Posted on 02/25/2004 6:20:30 PM PST by Hal1950
Shas chairman MK Eli Yishai on Wednesday called for Mel Gibson's "The Passion of the Christ" movie to be banned from Israeli cinemas, calling it a blood libel.
In the U.S., the Anti-Defamation League issued a statement saying that the film "repeats all of the stereotypes and myths surrounding the death of Jesus that have accompanied anti-Semitism for the last 2,000 years. Regretfully, Gibson refused all of our attempts for a dialogue aimed at preventing this harm to Jews."
ADL National Director Abraham Foxman said he was troubled by Gibson's claim of historical accuracy. "He made his choice," Foxman told a news conference after viewing the film. "And it's to blame the Jews."
"The Passion," which depicts in gruesome detail the final hours of the life of Jesus, premiered in the U.S. and other countries Wednesday, but not in Israel.
Jewish and other religious groups in Manhattan planned protests for Wednesday. Amcha, The Coalition for Jewish Concerns, planned to wear concentration camp uniforms at a New York theater to link the film's portrayal of Jews to the sort of hate that led to the Nazi Holocaust.
"The whole thing is a blood libel," said Yishai, from the ultra-Orthodox Shas party, using a term that refers to a medieval slur that Jews used the blood of Christians to make unleavened bread for the Passover festival.
However, it appeared unlikely that the film would be banned. Few films have been barred in recent years, and the ones to be forbidden are usually pornographic. The Israeli film board, which makes these decisions, could not be reached for comment.
Yishai said the belief that the Jews had killed Jesus had led to "millions" of Jews being killed and persecuted in the last two millennia.
"This libel used to spread by word of mouth. Now the media are spreading it," Yishai told AP. "We should not accept this."
Yishai said he had also appealed to the Foreign Ministry to try to encourage other governments to bar the film.
Jewish leaders have said that the movie gives a harsh portrayal of Jews and blames them for death of Jesus. They have warned it could lead to a rise in anti-Semitism. Gibson, who also funded and co-scripted the film, denies that charge.
New York Cardinal Edward Egan, meanwhile, wrote to parishes to stress Jews were not responsible for the crucifixion of Jesus.
"He gave His Life for us," Egan wrote in a column to appear in next month's issue of Catholic New York. "No one took it from Him. This is, and has always been, Catholic doctrine.
You should be prepared to if you are challenged.
I did Google Dio Cassius on Judea revolt. The first 20 hits did not contain anything like what you claimed.
Here is the closest I could find:
In the beginning, the Romans were not worried about the insurgents. But little by little, the disturbances spread to all of Judea. The Jews rose in rebellion throughout the country, inflicting increasingly heavy losses on the Romans, sometimes resorting to ruse, sometimes to all out war. People from other nations, attracted by the pillage, threatened to join them. The entire world was seething. Finally, Hadrian dispatched his greatest generals to fight them. The most famous was Julius Severus, the governor of Brittany. Initially, the latter did not risk openly attacking the insurgents because of their great numbers and the intensity of their desperation. Instead, he preferred to undertake isolating them, forcing them to withdraw to their strongholds and cutting off their provisions. Thus, he succeeded, slowly but surely, to weaken and destroy them. Few Jews survived. Julius Severus seized about fifty of their best fortresses; 985 of their most important villages were reduced to ruins; 580,000 men died in ambushes and in battles. The numbers of those that died of starvation, that were victims of epidemics or that were burned to death cannot be determined. Almost all of Judea was devastated
Dio Cassius, History, LXIX, 12
Sounds to me like the Jews were the ones who were victims of genocide (as usual!).
Don't ever demand that others do your homework because you don't want to take the treouble to back up your own claims.
There is a great deal of discomfort on the Jewish side with this alliance. It's kind of like a hasty, "thanks very much, but I really must be going, here's the door, bye...slam" the bum's rush.
There's certainly no warmth.
I can't escape some conclusions I am drawing from this Jewish response to a Catholic movie.
1) first of all, I am not taking seriously these protests of some return to pogrom-ic violence, at least not here in the US. Who knows what insanity will prevail in post-Christian Europe?
2) The Jewish leadership, like Heir from Weisenthal and Foxman from ADL, are utter cynics. They are playing victim in order to promote themselves and their institutions.
3) These leaders take themselves seriously, however, and seem determined to assert the right to tell Christians how to conduct Christian worship--there must be no mention of Jews--kind of boggles the mind. If Christians refuse, they risk that horrible threat of the accusation of antisemitism, only this eventuality is generally only in hints and veiled threats. Where have these leaders gotten the chustpa to believe they can make such a demand? Do we invade the half-empty synagogues to demand that the services be conducted to please Christians?
Once they actually start shooting the antisemitism salvos, however, it gets pretty dangerous. That's the only weapon they hold, and once it's gone there's no reloading.
Gibson's Passion is his own vision, based on much scripture if the discussion around it is any indication. Probably as faithful as any movie rendition to the text.
It is a kind of Mass, a Good Friday service. In short, a religious celebration.
This is America, and we may worship as we please.
Clearly not from you.
You have clearly stated that you have trouble defending the US-Israel alliance to your "liberal friends."
There is a great of warmth between Jews and Christians, between sincere Jews and sincere Christians that is.
The Passion will screen in Israel, because Israel is a democracy.
And since Israel is a democracy, free speech is the norm, even the freedom of some to express concern that the film might incite anti-semitism, in a region of the world where Jews are getting blown up on almost a daily basis.
Not necessarily Mel's fault, but an unintended consequence.
I'm truly, sorry.
But,.........truth is,.....'this' film an overly evil, abusive, and 'porno-graphic'......vile film.
'spots'......everywhere and on every person's mind who support it!
Shame on all 'involved' in its production and support!
I'm truly, sorry.
:-(
yet,.......Shalom forever.
(Romans 10:17)
re: You have clearly stated that you have trouble defending the US-Israel alliance to your "liberal friends." )))
Indeed, the question I find hardest to answer clearly and persuasively (and it's to libertarians, not liberals) is---"Why is it in the interest of the US to risk so much to protect Israel?" I think we may hear more of this as the numbers both of Jews and of Israel-supporters dwindle.
The arguments I do make all come down to shared moral loyalties--culture, democracy, and faith. But in this secular age, these don't persuade the increasingly secular. My arguments are of sentiment, and they have a limited shelf life. So--am always looking for a better and practical response to this question. One of these days, maybe you can stop hinting-hinting and sidling around and find the stones to respond.
I repeat, too, that Weisenthal and ADL have made one of the most breathtaking displays of self-promoting cynicism that I've ever seen in the entertainment business.
Foxman is a fool being manipulated by heathens to undermine any representation of righteous morality throughout humanity...
... as is any Jew who shares his opinion of 'The Passion.' My ire against them will be expunged, not through so-called blood-libel, but with the delivery of one uniquely western response:
"Mr. Foxman (et al), go F--- yourself!"
Sanhedrin 106a.
That was Balaam, not Jesus.
http://www.angelfire.com/mt/talmud/jesus.html
Where do you get you (mis)information?
I'm always getting confused with the Temples. I would have thought any new Temple would be the Third...hooboy.
Wrong, we don't ban movies in this country.
I took it as an image of anti-Christ.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.