Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article

To: bethelgrad
What is interesting to me is that Gibson's "traditional" approach dislikes ecumenism, yet he seems to be actively courting Evangelicals.

What's even more interesting to me is that Evangelicals (including the Southern Baptist Convention) are coming out very much in favor of this movie. If anyone knows whether the movie passes Scriptural muster, so to speak, it would be the Evangelicals. Not to mention that many Evangelicals are coming out in support of a *spit*, *spit* Roman Catholic "traditionalist". So you have on the one side a Catholic "traditionalist" who, if you buy into the stereotype, would normally consider Evangelicals a bunch of heretics, while on the other side you have Evangelicals, who, if you buy into the stereotype, would normally refer to the Roman Catholic Church as the Whore of Babylon, and both sides are coming together because both sides think this is a very faithful movie. Ain't that great?

I think it goes to show that the common perceptions people have about both the traditionalists and evangelicals don't always ring true.

10 posted on 09/11/2003 5:20:17 PM PDT by wimpycat (Down with Kooks and Kookery!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies ]


To: wimpycat
BUMP
12 posted on 09/11/2003 5:35:41 PM PDT by nickcarraway
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies ]

To: wimpycat
So you have on the one side a Catholic "traditionalist" who, if you buy into the stereotype, would normally consider Evangelicals a bunch of heretics...
Hey, he flat out said that his wife won't even make the cut because she isn't a Catholic!

FWIW, I'm a staunch Protestant but I certainly expect to see many, many Catholics in Heaven, including Gibson.


15 posted on 09/11/2003 5:58:39 PM PDT by DallasMike
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies ]

To: wimpycat
<<<<>>> yes, but I think it's more of a coming togetehr because both sides see it a a very 'literalist' movie. It follows the Gospels as they are in the Bible, so we can say yes, it is faithful to what is written there, literally speaking. TC
42 posted on 09/12/2003 9:07:08 AM PDT by truecompassion
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies ]

To: wimpycat
So you have on the one side a Catholic "traditionalist" who, if you buy into the stereotype, would normally consider Evangelicals a bunch of heretics, while on the other side you have Evangelicals, who, if you buy into the stereotype, would normally refer to the Roman Catholic Church as the Whore of Babylon, and both sides are coming together because both sides think this is a very faithful movie. Ain't that great?

I don't know... When I was talking with my friends at church yesterday, it looked as though I'd be the only young guy to go see that movie. The objection some had was the Aramaic thing -- they weren't going to see a subtitled movie. Oh, well.

More disturbing was the second reason -- that it was made by Gibson, a Catholic, and "would mis-represent the Gospels," indicitive of a denominational distrust of all things Catholic.

Oh well. What do I expect from a church where it is more than occasionally taught that Rome is the Whore of Babylon?

71 posted on 12/22/2003 6:28:39 AM PST by jude24 ("Facts are meaningless! You can use facts to prove anything thats even REMOTELY true!" -- H. Simpson)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies ]

To: wimpycat
...both sides are coming together because both sides think this is a very faithful movie. Ain't that great?

It's absolutely glorious and must go way beyond just this movie.

I notice that your posts are often given to softening interdenominational tensions. God will bless you.

74 posted on 12/22/2003 7:27:07 AM PST by AAABEST
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson