Gibson's gaffe. Mel Gibson needs to take a history class.

Gibson's gaffe. Mel Gibson needs to take a history class. It was the Romans, not the Jews, who were the Christ killers.

The flood of recent articles and publicity on Mel Gibson's forthcoming movie on Jesus' crucifixion have failed to mention the most important point about this controversy: if the movie does tell the truth about the cruelty and brutality of Jesus' crucifixion, it will make it clear that it was the Romans, not the Jews, who are the real "Christ killers".

According to the Christian Bible ( the "New Testament", especially the Gospel of Mark), Jesus, his family, and virtually all of his followers and disciples at the time were Jews. Jesus preached almost exclusively to the Jews ("the multitudes"), who dined and walked with him. It was his popularity with the Jewish people that caused Jesus to be killed by the ruling Roman authorities; and it was Jews who took Jesus off the cross, prepared him for "burial," mourned him, and then got the blame for the crime.

While a small clique of Jewish collaborators in the ruling classes are purported to have urged the Romans on, they had no real political power, all of which was held by the ruling Romans. All accounts make it clear that it was Romans who condemned Jesus to death, tortured him, put a crown of thorns on his head, spat on him, crucified him, even ran him through with a sword, fearing that this popular Jewish reformer with a huge Jewish following was a threat to Roman law and order.

The Romans went on to kill Jesus' closest disciples Peter and Paul, along with countless other Jewish "Christians", and eventually killed or expelled from the region almost all of the Jews, thus setting the stage for 2,000 years of Jewish suffering and persecution, and for the violence and territorial disputes that plague the Holy Land today.

It is unfortunate that Gibson's movie will apparently fail to make it clear who really killed Jesus, and instead will repeat the ancient blood libels that actually contradict the New Testament's account of the murder, and which have been used since that time to stir up hatred for Jesus' own people.

Indeed, the New Testament account of these events could be used to discredit Gibson's movie, which he claims is based on the truthful version of events as set forth in the Christian bible.

I agree with the observation that the prospect of fading away can be threatening to any group seeking autonomy in a society not predisposed to it. That's why I first suspected hyperbole in the sweeping accusations that Passion plays lead to murder.

That quote is quite interesting and certainly the opposite conclusion of those who seek race purity. It sent me off to google search Benjamin Butler. I love learning something new, Thanks!

I agree with the observation that the prospect of fading away can be threatening to any group seeking autonomy in a society not predisposed to it.

One has to wonder what the impact of that instinctual response is for the Isreali's. Not that they are worried about fading away into the Arabic world, but how it plays on their thinking in terms of the way the rest of Judaism is reacting to what is going on in Isreal. Perhaps it is the root of a need to exsaggerate the danger Israel is in by actually increasing that danger by constantly provoking the Arabs.

I can't disagree with a point that you made. I am trained in Christian marital counseling by the Assemblies of God. My point is that there has become way too much "Americanism" in what is called Christianity today. There is nothing special about America that gives it some saintly status that so many Christians think it has. In my heart, it has a political status that borders on what would be sainthood in Christianity, but it has no more grace, nor forgiveness, nor reprieve, than any other country. It is merely a form of organized force which Christians should reject with ease as a force to use to obtain Christian ends. Once we take that path, we stand with the Jews and cry out for the release of Barrabas--political force to change the world, and we reject the messianic method of change--self sacrifice as proof of God's love of all mankind, and faith that the Holy Spirit will abide in those that witness that sacrifice.

Once we take that path, we stand with the Jews and cry out for the release of Barrabas--political force to change the world, and we reject the messianic method of change--self sacrifice as proof of God's love of all mankind, and faith that the Holy Spirit will abide in those that witness that sacrifice.

My apoligies for my assumption about your exposure to Biblical Christianity. If you are active in Assemblies of God, you have studied it at length. My folks are AOG, so I get to many of their services.

One of the fellows in my small group agrees with you about political involvement--ie, Christ's only instruction to the apostles about acting on the world was his advice to spread the Gospel to all nations. I agree that should be the most important of my worldly activities.

I'm not sure it follows from that, that we should have no involvement in politics. Yes, the Lord makes the nations come and go. But maybe we are his instruments in acting to make the nations a more Godly place and stopping our nations slide into decadence.

Frankly, I haven't really reconciled these two positions and I go back and forth between them. It may just be that, as a father, I want a better world for my son and rationalize trying to change the world to achieve that goal.

This question may sound--but is not meant at all--as snotty. I am curious why you come to Free Republic with the philosophy you espouse in the above quote.

Mel needs to read this part:

For I testify unto every man that heareth the words of the prophecy of this book, If any man shall add unto these things, God shall add unto him the plagues that are written in this book:

And if any man shall take away from the words of the book of this prophecy, God shall take away his part out of the book of life, and out of the holy city, and from the things which are written in this book.

What is making a movie and fictionalizing the Bible, if not the above?

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.