Posted on 02/25/2004 6:00:38 PM PST by SJackson
What's all the uproar about? I thought both Jews and Christians were a lot smarter than all of this nonsense. A historical event interpreted by a filmmaker is causing fear, bickering and tension in an America where a beautiful partnership already exists between Jewish and Christian values, which are fundamental elements of the society. The few anti-Semites may have succeeded in creating a new rift.
The Passion of The Christ represents one individual's interpretation and is pretty much Hollywood entertainment in the same vein as Oliver Stone's JFK, Roman Polanski's The Pianist, Francis Ford Coppola's The Godfather, Steven Spielberg's Schindler's List and even Cubby Broccoli's "James Bond" series. Each work contains truth, creativity, speculation, interpretation and a somewhat imaginative story line.
There is absolutely nothing in The Passion for Jews in America to worry about. In fact, anyone who has watched educational TV or the History Channel has most likely seen another version of this film with slightly different camera angles, a little less blood and guts, and English-speaking actors.
Due to the large numbers of historical persecutions for 2,000 years, many Jews are naturally concerned about anything that may inflame Christian "passions." Overwhelmingly, most Christians understand this sensitivity, while American Christians have consistently proven to be among the best friends of Jews in history. Therefore, this film should have been a non-event from a Jewish perspective.
For an American Christian, this film portrays the suffering and death of their Lord, which is a central theme of the religion. Virtually every single American knows there is no relationship between that particular event and present day Jews. We may as well blame all people with beards for the death of Christ since "hairy faces" were predominant players in this horrendous act. All Jews must recognize that this experience is as central to Christianity as Moses receiving the 10 Commandments is to Judaism.
Disregarding the box office, this film's success should be defined as inspiring more people to Christianity and increasing a Christian's religiosity. This very idea was expressed by Mel Gibson, the self-proclaimed religious producer. However, if it were indeed his true intention, how could anyone expect such an event with all its gore to turn people on to attending church? That would be the equivalent of showing Jews being whipped and tortured in Egypt as a vehicle for bringing more people to Judaism.
If Mel Gibson had truly wanted to inspire Christians, he would have made The Passion of America, a story of how it was mostly religious Christians who suffered and were killed while founding the greatest country in history. However, that epic will never be made, since most of Hollywood hates America and its Christian roots.
Mel Gibson is a Hollywood idiot not very different than fellow radicals on the other side like Ed Asner, Barbara Streisand, Robert Altman, Alec Baldwin, Julia Roberts, Danny Glover, Martin Sheen, Tim Robbins and Susan Sarandon, among others, who have contempt for America's uniqueness and greatness in the world. The only important lesson to "arise" out of this uproar comes from one Hutton Gibson, a disciple of the Joseph Goebbels school of thought.
It is only due to his son's fame that a totally insignificant, crazy old man was given his 15 minutes of glory in the public spotlight. Otherwise, he would have continued to wallow in his basement reading The Protocols of The Elders of Zion, David Duke's website and other "stimulating" materials.
When Gibson Sr. went into his now infamous Holocaust denial spiel, it was the obligation of Gibson Jr. to either insure that his foolish dad remain quiet, or issue a very forceful condemnation. Merely spewing his own validation of the Holocaust as a true event was repetitive and unnecessary.
"So, no Mel. We won't leave it alone, like fearless Diane Sawyer, even if it is your father!" Since Mel Gibson permitted "evil daddy" to use his son's fame as a springboard for his vile lies and ideas, Mel must take responsibility for his dad's actions. "Of course we will go there, Mel baby," unlike Ms. Sawyer, whom you obviously spooked.
Since the apple usually does not fall too far from the tree, Mel junior has most likely inherited some paternal characteristics within his own DNA helix. Mel Gibson's non-acceptance of various reforms issued by the Vatican, shows his preference for taking the Church backwards to the good ol' days. Without the Church reformation for modernity, there would be Christian Osamas, like Gibson's dad, preaching their radical ideologies with Bible in hand.
Mel Gibson is by no stretch of the imagination an anti-Semite. However, his father is a bona fide Jew-hater, moral cretin and mental midget. Some of the elderly Gibson's latest revelations include such profound ideas as "Jews are the eternal enemy of Christianity and all humanity"; "Jews are anti-everyone"; " US Federal Reserve Chairman Alan Greenspan should be taken out and hanged"; and "The Holocaust is fiction."
No one really cares that Hutton Gibson is a Nazi, minus the power and gas chambers. The fact that the actor refuses to criticize his father as a despicable character and total scum is troubling. The only thing that Gibson has seen fit to say about his paternal unit was that "my dad never lied to me and I love him."
The other characters who have contributed to the climate of general uproar include several Jewish so-called leaders like Rabbi Marvin Heir of the Simon Wiesenthal Center and the ADL's Abe Foxman. Their lack of wisdom is quite apparent as their efforts have contributed to making this movie event a "great" Jewish issue at a time when many synagogues are more than half empty on a typical Sabbath and Jews are flocking away from Judaism in droves. Instead of using their positions to show the beauty and importance of Judaism to the world, they are assuming new roles as movie critics.
It is a virtual certainty that the Arab and Muslim world will use this film as a vehicle for more Jew/Israel-bashing. This is a meaningless argument against the movie, because the dominant parts of the Islamic world and their media will continually attempt to try anything, including Superman comics, to show that Jews are superhuman or subhuman caricatures who somehow control the world.
As this motion picture is screened worldwide, let us see if Europeans and others, both secular and Christian, can begin to follow the American Christian model of understanding, wisdom and tolerance. As far as the 57 Muslim nations go, that is probably asking too much.
"Permitted?" Just how was Gibson supposed to prevent his father from speaking? Ropes and chains? Sedatives?
When all is said and done, not near as well as they would have liked.
Since the apple usually does not fall too far from the tree, Mel junior has most likely inherited some paternal characteristics within his own DNA helix.
and;
Mel Gibson is by no stretch of the imagination an anti-Semite.
I appreciate the writers overall fairness but inconsistencies like this lend one to believe he is playing both sides of the aisle.
No ropes or chains. I think his point is that a comdemnation would have prevented Hutton from legitimizing his own views.
Did any of these critics feel that the horrors of the Nazis were overdone? Do they not understand that the magnitude of the horror Jesus endured is what adds the meaning to his sacrifice?
Some of the criticism that this film receives is extremely hollow, and leaves a strong impression that some people are very uncomfortable with the idea of Christians strengthening their faith.
As I said on another thread, in an Italian family, if you publicly denounce an immediate family member you might as well bury yourself alive. The family's sacrosanct, you don't draw its blood unless you wish to be banished from it. That doesn't mean you don't admonish your parents ignorance if it's there, but you don't openly and publicly castigate your father. His understandable contempt for anti-semites is blinding him to the greater pull and force of Family.
And the more people like him keep bellyaching for this denouncement the worse it makes them look, because my take on family is nearly everyone else's take on family too. And his sins of the father theory may be a good enough rationale for him, but most people won't take that stand until they have concrete reason to believe that the son feels the same or thinks the same as the father.
Of course.
Clearly he's put Mel in a difficult position, and his silence is understandable. However I doubt Mel's religion allows him to commit a transgression in the course of honoring his father, but that line probably hasn't been crossed.
Mel has refused to directly condem his father. He has, however, insisted that HE be the subject, and he has rejected the charges of anti-semitism, even calling it anti-christian.
However, this does not seem to be enough for some--some seem to be determined to get that direct condemnation, apparently to cause a rift between father and son, to exact some revenge on Mel for making this film that, really, they just don't like.
>Tough spot. For others associated or supporting the film >who refuse to condemn Hutton's views, no excuse.
Agreed. But for anyone else, do they answer for Hutton Gibson?
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.