Gibson's passion film 'too Catholic'

Belfast Telegraph ^ | 19 March 2004 | Alf McCreary

[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."

[Havoc]

You can keep quoting it till Christ returns and puts you in your place. You still keep hacking out the part where Jesus states it was a vision. You being in denial doesn't remove the statement from scripture or history. It stands as a witness against you. And you stand there and accuse me of doing precisely what everyone here is witnessing you doing - not me, you.

Jesus said it was a vision. You can read it over and over and over and it will still say that it was a vision. You aren't going to convince me to ignore Christ's words so that you'r lying philosophy may stand in place of scripture. It's not gonna happen. You can slice, dice and wiggle all you want. As Jesus said to Satan, so say I to you "IT IS WRITTEN" Matthew 17:9 "And as they came down from the mountain, Jesus charged them, saying, Tell the vision to no man, until the Son of man be risen again from the dead." Vision. Vision. Vision. Vision. Vision. Vision. Has it sunk in yet? It will haunt you till you reckon yourself to it. It was a Vision. Not a visitation. But go get some air, you'll probably need it before the Holy Spirit get's done with you.

[OLD REGGIE]

You might, rather than being emphatic about calling people liars, ask them simply for proof of their suppositions.

Or, since her harrangue was directed at me and I never made that statement, she should apologize.

[Havoc]

There was no Pope in the time. You're forgetting your history aren't you. You're also forgetting that there was no organization calling itself catholic officially until Theodosius. You'll also recall that the entirety of scripture minus six verses was duplicated in the first century by the so called "early fathers" telling us that they already knew the content of the scriptures several hundred years before a council decided to put their mark on it as though it were needed. You have all the signs of a good indoctrinated cultist in that you can spit up the propaganda on cue. It doesn't make it true.

[Future Snake Eater]

Wallace Thompson, secretary of the Evangelical Protestant Society, said the film displayed "an un-Biblical fixation on Mary, the mother of Jesus.

Yeah, gee, it was only her son who was being beaten to a bloody pulp right before her eyes, what was Gibson thinking showing her? That guy just has no clue, so I say let's let this Wallace Thompson direct a remake of "Passion."

[OLD REGGIE]

1. In a Christian monarchy, where Church and State are bound together, heresy against the Church is treason against the State. Therefore, in such a situation, heretics are traitors, and traitors deserve death.

2. The Inquisitions were never empowered to burn or otherwise kill anybody. Such sentences were carried out by the secular authority of the State.

3. The Inquisitions and Christian Monarchy were good things, and should be revived.

In the event you wonder why the RCC and her "ecumenical" aims are not trusted, you are a perfect example.

One more "good" Catholic to be added to the list of "kill the heretics when we are in charge".

[Havoc]

Sola scriptura is a red herring. A non argument. And I've demonstrated it before. You have defined it and others have defined it. And how you define it is not how others define it. So your rebuke of it is faulty because it doesn't say what you pretend it does. It actually states what the Bible states on the subject - that Christians with the mind of Christ and the leading of the Holy spirit thereby are able to read and understand God's word. It is because of this that they are able to follow the command of the Apostles and the Prophets, et al that we are to compare what comes at us with what is in scripture and thereby reject anything that does not align itself with scripture.
That is my belief. It is directly out of scripture. Anything else we can debunk for you as a non argument?

[Havoc]

No, I quote scripture and demand that if you are going to try and sell me something that it fall in line with the scripture. When it doesn't I'll call it the lie of the devil it is and I don't care a whit if it endears me to you or not. I wasn't put here to be liked by you. I was put here to save your soul. If you won't head scripture and God's word, that is your affair. You have to answer for it, not me. And you can't blame your ignorance and clingings to false doctrine on Catholicism. You have access to the scriptures and when You stand before God, Jesus himself stated that God's word will judge you. Not Catholic doctrine and dogma - God's word. You know, like "VISION"

[dangus]

Um... Samuel was in Hades. Mary is in Heaven with the Angels (Gr.: Messengers). We appeal to Mary through the grace of God; Saul appeared through a witch. Saul has appealed to God directly, and not receiving an answer tried to subvert God's will; Catholics pray to Mary because her will is made perfect in communion with Christ: Her will cannot oppose God's.

And Samuel did NOT curse Saul for bringing him up! Saul died bevause he "disobeyed the LORD's directive, and would not carry out his fierce anger against Amalek"!

[dangus]

Um... Samuel was in Hades. Mary is in Heaven with the Angels (Gr.: Messengers). We appeal to Mary through the grace of God; Saul appeared through a witch. Saul has appealed to God directly, and not receiving an answer tried to subvert God's will; Catholics pray to Mary because her will is made perfect in communion with Christ: Her will cannot oppose God's.

And Samuel did NOT curse Saul for bringing him up! Saul died bevause he "disobeyed the LORD's directive, and would not carry out his fierce anger against Amalek"!

[Havoc]

No, it is not proved false by one exception. Valla nearly faced the inquisition for exposing the truth regarding the Donation of Constantine. Long before that recorded in the documentation of Vatican I if memory serves is the record of an Archbishop noting the anathematizing of pope against pope.. the raising then throwing out of infallible decrees by the popes and councils, etc to the point where when he finished speaking the Council arose and shouted "heretic".
Because he did nothing more than quote right out of church history. It is the truth. The Church of Rome hunted down and slaughtered one group just for making them look bad. They preached everything Rome preached but did so under a vow of poverty and under the direction of scripture without so much as a 'by your leave' from the church. The problem is that these men wandering about in poverty made the poshness of the Pope and the rest of the church out to be excess and corruption - not by their words, but by stark contrast of action. So they had to be destroyed. Care to guess who it was.

Try these semantics games with someone who doesn't know the history. Ope, that was possible in the dark ages, I forgot, it's not as possible to hide the truth today.

[Havoc]

Um... Samuel was in Hades. Mary is in Heaven with the Angels

Makes zero difference.

And Samuel did NOT curse Saul for bringing him up! Saul died bevause he "disobeyed the LORD's directive, and would not carry out his fierce anger against Amalek"!

And you are a liar. And here is the proof. It is written: 1 Chronicles 10:13 So Saul died for his transgression which he committed against the LORD, [even] against the word of the LORD, which he kept not, and also for asking [counsel] of [one that had] a familiar spirit, to enquire [of it];

Saul was put to death for disobaying God - which included the fact that he'd attempted communicating with the dead prophet. That is the scripture. Care to mistate God's word again and be found a liar?

[dangus]

Wolfman, Man cannot atone for his sins. Purgatory is not atonement, it is exactly what the name says: purging. You've mistaken Protestant straw men for Catholic doctrine.

If purgatory were atonement, then even saints would go to purgatory for the sins they committed before they achieved perfection. If purgatory were atonement, then personal conversion, prayers for the dead, offetory masses, surrender to the will of God, and spiritual indulgences would have no effect. Listen to the prayers offered for those in purgatory, and for the remission of sins to obtain indulgence for our own offenses:

Eternal Father, I offer you the body and blood, soul and divinity of your dearly beloved son, in atonement for our sins, and those of the whole world.