is it possible the movie passion

do you think Jesus wants us to focus on his pain and suffering and bleeding and crucifixion, or on His resurrection and victory and mansions in heaven and our good works and evangelism? Yes He suffered and died. But he also rose from the dead, and this is the second half of the message. No, the New Testament does not focus on the graphic violence and sadism and brutality like this weird film The Passion. It should be enough to know that He suffered and died, why must the gory details be shoved in our faces? Violence freaks will Love this weird film and will walk away unsaved. Demonic people will relish the violence. The NT is not a graphic violence text, it is a saving grace text.

 

The Bible talks about both, numerous times over. So it's not an either/or. I think we need to focus on both. However, we humans don't like to focus on the gory stuff, because it repulses us. But since the Bible focuses on it, we should reconsider how much we downplay it.

 

What's next, "The Passion of David" film, with graphic sex and violence, focus on the sin of adultery and murder, for those who don't realize how horrible they are, sex scenes with Bathsheba, death agony of Uriah? Come on. Admit it. The Passion is a film glorifying violence against the Saviour, not glorifying His victory over sin and death in the Resurrection. No resurrection focus, no gospel at all. This is a sick flick, in my opinion.

 

"is channeled to Mary who is TRULY suffering for our sin!!"

Dream on Dr. Bob...

 

how true--where was all the hoopla when Jesus Christ Superstar n The Last Temptation hit the screens? sure, they had objectionable elements, too, but nobody celebrated the OPPORTUNITY to witness.

as i recalled, evangelicals were only too eager to bite of the head of anyone who'd block book tickets to either movie or laud it as "accurate."

 

FSIH, I think that the reason this film is getting such widespread attention, while the others didn't, is because this film may end up doing some real damage to the enemy, while the others didn't. Hence, the Enemy is going to toss every can and bottle he can at this attempt.

OTOH, it could just be a coincidence

 

Personally, I am going to see Mel's movie.
I REALLY like Mel Gibson (even though to him I am the worst of the worst, a turncoat Catholic).

I'll reserve final judgment till then.
But, I agree with those who say, be careful.


HankD

 

Just do yourself a favor if you do go to this film: if you can't handle the excessive focus on the sadistic violence and brutality, get up and walk out of the film. If you end up liking the film, ask yourself why you like it. If it takes a Hollywood film based on a strange Stigmata type mystic interpretation of Jesus suffering (I will not use the poorly selected "p" word), a weird mixture of Mariolatry and Mysticism, plus ultra-violence, to make you appreciate Christ's sacrifice on the cross, well, that's your deal. It's enough for me to read the Word of God, which is complete in itself and needs no help from Stigmata Mystics and Hollywood.

 

I agree with Johnv. We should put emphasis on both Christ's suffering, sacrafice, and substitution on the cross(and before) and on his burial and resurrection. Isnt that the Gospel anyway, "the death, burial, and resurrection" not just one part. This movie may(probably does, how can anyone perfectly recapture Christ's death?) have some flaws but the picture of Christ's suffering in the garden, the scourging, and the cross may have a deep affect on the viewers. I mean the tract says "All this I bore for thee". Showing a glimpse of the sufferings of Christ should help some come to Him. Now, not everyone, but some that may have a Christian background or people praying for them, God may put conviction on them while watching this movie and it may help lead to their salvation. But if it does promote Mary more than Christ that will poison the movie to the majority but to those that grew up in church or have heard the truth from somewhere, it may not affect them as much.
Whatever the case time will tell whether the movie was good or not. Plus, this movie seems to show a more vivid picture of Christ's sufferings than the movies on this subject before it.

 

Bishop Savas Zimbillas, of the Greek Orthodox Diocese of New York was appalled at the excessive, tasteless brutality of this "film." He said, "...a flogging scene went on for over a quarter of an hour...Mel Gibson is used to on-screen gore..." The Center for Christian-Jewish Learning at Boston College provides, on their web site, guidelines for viewing, or deciding whether or not to view, this "P" movie. They ask why slow, prolonged focus on gore details, but passsing quickly over positive aspects. Do you really want to watch 2 hours of unrelenting gore by a man with heretical beliefs--a film based on the freakshow Mystic Emmerich who was in love with pain and torture, not Christ Himself?

 

I'm confused...who are any of us to judge a man's heart?? How can any one of us know for certain who is truly saved and who is not?? It was my understanding that God was the One with that type of insight.

I know that we can see fruits of the spirit from true believers, but who here knows Mel Gibson personally??

Kathy
<><

 

None of them do. All they see is a very dimly painted portrait that the media has given them- a media who is out to show Mel in the worst possible light.

I have an aquaintace who has had personal contact with Mel, and having heard from this person, I'm convinced he's a believer, even if he is a mixed up one.

 

Is the glorious resurrection covered in the film?

 

not to ruin the suspense or anything, but since u asked, the bum of a naked male moves quickly past the eye as graveclothes collapse on rock ledge--end of movie.

 

"Bishop Savas Zimbillas, of the Greek Orthodox Diocese of New York was appalled at the excessive, tasteless brutality of this "film.""
Eastern-Orthodoxy downplays the suffering of christ compared to Western Christianity (Catholic or protestant).
Ironically the theology gap between Eastern-Orthodoxy and conservative baptism is distinctly larger than the gap between conservative baptism and Roman Catholicism. At least the RC's and the baptists share Augustine.

 

i don't doubt Mel's motives one teeny bit. IMO, he's sincere--n absolutely so--but sincerely WRONG. why do i say that? he's willing to stand w his theological position that damns his wife (n us baptists n Protestants) to hell for being outside THE church, i.e. the church of Rome.

no, even if a Baptist or Fundamentalist produce it, i wldn't endorse it. the contents r NOT accurate or biblical--it's an admixture of truth n fantasy n Romanist error. i'd expose the whoever produced it in the same way. God help us to let's call a spade a spade.

having said that, i will rejoice at every single soul that gets saved watching The Passion. i won't rejoice any less if someone gets to heaven thru a gay-ordaining episcopalian church, a colourful Jehovah's Witness handout, or a clean-cut Mormon witness. God is sovereign. however, with Paul, we have to declare that whoever brings a different gospel than what's given by God--be that an angel or apostle or top-notch Hollywood actor--let that one be anathema. </font>[/QUOTE]How can you claim that the movie isn't accurate or biblical if you haven't seen it yet?

 

The movie was translated into Latin and Aramaic by a Jesuit priest.

Mel Gibson adheres to the "old school" pre-Vatican II belief that none outside the RCC can be saved.

The visions of Nun mystics were incorporated into the movie at critical junctures.

Mary is raised to levels of participation which are extra-Biblical, and support RCC dogma concerning her.

The "Passion" was filtered through RCC perversion, and is thus an RCC production.



A servant of Christ,
Drew

 

How does Mel edit the six hours of total darkness---where the sun refused to give its light----????

 

n how can u KNOW that i haven't seen it?

unless u're God or Mel Gibson himself?

 

I'm impressed that Baptist Board is allowing a free discussion of this topic, and has allowed me to state view contrary to 99% of Christendom. This Open Forum opportunity needs to be appreciated. I am not judging Mel's heart. I am judging Mel's movie and his motivations and inspirations for making it. A Christian can be so corrupt, God takes their life away (Annanias and Sapphira). A good, solid Biblical movie comes out--The Gospel of John--what happened to it? No big evangelical push. This mess of heresy, morbid fantasy, substituting the devil for an angel in the garden of Gethsemane, slighting of the beautiful, saving Resurrection, etc. and the Evangelicals are going wild over it. What does that tell you? Can you say "Laodicean"?