The Passion of Christ

Discussion in '2004 Archive' started by aefting, Feb 5, 2004.

  1. aefting

    aefting
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Sep 17, 2002
    Messages:
    874
    Likes Received:
    0
    I wonder how many fundamentalists are going to see this film. Personally, I would not recommend it for several reasons:

    1. Pervasive Catholic influence

    Here is an interesting quote from the New York Times (Feb. 5, 2004):

    And then there is this warning from James While (www.aomin.org):

    2. The film is rated R

    Oh, but it’s just for the realistic depiction of the torture and death of Christ on the cross. Yes, that is right but such scenes are not Biblical. When it comes to objectionable elements (e.g., profanity, scatological realism, erotic realism, sexual perversion, lurid violence, occultism, and erroneous religious or philosophical assumptions), we need to let the Bible teach us how to depict those things in a Christ-honoring manner. The only way to do that is to follow the Bible’s example. The Holy Spirit did not depict the gore involved in the crucifixion in explicit detail like the film does. Certainly, the written descriptions could have been just as vivid if (1) it was appropriate and (2) it was how God wanted to reveal the crucifixion to us. BJU Press has an in depth and helpful article on the Biblical Approach to Objectionable Elements online HERE.

    3. The film violates the 3rd Commandment

    I am in the minority here but I have serious concerns about physical depictions of God and, by extension, likenesses of Christ. For example, I tolerate in church, but do not appreciate, flannel graph pictures of Christ. This film goes a step beyond that and brings to life a particular version of Christ that is not accurate. We are to worship Christ as He is revealed in the Scriptures, not a version of Christ that is dreamed up by man.

    4. My understanding is that the film downplays the resurrection

    I may be wrong here but I have heard that it does not include the resurrection. Does anyone know if that is true? A film that concentrates on the crucifixion without climaxing with the resurrection does the true gospel an injustice.


    Andy
     
  2. C.S. Murphy

    C.S. Murphy
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Jul 10, 2002
    Messages:
    2,302
    Likes Received:
    0
    I am not totally discounting your points but I feel that a vivid picture of the horrors of this event would possibly be helpful. Concerning your view that the scene was overdone I have not seen it but I doubt that it could have been overdone. Look atPsalm 22 and get a closer glimpse at the agony our Lord must have went thru. I am sad to hear that Mel is catholic, maybe he will get saved himself. I will pray toward that end.
    Murph
     
  3. Johnv

    Johnv
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Oct 24, 2001
    Messages:
    21,321
    Likes Received:
    0

    At least two: Me, and the woman I'm dating, who is a Christian school teacher (which means the cost of the tickets are tax dedictible! Woohoo!! [​IMG]

    The film is called "The Passion" for a reason. It's focusing on the sacrifice and punishment that Jesus undured for all of us. My understanding is, the scourging scene alone is so realistic, that we'll all have a different understanding of Christ shedding his blood for us. My understanding is, the resurrection is included, with text at the end as follows: "During the Roman occupation, 250,000 Jews were crucified by the Romans, but only One rose from the dead." Very powerful, and very true.
     
  4. Johnv

    Johnv
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Oct 24, 2001
    Messages:
    21,321
    Likes Received:
    0
    BTW - The full name of the film is:

    "The Passion of the Christ"
     
  5. All about Grace

    All about Grace
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Feb 11, 2002
    Messages:
    1,680
    Likes Received:
    0
    I have seen it and it does include the Resurrection (at least the version I saw did).

    Actually I thought the movie was less RCC than I expected from Gibson.

    Yes it is gruesome, horrific, and gory. Reminded me of Isaiah's prophecy that he was marred beyond human recognition.

    Just my opinion here: don't let legalism prevent you from missing out on this experience.
     
  6. Johnv

    Johnv
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Oct 24, 2001
    Messages:
    21,321
    Likes Received:
    0
    Amen, preach it!

    It's nice to receive input from someone who has seen it.

    Thanks for clarifying the resurrection topic.
     
  7. All about Grace

    All about Grace
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Feb 11, 2002
    Messages:
    1,680
    Likes Received:
    0
    I thought I might add here ... if you follow this logic to its natural conclusion any word picture (verbal or non-verbal) would violate this command.

    Each of us has a mental depiction of what it must have been like. The Passion of the Christ is a visual depiction of the same event. Did Isaiah violate this command with his depiction?
     
  8. aefting

    aefting
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Sep 17, 2002
    Messages:
    874
    Likes Received:
    0
    Just a few thoughts --

    1. Neither Ps 22 or Isaiah depict the crucifixion in the same gory detail as the film. It's one thing to say that "His visage was marred more than any other man." It's quite another thing to (in word or in pictures) describe the gore in explicit detail. The Bible simply does not present gruesome subjects in stunning realism.


    2. The 3rd commandment deals with graven images, not mental pictures.

    3. It's not legalism to apply principles in God's Word to daily living. I'm pretty much in a Romans 14:23 situation. If you're in a Romans 14:22 situation, then that's between you and God.

    4. I'm glad there is at least some reference to the resurrection.

    Andy
     
  9. Daniel David

    Daniel David
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Jan 4, 2002
    Messages:
    5,316
    Likes Received:
    0
    Just something to remember, it is just a movie. It isn't the same thing as preaching. This movie does not call people to faith in Christ. It only depicts the events.

    Also, as far as gore is concerned, the people during that time knew what it meant to carry your cross. Nowadays, it means everything from a headache to a bad relationship. It should give a very good understanding of what the people in the 1st century could have seen any day of their life.
     
  10. Ps104_33

    Ps104_33
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Sep 3, 2001
    Messages:
    4,005
    Likes Received:
    0
    Andy, I wholeheartedly agree. At first I was thinking about seeing it although I dont attend movies. But now I think I'll pass. Its just another tool of Satan to soften us up to Catholicism.

    BTW Johnv. What are you doing in this forum? You are by no stretch of the imagination a fundamentalist Baptist.
     
  11. Johnv

    Johnv
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Oct 24, 2001
    Messages:
    21,321
    Likes Received:
    0
    I adhere to the Baptist Fundamentals. My political and social views are towards the centrist side of conservative, but that doesn't change the aforementioned. [​IMG]
     
  12. blackbird

    blackbird
    Expand Collapse
    Administrator
    Administrator

    Joined:
    Feb 21, 2002
    Messages:
    11,898
    Likes Received:
    2
    Amen, Daniel David!! Amen and amen again!! Ditto to your post from this Southern Baptist preacher!

    Here's the problem---folks grab hold to anything "visual"--whether it be the "Left Behind" series or this motion picture---and seemingly suddenly to the reader and the viewer everyting read in the books and every picture frame that moves by the camera projector lens----becomes "The Bible" to them!!

    Then when the preacher stands and presents the truth---presenting a word about the Word---the response seems to be "WELL! That SURE ain't how the movie pictured it!!"
     
  13. LadyEagle

    LadyEagle
    Expand Collapse
    <b>Moderator</b> <img src =/israel.gif>
    Moderator

    Joined:
    Feb 7, 2002
    Messages:
    22,028
    Likes Received:
    1
    Amen!

    Re: Gore.

    OT:

    2 Chron. 35:6,7 6 So kill the passover, and sanctify yourselves, and prepare your brethren, that they may do according to the word of the LORD by the hand of Moses. And Josiah gave to the people, of the flock, lambs and kids, all for the passover offerings, for all that were present, to the number of thirty thousand, and three thousand bullocks: these were of the king's substance.


    33,000 animals being sacrificed at once according to the OT ritual would have been pretty gory.

    Historical Fact:

    The Romans crucified 6000 prisoners of war along the Appian Way - 73 BC -

    6,000 naked people hanging dying and dead in various stages of decay and stench with birds and insects feasting on the remains - all for the average person to see and smell - seems pretty gory to me.


    The rest of the Study is here:

    http://www.cfpeople.org/Apologetics/page51a024.html

    I seriously doubt that Hollywood, Mel Gibson, or anyone else can depict the actual gore of the Crucifixion or the horror of it or the suffering.

    I pray many will see this movie and come to know Jesus Christ as their personal Savior and Redeemer.
     
  14. aefting

    aefting
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Sep 17, 2002
    Messages:
    874
    Likes Received:
    0
    I don't think we want to set up the Roman army as our standard of right and wrong.

    Animal sacrifices, while intentionally vivid in their visual typology, are of a much different character than seeing human gore, extreme suffering, and torture. Man was made in the image of God; animals were not.

    The thing to realize is that the Bible does not depict the crucifixion with extreme gory detail, even though it could have. Did God make a mistake by not shocking the reader with graphic word pictures?

    Andy
     
  15. Daniel David

    Daniel David
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Jan 4, 2002
    Messages:
    5,316
    Likes Received:
    0
    Andy, he didn't have to. The reader in the 1st century didn't need a detailed explanation.

    As far as God writing explicitly violent words, consider the book of Judges.
     
  16. aefting

    aefting
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Sep 17, 2002
    Messages:
    874
    Likes Received:
    0
    Neither do we. Was God writing for the 1st century, exclusively?

    Could you give me some examples of what you are referring to? I know that there are gruesome stories in the Bible. My point, however, is that the Bible does not paint the gory details like Gibson does in his film. Just how does the Bible treat the cutting up of the concubine in Judges 20? Do you think it would be proper for Gibson to treat Judges 20 in graphic detail like he does the crucifixion? How do you draw the line regarding what is appropriate or not if you don't follow the Bible as your guide?

    Andy
     
  17. All about Grace

    All about Grace
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Feb 11, 2002
    Messages:
    1,680
    Likes Received:
    0
    Have you read the OT accounts???

    Again if we take what you say here to its logical conclusion then any verbal or visual depiction of the crucifixion should be banned. Toss out those crucifixion sermons describing the brutality of Roman scourgings and crucifixions.

    No more Easter or Christmas pageants. Throw out the Jesus film, gospel tracts that show a crucifixion scene, and children's Bible story books while you are tossing.

    Apply the command for what it was intended in its context.

    I can agree with this ... just don't try and justify your decision with skewed logic.


    We live in a visual day and age. We are visual people. No one is arguing this movie should "replace" the proclamation of God's word (in whatever form that comes). This movie should serve as a tool to initiate dialogue, thought, and questions regarding who Christ was/is. To not take advantage of this awesome opportunity to share the message is, I will use a kind word here, unwise (IMHO).

    My reaction to the movie was much like that of another viewer ~ 4 simple words: "I'm sorry I forgot."
     
  18. aefting

    aefting
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Sep 17, 2002
    Messages:
    874
    Likes Received:
    0
    I think these things are worth discussing since most Christians have jumped on the Passion bandwagon without much discernment, IMO. That being said, I’m also discussing this to sound out the “skewed logic” that I used to come to my conclusions. I realize that I’m in a small minority here and so I am willing to adjust my thinking if it is shown to be Biblically inaccurate. I haven’t seen that yet, though.

    Could you give me an example that we could discuss.

    No, we just have to be careful that we don’t go beyond Biblical propriety in our depictions. I don’t have any problem saying it was brutal, but I do have a problem with describing the brutality in graphic detail. Of course, there will be differing opinions as to what is too graphic. That’s OK but I think we do need to admit that there is a Biblical line that we should not go beyond.

    I have heard sermons on the crucifixion that crossed that line, IMO, and though they delivered results, they did so using “enticing words of man’s wisdom” resulting in results that stand in the wisdom of man rather than the power of God.

    There are many churches that take this exact stance. I am uncomfortable with these things but would not separate over them. To be honest, I am still working out in my own mind what is appropriate and what is not. Have you ever read Charles Hodge on the 3rd commandment in his systematic theology? If I get a chance, I may post some of his comments latter on today.


    Andy
     
  19. LadyEagle

    LadyEagle
    Expand Collapse
    <b>Moderator</b> <img src =/israel.gif>
    Moderator

    Joined:
    Feb 7, 2002
    Messages:
    22,028
    Likes Received:
    1
    Straining at gnats. :(
     
  20. LadyEagle

    LadyEagle
    Expand Collapse
    <b>Moderator</b> <img src =/israel.gif>
    Moderator

    Joined:
    Feb 7, 2002
    Messages:
    22,028
    Likes Received:
    1
    Are you saying that because he is Catholic, he is not saved?

    Source


    Source
     

Share This Page

Loading...