Posted on 03/01/2004 5:37:36 PM PST by gobucks
No, that is positively incorrect. It is a profoundly biblical and historical interpretation. The only thing that can be said to be uniquely Catholic is the incident with Veronica which is not a problem.
No, it was definately a Catholic interpretation! Any Catholic or former Catholic who sees that movie immediately recognizes that the stations of the cross served as the basis of the script. Those who know their art history will immediately recognize several famous works of art and icon images well known in the Catholic faith.
But it was also BIBLICAL in that it farily accurately portrays the words and actions of the the passion accounts in the gospels.
The historical interpretation was very good, but not perfect. There were some things shown that portray more of the legend and culture of the crucifixion rather than historical facts --but most of these sorts of things are very trivial, or were changed for the right reasons.
The Law condemns, not saves. It means they are under the Law, not the Blood. If you are under the Blood, you are not under the Law. Like I said(and Jesus),"There is none good, no not one." Your righteousness is as filthy rags to Him. Jesus didn't say there were many ways to God. He said, "I am the Way, the Truth, and the Life, NO ONE comes to the Father except through me."
The part about the heathen family is you are supposed to live a Christian life in front of them and you may get them to repent for their lives. He doesn't want you to get a divorce just because you believe and they don't. You are admonished to not marry them if you are already a believer. There are other verses that tell you if you pray "In the Will of God" He will not give you a "stone", because He is a good Father. What is God's Will?, That no man should perish. If you pray for your heathen family, and you are righteous, He will save your family members. He cannot however contradict Himself, and say I need the Blood of Jesus, but you don't.
Are you willing to convert to Islam, to test your theory?
Man, if all He had to do was sweat blood in the garden, He should have gotten the heck outa there and saved Himself alot of pain. You need to learn more about the Jewish faith. Read the OT about the feasts and festavals. Passover was what it was all about. Ain't no garden in Passover. His blood makes the death angel passover. Remember the blood on the door posts? You door is your heart. Is His blood on your door?
Read what you wrote again. I can't believe you can't see the error. This is the result of man teaching you. The Holy Spirit must reveal to you spiritual things. It's like arguing with Catholics, because the pope says so. Shheeeesh! You can quote verse after verse to them from God's word, and they talk about some council or some such. Mormons say it suposed to burn in my breast that the BOM is true. ZERO proof. In fact the Bible denounces what they expouse, and they insist they believe the Bible also. I'll take the Bible.
...calling criticism of the Sanhedrin "anti-semitic" is as dumb as saying "Either you are with the Republican Party or you are with the terrorists." It is possible to fault the ruling class without despising the entire people.
I hadn't heard this comparison before, but it resonates with me. Hopefully it will resonate with others.
I literally caught my breath when Gibson cuts to a scene from the Last Supper where the Passover bread is brought to the table, wrapped in cloth. The bread is set at the table and the cloth is taken off, then Gibson cuts back to Jesus being stripped of his garments. The bread is elevated for the consecration at the Last Supper, and Gibson cuts to the elevation of the cross ("If I be lifted up, I shall draw all men to me.")
I just received the coffee table book of pictures from the film and there is a striking two-page spread of two full-page photos that depict this same juxtaposition - Jesus' body on the cross and Jesus lifting up the bread just before He breaks it for His disciples.
I highly recommend the book, with it's forward by Mel Gibson and the Biblical text from all four gospels of the passion of our Lord, as well as the soundtrack, which is some of the loveliest holy music I've ever heard.
I am a former Catholic.
When the charge is made that the movie is a Catholic interpretation, it does not mean Catholic art or Catholic geography but Catholic theology. If the Stations of the Cross are represented, where is station 8?
Thats the problem.
Yes, it does mean Catholic art, Cathloic world-view, and all things Catholic, not just theology.
However, since I've not heard of a single Catholic theologian denounce "the Passion" on theological grounds, (and there are reports that there are many bishops & priests that fully support the film) then one would have to say that the movie in is complete accord with Catholic theology, as well as art & tradition.
Station 8 was certainly in the version of "the Passion" I saw this past Wednesday. There were definately shots of women weeping and moaning over treatment of Jesus, other than his mother & Mary M.
Gibsons effort here in this movie is crystal.
Any ultra famous hollywood directors (and I mean any) must move over. A movie made with sub-titles YET has challenged anything they ever made or thought about making..
Gibsons eye for this craft and intuition for story telling MUST be recognized.. and hopefully this movie is merely openers in this game..
GO MEL.!. BE BOLD and take no prisoners..
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.