Posted on 03/09/2004 6:00:17 AM PST by KriegerGeist
You have not misspoken at all. I appreciate that you might want clarification on such a statement. What I am really saying is that the Mary of the Bible is nothing like the Mary of Catholicism which is best described right here: http://www.immaculateheart.com/MaryOnLine/html/cover_story_0.html#
I'm curious to know where you found me offering anything resembling a "blanket condemnation." Sure, I've offered a couple examples of questionable scenes (from questionable sources), and I've mentioned I currently intend to miss it and why, but I never intended to condemn the movie entirely. Quite the contrary, I've repeatedly said I'm happy for those who choose to see it; I'd never be happy for believers who choose to see movies I'd condemned.
I have non-Christian friends who make the same sorts of statements about belief in God, or, (more often), in the whole concept of salvation--the atoning death of Christ that was depicted in the film.
Which "statements" do you mean?
I guess I'm just as guilty of prejudgement, though, since I have yet to see the movie myself.
Well, I appreciate that. However, I would suggest there is a difference between judgment (and/or condemnation) of the film and choosing not to see it for spiritual reasons. It may very well be an epic motion picture worthy of many awards. Better yet, God may use it to bring people closer to Himself. But, I'm thusfar convinced it's not for me.
It seems no one here who's actually seen the movie caught where there was any suggestion of the cross being made in the temple or synagogue to corroborate the allegation I quoted in reply # 12.
Spatzie, since you're planning to see the movie, I'd be very interested to hear whether it contains any such suggestion.
Please also watch for any indication that Mary sees the Satan character.
Those claims came from two different sources; I'd appreciate knowing whether they have any basis.
I still maintain the original verses were penned in Esperanto.
En la komenco Dio kreis la cielon kaj teron...Mia Dio, Hakilo estas en mia kapo.
Seems only reasonable, since Mel Gibson is Australian....
Horse hockey!
You are being misled, Biblewonk, and I am certainly NOT the one doing the misleading.
I'll tell you what I did see - for the first time, I finally understood the gravity and intensity of my Savior's suffering FOR MY SINS. I walked away from the experience re-examining my relationship with Christ, knowing that I had NOT honored Him in my thoughts and deeds, and re-affirming my commitment to Him.
That's what I saw. Where this other "poster" got their crazy ideas from, I don't know.
#2. Do you believe you got more out of this movie than you would if you had been reading the bible daily?
I tend to take everything that the Bible says as literal, and I think we all should.
We know that Jesus often spoke in metaphors, and I think this is one of those areas that could possibly lean in that direction.
I don't feel strongly enough one way or another to really make a case about it.
I agree that it WOULD have added to the drama of the moment to have the rooster crow, and in fact probably everyone was expecting it - which may be why Gibson left it out.
To me that's just another example of his masterful production.
Gibson knew his initial audience would be made up by people with at least a passing familiarity of scripture so maybe he left it to our understanding.
The more I think about the movie, the more I'm blown away by the job he did.
The poster from the other chatboard either made that scene up, because it wasn't in the movie I saw, or didn't understand what they saw.
As to whether I would have gotten more out of the movie if I had been reading the bible daily, I don't think so. I have studied my scripture and pray often. Although I am a woman, and women are traditionally more emotional than men, I tend to react rationally - not emotionally - in my daily living.
On a purely cerebral level, I knew that Christ suffered, was cruficied, died, was buried, descended into hell, and rose again for my sins. I did not understand, fully and completely, on an emotional and spiritual level, how horrendous it was. The movie drew me in, made me stand there, and portrayed, in terrible detail, the magnitude of Christ's physical suffering (while the cerebral part of me nagged about the sins He was paying for that I inflicted on Him).
It's the same as reading about a horrible car accident, witnessing one take place, or actually being in one. You never forget that sickening sound of screeching brakes, or how your body tensed muscles you didn't know you had, or how you slammed into the dashboard, the windsheild, the crunching sound of metal, the mess, the blood, the pain.
Despite the fact that I have had a strong faith in God since I was just a little child, it made all the difference in the world for me. Why? Because I felt like I was there. I surpassed an almost rote awareness of Christ's suffering, to a place of understanding.
And that has made me re-examine my life and my relationship to God.
Not necessarily. He seems to have a follow-up waiting in the wings.
The hypocrisey of Hollywood liberals magnified in living color.
Well, there was Caiphas and the handful of pompous elites of the Sanhedrin, but I did not see them portrayed as being any worse than the Romans who carried out the deed, nor than Herod's court. All of these characters revealed man's capacity for inhumanity and utter depravity and it was irrelevant whether the "men" were Jew or Gentile. It was like every evil that ever touched the human race, before or since, was drawn to and clarified at that point in history, frozen in one moment in time so that the sin of everyone involved seemed exaggerated and distorted. To say that the movie was anti-Semitic is just plain silly. Even Jesus said, "no man takes my life from me...I lay it down willingly."
Apparently they're only opposed to blacklising traitors. It's okay to blacklist a Christian for spreading hate the Word of God.
Turn on the news.
The only people who are going to see and spread such things (the cross being made in the synagogue) are those who view the movie with the intention of finding fault and promoting an agenda and who are not opposed to using their imaginations to embellish what they "see." It's not so different than these liberal whackjob journalists that report only what supports their own agenda and who have no problem torturing truth in such a way as to make it unrecognizable, as long at it connveys THEIR message, and the truth be d*mned. That is simply the devil slithering through their minds, always monitoring what is made available for public consumption. That shrieking you hear is his reaction to encountering someone (in this case, Mel) with enough faith to confront and defeat his machinations.
That said, I think I know which scene they are referring to and I certainly didn't get that out of it.
Not to mention common decency and common sense.
Personally, I don't see what all the Catholic/Protestant hype is about. In my opinion, it is just another tool the devil has slipped into the mix since he failed so miserably at keeping people away based on the false premise of anti-Semitism. The next best thing is to get Christians at each other's throats by saying the movie is too Catholic. Yeah, that'll work. < /sarcasm > C'mon; the only one that wins with that attitude is the devil.
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.