I'm going to see "The Passion of The Christ" today...

[Darris Chambless]

Is there anyone else looking forward to this movie?

I'm just curious. The interviews have been very well done and some of the people that went to the private first showing have stated that they went in to watch a "movie" and came out feeling like they had experience the whole thing in person. In fact I believe it was Paul Harvey that said "You don't watch this movie; you experience it."

I'll let you know how it was.

Darris C.

[chm2023]

My husband got tix for this weekend sometime, not sure when. Looking forward to it though I get pretty upset with violence on screen. We'll see. I went to Ash Wednesday services this AM and stopped off afterwards at the local deli for a breakfast sandwich, egg and sausage. (Meat of course a no no today for RCs today). I'm losing my mind.......

[Darris Chambless]

We can compare notes after we've seen the movie then. I'm sure it will be depicted in a manner that is true to form so it will be pretty violent I'm sure.

I have Ash Wednesday services tonight and am looking forward to getting "smudged" as my daughter and I call it ;)

Take care, stay warm and enjoy the show.

Darris C.

[LaurieC]

Our oldest son went last night to a private showing. He said it was well beyond graphic in it's depiction of those hours and just takes it right into your gut. However he was extremely disappointed in the ending. He said he was amazed how little time was devoted to the resurrection, that it was seconds not minute. Controversies regarding biblically accurate vs historically accurate aside.... One wonders if the purpose of this film is supposed to reinforce Christ's suffering for us, wouldn't it be just as well served to show a little more uplifting footage too? I'll be lookingforward to seeing everyone's opinion because I just can't decide whether to see it.

[Pete Hanlin]

I think I'm going to wait for it to come out on DVD to watch it... I have a feeling this is something I'll just want to be able to watch by myself.

The most gut-wrenching movie moments I can recall seeing were the opening D-Day invasion beach shots at the beginning of Saving Private Ryan, and certain moments in Schindler's List. For just a moment, one forgot they were at a movie and really felt the despair of the moment.

I've seen (and participated in) some dramas concerning the cruxifiction. Each one seems to spark an appreciation of something that I know I take for granted all too often.

[Cindy Hamlin]

I would love to see it but all the theatres in Richmond sell advance tickets only and they are ALL sold out. I will have to wait for the DVD.

They interviewed Franklin Graham this morning (Billy's son) on the Today show and I was amazed at his praise of the movie. He said that you get a renewed appreciation for the suffering of Christ. Katie asked him about the very graphic violence and he said that it was needed to fully appreciate the suffering of Christ.

I saw footage of people leaving the cinema on the news and they were wiping tears from their eyes and looked stunned. That alone was quite powerful!

Can I ask a question? I don't mean to incite anyone, but wondered. They mention that parts are anti-semitic. There was a rabbi on the news last night that said that the anti-semitic part was that the Jews were responsible for what happened to Christ. I was raised Catholic and that is what I learned. Would a Jewish person respond and let me know who the Jewish people believe was responsible for the Jesus' death. Again I am just wondering not trying to start a firestorm. If you want to e-mail me privately (and not post on the board) use the link below the post and it will stay between you and I.

[Joann Raytar]

It's selling out here. It is the first movie I have wanted to go see in a long time too.

[shanbaum]

Cindy Hamlin said:
Can I ask a question? I don't mean to incite anyone, but wondered. They mention that parts are anti-semitic. There was a rabbi on the news last night that said that the anti-semitic part was that the Jews were responsible for what happened to Christ. I was raised Catholic and that is what I learned. Would a Jewish person respond and let me know who the Jewish people believe was responsible for the Jesus' death.

I certainly wouldn't presume to speak for "the Jewish people", but as a Jew who has studied Christianity, I do not understand how a Christian could answer the question ("who was responsible...") other than thus:

God. God was responsible for Jesus' death; otherwise, Christianity makes no sense.

[karen]

shanbaum said:
I do not understand how a Christian could answer the question ("who was responsible...") other than thus:

God. God was responsible for Jesus' death; otherwise, Christianity makes no sense.

Shanbaum, I'll admit I was curious to see how you would respond to that question. I think most Christians would say that we were responsible for Jesus' death. It was our sins He died for. I will be bold enough to ask who you yourself think killed Him, I know you can't speak for every Jewish person but I find myself puzzled by the reaction of a large part of the Jewish community and like Cindy. am looking for some insight. I figure you are more than qualified to answer this on several levels-but only if you feel comfortable.

[Darris Chambless]

shanbaum said:
I certainly wouldn't presume to speak for "the Jewish people", but as a Jew who has studied Christianity, I do not understand how a Christian could answer the question ("who was responsible...") other than thus:

God. God was responsible for Jesus' death; otherwise, Christianity makes no sense.

It was Jesus' responsibility to (through his service to God) follow God's design for him. It was God's intent (as written in scripture) that Jesus revive faith, hope and religion through his own faith in God and then die for what he believed in.

I saw the movie yesterday and can say that I saw nothing anti-Semetic in it. I saw a biblical history of events leading up to the crucifixion and can say that after seeing the movie I was awe-struck. Because of my belief I've looked at what Jesus endured and can only say that, regardless of ones own beliefs, for Jesus to have endured what he did for people he didn't even know and to bring these people back to God was the epitomy of faith and the epitomy of sacrifice.

The movie, although very graphic in it's depiction of events, also gave what I consider to be a very realistic and historically accurate depiction of how the events unfolded and how punishment was carried out in those days. I'm sure many will leave the movie thinking it was gory, or that Mel Gibson didn't need to make it so graphic but it was the reality of the day. When you dress up what happened sos not to offend peoples sensativities you take away that reality and have turned it into nothing more than "cinema" or drama to be played out on stage.

For lack of a better way to describe it, watching the movie was like watching slides that were shown in biology class in high school of babies born to people that had done drugs (Acid in particular). The slides were rather gruesome and thankfully for the babies they didn't live, but I'll never forget what my biology teacher said to us when people whinced, hid their eyes and tried to block out the spectacle of what they saw. In the most soothing voice he said "Please look. I want you to see what can happen when you make the decision to take drugs. You may not think anything of it at the time but the decisions you make now can have lasting consequences on you and your future."

This movie is like that to me. "Please look." see what one man did for the many. Heck, even if you think Jesus was nothing more than a kook or a religious fanatic look at what he did, not to others but for others, with his own personal sacrifice. Regardless of what you believe Jesus gave his life in the belief or hope that his death would be our salvation. Whether some or all believe this or not he sure did!

As to the movie-going experience, it was graphic but true to form and I've never heard a theatre so quiet when people got up to leave. It was akin to filing out of a funeral service. A very powerful movie in my opinion.

Pete,

This movie is very moving but very painful. Think of me, "Mr. Dirt bikin', shade tree mechanic-in', pistol packin' and shootin'" trying to keep it together in a crouded movie theatre ;) I don't cry at movies.

Will like the movie? It's not a like/dislike question, but you will feel it I can assure you.

Take care all,

Darris C.

[shanbaum]

Karen,

There's a long history (as in, centuries) of Passion Plays inspiring anti-semitism, so it shouldn't be too surprising that Jews would be a little sensitive about being portrayed really negatively in this film.

I haven't seen it (though I plan to), but from what I've read, the complaint is that while the Romans are given something of a pass (e.g., Pilate is reportedly portrayed as an unwilling participant, when in fact he is generally believed to have been a paladin of brutality), the Jews are portrayed as the bloodthirsty culprits.

I really don't think that many Jews give a tremendous amount of thought to the "who's responsible" question - there's a sense of being doubly removed from the issue. On a theological level, I don't think that many Jews feel a strong sense of kinship with their ancient forebears, who were, after all, members of a sacrificial cult. And Jesus is just not an object of study or interest for most.

At the risk of repeating myself, let me put what I said before a little differently. Let's say that the Jews were portrayed accurately in the film (and I'm assuming it was a nasty portrayal) - as I see it, Christians would nonetheless owe Jews a debt of gratitude. No crucifixion, no redemption, no Christianity. They played their own kind of sacrificial role in a plan that Christians believe was devised by God, though I understand what you're saying about man's ultimate responsibility - if Adam and Eve had behaved themselves, we'd all be happy and naked and childbirth would be painless and God knows what else, and there would have been no need for redemption - but, given man's fallen state at the time, someone had to play God's executioner.

So, according to that view, Jews get eternal damnation so that Chrisitans get eternal life. It seems to me that an appropriate response on the part of Christians would have been to have instituted Take a Jew to Lunch Thursday on the day before each Good Friday. Instead, what followed was two millennia of violence against the very people who played a crucial (one might say "tragic") role in your salvation.

I think that the vast majority of Christians today would abhor any such violence. But there are a lot of really stupid people in the world; the fear is that Mel's movie will do what Mel's movies tend to do: invoke rage, and the targets of that rage will be... guess who...

[Pete Hanlin]

So, according to that view, Jews get eternal damnation so that Chrisitans get eternal life. It seems to me that an appropriate response on the part of Christians would have been to have instituted Take a Jew to Lunch Thursday on the day before each Good Friday. Instead, what followed was two millennia of violence against the very people who played a crucial (one might say "tragic") role in your salvation.

I think that the vast majority of Christians today would abhor any such violence. But there are a lot of really stupid people in the world; the fear is that Mel's movie will do what Mel's movies tend to do: invoke rage, and the targets of that rage will be... guess who...
First, I have to say the "take a Jew to lunch Thursday" idea was one of the nicest uses of levity that I've seen in a subject (religion) that gives us so few such opportunities (and, if you're around during lunch on Thursday at Vision Expo, I'll be happy to treat lunch...).
:D
I think a lot of people focus on the fact that it was a group of Jewish people who sought the death of Jesus (specifically, the representatives of the religious institution of the day), forget that it was also a group of Jewish people who constituted Jesus' original following. Fact is, the death of Jesus was brought about by a few people who were threatened by his presence and his popularity with the Jewish population in general. Remember, Palm Sunday occurred only a week before his crucifiction.

Also, it should be noted that- assuming God works consistently through history- what was destined to happen was going to happen. In other words, Jesus didn't die because Jewish people hated him, were murderous fiends, and so on- he died because he was "slain before the foundations of the earth." Kinda like a Moses and Pharoh thing (why didn't Pharoh just let the Jewish nation free at the beginning of the plagues... because God hardened his heart to fulfill His purpose).

All that said, I sincerely hope no one is ignorant enough to interpret this movie as a reason for anti-semitism. To be honest, halfway through Schindler's List I probably would have been willing to take a swing at the first German I saw (somehow by the end though, Spielburg managed to bring a calmness to the end of that excellent movie).

Anyway, if you wanna get miffed at someone for killing Jesus, get miffed at Adam- that's where the problem started.

[LaurieC]

shanbaum said:
I haven't seen it (though I plan to), but from what I've read, the complaint is that while the Romans are given something of a pass (e.g., Pilate is reportedly portrayed as an unwilling participant, when in fact he is generally believed to have been a paladin of brutality), the Jews are portrayed as the bloodthirsty culprits.

I think that the vast majority of Christians today would abhor any such violence. But there are a lot of really stupid people in the world; the fear is that Mel's movie will do what Mel's movies tend to do: invoke rage, and the targets of that rage will be... guess who...

I haven't seen the movie and the more we think about it or discuss it, the more we think it unlikely we will. So perhaps I shouldn't comment but I have an awful lot of strong feelings on some of the comments here. I know a lot more about Roman history than probably Jewish or for that matter Christian. Why? Because what I was taught about Roman history was probably more objective so I paid more attention. Pontius Pilate was a very crual dictator and his "washing of the hands" a very early example of "spin". Who killed Jesus? Why we all did if one embraces the Christian premise of God's only Son sent to redeem us as in EVERYBODY. The point the Bible makes is ask unto him and you shall be forgiven. And if Jewish people don't believe in Christ as the Messiah, doesn't the Bible also say some things about judging as in casting stones? DUH! I guess what bothers me most is a few hypothetical scenarios here.

Isn't one of the common principles of Judaism, Christianity and Islam love for each other as people of the book among other things? Aren't the other major religions the same as well? If we even want to say that the Jews killed Christ, are any of those Jews still alive, do we Christians know them? And if we do want to, as Christians, embrace that as who was right, who was wrong, gee were the earliest Christians doing anything to stop it? Wasn't Judas supposed to be one? I have to say, as a Christian, I have many problems with much of the dogma taught in many churchs. As for the Hollywood scene, and sorry Mel, as far as I'm concerned you're part of it........ really folks, why would anyone's interpretation of certain events, placed on a movie screen really influence our opinions? Just like, by virtue of anyone being a celebrity, they will not influence my political choices? Are we as a people really that weak minded that we believe someone's notoriety makes them smarter than us? Oh I know certain courts and jurys think so, but that's a topic for another day! So yes, other than technical issues, where Robert always speaks strongly to his greater expertise in certain areas and therefore I bow down to his substantial wisdom, I usually don't agree with Robert in Just Conversation. Hats off to you Robert for some very well thought out statements and one of the reasons I won't see the movie is in my own little way I don't want my little non significant dollars going to a product potentially divisive.

[Darris Chambless]

Strangely enough the movie did portray Potius Pilate as an unwilling participant in the whole thing, but does a good job of explaining why in his own words to his wife. I believe three times prior to this crucifixion Pilate had been called to Rome and was disciplined for excessive crucifixion and making the Romans look like blood thirsty monsters. The political climate of the day warranted keeping dissent to a minimum as directed by Caesar which included quite a bit of false witness and brutality if memory serves. Pilate was doing what was ordered (perhaps a little too willingly in some instances) but became the "whipping boy" when the political climate changed for Rome. He was in a "Damned if you do. Damned if you don't." situation at that point. An up rising against him and the Romans for calling for crucifixion would lend him no favor with Caesar and Rome would turn its back on him and replace him after his demise. To not call for crucifixion would change the climate with the Jewish Rabbi and elders and would lend him no favor with Caesar and Rome would turn their back on him and replace him after his demise. He had to pick one basically.

If you want to talk about a religion with a blood thirsty past, the Jews had nothing on the Catholics. Keep in mind we're talking historically (and some could and or would make the case that we're talking present as well) but I, WE are talking historically. In the early days of the Vatican and the extension of power to the Catholic church if you opposed the Catholic church in any way (and sometimes even if you didn't they just didn't take a liking to you) they would commit genocide against you and your ilk, no if's, and's or but's about it. Catholic history is a bloody history.

Anti-Semetic? Again I saw no anti-semetism, I saw historical portrayal. The Jews called for the crucifixion but the brutality was carried out by the Romans (and the movie depicts the Romans enjoyment of inflicting their brutality on others quite vividly, so be prepared). The movie shows the Romans more as a brutal people because...well, they were, which may have a little to do with Catholicisms bloody history. It is the Roman Catholic Church afterall. It shows the Jews as more politically driven imo, but decide for yourself. It is well worth the time to go see although you need to know something about Christianity and the time to get anything out of it other than it being a movie about brutality.

Take care and God bless

Darris C.

[keithbenjamin]

I'm not sure what you're so uptight about Laurie. I have yet to hear anyone say "Mel says, the Jews killed Jesus, so lets go kill the Jews!" This whole conversation, in my opinion, is just rediculous... along the lines of, "Hitler was a German, so lets go kill the Germans." or "Pilate killed Jesus, so lets go kill Italians." Who cares!? It's all completely hypothetical at this point and you're getting worked up over possibilities. The point is Jesus was born to die. It's the sins of humanity that are responsible for his death not any group or individual. Who actually commited the act is completely irrelevant. I would venture say that the majority of the "anti-semitic" controversy surrounding the movie isn't the opinion of most Jews, but of a few with political agendas, meant to detract from the film and its true meaning and discourage people from seeing it. Unfortunately for them, it seems to have backfired.

I'm sure you'll see very positive love-filled reactions to the movie as opposed to hatred. However, if some nut starts Jew-hating and attributes it to the movie, you can rest assured we'll hear about it. In which case, I can almost guarantee that hatred was there long before the movie.

[Cindy Hamlin]

Shanbaum,
I am in awe right now. I had always seen you as the crusty optical guy. I appreciate your explanation and have a newfound respect for you as a gentleman and scholar. And Darris almost is agreeing with you. Could a really hot place be freezing over now?

Thanks for the insight. I just wondered. And Karen, thanks for the clarification post that got this wonderful dialogue started.

And Laurie.....glad to see you back and passionate in your beliefs! Always knew you were!

[Joann Raytar]

shanbaum said:
So, according to that view, Jews get eternal damnation so that Chrisitans get eternal life. It seems to me that an appropriate response on the part of Christians would have been to have instituted Take a Jew to Lunch Thursday on the day before each Good Friday. Instead, what followed was two millennia of violence against the very people who played a crucial (one might say "tragic") role in your salvation.

More simply, Jesus was Jewish and the first Christians began as a sect of Judaism, a cult if you will; Rome decided if you can't beat 'em join 'em. Modern Chrisitans just forget where they started from. Actually, I think we have done that quite often.

Who knows what is actually going on when it happens. How do we know that thousands of years from now another sect isn't going to hate us for what James Earl Ray did?

The movie is violent but it is based on a book which is extremely violent at times. I don't think it is such a bad idea to express that passion. Hopefully it will serve as a history lesson more than an incitement to more violence.

[LaurieC]

Please see my quote in colored format following your quote. Please read what I say before bashing me for it!

keithbenjamin said:
I'm not sure what you're so uptight about Laurie. The point is Jesus was born to die. It's the sins of humanity that are responsible for his death not any group or individual.

Who killed Jesus? Why we all did if one embraces the Christian premise of God's only Son sent to redeem us as in EVERYBODY.

Does that possibly look like you called me uptight for saying the same thing?

[keithbenjamin]

Laurie,

Yes, and on that point we agree. However I was trying to illustrate the absurdity of getting upset over hypothetical situations that are not only based on somewhat erroneous accusations but very much absurd in their own right.

In other words, a movie depicting the sacrifice made by Jesus Christ because of his love for us is as likely to incite hatred against Jews as a movie about Ronald Reagan's shooting is to incite violence against anyone named Hinkley. That is not to say hatred of Jews or any other group doesn't exist, but it exists in spite of, not because of a movie about love.

By the way, no bashing intended, just conversation. :cheers:

[LaurieC]

Keith, thank you for saying you weren't bashing me, I'd still like you to read again, in it's entirety, my post because I also say people should not be influenced negatively by that movie or anything else on the big screen or anything but very responsible TV journalism or documentaries. They shouldn't and those that are seek an excuse for pre-existing views. I think Robert makes the same point and I think we both make it in a concise manner that is different than you paraphrase. But I love the discourse and apppreciate your opinions.

[chip anderson]

Shanebaum is right, for if Christ was God, or if God is God either could have avoided or changed the sentence at any time. And of course one or both of them did "reverse the sentence" after three days.

Chip

[Night Train]

I saw it Tuesday and was moved to uncontrollable sobbing.

I would not even attempt to compare it to other movies.
I dont think I want to ever see it again it was that good.

Dwayne

[karen]

shanbaum said:
- if Adam and Eve had behaved themselves, we'd all be happy and naked and childbirth would be painless and God knows what else,

Sure would have liked that to be true a few weeks ago ;) Thank you for your answer. I knew you would do that as well as you did. I had always thought it was the "religious" Jews ( i.e Sanhedrin and Pharisees) who had the problem with Jesus and never considered the Jews as a whole responsible. Since Jesus was a Jew, the apostles were Jews, the Jews are still God's chosen people, and if it weren't for Him a Gentile like me could not be saved I admit to being confused by some of the current controversy. Someday I would love to have a conversation with you about why it is that Jewish people don't acknowledge Jesus as the messiah-but that should probably wait until we get to meet in person. I think that would be a long conversation. And considering the controversy that thread could cause...thanks again for your well said respose! :D

[chm2023]

We saw the Passion on Saturday. I would not recommend it; the violence is unrelenting and really sickening. I know Gibson says this is realistic--but why the slow motion? There was a possibility of making an honest and moving movie, but IMO the lack of anything but violence for most of the movie has a numbing effect.

Anti-semitic? I thought so. I think some Jews are quick to make this charge (gee, wonder why that is?) but in this case I think it is warranted. The Pilate thing flies in the face of history (this guy gave Tiberius pause for his brutality) and there is Hamletesque dialogue between Pilate and Mrs Pilate that appears no where in the Gospels. Then there is the initial beating and brutalization of Christ as the Jewish soldiers take him away from the garden. Again, in the Gospels it simply says Jesus is led away, the violence is courtesy of Mad Max. The single worst thing that I caught was when Christ is being interrogated by Pilate. At first he doesn't answer but then when Pilate says (I am obviously paraphrasing) that he holds Christ's fate in his hands, Christ responds that "You have no power, the power is given to you by another. He who led me here is responsible"--the He in question being God the Father according to any and all respected interpretations of the Bible. Gibson cuts to a shot of Caiphus as this is being said and the implication is unmistakable. (PS Mel: as long as you're wrapping yourself in the mantle of truth and authenticity, people, including Christ, were crucified naked. How twisted is this, show someone being flayed and iron stakes driven through their wrists and ankles, but please, no nakedness!!)

I do think the movie was technically quite excellent, something that gets lost in the shuffle when discussing the film. I'm not sure the subtitles were a good or bad idea--what did other people think?

[Darris Chambless]

http://www.godrules.net/library/kjv/kjvmat27.htm

The above could have been and was the screen play for the movie.

As to Claudia Procula:

http://www.thechristianarchive.com/s...33/page/133457

There are some things one has to rely on historical research to find that may not have made its place in the Bible. It does not lend it any less credibility. From what I've read regarding the information gathered for this movie, Mel Gibson along with many others researched the events as thoroughly as recorded history would allow.

http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/12083c.htm

Here's a link with a little background of Pontius Pilate during this time. Keeping uprising down was the flavor of the day as requested by Rome and if that meant brutalizing people for others to watch then so be it but it was a double edged sword and the Governors knew it, so they had to be careful and mindful of which way the "political wind" blew.

chm,

I'm in agreement that the Sam Peckinpaw slow-mo's were a bit too frequent at the end. However, the gore is depicted as it was. What would one think happens when someone is beaten with wooden rods or flailed?

Anyway...

The Roman soldiers original intent, although it was stated otherwise by Pilate, was too beat Jesus to death. It was a bloody, brutal practice. Like I told my father regarding the brutality, we tend to here the words "chastize" or "beaten" or even "brutalized" and have a soft mental depiction of what these things really are or were. Like stoning for instance; I always had this picture in my head as a kid of rocks being lobbed (not thrown with any real force) at a person's body meant to hurt the person more accidentally than purposefully but not cause a great deal of damage other than a few cuts and bruises. I knew that the practice of stoning was very harsh but couldn't really change the mental image because of how it is portrayed even in the Bible. The brutality is not discussed in detail. The violence and gore in this movie were (imo) the best overall depiction of the reality of these punishments and give people a less subdued mental image of what really happened. It's gory. It's brutal. It's what happened.

This generation tends to have to see something for themselves to understand the magnitude of an event or the sacrifice made.

Take care,

Darris C.