The controversy surrounding The Passion of the Christ

PuccaKenobi:

Well, I'm Jewish and I wasn't offended by the film nor saw anything to be offended about.

So just because you're friend was offended, that doesn't speak for all Jews and once again it says that one sees what they bring with them.

And secondly, one can find several negative things which can come off as plain offensive about the gentiles in the Talmund. So I don't understand why Christians always get the **** end of the stick because of the New Testament.

Like I said, one takes with them what they want to.

 

While this shouldn't be construed as a "Christianity vs. Jewish thread", it appears it is bound for that pitfall.

It needs to be realized that there is more to the argument than whether Jesus met the qualifications to be the messiah or not. Personal beliefs aside, there is a great deal more to be discussed than if he was or was not.

From historical aspects, there is very little to believe that he wasn't crucified as he was. There are only small aspects of what is shown in the movie that are not congruent with history and Biblical recordings. Does that make the movie bad as a whole? No.

While some may not want to see it as it is extremely violent, it is no more violent as it was in the Roman Empire era.

And to make the stand for Mel Gibson on a personal level, under the new testement, once the veil was rent from top to bottom, one is not held under the law as one once was, therefor the sins of the father are not passed to the children. To hold Mel Gibson accountable for what is father has said is ludicrous. For him not to go against what his father has said would make people attack him for not honoring his mother and father. It's a no-win situation. He did what he thought was right.

What would you do in that situation?

 

I'd criticize their parents and use that against them.

Just kidding.

 

What bothers me is the way the movie, and Christianity itself, defines "good" and "bad." A bad jew, according to the film, is any Jew who didn't recognize the divinity of Christ.

Well, from what I can tell by what you're saying, you dont really seem to understand the principle of Christianity. According to Christianity, *anyone* who doesn't recognize the divinity of Jesus is "bad", not just jews (assuming that you mean "going ot hell" kinda bad). So if the bad-by-not-accepting-Jesus rule applies to everyone, asians, hispanics, jews, selonians, aqualish.., then Christianity (and mel gibsons movie) dosen't hold jews in any less regard than anyone else. So how is that discrimination? How is that anti-semitism?

 

What bothers me is the way the movie, and Christianity itself, defines "good" and "bad." A bad jew, according to the film, is any Jew who didn't recognize the divinity of Christ.

yep i guess those jews in the sanhedrian who opposed the trial were either bad jews or became christian, right jabba? and can you point out to me in scripture where christian are commanded to hate jews?

I don't know, ani. This thread has proven that a lot of Christians don't even know how to recognize anti-Semitism even when it hits them in the face. The fact that so many Christians have hailed The Passion of the Christ as a great film is all the evidence you need.

If you're not a "Jew for Jesus," you're an evil Jew. That's the message of the movie.

or...

it proves that you are ruled entirely by your presuppositions.

Well, from what I can tell by what you're saying, you dont really seem to understand the principle of Christianity. According to Christianity, *anyone* who doesn't recognize the divinity of Jesus is "bad", not just jews (assuming that you mean "going ot hell" kinda bad). So if the bad-by-not-accepting-Jesus rule applies to everyone, asians, hispanics, jews, selonians, aqualish.., then Christianity (and mel gibsons movie) dosen't hold jews in any less regard than anyone else. So how is that discrimination? How is that anti-semitism?

not ientirely true, Christianity at least in its orthodoxed form, states pretty clearely that everyone is sinful, and that those who believe Jesus to be the Messiah, and except His sacrifice, are forgiven of their sin. Good/Bad is are term that are used by humans to label other humans. And they are relatively used. Where as in the bible G-d is perfect we are not. You could still be a good or a great person and not be "forgiven". I doubt that any Christian would argue that Gandhi was a bad person. It is a common pitfall to get them mixed up.


Thanks for that Link vaderize03 good info...

 

I understand the deep-felt need to believe that the new testament is not, at heart, an anti-semitic text, and since it is only a text it is open to any and all interpretations of its meaning, just like "Huckleberry Finn," or Shakespeare's "Merchant of Venice."

Literary interpretation is divided over the anti-Semitic nature of "The Merchant of Venice." Some people see it as a work of deep humanity - evidence of Shakespeare's belief in tolerance and the underlying psychological drives that impact all people, regardless of race or religion. Other people see it as an overt piece of Jew-baiting - a spiteful rant in which the humanity of Jews is undermined at every step. These questions have dogged "The Merchant of Venice" for hundreds of years.

But "The Passion," at least, will not have this problem. As a crass piece of sadistically violent low-brow B entertainment, it will quickly be forgotten. We can hope that the complaints of its blatant anti-Semitism will die along with this truly awful movie, and Mel Gibson will use his hundreds of millions of dollars in profits to fund and direct his next pet project: a docudrama in which he reveals the Holocaust to have been a hoax.

 

I look forward to his next film then because then atleast you'll finally be able to offer proof of the claims you've been making for the entire thread.

I rejoice for you.

 

Actually, more to the point, there's room for both prequels and sequels to The Passion of the Christ. The problem is that although Mel Gibson now has enough money to fund a massive film of the entire life of Christ, he can't be certain that there will be much bank in a Jesus movie that lacks plenty of blood and gore, or in a Jesus movie with no obvious outlet for anti-Semitism. Jesus without the orgiastic "money shots" of the beatings and flayings and nails through flesh just may not be much fun for modern Christian audiences.

 

No wonder you're so quick to see setiments against a religion.

Physician heal thyself.

 

Christianity is simply a religion, or group of religions. If I critizice Christianity, everyone knows that I am speaking of the religion, but "Jewish" is also a cultural/ethnic as well as religious designation, so "anti-Semitism" has a broader meaning and different implications. I wouldn't have any problems criticizing Judaism as a religion. It is no better or worse than any other monotheistic cult.

But The Passion is more critical of Jews than of Judaism and for that should be condemned.

 

As a crass piece of sadistically violent low-brow B entertainment, it will quickly be forgotten. We can hope that the complaints of its blatant anti-Semitism will die along with this truly awful movie, and Mel Gibson will use his hundreds of millions of dollars in profits to fund and direct his next pet project: a docudrama in which he reveals the Holocaust to have been a hoax.

Dude. Shut Up. You havnt seen the movie. I have. People who hate christiantiy almost as much as you do have. And odly enough, said people said that if nothing else, it was a good movie.

So either see the movie, stop baiting or shut up. I am sick and tired of reading the same garbage that we've refuted hundereds of time, and Im sick of you ignoring everyone who says refutes what you say so you can keep your bigoted eyes closed and keep chanting your mantra over and over. Come here to debate, or shut up and leave. Adress people points, prove youve seen the movie, or I will report you to the mods for baiting.

 

Easy everyone, easy..

Your welcome for the link.

Look, people shouldn't fight over condemning any group for Jesus's crucifiction. The point is, His sacrifice was necessary to redeem mankind. It happened, it's over with, you either believe it, or not.

All this fighting is stupid, IMHO.

Peace,

V-03

 

Christianity at least in its orthodoxed form, states pretty clearely that everyone is sinful, and that those who believe Jesus to be the Messiah, and except His sacrifice, are forgiven of their sin. Good/Bad is are term that are used by humans to label other humans.

That was kinda my point. Thats why I said "bad", with quotes.

 

I've been wanting to say something for a long time in this thread but I was scared it would 'sway' the conversation, but since there has been a pause I'll say it. It might seem a little bit off-topic at first, but it's very much related to the whole subject of the thread(The controversy surrounding The Passion', etc.) and some stuff needs to be said to further understand what I'm talking about.

I see guys like Jerry Fallwell being the modern day versions of the Pharisees in the Christian religion. It comes to the point where they're subconsciously fooling themselves with their self-righteousness thinking they're doing good but they're giving the deity they stand for and the people who rightfully follow Him a bad name by being the total opposite of what they're supposed to be according to Jesus and The Bible. As Jesus said "He who is sinless cast the first stone" and it seems as if both the Pharisees and the pseudo-Christians today do very much the same thing, judging others and pointing fingers, with guys like Fallwell saying "YOU NEED JESUS!", when they're every bit as much a sinner yet they're acting totally the opposite of what they preach, and the the pseudo-Christians are the total opposite of Jesus, the only SINLESS man. They show no love, forgiveness, humility or any sign that they know that they're also sinners. Guys like Fallwell and the Pharisees will turn their backs on those who are gay or have done drugs or whatever yet Jesus hung out with murderers, theives, prostitutes, etc. and treated them all equally and with love.
The biggest problem that comes up is that pseudo-Christians like Fallwell and those who follow him(Those who think "Well, he carries a Bible and prays, I'll just believe him" sheep) eventually become examples, and bad ones, to the secular society of what Christianity is about, and it's a false, hypocritical image, but usually it's the first impression people get of the faith and they generalize the whole religion based on that.
The anti-Semites on the other hand use the Pharisees and those who were followers of their methods to judge and discriminate against all Jews.
The minority of people and the 'false hypocrites' seem to win over the majority of people and the truth in the eyes of those who are ready to strike at first glance, and unluckily people like Fallwell and the Pharisees are enough to feed that hate.

The problem when it comes to a movie like this is that those anti-Semites mentioned above will misrepresent any Christ-followers, and the people who are already looking to find something to use as leverage will surely use them for their argument and when there are anti-Semetic-related hate crimes, threats, harrassment, etc. it will be the movie's "fault". So basically the anti-Semites use the movie as their leverage and the anti-Christians use the anti-Semites as THEIR leverage.
The pseudo-Christians and Pharisees are very much the same, but the same people who judge Christianity based on the pseudos seem to be the same people who are accusing the Christians of doing the same thing to the bad Jews(The Pharisees and those like them) in the movie when in fact true Christians ARE NOT doing that and the already-Anti-Semites will of course be used as leverage for the argument. Any real Christian is NOT anti-Semitic and to say that the Jews portrayed in the movie are meant to be the reprasentatives of ALL Jews is every bit as ignorant, one-sided and biased as those racists and hypocrites who are the 'snakes' of society. To round it all up, those who are anti-Christian and condemning the movie are accusing the righteous audience and filmmakers of doing the SAME ignorant generalizing and degrading that they do toward Christians!

Now, to expand upon the whole "The movie causes anti-Semetism" nonsense...

I play WWII video games and other 'violent' videos games and I am wondering, are you also the kind of person that thinks that those games will cause me to kill somebody? If one mentally unstable person out of a million people kills someone because of a video game, would y

 

I'm heartened by the people on this thread who are so vigorously insisting that anti-Semitism should be allowed no place in the practice of Christianity.

At the same time I'm disappointed that so many Christians have been taken in by Mel Gibson's masterpiece of porn-violence and hate-mongering.

 

Your hate of Christ and His Word is blinding your eyes.

Can you not see that the Gospel of Jesus doesn't teach hate, but love? If it were the other way around, you wouldn't have a few people here and there going after the Jews using their actions against the Word in the past as justification. All of Christendom would be doing it. But instead you have one or two people who are in positions of power, and use this, wrongly, as justification for their hatred of the Jews.

And believe it or not, Jabba, anti-semitism has existed long before Jesus came. It starts with the Egyptians enslaving them. They were taken captive by the Babylonians. Then the Greeks and Romans. Not one of those cultures used the crucifixion of Messiah as a reason for doing it.

Today, the majority of anti-semites are *gasp* not Christians, but Palestinians and other middle eastern peoples. We Christians love the Jews, because they are still our God's chosen people, and they will be restored to their rightful place as heirs in the Kingdom of God.

Chances are you will foolishly deny this in an attempt to stick to your viewpoint, but really, you're only hurting yourself. The more you do that the more respect you lose from everyone in this thread.

The Passion of the Christ is almost completely accurate to the part of the Story it is telling. In regards to the Jews, especially. So again, your complaint is not about The Passion, but about the Gospel, which, as I pointed out, is not anti-semitic.

 

At the same time I'm disappointed that so many Christians have been taken in by Mel Gibson's masterpiece of porn-violence and hate-mongering.

Once again... Have you even seen the movie? ?

By the way, here's a nice quote from Charlie Daniels:

"Ok, we?re well into the release of the movie and where is the anti-Semitism? Or more importantly why hasn?t the media done anything to let the world know that it didn?t materialize? Why can?t they interview the same bunch of alarmists who started this fallacy in the first place and ask them what happened?"

 

At the same time I'm disappointed that so many Christians have been taken in by Mel Gibson's masterpiece of porn-violence and hate-mongering.

Thank you for proving my point.

 

I'm not a religious guy and I don't believe that the actions of one fellow who's life story is suspiciously lacking in detail are particularly important, but I have to say that the film really does seem to /enjoy/ what it's showing you. Lingering, slow-motion knife-fights(!?!) and close-ups on a man with a great make-up job plastered over his body do not a masterpiece make.

 

That's because you don't claim Him as your savior. To many of us, however, the actions being depicted on-screen are the actions that saved us from the death that we all rightly deserve.

While it is terribly sad and distressing for us, there is also a certain amount of beauty involved, as we are watching the love of God in action. That, to Christians, is the most beautiful thing ever. And apparently a great amount of non-Christians at least feel a sense of love and sacrifice from the film, one that draws them to it.

Granted there are bad reviews out there, from people like Jabba (except in other cases the people have actually seen the movie for themselves).

 

Oh don't get me wrong, I can understand why Christians would see the beauty in it. Personally, I just couldn't respond to it /as a film/.

 

Gotcha.

 

Jabba, glad to see you're being a little more forthcoming in the specifics of your complaints. If I could focus on a point or two...


From 3/11, 8:09 am

ani, you and a lot of other posters in this thread have completely missed the point. It's not that there are no good jews and bad jews, it's that the new testament defines "good Jews" as those who supported the work of Jesus and "bad Jews" as those responsible for his death. It's like that silly George Bush quote: "either you're with us or you're against us."

Are you saying that the members of the Sanhedrin who protested the illegality of Jesus' trial "supported the work of Jesus"? Are you saying that Simon the Cyrene "supported the work of Jesus"? I ask because I know of nothing in the film or the Gospels that would suggest that with any certainty.

Thus, it seems to me that -- short of framing the story so that there would be a case for executing Jesus -- you would not be satisfied by any account of Jesus' death. You seem to assume that all those who did the right thing (i.e., protest the death of an innocent man) were followers of Jesus. Because you make that assumption, it's only natural for you not to find any characters who were good, Jewish, and not Jesus' follower.


3/12, 7:54 am

What bothers me is the way the movie, and Christianity itself, defines "good" and "bad." A bad jew, according to the film, is any Jew who didn't recognize the divinity of Christ.

Is it clear that either the Sanhedrin dessenters or Simon the Cyrene recognized Jesus' divinity?

If so, how?

If not, aren't you jumping to conclusions? If Gibson did portray "good Jews" who might not have recognized Jesus' divinity, what's the problem?


If I'm off-base here, can you outline a character that you would introduce to the Passion story that is:

a) Jewish.
b) Good, however you've been defining it.
c) not a follower of Jesus.

Seriously, I believe you're connecting (b) and (c) so tightly that you're assuming that any character in the Passion story that is good must have been a follower of Jesus.

You're equating the two -- or you're assuming that others are equating the two -- and that's the fault of neither the New Testament nor Mel Gibson.

 

Lingering, slow-motion knife-fights(!?!) and close-ups on a man with a great make-up job plastered over his body do not a masterpiece make.

I had a similar thought. Something along the lines of "less is more". Dunno, I guess to me the human imagination is much more potent than somebody else's images. I'm thinking about the ear-cutting scene in Reservoir Dogs... To me at least, the impact of the sound alone makes the scene more uncomfortable and horrific, showing the event would have had less of an effect. But this kinda stuff is more suited to the Ampitheater, so I'll bow out.

 

"Seriously, I believe you're connecting (b) and (c) so tightly that you're assuming that any character in the Passion story that is good must have been a follower of Jesus."

No, that's incorrect. Any Jew who might have wanted Jesus dead is defined as evil under the new testament, but more specifically, in the film. Of course, if the movie is suggesting that anyone who promotes the death penalty is inherently evil, then I almost have to agree. I think of all the conservative Christians out there who are rabidly pro-death penalty, and I wonder how they interpret Mel Gibson's movie.

I guess, what I'm saying, is that if Mel Gibson's literal artistic intent was to suggest that the death penalty is a blight on civilization, and that anyone who advocates the execution of anyone, for any reason, is evil, then maybe I might be able to get behind this movie.

The more I think of it, the more I like the idea of The Passion as an anti-death penalty treatise. That is the only legitimate artistic means of reading anti-Semitism out of the film.