Mel Gibson`s Passion: Jesus and the Gospels

SeaMax ^ | 6/22/2003 | Fr. Michael Reilly

[Hugenot]

Some of Mel Gibson's biggest critics are Catholic theologians.

Believe it or not, they are "accusing" him of following the Gospel accounts of Jesus' passion too closely.

In other words, Gibson hasn't consulted them to receive their guidance and direction in understanding the Gospels.

According to some theologians, the Gospels are theological diatribes thoroughly lacking in historical value and accuracy.

Some theologians believe that the Gospels were written long after Christ's passion and therefore are more reflective of the community than they are of the actual events.

Interestingly, one of the main reasons for their later dating of the gospels centers around the Jews. When Jesus lambastes the Pharisees in the Gospels, this is supposedly representative of an hostility that did not exist between Christians and Jews before 85 AD, when the Christians were expelled from the synagogues.

I suppose these theologians discount the martyrdom of St. Stephen in 36 AD and the persecution of Christians carried out by St. Paul before his conversion.

The earliest and most reliable sources available indicate that the Gospels were written by the apostles and apostolic men not long after the events took place.

St. Irenaeus, instructed by St. Polycarp the disciple of John the Apostle informs us that Matthew wrote his Gospel before the martyrdom of Peter and Paul in 64 AD and that Mark and Luke wrote at the time of their martyrdom. Modern theologians know better?

Likewise, there is no reason to believe that the evangelists in any way sacrificed accuracy to make a theological point.

Ultimately nearly everything we know about Jesus has been handed down by the four evangelists. If we don't believe what they wrote, why would we call ourselves Christian?

[Bommer]

Man I cannot wait until April for this to come out!

[Little Bill]

Ultimately nearly everything we know about Jesus has been handed down by the four evangelists. If we don't believe what they wrote, why would we call ourselves Christian?

Amen

[prairiebreeze]

This is going to be a great movie I'll bet!

Prairie

[RhoTheta]

Already posted here.

[RhoTheta]

Oops, sorry. Good post, a followup to the other by Fr. Reilly.

[Radix]

Some Theologians

 

Hello? What does that mean? Who are "some Theologians?"

 

Ultimately nearly everything we know about Jesus has been handed down by the four evangelists.

 

Says who? What does that mean? Are you referring to some acknowledged  Scholars?

 

According to some theologians, the Gospels are theological diatribes thoroughly lacking in historical value and accuracy.

 

Should I be taking this stuff seriously? I won't easily.

 

Some theologians believe that the Gospels were written long after Christ's passion and therefore are more reflective of the community than they are of the actual events.

 

Who are these "theologians?"

 

 

 

Is there a movie being made?

 

I had no idea. Mel Gibson is making a movie based on the Gospels? Is that what I am reading here?

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[LiteKeeper]

SPOTREP

[TigersEye]

Mel Gibson/Passion bump!

[Imal]

If Mel is able to have both the Catholics and the ADL on his back at the same time, he must be doing something right.

It is refreshing to be reassured that a great film artist is apparently doing things his way, instead of attemptiong art by committee.

Stay the course, Mr. Gibson, I look forward to seeing the result of your efforts!

[SuziQ]

I had no idea. Mel Gibson is making a movie based on the Gospels? Is that what I am reading here?

Mel Gibson has made a movie about the last 12-24 hrs. of Jesus' life. I think the name is Passion. It will be entirely in Aramaic and Latin WITHOUT subtitles. Some have said this is stupid, but I think it is genius. Anyone who is going to take the time to see the movie already knows the story. They won't need subtitles to understand what is going on. I believe the original languages will make it that much more powerful!

[Pyro7480]

If Mel is able to have both the Catholics and the ADL on his back at the same time, he must be doing something right.

It's not even most Catholics. It was a few ultra-modernist "theologians" in the Bishops' Conference who had a cow.

[Grand Old Partisan]

It is genuis. What a terrific idea!

[SuziQ]

It's not even most Catholics. It was a few ultra-modernist "theologians" in the Bishops' Conference who had a cow.

I have learned over the years to ignore anything said by so-called 'Catholic theologians'.

[Anitius Severinus Boethius]

Latin was considered the "vulgar" language (thus the "Vulgate" Bible) while Greek was much more likely to be spoken by educated men.

[SuziQ]

But wouldn't most of the Romans in Judaea have spoken Greek rather than latin? Or was that just the aristocracy...

I doubt the Romans would have spoken Greek; they were #1 in the world at the time, I would think they'd have spoken their own language.

In the Judean province, I would think the official political language among the Roman officials would have been Latin, but the language of the Jewish leaders and people would have been Aramaic. I imagine Pilate would have know the language of the people in order to speak to them, and Herod would have known Latin to do business with Roman officials, but most regular folks would have only known a smattering of Latin. Kind of like the Anglo-Saxons when the Normans took over England. The official language of the Court was French, but the language of the people was 'English'.