Posted on 03/19/2004 9:59:58 AM PST by presidio9
THE controversial Mel Gibson film 'The Passion of the Christ' has been dismissed by the Evangelical Protestant Society as a 'Catholic' interpretation of events which "does not present the Gospel".
Wallace Thompson, secretary of the Evangelical Protestant Society, said the film displayed "an un-Biblical fixation on Mary, the mother of Jesus. None of this should surprise us, for both Mel Gibson and Jim Caviezel, who plays the part of Christ, are enthusiastic devotees of the traditional teachings of the Church of Rome."
He further claims that Mel Gibson "belongs to an ultra-conservative Catholic group which does not recognise the reforms of Vatican II, and celebrates Mass in Latin".
Mr Thompson says that "this malign influence of Rome ought to cause all evangelical Protestants to reject The Passion of the Christ" and refuse to be swayed by the subtleties of the alleged arguments in favour of it.
Sadly, however, it will be welcomed and praised by many who ought to know better."
Mr Thompson also says that the film is "extremely violent", and that "anyone who watches it will be shaken and possibly terrified by its graphic and bloody scenes."
Happy hunting.
Your last sentence is true only before the Word was placed in the Ark. Once the Ark had been consecrated, anyone who touched the Ark dropped dead. There are some schools of OT thought which state the Ark itself was hidden behind the veil in the Temple. The light which it emitted was so bright the average Jew could not look upon it. The OT high priest who approached the Ark had to be sinless in order to remain alive in its presence, so great was its holiness. They tied a rope around his waist so his body could be retrieved in case he dropped dead.
Only reference to this is in the Zohar (Kaballah), and it was around the ankle.
It is not a lie. John Paul II Called on Mary for his salvation. You can lay flowers around it if you want. It's the same prayer either way. The central issue of Christianity is salvation - the Gospel message. And you're leader is going to Mary for it. It is blasphemy. No matter how you cut it or try to explain it away. Christ is our redeemer and the only one from which we obtain salvation. Period. That is the message of the gospel - it is a free gift to anyone who might claim it; but, it comes directly from Christ - not from third parties. That was the whole point of Christ coming - to do away with the third parties who were making merchandise of the souls of men and to accomplish once and for all what the old system could not. Any man may be saved by simply believing and confessing Christ. There is no room for Mary or anyone/anything else between us and Christ on that issue.
Mary was conceived without sin. This is known as the Immaculate Conception. The Immaculate Conception means that Mary, whose conception was brought about the normal way, was conceived without original sin or its stain—that’s what "immaculate" means: without stain. The essence of original sin consists in the deprivation of sanctifying grace, and its stain is a corrupt nature. Mary was preserved from these defects by God’s grace; from the first instant of her existence she was in the state of sanctifying grace and was free from the corrupt nature original sin brings.
When discussing the Immaculate Conception, an implicit reference can be found in the angel’s greeting to Mary. The angel Gabriel said, "Hail, full of grace, the Lord is with you" (Luke 1:28). The phrase "full of grace" is a translation of the Greek word kecharitomene. This word represents the proper name of the person being addressed by the angel, and it therefore expresses a characteristic quality of Mary. The traditional translation, "full of grace," is more accurate than the one found in many recent versions of the New Testament, which give something along the lines of "highly favored daughter." Mary was indeed a highly favored daughter of God, but the Greek implies more than that (and it never mentions the word for "daughter"). The grace given to Mary is at once permanent and of a unique kind. Kecharitomene is a perfect passive participle of charitoo, meaning "to fill or endow with grace." Since this term is in the perfect tense, it indicates a perfection of grace that is both intensive and extensive. So, the grace Mary enjoyed was not a result of the angel’s visit, and was only as "full" or strong or complete as possible at any given time, but it extended over the whole of her life, from conception onward. She was in a state of sanctifying grace from the first moment of her existence to have been called "full of grace."
Since Mary is Jesus’ mother, it must be concluded that she is also the Mother of God: If Mary is the mother of Jesus, and if Jesus is God, then Mary is the Mother of God. There is no way out of this logical syllogism, the valid form of which has been recognized by classical logicians since before the time of Christ.
Although Mary is the Mother of God, she is not his mother in the sense that she is older than God or the source of her Son’s divinity, for she is neither. Rather, we say that she is the Mother of God in the sense that she carried in her womb a divine person—Jesus Christ, God "in the flesh" (2 John 7, cf. John 1:14)—and in the sense that she contributed the genetic matter to the human form God took in Jesus Christ.
"To become the mother of the Saviour, Mary 'was enriched by God with gifts appropriate to such a role.' [LG 56.] The angel Gabriel at the moment of the annunciation salutes her as 'full of grace'. [Lk 1:28 .] In fact, in order for Mary to be able to give the free assent of her faith to the announcement of her vocation, it was necessary that she be wholly borne by God's grace."
Catechism of the Catholic Church
Well, we'd hardly be likeable if we didn't have a couple of quirks, eh wot?
I've related this story before on this forum, so bear with me as I repeat it.
Upon hearing of my conversion to Catholicism some 20+ years ago, my dear (sincerely) Sis rushed to my office to confront me on my apostasy. There was much give and take and one of the "important" points was, of course, the baleful idea of purgatory.
I acknowledged that, yes, I was quite at peace with the concept. I asked her, "Where do you have Uncle Blake?" Well, it was a little snotty of me ... I knew darn well where my evangelical sister had my departed uncle. He had been a large man, with large appetites, and, thanks be to God, a very large heart, and I love(d) him dearly. I told her that for me he was was in purgatory and I prayed for him often.
If it be God's will, Unc and I will hug again in heaven.
In that sense, when Adam was created in the image of God, it was God in the person of Jesus Christ, since to God that existance already was an actuallity before creation.
So the first Adam was created in the image of the second Adam who was in the likeness of the first.. wheww!
Anyway, good thought.
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.