Replies

At the end of the day, "The Passion" doesn't connect with Jews because we reject the very notion that God can be tortured, can scream out in pain and can die.

Now, this outlook sounds very, very familiar. Anyone take a guess about who else 'rejects' a God willing to suffer for his children?

... a film that has already achieved not only unparalleled press but also a veritable cult following ...

Well, I guess I belong to a cult now. Didn't think I did, but the Rabbi thinks so. Oh yes, I exposed my 3 teens to 'pornography', as he puts it, as well. Ok, guilty. Mel, thanks for the chance to break 'the rules'.

In 1988, the Vatican published Criteria for the Evaluation of Dramatizations of the Passion, with a list of nine points that any future depictions of Passion Plays are to use as guides. Gibson's movie ignores every one of them.

Well, to Mel I say, good move. Otherwise it would have ended up being a movie about a Catholic Church's holiday that only leftists would approve of. Mel, of course, is guilty all right. Guilty of not obeying 'the rules'.

This Rabbi is looney, but its the first purely Rabbi review I know of. Figured Freepers everywhere would be interested.

Time to go say bed time prayers....and this protestant evangelical will say thank you God again for Mel's artwork.

Go figure... I'm as Jewish as anyone, not Messianic or part of any weird sect, but I liked the movie.

For some reason it is taboo for any Jew to openly discuss Jesus. I personally accept that Jesus did a lot more good in the world than Caiphas and his corrupted priesthood, and I don't have to think Jesus to be God come to walk the earth, nor do I have to reject any part of Judaism, to do so.

The Second Vatican Council acknowledged the sin of the Church for almost 2000 years in blaming the Jews for the death of Jesus. Neither the Jews of that generation or of those to come, they decreed, bear any guilt for deicide.

Why is that virtually every rabbi who has written about "The Passion of the Christ" has misquoted the teachings of Vatican II on Jewish responsibility (or lack of it) for the death of Christ?

Nostra Aetate didn’t say no Jews bore any responsibility for the death of Christ. It simply said that it’s an error to blame all Jews of the era "indiscriminately" or to blame today’s Jews for Christ’s death. But then after absolving those who clearly had nothing to do with the matter, Nostra Aetate also went on to say that the "Jewish authorities" of the time, as well as "those who followed their lead" had in fact "pressed for the death of Christ."

I don't how many times I've heard this misstated in the last couple of weeks. But the fact that it happens so often makes me think there's more going on here than simple honest error.

That brilliant insight is what I wish Jews would stress as the ultimate reason why we can't relate to a film that is preoccupied with nine hours of dying. "Choose life" is the cardinal message of our religion.

What the hell would a "Deformed" so-called Jew know about Choosing Life. Deformed Judiasm is pro-Abortion. This guy makes me want to puke. "Jews" like this give Real Jews a bad name.

Real Jews support our Christian Brothers and Sisters, and RESPECT THEIR FAITH AND DON'T PATRONIZE THEM ABOUT IT!

We will NOT be divided!

"Sister Mary Boys, a professor at the Union Theological Seminary in New York, who was part of an ad hoc group that was asked to read an early screenplay... "

Note that Rabbi Blech says that Sister Mary Boys "was asked to read" a screenplay. He neglects to say who asked her and makes it sound like the most casual of matters. I don't know how Gibson's screenplay got from his office into the hands of Sister Boys, but I do know that one of the "co-conveners" of the ad hoc "Get Mel" screenplay study group was Abe Foxman of the ADL.

Gibson has perpetrated an unforgivable crime that negates one of the most remarkable acts of communal religious repentance in history.

This is Blech's idea of "dialogue.

Disagree with any part of "The Passion" and for many you aren't anti-Gibson but anti-God, a non-believer who doesn't deserve the courtesy of a hearing because you're obviously simply a heretic.

I've seen this strawman before. Maybe calling a moviemaker a "criminal" is a little bit beyond aimple disagreement?

Disagree with any part of "The Passion" and for many you aren't anti-Gibson but anti-God, a non-believer who doesn't deserve the courtesy of a hearing because you're obviously simply a heretic.

Am I the only one who found this line a little bit, oh...ironic?