Thoughts on the Passion

JJM · 02-26-2004, 01:03 AM

Hey guys. I was just watching the news and saw a thing on the Mel Gibson movie the Passion, and was wondering what you thought. I also saw the movie today, and though it was graphic, overall it was a decent movie. Do you think he is in it for the money or really believes in his cause, and do you think that this will help spread Christianity or hurt it?

DrChaos · 02-26-2004, 01:05 AM

Woah, sorry about that JJM, I was accidentally logged on as you :/.

Victor · 02-26-2004, 05:25 AM

I have seen the promos and the one hour interview with Gibson. He is a self admitted fundamentalist who has broken with conventional Catholicism. He has formed his own 'catholic cult' and built a church to foster his views. From what I have seen, the movie is NOT scriptural though many great voices are saying that it is. As a quick note I would ask you to note the synoptic Gospels, Matthew, Mark and Luke, and direct me to the parts where Jesus carries the cross, nay, even touches the wood! I will give you time to find it, the rest of your life, because it isn't there. And in John, where he does carry the cross, he carries it all the way to Golgotha! The 'scourging' has gone from a mocking and humiliation, an expunging from society and slapping, (Greek Text) to beating with a whip, (Latin version) to flaying the flesh off the man! (Gibson version) However, it is meant to drive the viewer to a frenzy of emotional activity with an early Easter approaching (Today is Ash Wednesday here) and I personally believe to evoke some attempt to save a failing Christian religion. State wide, church attendance is down to about 17% of the entire, nationwide, baptized membership. Churches are closing or merging in every state and in every stronghold. Boston is down to 14%, Chicago, a Lutheran marketplace, is closing church after church for lack of money and members. However, I intend to see the movie to see just how far this madness will go. In the Living Christ, I am; Victor

Zenda71 · 02-26-2004, 03:12 PM

I wonder why Satan is a woman ... ???

I, Brian · 02-26-2004, 04:35 PM

Satan a woman? Ah, now sounds very mediaeval.

As for the film itself - really, the question that needs asking is - what new experience does it bring to the screen?

Pathless · 02-26-2004, 05:04 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Zenda71

I wonder why Satan is a woman ... ???

That's ridiculous. Everyone knows Satan is a snake.

Vajradhara · 02-26-2004, 05:38 PM

Namaste all,

you know... it was my impression that the message of Christianity was the Ressurrection, not the death.

perhaps, i'm misunderstanding the whole thing.

i've not seen the movie yet, however, there were plenty of folks talking about it... apparantly, Mary approaches Jesus whilst he's carrying the cross and talks with her..??? what's that about?

you won't find that in any Bible that is supposed to be accurate.

JJM · 02-26-2004, 10:41 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Vajradhara

Namaste all,

you know... it was my impression that the message of Christianity was the Ressurrection, not the death.

perhaps, i'm misunderstanding the whole thing.

i've not seen the movie yet, however, there were plenty of folks talking about it... apparantly, Mary approaches Jesus whilst he's carrying the cross and talks with her..??? what's that about?

you won't find that in any Bible that is supposed to be accurate.

The Death of Christ is a very important role in Christianity. It was his death not his resurrection that was the sacrifice. He as the final sacrifice for our sins is why we now no longer have to sacrifice at a temple to receive forgiveness. However the resurrection is very important as well because It helps fulfill his sacrifice and by first descending into Hell he was able to bring those who where there entrance into heaven. His death is still very important. So I guess you could say that it’s all Kind of like one big package.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Pathless

That's ridiculous. Everyone knows Satan is a snake.

I don't know if this was a joke but I would like to ask you where in Genesis it says that Satan was the snake. I don't see that but everyone insists that it is true. so if anyone could point out where I'm missing something it would help.

Pathless · 02-26-2004, 11:50 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by JJM

I don't know if this was a joke but I would like to ask you where in Genesis it says that Satan was the snake. I don't see that but everyone insists that it is true. so if anyone could point out where I'm missing something it would help.

Yeah, I was just being silly.

Quahom1 · 02-26-2004, 11:53 PM

There is one thing that appears certain about the movie. Whether loved, hated or other, it is being talked about at length.

The "snake" is mentioned in Genesis, though it is called the serpent, temptor, and such, where it is cursed to crawl on its belly...it will for ever strike at the heal of woman, and it will have its head crushed by her same heal.

At some part of the new testament, Jesus commands a rich man who is a disciple to take Mary as his mother, and Mary to take "Joseph" (I think) as her son. The point was to make provisions for his mother in her old age. He is the same man, who's tomb Jesus was laid in.

There is another reference in the new testament (and old), describing the "visage" of Christ as being unrecognizable, after the scourge. If anyone is familiar with the "whips" the Romans used to torture their condemned, you would have to consider the probability that there may not have been much epedermal layer left intact on him, after his whipping. The "whip" was constructed of leather thongs, with bits of bone and jagged stone sewn into the thongs. There were usually nine thongs to a whip, tied to a wooden handle about two feet long. The thongs were usually three to five feet in length and would be moving in excess of 100 miles per hour when they struck the back of the condemned. In later years, the term "Cat 'O' Nine tails" became the descriptor. Consider the damage a "Bull whip" can inflict with just one leather thong, and no bones or bits of stone added. It can take a man's head off, with one stroke...

As for carrying the "cross" from the chambers to the hill of skulls, Roman history is rift with examples of the condemned carrying the "cross beam" tied to the condemned's back and arms, while the main beam was already buried and cemented into the ground. The cruxifix was designed with a shiplap, or mortise and tennon (simple version of a dove tail) joint, which pieced the two together as one, using rope or peg and dowel fasteners. The typical dimensions of the cross beam was about 8 x 8 inches, and weighed approximately 100 to 200 pounds (it was made of dogwood, or other dense wood).

The nailing of the hands (through the wrist bones), was not so much as to hold the condemned in place as it was to add insult to injury (and excruciating, mind numbing agony). Same goes with the ankle bones. Usually the condemned was also lashed loosely with ropes around the arms above the elbow, so that the condemned would sink from his own body weight, causing restriction on his breathing, forcing him to "stand" on his feet to relieve the pressure on his lungs, but starting the cycle of agony all over again.

If after awhile (or once the guards were bored), the condemned was not dead (which could take DAYS), the lower leg bones would be deliberately broken, which prevented the condemned from standing, subsequently causing the condemned's lungs to fill with fluid, and he drowned. The Romans actually considered this to be a final act of mercy, that the condemned did not deserve.

This is not Biblical myth...it is historical fact, and it was all in a typical day.

The Jews did not kill Jesus (literally). The Romans did. And the Romans took great pleasure and pride in their execution skills. They wrote manuals inadnauseam on how to do it.

The bodies of the condemned were not usually buried either. Rather they were left to rot and to feed the carrion. It was unusual for a body to be brought down from a cuxifix for a "proper burial". Because of this Roman Guards were posted at the entrance of tombs to ensure enough time passed, and the body decomposed enough that no insurgent fanatical group would steal the body. In the heat of the Middle east, the significant decomposition of a body usually took from three to seven days (significant meaning the body exploded from the gas build up, along with bacterial and vermin infestation). After that, anyone entering the tomb would most likely die from toxic and hazardous gasses in the atmosphere, as well as a lack of oxygen. Death would be almost instantaneous.

The orders for the tomb guards were simple - no one gets the body, or your body would be on the next cross, if not worse.

The tomb guards were then usually HIGHLY MOTIVATED in preventing the theft of the body from the tomb.

Again, this is all historical fact, concerning roman punishment tactics.

And yes, at 48 years of age, Mary would have been an old woman in Palistine @ 33 ACE (AD). She was a widow, and shunned...a death sentence for any old person without means. What ever Jesus was, he was no fool, and had clear enough insight to see to his mother's needs. Hell, he convinced a tax collector to rally to his cause, why not a rich merchant to protect and provide for his mother (I would have). Life insurance...old testament style.

If you wish, I will research and provide specific information to back what I've just wrote (I love research).

Personally, I commend Mr. Gibson for the effort he put into this labour of love of his. On that note alone I will watch the movie in appreciation. As far as my Jewish neighbor is concerned...his ancestor may have screamed "death", but my ancestor may well have driven the spear into the side of a man named Jesus...and watched water and blood pour from the wound.

v/r

Q

DrChaos · 02-27-2004, 03:05 AM

I think that though the gospels don't speak of the things that happened to Jesus specifically, they still could have happened. And, I thought the devil was a guy, s/he sounded like one.

Susma Rio Sep · 02-27-2004, 05:02 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by JJM

Hey guys. I was just watching the news and saw a thing on the Mel Gibson movie the Passion, and was wondering what you thought. I also saw the movie today, and though it was graphic, overall it was a decent movie. Do you think he is in it for the money or really believes in his cause, and do you think that this will help spread Christianity or hurt it?

Yes, he's in for the money; otherwise he should found with the money he already made in movies orphanages where children are brought up to be self-sufficient and autonomous when they grow, notwithstanding that they are given a Catholic upbringing.

I think most people in the modern world, i.e., the Western world will not be much affected by the movie one way or another, not in a big number way.

Jews who are unhappy with the movie should finance many other movies showing the gory history of Christianity of which there is aplenty from the past to the present, in order to counterbalance whatever fear they have of the movie.

Susma Rio Sep

Quahom1 · 02-27-2004, 05:16 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Susma Rio Sep

Yes, he's in for the money; otherwise he should found with the money he already made in movies orphanages where children are brought up to be self-sufficient and autonomous when they grow, notwithstanding that they are given a Catholic upbringing.

I think most people in the modern world, i.e., the Western world will not be much affected by the movie one way or another, not in a big number way.

Jews who are unhappy with the movie should finance many other movies showing the gory history of Christianity of which there is aplenty from the past to the present, in order to counterbalance whatever fear they have of the movie.

Susma Rio Sep

Not so sure Susma, about the West not being affected much by the movie. $20,000,000 at first showing is no small potatoes. Critics up in arms, teenagers skipping school to "go see what this movie is all about", and then coming out with eyes red, and pain written all over their faces, along with a sense of what?...relief?...hope?, I don't know. Even non-Christians are coming out wondering about the extent that a "man" would go to, to bring forth a message of peace and good will.

You make a great point about the later actions of entities' atrocities in the name of the church. I for one am ashamed to know that history. But the "man" called Jesus is not guilty of those heinous crimes.

Just as I am mortified at the despicible actions of some "Catholic priests" in the current era.

I opine kind sir, that ANY MOVIE, or media, that expresses HOPE, is in deed a good thing, whether it be the story of Christ, Mohammad, Buda, the Dhali Llama, or Mohatma Ghandi. We need HOPE in copious amounts nowadays.

;-)

v/r

Q

I, Brian · 02-27-2004, 06:45 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Quahom1

Even non-Christians are coming out wondering about the extent that a "man" would go to, to bring forth a message of peace and good will.

Yes - "Mel Gibson" has a habit of directing films with violent themes.

The speech in Aramaic and Latin is a superb concept IMO - and perhaps people will laud it as a great work of art for it's emotional impact. But at the moment, there's too much hype making it sound like a gratuituous splatterfest for the religiously ghoulish.

Vajradhara · 02-27-2004, 07:44 PM

Namaste JJM,

thank you for the post.

from what i understand, the sacrifice of Jesus was to fulfill the OT requirements of a Blood sacrifice to atone for Sin. though i understand in Judaism that since the Temple was destroyed, this has been replaced with (correct me if i'm wrong) Torah.

however... isn't the Ressurrection of Jesus what conquers death? isn't that the act that allows one to receive the benediction of the Holy Spirit?

now.. you say something here that i find very interesting... are you saying that Jesus descended into Hell and then went to Heaven? and this is the significance of the Ressurrection?