Mel Gibson's Controversial Film "The Passion"
 

This film tells the story of the last 12 hours in the life of Jesus (Caviezel), on the day of his crucifixion in Jerusalem. This film's script is based upon several sources, including the diaries of St. Anne Catherine Emmerich (1774-1824) as collected in the book, "The Dolorous Passion of Our Lord Jesus Christ", "The Mystical City of God" by St. Mary of Agreda, and the New Testament books of John, Luke, Mark and Matthew.

Release Date: February 25th, 2004.
MPAA Rating: R for sequences of graphic violence.
Distributor: Newmarket Film Group

Is anyone planning on seeing this film?

Re: Mel Gibson's Controversial Film "The Passion"
 

I want to see it solely because of the hype that surrounded it. I thought they weren't going to release it in the states? Am I confusing this with another movie? :confused:

I have never heard those 4 books listed like that. It sounds backwards, funny, and out of order. I don't like it, lol.

I think it's going to be released in only 2000 theaters. :confused:

Yeah... (thinking of how it was taught...M, M, L and J) :o

I really want to see this film. I hope it opens in Alabama theaters. I've read so much about it in the past year that I've become intrigued with all the positive and negative media attention it has gotten. I hope to have the chance to develop my own opinion of the film.

I plan on going to see it. Why is it being opened only in 2000 theaters? And why is it so controversial? If you want to see it, see it. If you don't, don't. I'm baffled on this one.

Supposedly it portrays Jews in a very negative (some have said anti-Semitic) light. Also, Mel's dad (and maybe Mel) is affiliated with a schismatic sect of the Catholic church (they still do Mass in Latin and pretty much don't accept anything that happened during Vatican II).

**shortened explanation**

Ahhh, thanks kindly!

From another site...
 

Paul Harvey’s Words



I really did not know what to expect. I was thrilled to have been invited to a private viewing of Mel Gibson's film "The Passion," but I had also read all the cautious articles and spin. I grew up in a Jewish town and owe much of my own faith journey to the influence. I have a life long, deeply held aversion to anything that might even indirectly encourage any form of anti-Semitic thought, language or actions.

I arrived at the private viewing for "The Passion", held in Washington DC and greeted some familiar faces. The environment was typically Washingtonian, with people greeting you with a smile but seeming to look beyond you, having an agenda beyond the words.. The film was very briefly introduced, without fanfare, and then the room darkened. From the gripping opening scene in the Garden of Gethsemane, to the very human and tender portrayal of the earthly ministry of Jesus, through the betrayal, the arrest, the scourging, the way of the cross, the encounter with the thieves, the surrender on the Cross, until the final scene in the empty tomb, this was not simply a movie; it was an encounter, unlike anything I have ever experienced.

In addition to being a masterpiece of film-making and an artistic triumph, "The Passion" evoked more deep reflection, sorrow and emotional reaction within me than anything since my wedding, my ordination or the birth of my children. Frankly, I will never be the same. When the film concluded, this "invitation only" gathering of "movers and shakers" in Washington, DC were shaking indeed, but this time from sobbing. I am not sure there was a dry eye in the place. The crowd that had been glad-handing before the film was now eerily silent. No one could speak because words were woefully inadequate. We had experienced a kind of art that is a rarity in life, the kind that makes heaven touch earth.

One scene in the film has now been forever etched in my mind. A brutalized, wounded Jesus was soon to fall again under the weight of the cross. His mother had made her way along the Via Della Rosa. As she ran to him, she flashed back to a memory of Jesus as a child, falling in the dirt road outside of their home. Just as she reached to protect him from the fall, she was now reaching to touch his wounded adult face. Jesus looked at her with intensely probing and passionately loving eyes (and at all of us through the screen) and said "Behold I make all things new." These are words taken from the last Book of the New Testament, the Book of Revelations. Suddenly, the purpose of the pain was so clear and the wounds, that earlier in the film had been so difficult to see in His face, His back, indeed all over His body, became intensely beautiful. They had been borne voluntarily for love.



At the end of the film, after we had all had a chance to recover, a question and answer period ensued. The unanimous praise for the film, from a rather diverse crowd, was as astounding as the compliments were effusive. The questions included the one question that seems to follow this film, even though it has not yet even been released. "Why is this film considered by some to be "anti-Semitic?" Frankly, having now experienced (you do not "view" this film) "the Passion" it is a question that is impossible to answer. A law professor whom I admire sat in front of me. He raised his hand and responded "After watching this film, I do not understand how anyone can insinuate that it even remotely presents that the Jews killed Jesus. It doesn't." He continued "It made me realize that my sins killed Jesus" I agree. There is not a scintilla of anti-Semitism to be found anywhere in this powerful film. If there were, I would be among the first to decry it. It faithfully tells the Gospel story in a dramatically beautiful, sensitive and profoundly engaging way.

Those who are alleging otherwise have either not seen the film or have another agenda behind their protestations. This is not a "Christian" film, in the sense that it will appeal only to those who identify themselves as followers of Jesus Christ. It is a deeply human, beautiful story that will deeply touch all men and women. It is a profound work of art. Yes, its producer is a Catholic Christian and thankfully has remained faithful to the Gospel text; if that is no longer acceptable behavior than we are all in trouble. History demands that we remain faithful to the story and Christians have a right to tell it. After all, we believe that it is the greatest story ever told and that its message is for all men and women. The greatest right is the right to hear the truth.

We would all be well advised to remember that the Gospel narratives to which "The Passion" is so faithful were written by Jewish men who followed a Jewish Rabbi whose life and teaching have forever changed the history of the world. The problem is not the message but those who have distorted it and used it for hate rather than love. The solution is not to censor the message, but rather to promote the kind of gift of love that is Mel Gibson's filmmaking masterpiece, "The Passion."

It should be seen by as many people as possible. I intend to do everything I can to make sure that is the case. I am passionate about "The Passion." You will be as well. Don't miss it! This is a commentary by DAVID LIMBAUGH about Mel Gibson's very controversial movie regarding Christ's crucifixion. It, too, is well worth reading.



MEL GIBSON'S passion for "THE PASSION"

How ironic that when a movie producer takes artistic license with historical events, he is lionized as artistic, creative and brilliant, but when another takes special care to be true to the real-life story, he is vilified. Actor-producer Mel Gibson is discovering these truths the hard way as he is having difficulty finding a United States studio or distributor for his upcoming film, "The Passion," which depicts the last

12 hours of the life of Jesus Christ.

Gibson co-wrote the script and financed, directed and produced the movie. For the script, he and his co-author relied on the New Testament Gospels of Matthew, Mark, Luke and John, as well as the diaries of St. Anne Catherine Emmerich (1774-1824) and Mary of Agreda's "The City of God."

Gibson doesn't want this to be like other sterilized religious epics. "I'm trying to access the story on a very personal level and trying to be very real about it." So committed to realistically portraying what many would consider the most important half-day in the history of the universe, Gibson even shot the film in the Aramaic language of the period. In response to objections that viewers will not be able to understand that language, Gibson said, "Hopefully, I'll be able to transcend the language barriers with my visual storytelling; if I fail, I fail, but at least it'll be a monumental failure."

To further insure the accuracy of the work, Gibson has enlisted the counsel of pastors and theologians, and has received rave reviews. Don Hodel, president of Focus on the Family, said, "I was very impressed. The movie is historically and theologically accurate." Ted Haggard, pastor of New Life Church in Colorado Springs, Colo., and president of the National Evangelical Association, glowed: "It conveys, more accurately than any other film, who Jesus was."

During the filming, Gibson, a devout Catholic, attended Mass every morning because "we had to be squeaky clean just working on this." From Gibson's perspective, this movie is not about Mel Gibson. It's bigger than he is. "I'm not a preacher, and I'm not a pastor," he said. "But I really feel my career was leading me to make this. The Holy Ghost was working through me on this film, and I was just directing traffic. I hope the film has the power to evangelize."



Even before the release of the movie, scheduled for March 2004, Gibson is getting his wish. "Everyone who worked on this movie was changed. There were agnostics and Muslims on set converting to Christianity...[and] people being healed of diseases." Gibson wants people to understand through the movie, if they don't already, the incalculable influence Christ has had on the world. And he grasps that Christ is controversial precisely because of WHO HE IS - GOD incarnate. "And that's the point of my film really, to show all that turmoil around him politically and with religious leaders and the people, all because He is Who He is."

Gibson is beginning to experience first hand just how controversial Christ is. Critics have not only speciously challenged the movie's authenticity, but have charged that it is disparaging to Jews, which Gibson vehemently denies. "This is not a Christian vs. Jewish thing. '[Jesus] came into the world, and it knew him not.' Looking at Christ's crucifixion, I look first at my own culpability in that." Jesuit Father William J. Fulco, who translated the script into Aramaic and Latin, said he saw no hint of anti-Semitism in the movie. Fulco added, "I would be aghast at any suggestion that Mel Gibson is anti-Semitic." Nevertheless, certain groups and some in the mainstream press have been very critical of Gibson's "Passion."

The New York Post's Andrea Peyser chided him: "There is still time, Mel, to tell the truth." Boston Globe columnist James Carroll denounced Gibson's literal reading of the biblical accounts. "Even a faithful repetition of the Gospel stories of the death of Jesus can do damage exactly because those sacred texts themselves carry the virus of Jew hatred," wrote Carroll. A group of Jewish and Christian academics has issued an 18-page report slamming all aspects of the film, including its undue emphasis on Christ's passion rather than "a broader vision." The report disapproves of the movie's treatment of Christ's passion as historical fact.

The moral is that if you want the popular culture to laud your work on Christ, make sure it either depicts Him as a homosexual or as an everyday sinner with no particular redeeming value (literally). In our anti-Christian culture, the blasphemous "The Last Temptation of Christ" is celebrated and "The Passion" is condemned. But if this movie continues to affect people the way it is now, no amount of cultural opposition will suppress its force and its positive impact on lives everywhere. Mel Gibson is a model of faith and courage.

I plan to see it. :)

I don't understand all the controversy around it either. Shoot, movies show US (black folks) in a bad light all the time. :rolleyes:

looking around the thread asking who actually went to see My Baby Daddy

I won't go and see it. I hate how so many religious movies aren't true to the regions where these stories took place. How is that the area where Jesus lived has been inhabited by Arabs, Africans, and other non-white ethnic groups for centuries but the films always reflect tanned Caucasians? I just don't believe that the people in that region could be what we know as white today.

I have the same feelings about Elizabeth Taylor as Cleopatra the Egyptian...puhleeze.

Re: From another site...
 

I realize this has nothing to do with the movie, I just wanted to say, this quote is SO true!!!

ETA: after reading that review, I really want to see it now.

Sorry to ruin your righteous indignation, but Cleopatra was white. She was a direct descendant of Ptolemy, a Greek general. The Ptolemaic Dynasty was notorious for inbreeding and not marrying outside the family. She most definitely was Greek and not African.

Back on Topic

The reason the film is "controversial" is because Jews run Hollywood and the Media and they don't want to see a sympathetic portrayal of Christ that a true believer and even non-belivers can connect with. They falsely believe that the movie would foment anti-Jewish sentiment. The secularist movement cannot stand any favorable depiction of religion.

>>Sorry to ruin your righteous indignation, but Cleopatra was white. She was a direct descendant of Ptolemy, a Greek general. The Ptolemaic Dynasty was notorious for inbreeding and not marrying outside the family. She most definitely was Greek and not African.<<


I'm sorry but you're going to have to provide some sort of proof for your statement. I've read several scholars and not all would agree w/ your statement. Yes Cleopatra is a decendant of Ptolemy but the rest of her heritage is in wide dispute.

The movie is only in limited release, right?

I haven't seen much about it lately, but I might not be reading the right things.

TTT
 

Is anyone going to see it? It opens up in theaters today?

I would really like to see it. I have an issue with people saying the film is Anti-Semetic when they havent seen the film. That bothers me. I would really like to see the film. :)

. . .so we can make our own judgements. I understand where you're coming from Nikki.

I do hear that it's quite graphic though. But the Bible even speaks of the beatings that Jesus endured that he was hardly recognizable.

Thousands Rush to 'Passion'
Feb 25, 9:31 AM EST
Associated Press
Even before sunrise, believers and nonbelievers alike poured into movie theaters around the nation on Ash Wednesday for the opening of Mel Gibson's "The Passion of the Christ."
An estimated 6,000 people filled all 20 auditoriums at a Cinemark theater in this Dallas suburb to watch the film. All the tickets had been bought and donated by a local churchgoer.
"I hope everybody sees it with an open mind," said Rick Pierce, 53, a Baptist who sipped coffee and chewed on a breakfast burrito at the theater before the first showing.
Elsewhere across the nation, some couldn't wait for morning screenings.
More than 100 people watched the midnight showing of "The Passion" at the ArcLight Cinemas in Los Angeles.
"I'm in shock. I'm physically weak. I'm emotional," said Joseph Camerieri, a 39-year-old paralegal student from Los Angeles who was trying to hold back tears after seeing the film.
"I think if you're a Christian it will increase your faith tenfold in what Christ has done for you. If you're not a Christian, you'll probably treat others with more love."
In the central Pennsylvania community of Bellefonte, about 50 people attended a showing after midnight. Viewers groaned as Jesus was nailed to the cross, and muffled cries could be heard during more than an hour of Jesus' torture, crucifixion and death. In the end, as Jesus rises from the grave, some in the audience quietly celebrated.
"To me, that was the important part," said Aaron Tucker, an English major at Penn State. "I'm like, 'Oh, victory!' There's more to this movie than just the violence. It's about triumph."
In Plano, Arch Bonnema, a financial planner, reserved the entire Cinemark Tinseltown 20 theater, spending $42,000 of his own money on tickets.
"When you see the sacrifice that Jesus made, it makes you feel like, I have to do something better with my life," said Bonnema, 50, a lifelong Christian inspired to act after seeing a special screening of the movie.
Popcorn and soft drinks remained on the concession menu — but theater managers bet that most early morning moviegoers would rather choose breakfast pastries and orange juice.
A cadre of ministers were on hand to reach out to moviegoers.
"Not to preach a sermon," said the Rev. Jack Graham, pastor of Prestonwood Baptist where Bonnema is a member and president of the Southern Baptist Convention, "but to sum up the message and meaning of the cross. ... We anticipate that there will be a tremendous outpouring of God's favor on this movie."
Funded and directed by Gibson, the film has received decidedly mixed reviews from critics. Some have praised Gibson's total commitment to his subject: The Oscar-winning filmmaker says the movie is both an attempt to faithfully render the Gospels and a personal vision. Others see it as excessively bloody, obsessed with cruelty and unfair in its portrayal of Jews.
But following months of hype, curiosity about the movie is almost insatiable.
After seeing "The Passion" a few months ago, Bonnema called his wife, Sherry, and told her, "Honey, we've got to get as many people as we can to see this film because it's changed my life."
With her blessing, he approached Cinemark about reserving a single auditorium. Theater officials told him that would be fine, but he would need to do so before regular operating hours.
"If it's before hours, aren't all of them empty?" Bonnema recalled asking. "So I called my wife back and said, 'What do you think about getting 6,000 seats?'"
She agreed, even though she hadn't seen the film herself.
The Bonnemas gave 3,000 tickets to their church and 1,000 to the Dallas Theological Seminary.
That left them with 2,000 — but not for long.
"I put out an e-mail to friends in the Dallas-Fort Worth area," Arch Bonnema said. "In three days, I had 23,000 requests."
Ordinarily, showing the same movie on 20 screens would be impossible because of a lack of prints, said Terrell Falk, spokeswoman for Plano-based Cinemark USA, which owns about 300 theaters in 33 states.
But in this case, Cinemark made special arrangements to borrow prints from its other area theaters.
"We'll show it early in the morning, then take them to the other theaters," Falk said.
———
Associated Press Writer Angela Watercutter in Los Angeles contributed to this report.

http://entertainment.msn.com/movies/...px?news=150771

HK,
This morning Doug Banks and his crew (92.3 in Chicago) were asking callers and a number of them were saying that they were not going to support b/c the movie did not cast Christ in his true light. That he was actually of African descent according to history apparently and that Hollywood was doing a number of folk once again. What do you think about that?

SC

Markmywords,
Others feel this way too. This is the post that I just posted:


This morning Doug Banks and his crew (92.3 in Chicago) were asking callers and a number of them were saying that they were not going to support b/c the movie did not cast Christ in his true light. That he was actually of African descent according to history apparently and that Hollywood was doing a number of folk once again.

SC

Doggystyle, I always learned that Cleopatra was of mixed heritage, greek and Egyptian I think. Further, the Greeks at that time were much darker than we see today. And the Egyptians....well, I'll just say that they were much darker too. Apparently, the Egyptians weren't terribly unlike the inhibitants of *other* African countries.

SC

Nikki, this isn't directed to you. It's a general post.

Maybe I don't get it. So what if the movie *is* anti-Semitic. If it tells the truth, then who cares. Nobody is perfect and all groups have some shame in their background at some point - AND PEOPLE OF THE JEWISH FAITH ARE NO DIFFERENT.

I get so tired of some folk. Running around here all holier than thou. Heck, I know Ethiopian Jews (yes, Ethiopian ie. Black - nappy hair and all) that can trace their lineage back to the tribe of Dan (one of the 12 tribes of Israel). In fact, some Ethiopian Jews were discovered still practicing the ancient way of life several years ago in Africa. Do they get coverage on tv? Nooooooo b/c they don't look like what the world has been taught to believe is a Jew. Do the Jewish people in this country claim them? Nooooo b/c it would place into question the notion that a Jew looks like what we have been told that they look like.

All of this fear of anti-Semitism crap is really getting on my nerves. So what if it is true?

I mean come on!

Ok, I'm through ranting. :p

SC

I plan to see the movie, in spite of the melanin deficiency of the actor playing the role of Jesus. Here in Tampa, the Christian radio station bought out a few theaters on Monday and gave tickets to a sneak preview. On the evening news they showed footage of people leaving the theater in tears. That didn's say much for me as melanin deficient people were in tears over the movie Titanic. :rolleyes: I'm anticipating this one though, with all of the controversy and coverage of it, I have a feeling it will be a let down- too much hype, too little delivery, but we'll see.

I plan on going to see it as well!

Soror Erika

We are --------->HERE<--------------

This movie is not anti-semetic at all. I swear, they can make movies about black folks acting as total bafoons or being portrayed as thieves, gangstas, murders, etc. all the time to the point where other races are scared of us.

And we're told that we're being "sensitive" - its not a big deal, its just TV or movie. Maybe these same folks need to take their own advice.

Thank you HK!!!!!
Amen.
SC

I just saw it earlier this evening....
 

....and I was impressed. Took my lady to see it with me.

First and foremost, DON'T BELIEVE THE HYPE!! Meaning: don't see it based on reviews, controversy, hearsay, and speculation. See it because you want to see someone--The Perfect Man, take all your shortcomings, faults, inadequacies, and just straight up spiritual GARBAGE personally.

If you watch the movie as though it was personally made just for you to see, I guarantee you that you will appreciate the movie for what it was intended to portray. No more, no less, 'nuff said.

BTW, me and my lady didn't have any problems getting tickets, seats, or parking spaces for that matter (Easton Town Center is a MAJOR rat race that I avoid like the plague but tonight was truly a welcome exception).

Why?
 

Why are people not supporting the movie because "Jesus" wasn't black in the movie? I get sick of people huffing and puffing over if Jesus was black! That has no relevence--the purpose of Jesus coming to the world was to save us from our sins so that we may have salvation. Is race really an issue when He did something so awesome? DOUBT IT! God, Jesus, Holy Spirit (The Trinity), Salvation, Christianity, etc. goes beyond race.

Re: Why?
 

Del, you can't see me but know that I'm giving you a standing ovation! I was thinking the same thing.

My prayer is that this movie witnesses to those that don't know the way of which I believe is Jesus Christ, and Him crucified. Now those that don't believe, that's on them, but I believe that He is the only way, the truth, and the life and that no man comes to the Father except through Him.

Not preaching, but there it is.

Re: Why?
 

Really? :confused: I haven't heard this one aside from a comment in this thread.

Were you informed that the movie was filled with Caucasians???

If not, do not assume. I've seen the movie and the only obviously Caucasian people were the Romans. So, if that is your reason, there is nothing to worry about.

Christ was portrayed as a Caucasian-ish looking Jew so that I wondered about. But it didn't change the message of the movie for me. If portraying Christ that way is what will spread him message to a greater number of people, then so be it. I believe the message takes precedence in this case.


It was a great movie. I think that all Christians (at least) should watch and support this movie. It wasn't as violent as I'd been led to believe compared to some of these movies that come out. The violence in the movie was as described in the Bible - it was more hurtful because He was being punished for OUR wrong-doings. It was hard to watch sometimes.

The credits have to be the most watch credits ever. No one moved until the credits were over. People were quietly sobbing, etc. It made His sacrifice very real. I'm definitely buying the DVD.
It was definitely a powerful movie. Props to Mel Gibson for sticking it through, and making this movie.

And oh yeah, if I had any anti-Semitic thought, it was "what is so anti-semitic about this film???" Had the media not mentioned anti-semitism, I wouldn't have thought that at all. It happened as it was supposed to. The Pharisees were the strongest voices in favor of the crucifixtion, but at the same time, those that helped carry the cross, gave Him water, etc were Jews as well.

Re: Why?
 

^5 to you delph for making such a remark. Jesus did not care what color people were when he laid his life down. He cared about the salvation of souls. Who are we then to care what color he was when he was on this earth fulfilling God's Will?

I plan on taking a Mental Health day next Thursday. On that day I will go see The Passion.

Re: Re: Why?
 

Ok, I stand corrected. I just heard on the radio (BBN) that a black panther group and other black leaders are protesting the movie because of its inaccurate portrayal of Jesus.

ETA: Here is an article I found...

Jesus Was Black, Not White, Group Says
By Melanie Hunter
CNSNews.com Deputy Managing Editor
February 24, 2004

(Clarification: Corrects reference to Bible verse in third paragraph.)

(CNSNews.com) - One day before it debuts in theaters, a black activist group is protesting the Mel Gibson-written, directed and produced "The Passion of the Christ" film, not because of the film's violent depiction of Jesus Christ's final hours. Instead, they say the film is historically inaccurate because Jesus is portrayed as a white man, not a black man.

"Strangely absent from the debate is one very basic inaccuracy which has been long promoted in order to bolster white supremacy and maintain a revisionist history that is beneficial to only people of European descent," said Malik Z. Shabazz, national chairman of the New Black Panther Party in a statement Tuesday.

"This purposely omitted fact is that Jesus was not a European white man. Jesus Christ was a black man - a dark skinned Hebrew Israelite from Northern Africa and even the only Biblical physical description confirms this (Rev. 13:20)," said Shabazz in a statement..

Chapter 13 of the Book of Revelations only ends with verse 18. After CNSNews.com contacted the New Black Panther Party to clarify the Bible verse they referenced, Imam Akbar, national minister for the New Black Panther Party, explained that the original reference was a typo on their original press release.

Akbar instead, pointed to Revelations 1:14 and 1:15 as well as Daniel 10:6.

"His head and his hairs were white like wool, as white as snow; and his eyes were as a flame of fire; 15 And his feet like unto fine brass, as if they burned in a furnace; and his voice as the sound of many waters." (Rev. 1:14 and 1:15)

"His body also was like the beryl, and his face as the appearance of lightning, and his eyes as lamps of fire, and his arms and his feet like in colour to polished brass, and the voice of his words like the voice of a multitude." (Daniel 10:6)

"Not only does this film wrongfully depict Christ as white but all the disciples and Israelites are people of European descent, which presents a historical and physical impossibility," Shabazz added.

The New Black Panther Party and other black activists plan to stage protests nationwide over the controversy. Not only does the group claim the movie is "false," but also "harmful and racist."

The Anti-Defamation League recently expressed to Gibson its concern that the film would drum up anti-Semetism. Shabazz said his group disagrees with the ADL's claims that the film is "anti-semetic" and challenged the ADL to "deny the historical accuracy of the Jews' attack on Christ."

But Shabazz says, the "true controversy" surrounding the film "lies in the maligned history of African people through the world and the continual inaccuracies presented in every Hollywood production to date of any Biblical story from the 10 Commandments to the Christmas Story."

"These false images presented are 'anti-black' and these false images and interpretations only seek to further the racist and white supremist idea that God and Jesus Christ 'The Messiah' or 'Savior' is European and white," he added.

"This is clearly one more example of how black people in this country are treated unfairly. Black/African history has and continues to be misrepresented, black people worldwide are subjected to the psychologically abusive images of white supremacy and have no collective voice to defend or promote a Black agenda," Shabazz concluded.

Movie 'not racist,' says black conservative

But Rev. Jesse Peterson, president of the black conservative group, B.O.N.D. (Brotherhood Organization of a New Destiny) said claims that Jesus is black takes away from the overall message.

Peterson said he saw the movie last weekend and "there's nothing in this movie that is racist at all."

"It was inspiring spiritually," he said. "I think that it's gonna reconfirm the faith in many Christians and it's gonna encourage those who had doubt about Christ. There will be many, I believe, that will believe in him. I knew that this thing would come out that 'he wasn't black' and that 'it's racist.' It's not."

Peterson explained that "the Bible clearly states that Christ was in Israel and that he was a Jew." The movie, he said "clearly points that out as well."

Peterson said to "cry racism is a non-issue. This is an attempt for attention. It's shameful to make that kind of assertion about this movie."

When asked specifically whether Shabazz's physical description of Jesus and his birthplace of Northern Africa was accurate, Peterson said, "I've heard that over and over again, and at one point when I resented white Americans, I believed that too."

But, he said, "in all honesty there is no, I think, perfect description of what Christ looked like anyway, and I think that each race…the white race at one point said that he looked white [with] blue eyes and blond hair. That wasn't true. The blacks are trying to claim him…Hispanics, everybody are trying to claim him as their own."

Peterson said that's why the Scripture clearly states "'do not create a graven image of him, because it will divide and cause confusion.'

"The most important thing is that he was a spirit. It's the spirit of the man, not necessarily what he looked like. And that's the focus that this movie brings out," Peterson said, adding that he thinks blacks and white are likely to focus on Jesus' "spirit rather than the color."

He said the Bible does point out that Jesus was "born in that area, but still he was a Jew, and at that time, maybe they didn't have the straight hair, but it doesn't mean he was…a black, African man."

Peterson said in the movie, Jesus is a dark-skinned man, not white with blue eyes, but a dark-skinned man. "He's not black, but he's not white either," he said.

Race not an issue

Peterson took the New Black Panther Party to task for making Jesus' race an issue.

"It's a shame that you have racist organizations like the New Black Panther Party that will come out and allow the devil or darkness to use them, because that's what's happening," he said. "It's a distraction. It's a trick of the devil to come out and call this movie racist…that he was black, he had nappy hair. That's a distraction."

Peterson believes the group is taking away from the spiritual message of the movie, a message, he said that can possibly help people that are hurting spiritually.

"I think that when people go to this movie, they need to look beyond the color. And I think most will, whether they want to or not…look at the spirit and the suffering that Christ went through," Peterson said.

http://www.cnsnews.com/ViewCulture.a...20040224f.html

I saw the movie last night. It was VERY, VERY powerful to me. I haven't even collected my words to say exactly what I want to say. I was speechless throughout the entire movie.

Now, the Jewish characters were somewhat light skinned but they did not look that Caucasian to me. They look like most of the present day inhabitants of that area. I actually spotted one or two black Jews in the movie and although that's not a lot, I was glad they were in there at all. The Bible mentions black Jews so they could've have included more of us.

The message is STILL VERY POWERFUL regardless.

I don't know if this helps, but I saw an interview with Mel Gibson. He said he wanted the person who portrayed Jesus to CLOSELY reflect how he is described in the bible. He said he wasn't satisfied with how Hollywood portrayed (the looks) the blonde/blue-eyed type.

:confused:

I am going to see it. I consider myself agnostic (was raised Catholic). I would love to see the portrayal


The man who plays Jesus is a local boy from Mt. Vernon, WA (not to mention he ain't too bad looking)

Another motive is to tick off my Pentacostal mother in law :D (her congregation is against the film)

I have always thought that Jim (the guy that plays Jesus) was cute ever since I saw him in Angel Eyes. :)

he was in Angel Eyes. Dang!!! Apparently I've seen many of this guy's movies and I've never recognized him as the same person. He was in Count of Monte Cristo, Frequency, Pay It Forward, High Crimes, ... hmph - I need to get my eyes checked