Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9162 total)
5 online now:
Newest Member: popoi
Post Volume: Total: 915,811 Year: 3,068/9,624 Month: 913/1,588 Week: 96/223 Day: 7/17 Hour: 3/1


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   The Passion Of The Christ
1.61803
Member (Idle past 1503 days)
Posts: 2928
From: Lone Star State USA
Joined: 02-19-2004


Message 46 of 71 (88647)
02-25-2004 3:49 PM


I was Wrong....
Well I read through my own link an darned if I can find the quote.
My apologies to the forum, I learned a lesson though never assume a link referencing somthing is correct.

ConsequentAtheist
Member (Idle past 6238 days)
Posts: 392
Joined: 05-28-2003


Message 47 of 71 (88717)
02-26-2004 12:17 AM
Reply to: Message 44 by Phat
02-25-2004 9:35 AM


Re: CONSTANTINE’S SWORD
We will NOT have the scriptures reduced to the opinions of men. The scriptures are inerrent.
You have no reason to presume that they were ever anythine else.
By the way, I notice that, as you wallow in faith, you studiously avoud comment on the content of Carroll's book and the other items quoted. It's as if this capacity to tread holy water increases ones capacity to ignore/condone antisemtism.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 44 by Phat, posted 02-25-2004 9:35 AM Phat has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 48 by Phat, posted 02-26-2004 7:31 AM ConsequentAtheist has replied

Phat
Member
Posts: 18262
From: Denver,Colorado USA
Joined: 12-30-2003
Member Rating: 1.1


Message 48 of 71 (88769)
02-26-2004 7:31 AM
Reply to: Message 47 by ConsequentAtheist
02-26-2004 12:17 AM


Re: CONSTANTINE’S SWORD
And I will concede that the behavior of some who profess my belief has been deplorable.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 47 by ConsequentAtheist, posted 02-26-2004 12:17 AM ConsequentAtheist has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 49 by ConsequentAtheist, posted 02-26-2004 8:02 AM Phat has replied

ConsequentAtheist
Member (Idle past 6238 days)
Posts: 392
Joined: 05-28-2003


Message 49 of 71 (88774)
02-26-2004 8:02 AM
Reply to: Message 48 by Phat
02-26-2004 7:31 AM


Re: CONSTANTINE’S SWORD
We are not talking about [i]"some who profess"[i]. We are talking about a foundation of Christianity over some 15 centuries.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 48 by Phat, posted 02-26-2004 7:31 AM Phat has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 50 by Phat, posted 02-26-2004 10:15 AM ConsequentAtheist has not replied

Phat
Member
Posts: 18262
From: Denver,Colorado USA
Joined: 12-30-2003
Member Rating: 1.1


Message 50 of 71 (88799)
02-26-2004 10:15 AM
Reply to: Message 49 by ConsequentAtheist
02-26-2004 8:02 AM


Re: CONSTANTINE’S SWORD
It has been brought up elsewhere that the true Christians who love God and have allowed his spirit to live in them are NOT the ones who are responsible. As Mike the Wiz pointed out, I did not kill Indians, Jews, and Witches. To a non believer, there is no difference. You think that it is the concept of Christianity that is the evil. You would prefer it if man was freed from any absolute moral compass to live by and that if man were allowed to decide his own fate that it would be better. In this sense, Christians will disagree with you. Man is fallible, flawed, and incapable of running his own soul. That is why God sent His Son. America is a democracy and not a Theocracy--this is true. I believe that Christians need to stay seperate from politics. I do not believe that the state has a higher source of ethics and morality(individual choice) than does the church.(choose Him) In this setting, you and I will continue to disagree. You will stand on human intellect as a higher and more noble source. I will stand on a divine spirit as my source. You will inform me that my reasoning is simple, faulty, and dogmatically zealous. I will inform you that your human pride has placed itself above God, even denying that He is real. So we will disagree. In America, you and I have the free speech rights to do so.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 49 by ConsequentAtheist, posted 02-26-2004 8:02 AM ConsequentAtheist has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 53 by Cthulhu, posted 02-26-2004 9:38 PM Phat has not replied

godsmac
Inactive Member


Message 51 of 71 (88899)
02-26-2004 5:05 PM
Reply to: Message 42 by ConsequentAtheist
02-25-2004 7:44 AM


Re:
CA, I just looked at one of your links. I have no arguments with what it says. But you may have glossed over or missed the main point of the article--that a passion play may be used as a tool for anti-Semitic propaganda.
"The major point is clear. The dramatization of the suffering of Jesus the Christ can provide the opportunity to teach people to hate the Jews."
A passion play is not necessarily anti-Semitic. The message provided by the story of Jesus' crucifixion should be about the sacrifice he made, not about who killed him or who is to blame for his death. He sacrificed himself out of love and forgiveness for those around him. This simple yet profound part of the story should make it clear to anyone who is properly taught the story that it is not against any people or group of persons.
"Now, in the year 2004, there are still those about who would seize on a new version of the passion play to bolster their prejudices and use the controversies surrounding it to make anti-Semitic propaganda."
No arguments with this statement, either. But you cannot wrap all Christians up into a group of anti-Semites because of the actions of some. That would be the same kind of stereotyping that leads to the bigotry and prejudice that you appear to be railing against. You have every right to rail against bigotry and prejudice, but not if you become a perpetrator of it yourself.
Some of us Christians would contend that anyone who called themselves a Christian while acting out of hate for any people or group of persons was actually false in their Christianity. I do contend just that. I admit that some have used the story of Jesus' execution to commit pogroms against Jews. I am not defending that practice, I despise it.
As to Gibson's film, I have not had the opportunity to see it yet, but I still maintain the belief and hope that it is not intended as a tool for use in anti-Semitism. That it may be used so by evil people is a possibility, but the possibility should not be used to condemn the film itself. Those people should be condemned for misusing it so.
[This message has been edited by godsmac, 02-26-2004]

This message is a reply to:
 Message 42 by ConsequentAtheist, posted 02-25-2004 7:44 AM ConsequentAtheist has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 52 by ConsequentAtheist, posted 02-26-2004 8:22 PM godsmac has not replied

ConsequentAtheist
Member (Idle past 6238 days)
Posts: 392
Joined: 05-28-2003


Message 52 of 71 (88934)
02-26-2004 8:22 PM
Reply to: Message 51 by godsmac
02-26-2004 5:05 PM


Re:
But you may have glossed over or missed the main point of the article--that a passion play may be used as a tool for anti-Semitic propaganda.
I suggest that the most reasonable reading of the Passion narrative suggests it to be a largely fictive legend layered with anti-Judaism, i.e., a story molded at a time when the Jerusalem cult had been defeated and replaced by the gentile mission of, first Paul, and then John, a time when these Christians were developing the pervasive and vitriolic hatred of the Jews that would later be codified as referenced above, and a time, between Masada and bar Kochba, when targeting the Jews, raher than Pontius Pilatus, made good tactical as well as dogmatic sense.
But you cannot wrap all Christians up into a group of anti-Semites because of the actions of some.
Of course not. Where have I done so?
[This message has been edited by ConsequentAtheist, 02-26-2004]

This message is a reply to:
 Message 51 by godsmac, posted 02-26-2004 5:05 PM godsmac has not replied

Cthulhu
Member (Idle past 5851 days)
Posts: 273
From: Roe Dyelin
Joined: 09-09-2003


Message 53 of 71 (88942)
02-26-2004 9:38 PM
Reply to: Message 50 by Phat
02-26-2004 10:15 AM


Re: CONSTANTINE’S SWORD
It has been brought up elsewhere that the true Christians who love God and have allowed his spirit to live in them are NOT the ones who are responsible.
No True Scotsman fallacy.

Ia! Cthulhu fhtagn!

This message is a reply to:
 Message 50 by Phat, posted 02-26-2004 10:15 AM Phat has not replied

Yaro
Member (Idle past 6495 days)
Posts: 1797
Joined: 07-12-2003


Message 54 of 71 (88948)
02-26-2004 10:24 PM


Soooooo....
Ummm... who saw the movie?
What did you think?
CA?

Eastern Star
Inactive Member


Message 55 of 71 (89004)
02-27-2004 7:32 AM


I saw the movie
I was really looking forward to this film. But I have to say it was an utter disappointment. I walked away thinking I was clipped of 9 bucks and two hours of my time. I didn't see anything anti-semitic about the movie. What I saw was a very conservative view of the Passion brought to the screen. And that is fine. It just isn't my interpretation. The movie bored me more than moved me. If this film moves a person in such a way that it strengthens their spirit, then great. Faith is wonderful in that way because we all have our ways of accepting the Lords word in our heart. But for me this movie was wildly overdone/interpreted.
I read an earlier post that the movie doesn't do any historical or factual justice to the story and someone else replied that you can't do that to this movie. Being someone who mixes both faith and a scholarly approach to Christianity, I'd say you are both right and wrong. What has been done wrong (to me) is that Mel still thinks of Mary of Magdalene as a prostitute. He doesn't say it so much as he insinuates it in the movie and it's hard to miss. From a scholarly approach; The Gospel of John is considered the most myth driven of the four gospels. In the early church, it was a book that was rejected as heresy by some circles. The book didn't gain real importance until around the middle of the second century when Christians were really beginning to seperate themselves as a different entity, rather than as a Jewish faction. That said, this movie is really Mel's interpretation of the Gospel of John and then some. To me, it seems, the other three books mean little to nothing to Mel Gibson.
AS for acting - there are bits here that are so overdone its laughable. The Roman soldiers who take delight in scourging Jesus is an example of bad acting that should be shown to actors on how NOT to act.
The first hour of the movie has little to no violence in it. The second hour is just a constant beating to the point of being pornographic. But I have to say, the beatings weren't as graphic as I thought it was going to be, it's just that it rarely stops. Jesus' body is so torn that it can be hard to look at if you have a weak stomach.
AS for the anti-semitism. I didn't see it. Plenty of people call for Jesus to be saved and spared. Yes there is a mob mentality that is portrayed but I think that is how it was set up. I also didn't see any Jews taking delight in the beatings. If anyone took delight, it was the Romans. Pilate may be portrayed as weak but it doesn't mean that anti-semitism gets passed on to Jews. I took from the movie that EVERYONE is culpable. I think that is what Mel wanted to portray and in that he succeded. But overall, this was not a good movie..., at least for me.

Replies to this message:
 Message 57 by ConsequentAtheist, posted 02-27-2004 8:01 AM Eastern Star has not replied
 Message 59 by Phat, posted 02-28-2004 5:21 AM Eastern Star has not replied

Zealot
Inactive Member


Message 56 of 71 (89005)
02-27-2004 7:36 AM
Reply to: Message 3 by phil
02-22-2004 10:35 PM


Whats with Anti Sematism ?
Hi, just curious but exactly what is wrong with depicting certain Jews around 30 AD in a bad way ?
In the last 20 years atleast there have been numerous movies depicting one or other nation, belief or religion in an unfavourable way.
In Indiana Jones, Saving Private Ryan, Schindlers List and countless other WWII movies, we portray Germans in a bad light. We can claim that we are actually portraying the "Nazi's" in a bad light, but lets be honest, we are essentially making out Germans in the 40's to be cruel killers. This is all of 50 years ago. The grandparents of most 20 year old German citizens today.
If we watch Mel Gibson's "Braveheart" or "The Patriot", now the English are depicted as a cruel nation.
"Pearl harbour", "The Last of the Mohicans", "Amistadt". Someone gets the short straw here.
Now my main point is as follows. Firstly, personally I bear no grudge against Jews in any case. I am as much guilty of Jesus's death as the next man and realise Jesus had to die to save our sins. What I don't understand is why there is such an outcry over anti-sematism in this movie. Was there an outcry over the torture of Wallace in Braveheart ? Why is it thus so unacceptable to depict Jews from 2000 years ago as the killers of Christ ?
Sorry, just that I've managed to watch countless movies depicting christians and the clergy in the middle ages as murderous bigots, yet never seen it make the forums.
cheers

This message is a reply to:
 Message 3 by phil, posted 02-22-2004 10:35 PM phil has not replied

ConsequentAtheist
Member (Idle past 6238 days)
Posts: 392
Joined: 05-28-2003


Message 57 of 71 (89009)
02-27-2004 8:01 AM
Reply to: Message 55 by Eastern Star
02-27-2004 7:32 AM


Re: I saw the movie
The book didn't gain real importance until around the middle of the second century when Christians were really beginning to seperate themselves as a different entity, rather than as a Jewish faction. That said, this movie is really Mel's interpretation of the Gospel of John and then some. ... AS for the anti-semitism. I didn't see it. Plenty of people call for Jesus to be saved and spared. Yes there is a mob mentality that is portrayed but I think that is how it was set up. I also didn't see any Jews taking delight in the beatings. If anyone took delight, it was the Romans. Pilate may be portrayed as weak but it doesn't mean that anti-semitism gets passed on to Jews.
There are really three issues surround the film. Is the narrative historically accurate? Is the narrative potentially incendiary? Is the narrative portrayed by Gibson in a manner to maximize its incendiary effect?
Taken in reverse order ...
3. It's impossible to know Gibson's intent. It is clear, however, that he paints his characters in such a way as to maximixe the nature of the crime, minimize Pilate's culpability, and focus of the Jewish leadership as the most despicable force behind the crucifixian.
2. Clearly, yes.
1. I believe that most scholars would argue that the Passion narrative was written and redacted during the period bracketed by Masada and bar Kochba. It was, as you suggest, a period characterized by the victory of the Gentile Mission over the Jerusalem church, a period that resulted in the pervasive anti-Jewish vitriol that later resulted in a whole serious of antisemitic measures.
The narrative, with its progression from Mark to John, has all the qualities of legend creation/embellishment at a time when hatred of the Jews was endemic to the movement, while painting Pilate as a sympathetic figure in the clutches of a Jewish conspiracy could only serve to appease Rome.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 55 by Eastern Star, posted 02-27-2004 7:32 AM Eastern Star has not replied

mike the wiz
Member
Posts: 4752
From: u.k
Joined: 05-24-2003


Message 58 of 71 (89042)
02-27-2004 11:16 AM


Excerpt
Thought you might be interested.

Phat
Member
Posts: 18262
From: Denver,Colorado USA
Joined: 12-30-2003
Member Rating: 1.1


Message 59 of 71 (89217)
02-28-2004 5:21 AM
Reply to: Message 55 by Eastern Star
02-27-2004 7:32 AM


Re: I saw the movie
I clearly saw a plausible story that I believe did happen. It has always struck me as odd the passion and zeal by which people have tried and still try to minimize or mythify the story of God incarnate taking on the sins of man. To a believer, many things in life are uncertain and some events and processes of humanity and our collective interaction with destiny remain a mystery. Some ideas that we have learned and have questioned are never disproven. One of these ideas is the idea that humans are a paradox. On the one hand, humans are more than just animals. Humans are infused with the divine image of God. On the other hand, humans can be worse than the lowest animals. Animals act and react purely according to instinct, whereas humans often are seized by irrational attitudes and zealous passions. Jesus Christ has always brought out the best and the worst in humans. One either loves and believes in His personal Messiah, or one fervantly and dogmatically attempts to disprove and downplay the entire story of Jesus. This movie was well done. The jeers of the crowd and of the guards were a bit of a stretch unless one is struck by the supernatural reality of the event. There is a spiritual realm, and a battle of forces. For those of you who deny this, I will ask you about it again on the next, worse version of 9/11.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 55 by Eastern Star, posted 02-27-2004 7:32 AM Eastern Star has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 60 by ConsequentAtheist, posted 02-28-2004 9:34 AM Phat has replied

ConsequentAtheist
Member (Idle past 6238 days)
Posts: 392
Joined: 05-28-2003


Message 60 of 71 (89237)
02-28-2004 9:34 AM
Reply to: Message 59 by Phat
02-28-2004 5:21 AM


Re: I saw the movie
I clearly saw a plausible story that I believe did happen.
You saw a long-haired Jesus speaking Latin, a pervasively evil and manipulative High Priest (those damn rich Jews are behind everything), and a weak and thoroughly sympathetic Pilate. That you found this "plausible" says a great deal more about you than anything else.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 59 by Phat, posted 02-28-2004 5:21 AM Phat has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 61 by Phat, posted 02-28-2004 9:45 AM ConsequentAtheist has not replied

Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024