Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: dennisw
Immediately after the "trial," the priests take turns hitting and spitting on Jesus, and then the guards and observers join in, beating him with sadistic glee.

I hate to tell the author of this piece, but this in Scripture.

Mark 14:65 And some began to spit on him, and to cover his face, and to buffet him, and to say unto him, Prophesy: and the servants did strike him with the palms of their hands.

As far as the Jewish Priests being present at the Crucifixion and taunting Our Lords, this is true too.

Mark 15:31 Likewise also the chief priests mocking said among themselves with the scribes, He saved others; himself he cannot save. 15:32 Let Christ the King of Israel descend now from the cross, that we may see and believe. And they that were crucified with him reviled him.

As usual, this guy doesn't have a problem with Mel Gibson or his movie, but with Scripture. The other things-the scene on the bridge, the Priests on Donkeys-are artistic license, and certainly not inappropiate. As far as the Jews entering the Praetorium, if this is in the film, it is a historical blunder. But there was an antechamber to the Praetorium, and Jews could go there. Perhaps this is what is intended in the film, but it may not be explained correctly.

What I get from this review is the impression that it was written by someone who has a modernistic bent, and doesn't like the politically incorrect parts of the Gospel(ie, the Jewish establishment's participation in the event, Pilate's vacillation). His problem isn't with Gibson or his film, but with the divine revelation contained in the Holy Gospels and in Sacred Tradition.

20 posted on 02/20/2004 2:20:06 PM PST by Clintons a commie
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]


To: Clintons a commie; All
I love Mel, but...

I think the problem is the direction the "historical blunders" and/or his artistic license seems to consistently take.

And does the scriptural account really need embellishing? Wouldn't a graphic depiction maintaining scriptural integrity be enough? ...in fact, more effective and credible?

Our church will be viewing it as a group, and I'll wait til afterward to draw any firm conclusions, but I am just as, if not more, bothered by the knee-jerk (not very Christ-like) defense of it as I am by the protesters...

Some Christians sure don't seem to consider (or care?) how their behavior alienates those who might otherwise be more open to the message.
36 posted on 02/20/2004 3:08:23 PM PST by Trinity_Tx
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


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