capable director.

[Red State Rebel]

19. I have found, for the most part, Christians are derided here...

Most, but not all, DU'ers link Christianity with Right Wing and thats that. The Passion has been ripped apart and usually anyone who stands for the movie or the beliefs in the movie are ripped apart with it.

As a Christian, I think it's a shame. We are supposed to be the tolerant, understanding and caring party. I don't think that a lot of the people on this board realize how many Democrats are also Christians.

The board doesn't tolerate discrimination of any other groups that I can think of besides Republicans and fat people.

[Screaming Lord Byron]

23. Most, but not all, DU'ers link Christianity with Right Wing and thats that

Be very careful attributing the opinions of a vocal few to such a large number of people. I have no such preconceptions of faith.

[Az]

27. Please keep in mind

That there are some very active and very vocal groups actively trying to take away the rights of those that do not agree with Christianity. The religious right is by far more visible than progressive Christians. During the civil rights era white people trying to help the black people were often met by anger by those they were trying to help. It is not always so easy to seperate the good from the bad. Particularly when the good tend not to make themself as known to the world or visibly resisting the negative voices claiming to speak for them.

[shekina]

31. true

The left needs religious figures on our side. Seriously, the last prominent member of the Christian left I think was Martin Luther King. The right has totally got us beat on religion and that's sad, cause I believe if Jesus was born in this time he would have been considered a liberal

[Screaming Lord Byron]

34. I would call Bill Clinton a fairly prominent Christian.

Certainly Al Gore, not to mention the Rev. Al Sharpton, and Congressman Kucinich.

[shekina]

38. Please..

Bill Clinton totally blew whatever religious reputation he had when the whole Lewinsky scandal came along. Look, I like Clinton, but I don't consider him a religious person. I might have if he would have just apologized for his mistake of adultery, but he didn't.

[felonious thunk]

41. Perhaps he apologized to his God

And didn't feel the need to apologize to you, personally.

[shekina]

43. not saying he had to

but, like it or not, it did take away whatever religious reputation he may have had.

[felonious thunk]

46. Oh, ok. So you've never sinned, is that so?

So did Bush's alcoholism destroy his religious reputation?

Look I'm not going to claim that Clinton was Joe Religious, but come on, a sin does not get you booted out of being religious. Aren't we all sinners? Who do we make our peace with? You or God?

[Hell Hath No Fury]

119. What about Bush's...

"...like it or not, it did take away whatever religious reputation he may have had."

What do you think lying to the American people and bombing innocent Iraqis has done to Bush's religious reputation? Just curious...

[StopTheMorans]

42. so "religious people" by your definition can't commit sins eh?

so if Clinton apologized, would he be admitted back into the "religious people" club? Would he have "religious people" street cred then? :eyes: remove the plank from your own eye, judge not lest ye be judged, you know the quotes...

[shekina]

47. let me rephrase that

Once you commit a sin so despised in the Christian community as adultery and everybody finds out about it, your reputation will go down the tubes. However, that reputation can be built back up. Look at King David, the Bible says he was a man after God's own heart, and he was a murderer and an adulterer. Yes, God forgave him, but he never did have the same reputation after that.

[felonious thunk]

49. So there is a scale of sins?

Hmm. So it's a sliding scale? Like a 1 to 10? So I'd be a worse person if I cheated on my spouse than say, if I worked on Sunday?

[Az]

50. Some would say yes

So many Hail Mary's for this sin. This level of hell for that sin. Yep, many beliefs categorize sin.

PS Do not work on Sunday. There may be roving bands of ultrafundimentalists that hold to the command to kill those that work on the sabbath.

PSS Or was that Saturday. Dang, we screwed up the calendar and now we don't know who to kill.

[shekina]

54. for people yes

I believe that all sins are equal in God's eyes. But we as man do have our own scale of sins. Like, murder is worse than lying, adultery is worse than cussing, things of that nature.

[StopTheMorans]

55. how high up on the scale is "judging one's neighbor"?

n/t

[StopTheMorans]

53. "your reputation will go down the tubes"

so these "Christians" that you reference aren't really practicing their faith then, are they? Christ hung out with whores and the like. He practiced acceptance, not exclusion. And per the quotes I already listed "JUDGE NOT LEST YE BE JUDGED", etc..., who are any mortals to judge? Isn't that supposed to be left up to God? This whole thing reeks of hypocrisy.

[shekina]

57. i guess so

Like I said, I like Bill Clinton. I believe the Christian community should forgive him if he asks for it. But he would have to prove with his actions that he really was sorry for what he did.

[StopTheMorans]

59. why does he have to ask for forgiveness from his "fellow Christians'

isn't the whole thing to ask God for forgiveness? Isn't that the only thing that matters? If you don't practice what you preach, and instead, practice the opposite (i.e. your religion says only God can judge), then people are going to call you on your hypocrisy (and now I hope you can begin to understand why "the left hates religion"). The left doesn't hate religion; it hates hypocrisy

[RobinA]

105. This is What I Figure

Or would figure if I believed in the whole sin thing. God created all these sins, he can deal with the forgiveness end of it too. Not in my job decription. I'm from the "live and let live" end of things.

[Red State Rebel]

171. You are correct, confession and forgiveness are between

each individual and God. No person has the right to judge any other, period. I may not like what some people do, but I am not called to judge them.

[dawn]

174. Screw the "Christian Community".

People seek forgiveness from God or Jesus, not from other Christians.

This is what I don't like about the Religious Right. People should mind their own damn business.

[sendero]

170. You've hit on..

... ah never mind.

[Trajan]

69. SO you are saying: ..

If a man sins a sin 'so despised', then there IS no forgiveness for him ??? ...

I thought this was what christ was all about ?????

[smirkymonkey]

118. However, GWB is a liar, addict,

adulterer, murderer, evil-doer and I never hear any Christians getting all upset over that.

Funny how it's ok for just SOME people to sin...

[shekina]

123. duly noted

don't know about the whole adulterer part though. Must be something I haven't heard yet.

[supernova]

45. Heh. And there it is

Bill Clinton totally blew whatever religious reputation he had when the whole Lewinsky scandal came along

And there it is. The whole xtian fascination with sex as something incompatible with a religious life. Look Clinton is not perfect in the exact same way the rest of us humans are not perfect. What makes a sexual sin somehow more evil or punishment worthy than declaring war with no reason?

I am certainly not going to say that he is somehow less pious in my mind. In fact, due to his imperfectness, Bill is more spiritual to me. I'll take imperfect Bill over sactimonius * anyday.

[Az]

40. This is probably indicitive

of why there are not more vocal liberal Christians visible. Those that are liberal do not use the dogma of their belief to enforce their positions. They work with others. They can shelve their dogma to sort out a complex world.

The right leads with their dogma. It is much more apparent. The left rejects such arrogance and thus their voice recedes into the chorus.

[tishaLA]

136. Rev. (!) Jessee Jackson, Paul Simon,

Cornel West, and on and on and on. These are/were prominent members of the Christian left. Freepers just profess to religion more often and exhibit it less.

[mmm]

20. Face it: this is a well done flick. Good sound track as well.

It is not homophobic and it is not anti-Semitic.
It is violent. Lots of movies are violent.

Personally, I think Christ was just a man, so I don't care
about the religious veracity.

[shekina]

25. oh ya, very good soundtrack

Although i was surprised to find out that the music from the trailers to the movie were not on the cd.

[ThatPoetGuy]

51. It IS anti-semitic

Yes, in addition to being a vile and brutal film, the decision to portray Pilate as a helpless bureaucrat giving in to the power of the evil, gibbering, ugly, hateful Jews, is nothing but antisemitism. It is one of the goals of the movie, I reflected in the theatre, to make people think that Jews control the world and cause all kinds of suffering and evil.

Keep in mind that a Jewish group asked Gibson to include a message in the closing credits, urging people not to do violence against Jews. Gibson refused.

Some people are saying that there hasn't been much violence against Jews as a result of the movie; all this means is that Gibson didn't succeed at what he set out to do.

[shekina]

124. by adding that message

that would be implying that there's something wrong with the movie, which there isn't.

[ikojo]

160. mmm, I don't know if you are Jewish but I am

I also saw the Passion. I find this movie to be extremely antisemiitc. The demonic characters appear only among the Jews
1. When the children are taunting Judas they turn into little demons.
2. When the Roman soldier is mercelessly beating Jesus there is a person holding a baby and it is also revealed as a demon when its cloak is removed from his shoulder.
3. A demon is seen walking amongst the Jewish crowd when Pontius Pilate (who is treated very well in this movie, even experiencing remorse at killing yet another Jew) offers them a choice of freeing Barrabas (a murderous criminal as is emphasized in the movie) or the peace loving Jesus.

A Gentile cannot really understand why Jews consider Passion plays to be inherently antisemitic. I guess if Gentiles were called Christ killers perhaps then there would be a bit of an understanding. Just as a whlte American can't truly understand racism so too can a Gentile truly not understand antisemitism and its effects on a Jew.

[felonious thunk]

30. I respect his right to make it

And kudos to him for doing so. Art should be made, and I'm glad I live somewhere that it can be.

Now, I'd like to see a movie about the billions of other people in history that have suffered violence far worse, have suffered fates far more horrible. I'd like to see an accurate portrayal of any other pauper in any other time, in any other part of the world.

[GoBlue]

Just to be fair

I think Mel should follow-up with a sequel eg. The Passion of the Inquisition.. It's a well-documented story from many sources that depicts the evil side of Christianity.

[Bridget Burke]

32. Can't speak from experience,

but Mel's just not getting my entertainment dollar. I've read the book--he's no Peter Jackson. The Houston Chronicle's reviewer gave the flick an "F"--Gigli earned a "C-".

By the way, are you a Kabbalist? Or just a fan of Shock & Awe?

[shekina]

39. uh......

1. Do you believe every review you read?

2. No, I'm Christian. The only thing I know about Kabbalism is that it's some form of Jewish mysticism and that Madonna does it.

[The Backlash Cometh]

65. post deleted and moved to proper place in thread.

*

[Bridget Burke]

121. No, but when most of the reviews say the movie sucks....

I do pay attention. Personally, I don't get off to graphic violence--but, whatever rings your chimes.

"Shekina" is one spelling of an important Kabbalistic principal. There were those who said calling the heavy bombing of Iraq "Shock & Awe" was a tasteless religious reference.

But, taste is relative.

[shekina]

126. didn't know that

Shekina also means "the presence of God is here". That's where I get it from. Not saying I'm God or anything:) I just like the word.


And I don't "get off" to graphic violence. Like I've said before, I am a christian and it holds special meaning for me.

[ikojo]

162. I saw the Passion but Mel Gibson did not see not

one of my Jewish dollars. My manager, a former NUN, went with me and suggested that I buy a ticket for another movie and go see the Passion instead of the movie for which I bought the ticket. The theater got its money and I notched up one more ticket sold for Starsky and Hutch.

[Commie Pinko Dirtbag]

33. Short answer: every possible one.

We're a diverse bunch, that's for sure.

[ronnykmarshall]

36. Passions?

Ptewy!! Days Of Our Lives rules!!!

[undergroundpanther]

72. Torture

I don't like torture movies,I don't enjoy seeing people suffer it isn't spiritual,it's traumatizing.Trauma recreates the fact in reality people torture people and allows people stand by while it happens to others.I HATE this habitual make believe society indulges in concerning denial and fetishism over the atrocity of torture in this world.

Jesus "god" allegedly condemns or has 'chosen' from the beginning of time or "lets people choose hell or him" (depending on Christian denominational opinions of a contrary bible) to an eternity of torture. To me a god who does this to people he claims to have created and loves is very evil,corrupt,immoral,abusive sick and WRONG..Wife beaters and child abusers will say they love their wives so much,and talk about forgiveness after they have beaten them to a pulp too.The bible is abusive.Mel Gibson just spells one part of it out for you.


To me, so called "good"people,Christians who will excuse the horrid unresolvable conflict their god sets up,in the bible,caused by the hell concept of this good 'god'sending people who live at most 105 years to an _eternal_ brutal torture is not healthy for a person to believe or a society to rationalize.Christians who are in denial or pretending this kind of spiritual real hellish brutality from a god with absolute power can anything but insane are sick..

Those who think eternal torture for any person in hell can be just, moral,good,sane or righteous have just lost any sense of proportion of right and wrong,they have no morality and should not be trusted to have any sanity when it comes to spouting off their self righteous torture excusing,bullying, opinions about other people's 'unbiblical'ethics,art government,or morals. Apparently their god and his tortured son excuse the torture of humans forever...This is sick.


Any sane spirituality in the bible has been twisted or has been edited out selectively by the early church/state theocracy.It was spouted by the same bunch of rich theocratic and genocidal conquerers that led humanity to the dark ages..Wo are psychologically like the self styled authoritarians you can see psychologically bullying people today by not taking no for an answer,foisting their mentally ill god at a bus stop ,in the courts of the united states or on TV.


Christianity as practiced by fundies,neocons and Mel Gibson and his opus dei cult friends is a form of mental illness IMO.
Gibson's movie is grotesque torture fest .I will not see it because I do not wish to subject myself to psychological abuse.I don't associate with fundies,bullies or authoritarians because I do not accept or feel I have to tolerate psychological abusiveness from people in my presence.I have gotten enough of that crap from Christians foisting their torture loving god intrusively into my daily life to ever want to see the bloody scenes they glorify as the 'love' of god.

[shekina]

80. Ur making a common error

Yes, God is love, but he is also justice. The Christian doctrine states that God hates sin and cannot allow it into Heaven. We hear alot of "God is love", which is fine, but He is also justice. And this is just what I believe, I'm not goin to try and convert you. God sent his Son to pay the ultimate penalty for man's sin. That penalty included gruesome torture, unspeakable pain, and eventually death. Yes, it's a horrible price to pay, but it was the only one that could be paid.

But hey, that's just what I believe, feel free to disagree. You ain't gonna make any difference in my relationship with the Almighty.

[Trajan]

125. And I quote:

Peter I 4:16
Yet if any man suffer as a Christian, let him not be ashamed; but let him glorify God on this behalf.

4:17
For the time is come that judgment must begin at the house of God: and if it first begin at us, what shall the end be of them that obey not the gospel of God?

4:18
And if the righteous scarcely be saved, where shall the ungodly and the sinner appear?

4:19
Wherefore let them that suffer according to the will of God commit the keeping of their souls to him in well doing, as unto a faithful Creator.


Indeed: ... the infliction of eternal suffering appears to be the goal of the god ...

[Bertha Venation]

44. I can respect this

"Too often people wanna skip Good Friday and go straight into Easter. For me, this movie shows exactly what Christ went through for my salvation(this is just what I believe, I ain't trying to convert anybody here)."

I used to be an evangelical Christian and I can totally understand and respect this point of view. My brother-in-law is also an evangelical Christian and we had this discussion a couple of weeks ago. In that theology, Christ's sacrifice is paramount, and the film is a way for ECs to understand what he suffered on their behalf.

I disagree w/ the theology to the extent that, although I'm a follower of Christ, I don't believe the bible's version of most everything it talks about. But I don't begrudge anyone else his right to believe in it. I don't believe in Christ's divinity or resurrection, but I do believe he was crucified because his beliefs & ministry were offensive to those in power.

As to the movie: I have no desire whatever to see it. I don't need to.

[The Backlash Cometh]

56. The way you describe it, it's a movie made by a Christian for Christians.

In other words, it's okay as long as it stays within your inner religious circle. But as long as you're asking how it plays in the outer world, the answer is, not well.

[shekina]

60. Not well huh?

is that why it's already made $275 million dollars at the box office? Wow, looks pretty well to me.

[Screaming Lord Byron]

64. From a marketing point of view, there is a large ready-made market.

Other movies don't have that kind of advantage.

[INTELBYTES]

66. Even better than that now!

Over $299 million as of today. It has topped Matrix for the top "R" rated movie of all times. In fact, they are predicting it to top Titanic for all time box office hit. Pretty good for "not well".

[The Backlash Cometh]

68. Shekina, look at your original question, again.

You asked what the attitude was toward the Passion. Now look at your response to my post. Think for a moment and ask yourself, what people are paying to see this movie? Could it possibly be, er, Christians? Could the fact that the churches have been plugging it to their constitutents possibly explain why Christians are flooding the theaters?

Now, look at my response again. Would you like to amend your response?

[shekina]

71. umm....

No, I don't

[The Backlash Cometh]

84. Okay, let me break it down for you.

There are Christians, and then there are non-Christians. Believe it or not, the latter outnumbers the former, i.e. more non-Christians live on this planet than Christians.

Now, your original post explains why Christians would enjoy this movie. Christians could differentiate between Good Friday and the Resurrection, so, for them, this movie has value. And those Christians are who are driving the theater sales. Among Christians, this movie is received well.

But that's not what you asked. You asked what the attitude was toward the Passion. Now we have to start talking about non-Christians. In a nutshell, they don't seem to like it.

I'm sorry that you're having trouble understanding why you're question is too broad to get the response you're looking for.

[shekina]

88. maybe

But why did everybody love Last Temptation then? It just seems unfair. Scorsesee can take HUGE liberties with Scripture and everybody loves it, yet Gibson takes very few liberties and tries to make his movie biblically accurate, and all of a sudden he's an evil, homphobic, ultra-conservative, antisemitic, religious nutbag.

[The Backlash Cometh]

93. I never saw Last Temptation of Christ but I can take a guess why they

liked it, assuming it's true that people did.

My old time favorite is Jesus Christ Superstar, myself. Ho-sana, hey sana, sana sana ho, sana hey sana ho ...Super Star ta-ta-ta-ta-tum.

[Hell Hath No Fury]

104. Actually, Mel was thought to be...

all of those things BEFORE the film came out. Those are all long-standing impressions of Mel, going back years.

The film was just a reminder for many of us.

[shekina]

110. right....

ok..keep thinking that:eyes:

[Screaming Lord Byron]

116. Actually, to be fair. That is true. Mel's views are pretty well known.

Like I said upthread, I would have much prefered a more able director.

[Hell Hath No Fury]

131. Okay...

ask any of the gays here -- the allegations of Mel being homophobic go back years, to a Spanish language newspaper interview (if I remember correctly), in which he said some not very flattering things about homosexuality.

As for the anti-semitism charge, that has also been around because his daddy has a large mouth and many fear the apple falls not far from the tree. Mel seemed to address that on "60 Minutes" when he said he "loves Jews and prays for them". Um hm.

As for being a bit of a nutty religious person, as someone who was raised Catholic, I have long heard about Mel's utter devotion to the old-school, pre-Vatican II Catholicism. (You know, the old theology that that doesn't absolve Jews for the death of Jesus?) And many of us who were raised Catholic do feel that branch a bit "nutty".

As I said in my original post, none of these allegations about Mel are new, just rehashed in light of the film's release.

On edit, I wanted to add, I hope you are a baptised Catholic in good standing, 'cause Mel says you're going to hell otherwise! ;) (And don't think I am kidding!)

[Trajan]

77. Chuckles ...

God 'made' 275 Million $$$ ??? ..

Wow ... almost as much as Oprah ....

[StopTheMorans]

79. wait, I thought "you can't take it with you" when you're going to the

afterlife! :evilgrin:

[shekina]

82. Laugh it up

I'm sure you were one of the people criticizing Mel before this movie came out. People tried every possible way to destroy him and this movie, but it didn't work now did it. Gibson is gonna make about $300 million from this film and he deserves every last dollar. I guess that's what happens when you don't back down from doing the right thing because of persecution, the end result is absolutely worth every vile, slanderous word thrown at you.

[Az]

85. The right thing

I don't know that any here are the rightful judges of whether what he did was the right thing. It certainly was a meaningful thing to some. And a very profitable thing for him. He also seems to believe very much in his message. But whether it was the right thing.... neither you nor I can truly know that.

[StopTheMorans]

87. Gibson never refuted what his father said

his father is an avowed Holocaust denier (it's true, he doesn't try to hide it). Gibson practices a right-wing version of Catholicism that doesn't agree with many papal dictates. Gibson should be the last person to speak for anyone who wants to distance today's "American Christianity" from "Right-Wing Christians". if doing the right thing is portaying the Romans as merely bystanders, while the Jews are portrayed as hook-nosed, vindictive, and evil, then you can have your God; I don't need him

[shekina]

91. Ur using a red herring argument

A red herring argument is when a person introduces an irrelevant, but tempting point in an argument. Sorry man, I'm not going after Gibson's father. The point I made in my last post was that Gibson came out alright after the intense vileness thrown his way. Why don't you talk about that other than trying to waste my time with stupid crap like that. Leave the smearing to Frank Rich



Try again....

[Hell Hath No Fury]

102. Ahhh...

"Why don't you talk about that other than trying to waste my time with stupid crap like that."

...another "Christian" heard from. :)

[shekina]

106. gimme a break

the guy is obviously trying to bait me with something irrelevant to the discussion at hand and I'm not gonna fall for it.

[tishaLA]

137. You don't like Frank Rich?

he's a very good--and quite a religious--liberal. He's also the one whose intestines Gibson wanted on a stick. But I guess that is passing for compassion these days.

[StopTheMorans]

139. not baiting you my friend

"I'm sure you were one of the ones critizing Mel Gibson before the movie came out". if that's not baiting, I don't know what is, and YOU posted that. and, for the record, I liked everything Mel Gibson did UP UNTIL this movie. once again, the hypocrisy amuses me.

[Trajan]

89. To laugh is human ...

to scorn divine ....

Mel, with his huge money bags attached to his derriere, will not leave his casket after he is planted ... Just like all the flimflam relic hawkers who used to line the streets of europes cathedrals, selling cow limbs as holy relics ....

YOU forgot to mention how I will burn in hell like a roman candle, screaming OVER and OVER again: .. gnashing my teeth and wailing and all that rot ...

Its all about the burning flesh hun ... a wonderful way to separate the sinner from the saint ...

Well: .. I always have the Bible to tell me that ....

[shekina]

96. not saying he will

and what's all this nonsense about me telling you you're gonna burn in hell? Seriously, are you trying to bait me or something? That stuff don't work on me, take out your hysteria on someone else

[Trajan]

107. Typical ...

The Priest wears the pure white robes and chants softly at the altar, as his parishoners surround the synagogue, and torch it, killing the hundreds of apostate jews who refuse to convert ...

And YOU ? .. you say "what is this nonsense about me telling you your gonna burn in hell? " .... while your fellow christians do that EVERY day to ANYONE who doesnt accept their beliefs ...

Try as you might: it is hard to run away from a BIBLE that threatens torture and eternal suffering of 'sinners' ...

Jesus himself condemns ALL of Capernaum to hell: why ? .. because THEY didnt listen to him ... Nice godman, eh ? ..

YOU dont have to say a THING about hell and its tortures: .. its all in the 'guide book' ... Jesus just isnt Jesus without a hell somewhere in the picture: the christian eschatology cannot stand without a hell .... If you are christian ? then you abide by these notions of punishment for unbelief ...

You dont read much, do you ?? ..

BTW ? .. this thread was intended to bait ... You just dont seem to know that ....

[shekina]

112. like I said

take your hysteria somewhere else. You don't really care about what I have to say and I'm not wasting my time with you.



p.s This thread was not intended to bait. All I did was ask what I thought was a harmless question.

[Trajan]

120. And I quote ...

Zechariah 14:12 And this shall be the plague wherewith the LORD will smite all the people that have fought against Jerusalem; Their flesh shall consume away while they stand upon their feet, and their eyes shall consume away in their holes, and their tongue shall consume away in their mouth.

[Hell Hath No Fury]

108. I'm curious....

what do you think Mel is going to do with that money? I mean the money left after reimbursing himself the $30-50 million I hear he put out for the production of the film?

What do you HOPE he will do with it?

$200 million...that could feed a lot of people...

[shekina]

115. Well...

I know that he's giving a whole lot, if not all, of the money he makes from the merchandise like the nail necklaces, which I have one of btw, and giving it to charity. And I hope he uses the money to make other good films like this. And yes, I do hope he makes one on the teaching of Jesus. Maybe even a trilogy: One movie based on his teachings, one movie based on his death(the Passion), and one more based on the founding of the Christian church after Jesus's ascencion(sp?)

That's my humble opinion

[INTELBYTES]

61. An awesome movie!!

I will see it again, and take my teenagers to see it. I applaud Mel Gibson and hope to see more movies of this nature from him.

[shekina]

62. about time I got a thoroughly positive reply

peace


p.s. Yes, I applaud Mel Gibson too. I think he's the man and he's my fave actor.

[INTELBYTES]

67. It's interesting that most people that are critics...

...have not even taken the time to see the movie. This doesn't apply to all of them of course, but it's nice to see some people can make judgements without facts.

[Trajan]

83. I would venture a guess ...

That you have NOT investigated Mayan fertility gods ....

I would also venture a guess that you do not accept them as gods either ...

I can base my beliefs about Christianity on 2000 years of strife, human sufferings, and wild-eyed fanatics holding used torches in one hand, and blood dripping swords in the other ... I dont need a filmed gospel full of emotional appeals to convince me that no man is a god ....

Smell that sweet smell ? ... THAT is what burning sinner smells like ....

God loves a sweet savor .. eh ? ..

[shekina]

97. what the hell?

are you talking about? Mayan fertility gods?

Look, I'm sorry you're anti-christian, but I'm not listening to your ramblings. I guess if you can base your ideas on Christianity from 2000 years of bloodshed, then I can base my ideas of islam on september 11. Right? If what you say is true, I can say that Islam is nothing but a violent, bloody, hate filled religion and should be wiped from the face of the earth.

[Trajan]

113. Er .. that post wasnt for you ..

Why dont you answer the various other posts that actually refer to your comments ? ..

Sheeesh: .. get a grip ...

and yes: ... Islam is a bloody, intolerant belief system: like christianity, but with less victims ...

[shekina]

117. i'm surprised

At least you're being consistent and not targeting just Christians.

[INTELBYTES]

140. Well if that post were meant for me then "What the hell?"

What does mayan gods have to do with crap?

How bout staying on the subject? We are reviewing a movie not a religion. Did you hear that jet just fly over your head?

[Trajan]

63. The Smashin of the Christ ...

One gets the impression that the level of physical torture endured by a human being creates a direct relationship to Deity ...

Does a man who endures 15 minute of teeth spitting, gut busting, derma-ripping suffering form a GREATER god then one who only endures 14 minutes ? ...

Jesus was one of MILLIONS who were tortured and killed by the Romans, ... I would venture that MANY humans have lost their lives in even WORSE suffering than he: .... yet: the focus of this movie is "How Much Pain can God/Jesus suffer?" ... Did he win the 'Race to Suffer' ? ... I doubt it ...

EVERYONE of those other victims did not 'rise up' 36 hours later to enjoy an infinity of pleasant 'living' in heaven with YHWH, the angels, and one little lambie ...

I think it is a disservice to a god to attempt to 'humanize' him ... It cheapens the notion of deity to give that deity human fault and frailty ... Humans are NOT gods ....

The Smashin of the Christ is apologia with sadomasochistic overtones ...

[shekina]

70. ah...

but Jesus was both God and man(i believe so anyway). And yes, Jesus was tortured and killed...but he was my savior, none of those other people were. Like I said, I'm a Christian, and the movie holds special meaning to me.

[Trajan]

73. Shrugs ...

He appears to be the "God/Man" of billions of poor suffering humans ...

The "God/Man" was to be MY god/man as well, until I wised up ...

So much for a lifetime of catholic school, weekend catechisem, millions of earnest but unanswered prayers, and a pious italian woman whom I call mom ....

I dont believe in Godmen anymore ... But I am QUITE aware of how humans are tortured through pious righteousness, among other causes ...

[Az]

74. Of course it does

I cannot imagine how it would not have special meaning to you. But that does not mean that it does not create problems.

There has been and continues to be those that kill because of what they believe. There are those that believe that I am evil because I do not share their belief in god. There are those that believe evil should be struck down.

The Passion can intensify whatever passions an individual already has. 1000s have died in the past because of this reaction. There is reason for concern. I do not suggest that such stories should be banned. But I am definately going to say "uhoh" in reaction to it.

[shekina]

86. I can see ur point

But like you said, the movie would already inflame the passions of the individual that already had them. A person who is not anti-semitic or whatever will not come out of this movie being any more anti-semitic than when they walked in.

Hey, remember when Schindler's List and Pearl Harbor came out? Did you hate Germans and Japanese after that? No, i assume you didn't. Nothing bad happened because of those films and nothing bad will happen because of this one.

And hey, I don't think you're evil. I'm sure you're actually a good person. But hey, only God can make judgments about you.



p.s. See! I edited it. Good God, political correctness...I freaking hate it

[Az]

98. Target

No, I don't hate Germans (I am part German). But then again the anger that Schindlers List generated was towards Nazis. Its ok to hate Nazis. The tension that The Passion generates is torward people that are part of our current society. Those that it pits people against are those who do not accept its story as true. We are still here. We are supposed to be acceptable members of society.

I of course understand that this was not the intent behind the movie. At least not consciously. But it is an effect. It would be reasuring to hear some believers realizing the devisiveness that is potentially here and advising against reactions from the more "expressive" amongst them.

[Hell Hath No Fury]

100. "Germans and Japs"?

try again please -- the term is "Japanese".

[ikojo]

163. To compare Schindler's List and Pearl Harbor to

a Passion play is to completely disavow the history of Passion Plays over the last couple of millenia. Few Christians know what has been done in the name of Jesus so it does not surprise me.
Passion Plays were often put on during Holy Week (the week between Palm Sunday and Easter). Upon viewing a Passion Play the crowds were often encouraged by the church leaders to take their vengeance out on the "evil Christ killers" in their midst. Very often extremely violent pogroms would follow a Passion play. Many, many Jews died.
Schindler's list was based upon the fictionalized story of a man who overcame his weaker self and rescued Jews (who IMHO were experiencing the culmination of 2000 years of Christian influenced antisemitism).

Unfortunately I cannot post the entire article but I implore all Christians to read this article from Christianity Today. I assume it's written by a Christian so there should be no assumption of bias.

http://www.christianitytoday.com/history/newsletter/2004/feb20.html

Why some Jews fear the Passion

The Passion of the Christ scares Abraham Foxman. The Anti-Defamation League's national director, currently cast in the role of reluctant film critic, has spent months warning anyone and everyone that The Passion will dramatically strain Christian-Jewish relations and revive age-old Christian hatred for Jews. While most Christians in the West balk at this suggestion, Foxman cannot be dissuaded. He knows the grim history.

"For almost 2,000 years in Western civilization, four words legitimized, rationalized, and fueled anti-Semitism: 'The Jews killed Christ,'" Foxman told the ADL national executive committee during a February meeting. "For hundreds of years those four words—acted out, spoken out, sermonized out—inspired and legitimized pogroms, inquisitions and expulsions."

-snip-

Outbreaks of Christian anti-Semitism related to the Passion narrative have been so numerous and destructive that theologian and Holocaust survivor Eliezer Berkovits concluded, "the New Testament is the most dangerous anti-Semitic tract in human history." But neither the New Testament nor The Passion of the Christ is about Jewish deicide or revenge. Each is about God placing the iniquities of us all on his one and only son, who suffered unspeakable brutality to redeem his estranged children. Now is the time for Christians to disavow the history of Passion-linked hatred and show Jews "how wide and long and high and deep is the love of Christ" (Eph. 3:18).

[tigerbeat]

75. haven't seen it....

....i didn't like "braveheart" which is the primary reason i'm not seeing it. the secondary one is this:

isn't doing a movie exclusively about the torture, brutalization and crucifiction of jesus approximately the same as making a movie based on "1984" by george orwell but only about the sequence where winston smith has a rat-cage strapped to his face? it might provoke a visceral reaction and empathy for smith's plight and sacrifice, but it illuminates NOTHING about his struggle or story. and it assumes that you already know the story.....which in my opinion is just bad filmmaking.

personally, and i say this as an atheist, i would think there is a more enlightening and positive way to get at the message and story of the man who stopped the stoning of a prostitute than spiritual pornography.

[Paragon]

78. I'm a lapsed Catholic, and I understand Jesus better than you do

Jesus isn't special because he was tortured or even because he was crucified -- "thousands of skulls on Golgotha", didn't Pilate say? He is "The Christ" because he rose again in three days and even moreso, because of his teachings.

I tell you what - I'll see The Passion when YOU see The Last Temptation of Christ - which actually IS the best movie about Christ ever made.

[shekina]

81. true

But you can't have the resurrection without the crucifixion. As for what Pilate I don't know, must be some Catholic thing. I ain't heard that.

And you haven't seen Passion, so how can you say Last Temptation is better?

[Paragon]

90. Two reasons:

1. As I've said before, the mere premise of the movie itself is incorrect -- that Jesus is "The Christ" because he was tortured and crucified.

2. I have yet to find value in Mel Gibson as a director -- Braveheart and Man Without a Face were quite awful. Unlike Mel, I'm not a sadist -- I don't keep exposing myself to "art" that sucks.

[shekina]

94. one prob with ur argument

I never did get the feeling that Mel was trying to make the point that Jesus was "The Christ" because he was tortured. I haven't heard anybody else say this either. But hey, that's your opinion and I respect. I just ask that you respect mine in return.

[Paragon]

103. Well...

As I understand it, there is little content of Jesus' teachings in the movie...and it ends with Jesus' resurrection. You said in an earlier post that the notion of Jesus & Mary Magdalene making love (which is taken out of context, as Jesus is in the midst of Satan's "temptation" of a normal, human life - and is not in any way shot as offensively as half the shit in Passion) offends you. In MY opinion, if you don't discuss Jesus' teachings and/or his resurrection, you're hardly discussing Jesus. That's offensive.

Also, I'm being critical of the movie. Good critics inform opinion, not merely express one.

[INTELBYTES]

143. The movie shows the last twelve hours of Christ....

and His sacrifice for us. Although I love the epic Christian movies such as Ten Commandments and The Robe, this movie was a stark look at the sacrifice that was made for us. That is the beauty of it. Not the blood and guts, but a visual to see what Christ went through to show His profound love for us - especially noting He could have stopped it at any time.

[Paragon]

144. Cool!

I'm going to go deify Nelson Mandela...or maybe John McCain...

And those guys COULDN'T "have stopped it at any time".

[INTELBYTES]

148. All I can do is scratch my head at that answer.

I didn't see the connection in your reply but I guess you tried.

Feel free to pray to either though. It's your eternity not mine.

[Paragon]

150. How Christian of you

Thanks. :eyes:

[scottcsmith]

92. No Christian finds the film anti-Semitic

Which is interesting. I think Christians want to avoid the subject entirely by refusing to see what others (like me, a Jew) see so very clearly. This is an article I wrote which outlines why I believe the film to be anti-Semitic:

Deconstructing The Passion:
New Testament anti-Semitism and Mel Gibson's vision

Webster's Dictionary defines an anti-Semite as "One who discriminates against or who is hostile towards or prejudiced against Jews."

After reading the Gospels, and other chapters in the New Testament, it's clear that the writers of those chapters added anti-Semitic elements. Christians are in denial if they do not see the anti-Semitism of the New Testament. That sentiment is best summed up by the following passage from 1 Thessalonians 2, verses 14-16:

"For you, brothers, became imitators of God's churches in Judea, which are in Christ Jesus: You suffered from your own countrymen the same things those churches suffered from the Jews, who killed the Lord Jesus and the prophets and also drove us out. They displease God and are hostile to all men in their effort to keep us from speaking to the Gentiles so that they may be saved. In this way they always heap up their sins to the limit. The wrath of God has come upon them at last."

Mel Gibson has taken bits from each of the Gospels to write his screenplay, as well as adding his own interpretation of events. The end result is a film full of hatred towards Jews. I will deconstruct sections of The Passion to expose the anti-Semitism of those scenes.

Jesus at Gethsemane
The film opens with Jesus praying in Gethsemane. Judas arrives with a crowd of Jews, the crowd armed with swords and clubs (Matthew 26:47). Judas kisses Jesus' cheek, which was a signal to the crowd that Jesus was the one they were looking for. After the betrayal of Judas, Gibson has the crowd immediately attack Jesus. At this point in the film no reason has been given as to why the crowd came looking for Jesus. In the movie the mob beats Jesus to a pulp. In this first half-hour of the film, Romans are not involved at all; Gibson establishes from the start that it was the Jews who first spilled Christ's blood.

Christ brought before the Priests
The mob delivers Christ to Caiaphas and the other high priests. Gibson has a large group of Jews assembled, all of them screaming and yelling and wanting to see Christ punished. Christ is questioned by the priests, and the crowd so wants Jesus dead that they start to lie to the priests about crimes Jesus supposedly committed. Christ is beaten (again), mocked, and Matthew 26:67 has the priests themselves beating Jesus and even spitting in his face. Now Gibson has established the Jews to not only be bloodthirsty but also to be liars. The crowd lies in order to have Christ punished. Why do they want him punished? The Gospels, nor Gibson, are clear on this point.

Judas and the Evil Jewish Children
While the crowd is screaming for the blood of Jesus, Gibson shows us Judas, who is hiding. Two Jewish children approach Judas, and Gibson turns the Jewish children into demons that hound Judas. This is Gibson's conceit as this scene is not in any of the Gospels. Why would Gibson choose Jewish children to be demons? Later we see Judas driven out of town by a small mob of evil Jewish children. Judas commits suicide.

Christ brought before Pilate
Pontius Pilate, the Roman Prefect of Judea, is portrayed by the Gospels and Gibson as a thoughtful man, wracked with doubt and indecision, and Christ's only defender. History gives us a different view of Pilate, a ruthless ruler who is quick to strike down any uprisings by his subjects. Pilate would not have allowed a crowd of Jews to sway his opinion; in all likelihood if events had unfolded as portrayed in the Gospels, Pilate would have sent soldiers to break up the crowd of Jews.

The writers of the Gospels, however, lived under Roman rule and in all likelihood the sympathetic portrayal of Pilate in the Gospels was more a result of wanting to appease a suppressive Roman government than to accurately describe events.

Gibson sticks to the Gospel portrayal of Pilate. Christ is brought before Pilate by a huge crowd of Jews and the priests. The crowd demands blood; they want to see Christ crucified. The priests attempt to sell Pilate on having Jesus executed. Pilate speaks with Jesus, and tells the crowd he has no reason to crucify Christ. The crowd howls in disapproval. Pilate attempts to rid himself of the issue entirely by sending Jesus to King Herod for interrogation. Like Pilate, Herod finds no reason to execute Christ. When Christ is returned to Pilate, Pilate announces to the crowd (who apparently left and returned the next day en mass) that Herod also found no reason to execute Christ. Once again the Jews howl and yell out their disapproval. Pilate decides to turn Jesus over to be punished, in an effort to appease the crowd.

Finally, a chance for Gibson to place some of the blame for Christ's death into Roman hands. Unfortunately, it does not happen. The Roman guards who torture Jesus (while crowds of Jews watch) are portrayed by Gibson as essentially mindless brutes. They're just doing their job, something they do well in one of the film's lengthy, grotesque, gory torture scenes.

Pilate washes his hands of Christ
With the torture out of the way, Jesus is brought before Pilate once again, who still insists that he isn't going to execute Christ. Again, the crowd of Jews howl in disapproval, and they soon are chanting for Christ to be crucified.

At this point Gibson absolves the Romans of guilt with a scene taken from the book of John, Chapter 19, verses 4-11:

"Once more Pilate came out and said to the Jews, 'Look, I am bringing him out to you to let you know that I find no basis for a charge against him.' When Jesus came out wearing the crown of thorns and the purple robe, Pilate said to them, 'Here is the man!'
As soon as the chief priests and their officials saw him, they shouted, 'Crucify! Crucify!'
But Pilate answered, 'You take him and crucify him. As for me, I find no basis for a charge against him.'
The Jews insisted, 'We have a law, and according to that law he must die, because he claimed to be the Son of God.'
When Pilate heard this, he was even more afraid, and he went back inside the palace. 'Where do you come from?' he asked Jesus, but Jesus gave him no answer. 'Do you refuse to speak to me?' Pilate said. 'Don't you realize I have power either to free you or to crucify you?'
Jesus answered, 'You would have no power over me if it were not given to you from above. Therefore the one who handed me over to you is guilty of a greater sin.'

These verses from John are problematic for a number of reasons. It's suggested that Pilate was frightened by the bloodthirsty crowd of Jews (not historically accurate); that Pilate would allow the Jews to execute Jesus (crucifixion was a Roman punishment, usually carried out as a way to send a message to anyone else who might be plotting an uprising); and finally, Jesus absolves Pilate of any accountability for his death by stating that the ones that handed him over (the Jews) are guilty of a greater sin (than Pilate executing Christ).

The crowd is screaming for crucifixion. Pilate has Barabbas, described in Matthew 27:16 as a "notorious prisoner" and described by Gibson's film as a murderer, brought out. Pilate tells the Jews he will release a prisoner. Do they want Jesus released, or Barabbas?

Gibson's Barabbas is portrayed as a giggling lunatic, yet the crowd wants him released, not Jesus. Why would any crowd want a still-crazy murderer released into their midst? No crowd would, but the Jews of the New Testament do.

The Gospels, and Gibson, again take any blame off the shoulders of the Roman government and put it squarely on the shoulders of the Jewish crowd. Pilate symbolically washes his hands of Christ, and the crowd screams out "Let his blood be on us and on our children!" (Matthew 27:25). While Gibson has removed the subtitles of the crowd saying this, it's clear the dialog is still in the film.

At this point, even though Christ is to be crucified, the Roman government bears none of the blame for the execution, while the crowd of Jews bears all of the blame. The Jews are excited that Jesus is going to die, and they follow him as he attempts to carry his cross. Once again, it is a Roman that shows Christ sympathy; one of the Roman guards orders someone in the crowd to help Christ bear his burden.

At no point in the film are we led to believe that the Romans had anything to do with Christ's death; there is virtually no culpability for the crucifixion of Christ by the Romans.

On the other hand, it is the Jews, from start to finish, that want to see Christ die. It's the Jews that first spill Christ's blood by beating him in Gethsemane, and it is the Jews that convince Pilate to have Jesus executed.

For Gibson or anyone else to claim the film not to be anti-Semitic is just ludicrous. The message couldn't be more clear: the Jews killed Christ.

[shekina]

101. so what if they did kill Christ?

Do I hate Germans because of the Holocaust? No. Do i hate Japanese people because of Pearl Harbor? No. C'mon dude, even the head of the Anti-Defamation League said that this film wasn't anti-semitic. This argument's pretty much been put to rest. I don't think about WHO killed Christ, I'm much more concerned with WHY He died.

[LeahMira]

129. Concern yourself with fact, not fiction.

I don't think about WHO killed Christ, I'm much more concerned with WHY He died.

Gibson's film certainly does not make it clear at all why he died. In fact, neither do the gospel writers.


C'mon dude, even the head of the Anti-Defamation League said that this film wasn't anti-semitic.

That's strange, because this is what I find on the home page of their website:

"While the number of anti-Semitic incidents in the United States is virtually unchanged since 2002, the levels continue to be disturbing and unacceptable. In addition, the controversy over Mel Gibson’s film “The Passion of the Christ” elicited a barrage of hate mail filled with ugly anti-Semitism. These messages, though not included in the total count, are an indication of the anti-Semitic feelings stirred as a result of the Jewish concerns about the film."

[Az]

130. Gonna be tough

We have no historical references to Jesus or his activities. Only thing we have is the bible and it does not constitute and accepted historical refrence. Facts are kinda thin in this game and people are going to continue to believe whichever version they are familiar with. Its a faith thing. No amount of evidence will disuade a believer. Change only comes from within.

[Az]

111. I continue to argue it is not antisemetic

The Jews have the historical misfortune and blessing to be survivors. The nature of aggressive religions is to enter a territory and attempt to absorb or drive out any other competeting religion. Our calendars and holidays are testimonies to this process.

Jews are the only major religion that has survived within Christian dominated societies. There are a number of factors that bring this about but the net effect is that they have been the focus of a religious institution that is used to rolling over and dismantling any religion it comes across.

Our new society creates a situation where in the Jews are no longer the only group that coexist with the Christians. There is a world of beliefs living alongside each other in this nation. The focus is the same as it even has been. Its just the target that has diversified. Those that do not accept their beliefs become the target for either indoctrination or demonization.

This is of course primarily true of the more auhtoratative sects. The more liberalized sects are typically not as involved in evangelyzing and reject that aspect of their history.

[shekina]

122. good answer

Why can't this film be used as a talking point to bring jews and christians closer together. After all, Christianity is a spin off of Judaism. It's sad we're focusing so much on if it's anit-semitic or not.

[scottcsmith]

157. Respectfully, you are wrong

When Christianity handed Jews the complicity in killing the Christian deity, Jesus Christ, they effectively started a pogrom that resulted in the deaths of untold numbers of Jews. In many community Jews were forced to convert to Christianity or be killed. Remember, now, this hatred is based on the FALSE idea that Jews killed Christ. You can't dismiss it or ignore it. It happened. As I've noted before, the Christian bible makes it pretty clear how Jews are perceived in the New Testament, as these verses from 1st Thessalonians 2, 14-16, state:

"For you, brothers, became imitators of God's churches in Judea, which are in Christ Jesus: You suffered from your own countrymen the same things those churches suffered from the Jews, who killed the Lord Jesus and the prophets and also drove us out. They displease God and are hostile to all men in their effort to keep us from speaking to the Gentiles so that they may be saved. In this way they always heap up their sins to the limit. The wrath of God has come upon them at last."

Is that not a pretty clear indictment against Jews and the charge of deicide? Christian apologists dismiss those verses as not being anti-Semitic, but to me what is said is unambiguous. And Christians that deny the anti-Semitism found in their own scriptures really need to open their eyes to the truth.

[Az]

161. I do not deny

The existance of hostility between Judaism and Christianity within the doctrine. What I am refering to is the social drive that brought the two faiths into conflict with each other.

Christianity has a complicated relationship with Judaism. They believe themself to be the continuation of the Jewish teachings. They have included a series of prophecies that they believe require the Jews to be around for the end times. Thus there is impetus for them to stop short of eradication of the Jewish faith as was performed to all other religions they encountered during their centuries of dominance.

This tendency of Judaism to survive in the presense of Christianity brings about social stress. Under such circumstances adherants of the dominant faith will find reasons within their own doctrine to justify their anger at the opposition. As their fervor is fanned the anger will burst into persecution and violence.

It is demonstrable through history that Christians have been able to justify acceptance and intolerance towards the Jews within their own teachings. The reasons for the outbursts and pogroms have more to do with the predatory natures of authoratative mind sets than of the actual teachings of the doctrines involved.

[INTELBYTES]

141. Yeah, I don't know how many synagogues I've seen burning....

...in my neighborhood after Christians went to see that movie. You guys better stay indoors!

What a load of crap that anti-semitism is. Christians understands that Christ chose to give His life for us. The Jews could not have taken it no more than the Romans could have if Christ had not chosen to give it.

Christians support and pray for our Jewish brothers. Christians are the best friends you have in the world.

[scottcsmith]

159. You've got to be kidding

Jewish history is filled with Christians killing us or forcing us to convert. It wasn't even until the 1960s that the Catholic church absolved Jews of the charge of deicide in the second Vatican council. Mel Gibson does not support the policies proposed by the second Vatican council, by the way.

The film has been out a few weeks. It's effects may not be felt for decades.

If Christians want to be our "friends" they'll take us seriously when we mention our concerns that a film like The Passion is anti-Semitic, rather than dismiss us and our concerns, as you have. Many other Christians that post here at DU have dismissed our concerns as well. I have not encountered much in the way of empathy, and the Christian attitude towards Jewish concerns here have been very patronizing.

[scottcsmith]

95. One other thing

The Jews DID NOT KILL CHRIST. Period. They had no authority to carry out an execution. The Roman government killed Christ.

[Screaming Lord Byron]

99. "Passion" by Elisabeth Taylor? I'm more of a YSL guy myself.

[LeahMira]

109. Gibson's Passion as Subversion of Christianity

That's the title of a critique of the film that I find right on the money... although I hadn't been aware of exactly what was going on until I read the author's insights. BTW, this author has written extensively on masculinity issues. The article's here: http://www.tikkun.org/index.cfm/action/current/article/225.html


Some quotes from the article that you might interesting to talk about...

"The basic technique of quick cut between close-up and medium range shot, between the protagonist and the crowd, with the occasional long lingering panning shot to integrate it all, promotes not empathy or compassion, which require greater focus and concentration to be brought forth, but an ersatz immediate identification, one that is elicited as a pre-programmed reaction rather than as an authentic expression of the self. The relentlessness of the film violence, its senses and mind numbing infliction of blow upon blow, with the audience made to shudder along with each one, short circuits any authentically deep emotional reaction."


"The transformation of Christians from active makers of their community into passive members of an audience is the trademark of the new mass media style of right wing Christianity, symbolized by Gibson's film and the Crystal Cathedral model of Christianity. This is Christianity as spectacle, indeed as spectator sport. And a bloody sport it is in Gibson's hands. Gibson's film seems poised to be spectacularly successful, in the spectacle of its violence and in its turning of Christians into spectators, both on the screen and in the audience. This is a new spectacular Christianity."


"It not just that Gibson personally rejects Vatican II and all that it meant and still means. It that that stance permeates the film itself. Vatican II was, after all, of a time when power to the people was an ideology in ascendance. The rejection of the traditionalist Latin Mass was part of that trend, making the meaning of the service more accessible to the congregation, less ruled by the authority of the priests. The film use of ancient languages and accompanying subtitles has more to do with restoring linguistic authority to the authorities who produce the show than with the ideals of historical accuracy put forward by Gibson to justify the practice. The impenetrability of the language keeps the wielders of power secure, the source of their authority unknown. Mysterium, Magisterium, Imperium: mystery, authority and empire. These are the values of the Christian right and of Gibson film."

[slackmaster]

127. I want to see Dawn of the Dead first

Go Zombies!

[Bridget Burke]

128. One good result of The Passion

The upcoming theatrical re-relase of Monty Pyton's "Life of Brian".

I'm also hoping that Oxygen cable will make a special marathon of all the Xena: Warrior Princess episodes where she was crucified!

[supernova]

142. Ha!

Good one! :thumbsup:

As for Mel, it doesn't do much for me. My theology isn't rooted in substitution attonement.

[INTELBYTES]

145. Then what is it rooted in?

[supernova]

149. Universal love and acceptance

of the human as well as the divine.

[INTELBYTES]

151. Well, I'm a Christian and I love and accept you.

But I'm only divine in the Beloved.

[supernova]

152. Aww, how sweet!

I love you too. :hi:

I don't understand your last sentence.

[INTELBYTES]

154. You don't need to as long as you universally love and accept me.

:D

[absyntheNsugar]

147. Used to be against it, then my brother gave it a high rec

So I'll go see it and give it a chance.

So I'm rather neutral on it now.

[geniph]

155. Pretty typical for a Mel Gibson movie

there's something wrong with the guy. He's got an unhealthy obsession with graphic scenes of pain and torture. Damn near every movie he's ever made dwells in loving detail on someone having the living shit beaten out of them. The Mad Max movies, Braveheart, Lethal Weapon, Man Without a Face, the Patriot, etc. There's something seriously the matter with him.

And I find it horrifying that people are taking children to what is practically a snuff flick.

[INTELBYTES]

156. Well, I hope you have the same attitude towards any other slasher flick.

How bout that "Dawn of the Dead" where they eat each others guts? How bout Friday the 13th, and My Bloody Valentine? I could name a few more. These movies were made to entertain you with violence. The Passion on the other hand was Gibsons attempt, (which I say he did a wonderful job of), to graphically display what Jesus suffered.

I find it horrifying that people let there kids play violent video games and cringe at a historically based movie such as The Passion. My 13 year old saw it. He didn't go "Jew hunting" after the movie either. He just felt what everyone else did, a profound awe at what His Saviour endured for his sake.

[scottcsmith]

158. The graphic scenes of Christ's Crucifixion are NOT historical

Gibson's source for the Crucifixion and torture scenes of Christ do not come from history or the Christian bible. They are based on the visions of a nun, named Anne Catherine Emmerich, who wrote a book called "The Dolorous Passion" in the 1800s.

The Passion has no basis in history. It's the product of Mel Gibson's imagination.

[shekina]

167. i hear that

I'm trying to figure out the double standard here. Why is Dawn of the Dead, Texas Chainsaw Massacre, and Kill Bill ok, but Jesus is bad? Hmm......? Something's rotten in the state of Denmark if I might say so.....

[Bridget Burke]

176. I don't care for those other extremely violent movies, either.

(Not that I eschew all movies with violent scenes--for example, when there are orcs or trolls to be fought.)

But a lot of people really do get off on the extreme gore. Guess it's good that the godly sort--who are normally scorn the vulgar masses--now have a gore-fest of their very own.

[Snellius]

164. 55 posts in one day?

shekina Profile:
Member since Mar 25th 2004
Number of posts 55

Even on my best day I never managed 55 posts. Welcome and good luck.

[shekina]

166. thanx

Man, I just noticed that. 55 posts on my first day and all of em have pretty much been defending Mel Gibson. Woot for me.

[Deja Q]

165. I'd be offended if I was Christian... Good thing I'm more of one than Mel

Christ did die for us.

His Life should be celebrated. Not belittled by some pompous actor's interpretation of some book he'd read.

All this movie does is depict Mel Gibson's personal version of Jesus' final 12 hours - which is essentially Jesus being treated as a punching bag being hit with a meat tenderizer, combined with a bunch of scenes suggesting Judas personally knew the Devil - who just happened to be female, of course. :eyes: This is supposed to make me feel proud? OF WHAT? This "movie" hardly shows the good Jesus tried to preach, which should be celebrated - NOT IGNORED.

Gibby is definitely sexist.

His granddaddy might be a nazi sympathizer.

If he himself is anti-semitic, it depends on how accurate the version of the Bible he'd read was. If you ask me, the Bible has been translated and perverted so many times by selfish jerks out to create scapegoats, there's a lot of it that I refuse to believe. Sodom & Gomorrah being such an example of what was perverted. (New translations blames homosexuals for those cities' destruction. :eyes: Real reason was that inhabitants of both cities were selfish, greedy, and cruel - not unlike modern America, by the way...)

[shekina]

169. Well....

you just said you weren't a Christian. I am, and I was not offended by this movie. Are you trying to speak for me?

[camero]

172. Two things

1. I'm not exactly thrilled with seeing anybody, including a caracature of Jesus, being beaten to a bloody pulp. Don't alot of Christians complain about violence in the movies? Not all but some do.

2. I have a deep suspicion that any movie that shows Jesus or God violates the commandment against graven images.

I've thought about this for quite awhile and I think that anyone who would go to see a blatantly violent movie and base it on thier faith may have to reassess thier faith.

[shekina]

173. eh....

while I can respect your argument, I have to disagree. And this type of violence is different, to me at least. And I don't think a movie would qualify as a graven image.

[camero]

175. God is unseen

You pray in the closet unseen, as your father is unseen. I believe that is in the Book of Matthew. Also, violence is violence no matter the medium.

[LWolf]

178. Not interested.

Won't see it.

That's not that unusual, I only see 3-4 movies a year anyway. But if I wanted to see a movie about the Christ, I'd find one that focused on what I value about his remembered life. Something about love, joy, hope, etc., not a movie focused on the aspects of hate and violence.

I haven't actually heard or read about any movie I'm interested in seeing yet this spring. :shrug:

[Mobius]

179. CHEAP AD FOR PASSION AVATARS

http://www.angelfire.com/ar3/shagaspiel/shagatopicavis.html