Mel's Movie: Preview vs Final Cut

I won't answer due to your lack of respect.

 

Can anyone interpet FSIH's post?

Don't be so touchy Adam. Get over the "wow" of the movie and get back to serving God. I think it's wonderful you have been adherently effected by the movie, but lets not lash out at the ignorant to the actual film.

Answer him truthfully to his ignorance, maybe you can actually help him? or her?

 

I just wish folks would get as excited about the REAL Jesus in the Bible as they apparently are over fakery.

 

A-men! Sister! A-men!

 

"Mary mopping up the blood, falling again n again n again, Veronica"
Falling 3 times and Veronica actually predate Emmerich by many centuries.
Anyhow I've read some reviews of the theatrical version, those 3 apparently made it in.

 

7. You see his upper legs/ thighs NOT his naked bum as you call it.

Diane

 

Thanks dianetavegia.

At least answer methodically the objections Forever Settled has raised.

FSiH opened my eyes even more than the weird Mel/Diane Sawyer interview when Mel said all people are children of God and everybody goes to heaven, which makes Jesus' sacrifice totally meaningless then.

But it's God's Holy Word that opens our eyes fully. BEHOLD: false depictions of Jesus are worse than none at all. Error is hard to overcome--recall the Pharisees.

 

It's funny this dichotomy of preposterous proportions.

If you question the film, some say you are ignorant, critical, on a high horse, obsessed.

If you praise the film, some say you are rallying behind a great evangelical tool. (Yet Mel is not in any way an Evangelical, he's in a cult called Latin Rite catholic and has some association with members of Opus Dei.)

If your son died for you, say he somehow took your stomach cancer from you and experienced the disease agonies himself, and Mel videotaped live every excruciating moment of misery, pain, groaning, and wretching...would you gleefully run to view the video and encourage strangers to see it?

If so, I hardly know what to say.

Behold: Hebrews 6:6.

 

I just watched the interview for the third time last night. He DID NOT say that everyone goes to heaven.

 

Yes, as I understand his words, he did.

He was talking about how "we are all the children of God" and in reference to going to heaven, salvation, eternal life, whatever you want to call it, he said "Christians just have an easier ride."

Please clarify if you still don't agree. Am I wrong? How so? You Johnv are a good debate opponent, so I await your response.

Okay, i'll go watch it again too, and take notes. I will withdraw my comment if i have misquoted or distorted the "words of Mel". Sure wish people had the same concern for distorting the Word of God.

 

To discuss it further would not be possible, really, without opening the can of worms of the same old arguements: "unsaved children of God vs creations of God", "Salvation for God alone to judge" "age/state of accountability", and "OSAS". No noeed to go there, as those are all better suited for other threads (and have been debated ad nauseum).

What we have hear is a statement made in an interview that was, well, rather ambiguous. He didn't clearly say that "everyone goes to Heaven", nor did he say that "only born agains go to heaven", nor did he say that "only those that God elects goes to heaven", etc etc etc. The man's not a theologian, and not a preacher. He's an actor/director (and a good one at that). It's interesting to note, though, that on another thread, there's discussion over a statement made by Mel about his non-Catholic wife not going to Heaven because she's not Catholic. Clearly, that statement and the statement discussed here are in conflict. I do take it from Mel's general context, though, in this invervies, that it is NOT Mel's opinion that everyone's got a free pass to Heaven.

I don't think you distorted Mel's words. Rather, you applied an ambiguous statement in a manner differently that I.

 

1. in the opening was Isaiah dated at 400BC?

I recall something about 700BC.

2. did "his blood be on our heads n our children's" get deleted, either in subtitles or in Aramaic/entire scene (for those who can understsand the Aramaic)?

It was not in the film

3. the androgynous Satan, fr male-ish hood in Gethsemane to ugly madonna at the crucifixion

I'm not sure what your talking about.

4. the Emmerich insertions: Jesus falling off the overpass, Mary mopping up the blood, falling again n again n again, Veronica

I see these as a good way to fill in history rather Mel use his own imagination.

5. Mel's extra: the freshly crucified Jesus flipped like a burger, face up, face down, then face up again

Historically, this is probable.

6. the Pieta tableau

Again, you'lll have to explain

7. the adult naked male bum leaving the tomb in the final, resurrection scene

This is what I find offensive, but someone already answered you. Its not cool to call an actor a "bum"

 

Do you mean "bum" as in a person...or "Bum" as in hind end?

 

He means the upper legs crossing as Christ walked out of the tomb. Again, I asked our pastors and the other's who went with me and everyone saw that less than one second of skin as upper legs and a step being taken out of the tomb. NNE perceived it as a naked backside.

Diane