A Freeper Review of The Passion of Christ

Vanity | 2/21/04 | John Fields

[jonboy]

I'm not sure where to start. I'm a fellow Freeper who also happens to be minister. I was invited today to see a screening of the Passion of the Christ at our local theater. I have been fascinated, and you might even be able to say obsessed with this movie ever since I heard about it a few months ago and first saw the trailer (I cried every time I saw it).

Given that I have watched and listened to several interviews and read several news stories about this movie I was as prepared as I thought I could be to watch it. I HAVE NEVER BEEN THROUGH ANYTHING LIKE THIS MOVIE! I sobbed, I throbbed, my Kleenex became a fairly useless mess that occupied the hand not tightly gripping the seat. IT WAS HARD TO WATCH. The cruelty was overwhelming, but approximated what we have a glimpse from in scripture. The violence and horror of what was done to Him nearly overwhelming, but not gratuitous as some have claimed.

As to the charges of anti-semitism, I can understand how a Jew who does not believe that Jesus is their Messiah would be frightened by this film. However, it was NOT anti-semitic. I could just as easily be moved to be against Italians for what the Romans did as I could be against the Jews. If one were inspired to hate the perpetrators if this event, they would be anti-Christian, anti-Semitic, anti-Arab, anti-Japanese, and anti-__________ (fill in your own blanks). I was filled with the grim overwhelming knowledge of my own guilt as much as anything else. As I watched Him writhing in pain, the ribs virtually exposed from the beating that He had taken, as I watched His shoulder ripped out of socket as they stretched his hand to make it to the pre-drilled nail hole, as I watched the blood flowing and the breath ripped from His body from the pain, one thing entered into my mind above all else. I PUT HIM THERE! He could have come down, He could have called in excess of ten-thousand angels. He could have stopped that horrible mockery and evil in its tracks by coming down off of that cross, healing His own wounds, and then saying go to it boys as He releases the angels to take care of business. BUT HE DIDN'T. I am in awe.

I admit that I has moments when I felt like ripping the Jewish and Roman perpetrators apart. How dare they laugh in the face of such agony! How dare they spit on Him! How dare they stand in pompous, arrogant, self-righteous judgment of the King of Kings and Lord of Lords (how dare MYSELF go on sinning after what He did for me)! But as the High Priest is walking away from making fun and mocking. He hears Jesus softly say, taking up precious breath, "Father forgive them, they don't know what they are doing." The High Priest pauses in uncomfortable silence, then walks on. Later, after Jesus has died and the earthquake has damaged the temple and they are very aware that they have done something terribly wrong the High Priest is seen crying out and holding his face in grief and horror.

This movie was about love and forgiveness and about our sin and what God and His Son did together about that sin. It is about the horrible things that men do to their fellow men which can still be forgiven if they will but repent. Some of the Jews were depraved and some were compassionate. Some of the Romans were depraved, and some of them were inclined towards compassion. Anti-Jewish? NO WAY! Besides, the early church was exlusively Jewish. The movie is not about Mel Gibson having some kind of point to prove to anyone, let alone the Jews. It was Mel's passion, a labor of love. Will it profit Him? Unbelievably! Did he do it for the money, not a chance.

Were there any liberties taken with the scripture? Maybe a few. Poetic/artistic license was taken to a degree. There were some scenes with Judas that were extra Biblical, but imaginable. Surprisingly, he was shown as a somewhat sympathetic character, which is something I've felt to a degree for him. I doubt that he was a completely depraved man, he just wanted to speed things along so that Jesus would have to rise to the throne and have to take His true place. When he realized he had been horribly mis-lead he admitted guilt but then went out and killed himself. There was a scene in which the unrepentant thief had his eyes pecked out by a crow. I thought that didn't gel well with the theme of forgiveness and should have been left out. It seemed to represent Divine retribution since the thief had just been blaspheming Jesus. But the cross wasn't about retribution, that will come later at Judgment, it was about mercy.

As to this movie being appropriate for children? That's a hard call. I think it would be best if conscientous parents screened it for themselves first. It is hard enough for mature adults to stomach. However, there is something to be said for exposing young tender hearts to the truth of what He did. Maybe knowing what He did at a younger age would lead to more mature Christians later. Again, it's an individual call.

Is this movie Catholic? Yes and no. Those who see the relationship between Jesus and Mary who are Catholic will likely see Mary as divine. Those of us who believe that Mary was a mere woman who was blessed enough to have been chosen to be the mother of the Christ will see the relationship between a mother and her Son. THIS MOVIE IS FOR ALL!!! I can wholeheartedly recommend this movie to others for personal devotion or to touch the hearts of those who are lost. I believe very much that it will be a culturally defining movie and that it will break most IF NOT ALL of the box office records both nationally and world-wide. The Lord will not be silenced. I truly feel He has spoken through this movie. Maybe its His way of saying WAKE UP before He comes again. If it is, this Christian is awake (wiping away tears).

[tekriter]

I respect your reluctance to accept the Apochrypha as "authoritative." Regardless, you and others might find this RealAudio of Where We Got the Bible interesting.

[TheGeezer]

Mary is also our mother, the mother of the Church.

Well, be at peace, in any case. I'll ask God's mother to pray for you. You see, it's nice to have friends close to the Highest Possible Place. :>)

[savedbygrace]

Thank you for that. Real isn't going to be installed on any computer I own, though. What's the upshot WRT the issue at hand?

[jonboy]

But what do you say to those scriptures?

[savedbygrace]

I posted earlier that I had tickets for Wednesday afternoon and Saturday afternoon. That wasn't entirely accurate. One of the churches in town bought out all Wednesday showings and was making the tickets available for purchase at a slight discount this afternoon.

Based on the possibility that all the Wednesday tickets would be taken by the time we got there, we bought tickets at the theatre for Saturday afternoon "just in case."

Today at the church my wife stood in line and got the last three tickets for the 9:30pm showing. We needed three tickets and that's what was left from all the showings. What a mighty God we serve.

So now we'll be seeing The Passion twice this week. Promises to be emotionally draining.

[tekriter]

Thank you for that. Real isn't going to be installed on any computer I own, though. What's the upshot WRT the issue at hand?

The essence can be found here, though less entertaining than the audio (smile). I pray for God's blessings for you and all who mean the most to you.

[jwalsh07]

While I respect her for being the mother of Jesus, she was a "mere" mortal as I am. I don't think she has any MORE influence than I. That's the difference.

And yet for some strange reason God chose Mary to birth Jesus and not you. Why to you suppose God did that?

[jwalsh07]

More from Romans.

Rom. 5:12 - sin came into the world through one man, Adam, and death came through this sin.

Rom. 5:14 - death reigned from Adam to Moses, born from Adam's original sin.

Rom. 5:16 - the judgment following one single trespass brought condemnation for all.

Rom. 5:19 - by one man's disobedience many were made sinners.

[what's up]

If you were the Second Person of the Trinity about to take on the flesh of humanity, would you choose to prepare a worthy mother?

You must remember, those who are Muslim refuse to believe that Jesus was God's Son because they can't believe that God would allow His Son to die on a human cross and die a human death.

Well, this is the reality, that God allowed His Son to go to earth to have a human experience from conception to death. It's hard to accept but it's true. Jesus lived among sinful men, was killed by sinful people, and was birthed by a sinful mother. From conception to death, He experienced the human experience among sinners, and was not exempt from that in the first 9 months, nor in the last moments of death.

[LadyDoc]

original sin is the ingrown tendency of man to sin. It is the sin that is removed by baptism, and by christ's blood.

My point is that taking one line out of context from the bible is not the same as saying the bible is not true.You have to read the verse into the entire discussion, which is the terrible sinfulness of man and need to be saved...

and profoundly retarded people function at a mental age beneath age 2...some are similar to babies in mind. I did not mean the mildly retarded, who of course have some reasoning ability.

[MiniCooperChick]

As others have pointed out, if you ask other people to pray for your intentions, then you are doing nothing different than Catholics do when we pray for the intercession of the Angels and Saints.

The difference is significant. You are communicating with someone who has died. That is the crux of the discussion.

Died and reborn in Heaven. The Communion of the Saints is an essential part of Christianity. The human part of Heaven, the Church Triumphant, certainly exists and certainly adds their prayers to the Church Militant (the mortal elect here on Earth) fighting for the Reign of Christ the King.

I agree that they are alive in heaven; that is not the issue.

THAT IS PRECISELY THE ISSUE!
You admit that those to whom we request Heavenly intercession through prayer ARE "alive in heaven" so clearly we are not "communicating with the dead".

Why don't you just agree to disagree with Catholics and leave it at that?

You certainly could follow your own advice, true?

I was offering information to answer your repetitive, obviously anti-Catholic questions. I am happy to "agree to disagree" but you are not at that point in the discussion yet, and probably never will be.

That said, I have a question to you....you said that you would NEVER pray a "man-made" prayer (in so many words) because it's not "Scripturally Based". Does this mean you never make up your own prayers but only feel qualified to pray by repeating Scripture only? This is a serious question, and I would REALLY appreciate a response. Thanks! 0:-) MCC

[Ohioan from Florida]

Regarding Mary's perpetual virginity, I'd like to bring to mind some food for thought. In Matthew 1:18-25 the topic is the birth of Jesus. In my NAB translation it states:

"Now this is how the birth of Jesus Christ came about. When his mother Mary was betrothed to Joseph, but before they lived together, she was found with child through the Holy Spirit. Joseph her husband, since he was a righteous man, yet unwilling to expose her to shame, decided to divorce her quietly. Such was his intention when, behold, the angel of the Lord appeared to him in a dream and said, 'Joseph, son of David, do not be afraid to take Mary your wife into your home. For it is through the Holy Spirit that this child has been conceived in her. She will bear a son and you are to name him Jesus, because he will save his people from their sins.' All this took place to fulfill what the Lord had said through the prophet:
'Behold, the virgin shall be with child and bear a son, and they shall name him Emmanuel,'
Which means 'God is with us.' When Joseph awoke, he did as the angel of the Lord had commanded him and took his wife into his home. He had no relations with her until she bore a son, and he named him Jesus."

I have a parallel Bible in which the different translations say much the same thing. A few words are different, but the meaning remains intact.

So, here's my explanation for Mary's perpetual virginity. I tried to picture being Joseph, discovering that this lovely young lady he's engaged to has gotten herself pregnant! Even in our day this brings about much shame, but in Joseph's time, the consequences were even worse. Stoning to death was the punishment for adultery. (Check Deuteronomy 22:13-29 for the laws in place at this time for the Jews.) So it was pretty serious business to fool around before you were legally married.

Now, imagine that this young lady (do we dare call her a lady given her circumstances?) tells Joseph that she didn't have sex with anyone, that an angel greeted her strangely, and told her, "The Holy Spirit will come upon you, and the power of the Most High will overshadow you. Therefore the child to be born will be called holy, the Son of God." (from Luke 1: 35). Wouldn't you think Joseph is just saying to himself, "Oh, man! This is not good! This girl is nuts!" or something along those lines. He's wondering what he should do. He wants to believe her, but it seems preposterous! He considers himself a good, faithful, law-abiding Jew, and he thought Mary was one, too! He knows she loves the Lord, but...so he decides to quietly divorce her so that at least he can go on with his life, and well, who knows what will become of her?

Luckily Joseph then has a dream in which the angel of the Lord comes to him and confirms all that Mary has told him about the true Father of her child. It's a pretty wild story, but it seems to be verified. Wow, Mary's baby is going to be the Son of God! The Son of God! Can you believe it? He goes ahead and marries Mary and it tells us in scripture that "He had no relations with her until she bore a son..." Some translations go so far as to tell us it is Mary's first-born. Now I know some of you may be shouting with glee at the mention of the word "until" because you think that proves your point. But it doesn't. It signifies that Jesus was not born of a human father (Joseph) and that Mary had had no children before Jesus. "Until" refers to the period of time leading up to the event in question, so that the paternity of Jesus is not in doubt. Otherwise St. Matthew would use the words "until AFTER she bore a son", and that's not what he says. "Until" does not give an indication of what happens "after", it signifies what happened "before".

But just for grins, let's take a look at Mary and Joseph's relationship after Jesus is born. Again I ask you to put yourself in Joseph's shoes. Here he is with this beautiful young VIRGINAL wife who has given birth to a beautiful little boy, all because of what these angels have told them. They are not at their comfy home in Nazareth, they are in Bethlehem. The baby Jesus is born in this little nook of a space where animals get food and shelter. Angels start singing, and then shepherds arrived. Soon they are visited by some wise men (maybe they were kings?) who brought them lovely gifts. After the wise men leave, another angel appears to Joseph telling him to take Mary and the baby to Egypt, because they are in danger from King Herod. Well, Joseph must be going just about crazy with how directly God is coming into his life, but he seems to go along with everything the angels tell him. Surely he must have a very strong sense that Mary is a particularly special woman who is deeply loved by God, in order to bear His Son.

My big point is this: if you have ever had sexual relations with another person, you know how intimate it can be. I don't need to go into any of the nitty gritty details here, suffice to say, that I simply cannot believe that any man, as holy as he himself might be, could actually bring to fruition following through on sexual intercourse with a young woman who, though a virgin, got pregnant and bore the Son of God. If you think Joseph could have, then I think you do not hold the Lord in as high esteem as He should be held. Don't you think that part of the reason people in that time did not believe that Jesus was the Son of God is because that is a difficult concept to understand?

Flame away if you want to, but don't expect me to respond. This is my opinion. You can have yours.

[GirlShortstop]

THAT IS PRECISELY THE ISSUE! You admit that those to whom we request Heavenly intercession through prayer ARE "alive in heaven" so clearly we are not "communicating with the dead".

Thank you for the ping to your erudite response.  As I see it, it defies logical sense when the point you are making can not (or will not?) be grasped.  Also, please accept my apology for overlooking you in my post about this anti-Catholic conundrum earlier today.   FReegards!

[JulieRNR21]

But what do you say to those scriptures?

I am not qualified to 'debate' scripture with you. I simply shared my beliefs and I respect yours.

[jonboy]

Respectfully, what does that prove in the context of the scripture earlier?

See post 393.

Sin entered into the world because of Adam, when Adam ate of the tree of good and evil the effect of that was passed on. We all start off like Adam did, pure and innocent in our birth. If we grow past childhood to the point of knowing good and evil (the age of accountability), we are able and do sin and need forgiveness like Adam did. It doesn't mean that we inherit Adam's taint. We have our own. If you have us guilty by reason of Adam than you are putting the scriptures you quoted into opposition with the others in post 393. Other things came into the world during that time as well. Because of Eve, women are to be in submission to men and will have pain in childbirth. It is a result of her sin. Because of Adam sin and death entered into the world, but again it wasn't a pool of sin passed from him onward, we each sinned on our own. And if you have a rebuttal to this, please include explanations to the scriptures from post 393 as well.

[jonboy]

Why aren't you qualified? Don't we have access to the same scriptures? Why does it have to be looked at as a debate?! Believe me, I don't have a perverse need to be right OR to prove you wrong. Our beliefs are shaped either by what we hear others say about the scriptures or by what the scriptures themselves say. Shouldn't we be concerned (any of us) if we find something in scripture that seems to undo any of our beliefs? I have literally questioned every belief that I hold for the purpose of making my faith my own and not borrowed from anyone else. I don't believe in lazy dogma. If you do nothing else but prove those scriptures right or wrong where YOUR own faith is concerned I will consider that a win. But please don't retreat because you think this is a battle, I want us to be on the same team. Please don't feel threatened IN ANY WAY by me.

[jwalsh07]

Respectfully, what does that prove in the context of the scripture earlier?

Respectfully, those words from scripture offer plenty of room for debate on original sin. You may not agree with Catholic interpretation of those words but you nor I are the final arbiter.

I don't claim omniscience, I would hope you don't either.

[jonboy]

LOL. I certainly don't claim omniscience (although my wife sometimes claims I'm a know it all). But I do happen to think this debate is answerable. I hope that I wasn't coming across as the Great and Powerful Know It All, I certainly take pains to avoid that. That said, I think a good debate is not one to be avoided but helps us all grow. I think that we ALL should earn our beliefs, not rest on easy dogma. I for one welcome debate in good spirit and faith.

[Barnacle]

I believe you posted a thread requesting ideas of how to handle comments of liberal friends at an upcoming party
following 9-11. Does that sound right?

[savedbygrace]

That said, I have a question to you....you said that you would NEVER pray a "man-made" prayer (in so many words) because it's not "Scripturally Based". Does this mean you never make up your own prayers but only feel qualified to pray by repeating Scripture only? This is a serious question, and I would REALLY appreciate a response.

You're putting words in my mouth. Go back and re-read what I said. You're misquoting me, misrepresenting what I've said, and I'm beginning to suspect you're doing it intentionally, all the time knowing what I mean. If you want to debate, do so honestly, please.

And please get off the wounded-Catholic-victim thing. I write what I write because it's what I believe, not because it's against what someone else believes.