Mel Gibson's movie about Jesus

[The1calledTKE]

Do you want to see it? Jewish leaders say it will lead people to hate jews. Catholic leaders have given it the thumbs up even though Gibson is a "tradionalist catholic" which means he doesn't recoginize the pope , the statements he made, and the rules he made.

[AlphaSigOU]

Originally posted by zntke711
Do you want to see it? Jewish leaders say it will lead people to hate jews. Catholic leaders have given it the thumbs up even though Gibson is a "tradionalist catholic" which means he doesn't recoginize the pope , the statements he made, and the rules he made.

A little more clarification is in order here. Traditionalist Catholics are strongly opposed to the reforms made to the Roman Catholic Church as a result of the Vatican II conference in the 1960s. Previously, the priest would officiate the Mass strictly in Latin and facing away from the congregation; Vatican II allowed the priest to deliver the Mass in the vernacular (the local language) and facing the congregation.

Unfortunately there still are quite a few old-line Roman Catholics that still espouse the bullsh*t that Jesus was killed by the Jews and sometimes referring to Jews as 'Christ-killers'

More info on Vatican II: http://www.vatican.va/archive/hist_c...tican_council/

[Munchkin03]

If I'm not mistaken, the movie is entirely in Aramaic and Hebrew, with some Latin thrown in.

How many people do you know who speak Aramaic? Yeah, I thought so.

He did, however, show a translated version to some Christian groups (but won't let the ADL see it). It will have to be translated for mainstream audiences, but I imagine with its length (approximately 4 hours) and surrounding controversy, many theaters won't take it. Gibson knows it won't make a profit--it is his labor of love.

I'd actually like to see it. Not as a religious person, but someone who loves history and film.

You can see the trailer here:The Passion entry on IMDB

[smiley21]

i am interesting in seeing the story from mel gibson's angle. my pastor wont stop talking about it. he cant wait to see it. i hope it gets its due credit.

[AchtungBaby80]

I want to see it.

[33girl]

Originally posted by AlphaSigOU
Previously, the priest would officiate the Mass strictly in Latin and facing away from the congregation; Vatican II allowed the priest to deliver the Mass in the vernacular (the local language) and facing the congregation.

Heck, I'm Lutheran, and my church just changed the facing-away thing a few years ago. (Then again, our altar was bolted down so he couldn't fit behind it.) I think it would be cool to hear the Mass in Latin though.

[Imthachamp]

the jews were responsible for jesus' death.

thats the truth. the world should know it.

[AXJules]

Originally posted by Imthachamp
the jews were responsible for jesus' death.

thats the truth. the world should know it.

Buckle up!!!! Gonna be a bumpy thread!!!!

The only thing I had to add is that #1 Gibson is using English subtitles for the whole movie, and #2 I went to a Catholic grade school and they definitely teach that the Jews were responsible. I'm not saying they were, to be honest for all the Catholic education I've had I really know very lil about the Bible....but my friends and I were talking about this issue the other day and someone made the comment that our education totally left us with that impression......then you get out into the rest of the world and people think you're nuts- something to think about

[JohnsDGsweethrt]

It is my understanding that regardless of who killed Jesus he forgave them on the cross for doing it. I believe God told Jesus knew he was going to die on the cross. Quite frankly, who put him there is irrelevant to me. The empty tomb 2 days later says it all. Anywho, I plan on seeing the movie.

[SirHornyToad]

I'l see it based soley on the fact that anything religious and controversial is interesting. And we all know the jews didnt kill christ, the romans did, the jews just sold him out =) jk

[White_Chocolate]

actually, the romans didn't kill him; they flogged him which was standard procedure for all people arrested
the jews brought Jesus to pilate and pilate said that he found no cause to kill him
then, he gave them a choice: the murderer Barabas or Jesus because he thought they would choose Jesus
But they chose to kill Jesus
pilate said he washed his hands of Jesus' blood and he gave him back to the people
and Jesus did forgive them but there was judgement passed down
because they said 'let HIS blood be on the hands of our children and our children's children'
my family is composed of messianic jews
this is how i read the story in history books and the Bible

as for the hating Jewish people more, people already hated them even before Jesus was born
people hated them after Jesus' resurrection
Jews have been taking persecution since forever
this movie won't ignite that much of a big controversy anyway
because most people scream they don't believe in Him
or they believe He existed but that He wasn't the Messiah

[GeekyPenguin]

Jules, that is an interesting point - my Catholic school never taught us that Jews were responsible, they were too busy lecturing us about the evils of premarital sex, homosexuality, and abortion.

[blueGBI]

I can't wait to see the movie. From all of the trailers, it looks like it should be a good movie.
As for anti-semitism, I agree with JohnsDGsweethrt, and Jesus is a Jew. Hate the Jews, you hate Jesus. to all of the anti-semites.

[Cloud9]

This article provides some good insight on the theories surrounding Jesus' death, and yet more reasons why it's stupid to take the bible literally!

(I posted the second half of the article, the first half deals mainly with reactions to the film so far)


http://archive.salon.com/ent/feature...on/index1.html


It should be noted that to Jews of the first century, Jesus of Nazareth was simply another false messiah, one of hundreds -- a Galilean village preacher with a ragtag following of Jewish fishermen who, in various statements, claimed to be the Jewish messiah, God's son and the Jewish king all wrapped into one. The traditional Jewish messiah, however, would not be a deity, but a bellicose homo sapiens, with a hankering to lead an uprising against the Romans, perhaps someone with the stature and nobility of Alexander the Great or Julius Caesar. To claim you were the messiah but that you were unconcerned with this world was absurd. Likewise, to preach that you were God's son was the supreme blasphemy, as well as the ultimate absurdity. God had no son, and whoever uttered such absurdities sealed his own doom.

So who was to blame for the execution of Jesus of Nazareth? The Jews? The Romans? Jesus himself? Christians who believe Jesus died for their individual sins are logically themselves responsible for his death, and have no cause to scapegoat "The Jews." But if we believe the Nazarene was simply a Jewish reformer executed by his own tribesmen for the crime of blasphemy, then he suffered the same fate as thousands of reformers from the Jewish Matthias to the Christian Savonarola. Or, we may believe that Jesus was crucified because of some perceived threat to Roman authority. Rome was, after all, interested in but one thing: order. If the Romans executed Jesus it was because he was seen as a considerable threat to the stability of the empire. The gospels hint only vaguely at this, in a scene showing Jesus causing some seemingly minor disturbance at the Jerusalem temple. No doubt there was more to the story. Writing in the New Republic this week, Paula Fredrikson, Aurelio professor of Scripture at Boston University and a member of a panel of scholars who studied Gibson's script, writes:


"The fact that Jesus was publicly executed by the method of crucifixion can only mean that Rome wanted him dead: Rome alone had the sovereign authority to crucify. Moreover, the point of a public execution ... was to communicate a message. Crucifixion itself implies that Pilate was concerned about sedition ... Jesus' death on the cross points to a primarily Roman agenda."

Sedition, then, seems the likely cause of Jesus' execution, and not some minor theological squabble among Jews.


Of the five discrepant biblical accounts of Jesus' trial, composed decades after his execution by men absent from his trial, none are very helpful, nor are the disciples very trustworthy sources. We know that early Christians put great emphasis on staying on the Romans' good side lest they lose potential converts or, worse, be massacred or driven out of Rome and Jerusalem like their Jewish brethren. It is not surprising then that early Christians would blame "The Jews" (who were even then the universal scapegoats) for Jesus' death, and that Matthew would make sure that 2,000 years hence "The Jews" would still be on the hook, by attributing to the Jewish multitude the fantastic quote: "His blood be on us and on our children." A peculiar thing for a Jewish mob to shout, it must be said. The Gospel writers are exceedingly clumsy in dealing with the trial of Jesus. Again and again the Roman prefect Pilate comes off not as the iron-fisted autocrat we know from history but as a lame, ineffectual pamby who is prevented from setting Jesus free by the bloodthirsty Jewish mob. The scene stretches credulity. Likewise, many scholars dispute the accuracy of the Jews' claim that Roman law forbids them to execute Jesus. In fact, the Jews of Jerusalem executed each other all the time. They stoned Jesus' brother James, and only a year or two after Jesus' death they stoned Stephen, the traditional first Christian martyr. A well-known sign (in Greek) in the Jerusalem temple promised death to any non-Jew who invaded the inner sanctum.

The most damning piece of evidence for Jewish culpability, however, comes down from the Roman-Jewish historian, Flavius Josephus, who wrote in the early 90s C.E.: "About the same time there lived Jesus, a wise man for he was a performer of marvelous feats and a teacher of such men who received the truth with pleasure. He attracted many Jews and many Greeks. He was called the Christ. Pilate sentenced him to die on the cross, having been urged to do so by the noblest of our citizens."

"The noblest of our citizens" urging Jesus' execution would seem to vindicate the gospel writers. And yet historians readily admit that early Christian writers monkeyed with Josephus' text, adding references to Jesus' resurrection, and, likely, the sentence about the "noblest of our citizens."

The fact is that the truths surrounding Jesus' execution will never be known. And what has been handed down to posterity is legend, vision, conjecture, superstition and doubtlessly historically inaccurate. But does the Gibson film discuss the differing accounts, the historical inaccuracies, and the political nuances involved in the trial and execution of Jesus of Nazareth? Don't count on it. The audience would soon be snoozing in their seats. Instead "The Passion" will most likely offer up the familiar puerile, stereotypical view of the evil Jew calling for Jesus' blood and the clueless Pilate begging him to reconsider. It is a view guaranteed to stir anew the passions of the rabid Christian, and one that will send the Jews scurrying back to the dark corners of history.

[Dionysus]

Hi, I am Jew for Jesus!



Not serious. Can someone tell me what that is about? I get the impression that they are jews who believe that Jesus was the messaiah.