WIESENTHAL CENTER URGES MEL GIBSON TO MAKE CHANGES TO THE PASSION

Discussion in '2003 Archive' started by dianetavegia, Aug 16, 2003.

  1. dianetavegia

    dianetavegia
    Expand Collapse
    Guest

    August 12, 2003

    WIESENTHAL CENTER URGES MEL GIBSON TO MAKE CHANGES TO THE PASSION; Jewish Human Rights Group Receives Flurry of Phone Calls and Hate Mail Accusing Jews of Killing Jesus

    Rabbi Marvin Hier, dean and founder of the Simon Wiesenthal Center said that the controversy over Mel Gibson’s yet-to-be released film, The Passion, has generated an unprecedented wave of hate mail and calls to the Jewish human rights group over the Center’s endorsement of changes to the film proposed by Christian and Jewish scholars.

    Included in one of the letters that the Wiesenthal Center received soon after the film was screened in Colorado Springs, Colorado, the writer said in part, “…What this tells me is that you do not want the real truth to be shown on a public setting that will remind millions of Americans that the jews were in fact totally responsible for the death of Jesus Christ.”

    The letter continued, “I don’t endorse terrorism of any kind but the odds are that some of these enlightened folks will go for the throat of you jews and some of your offices of hate such as the ADL main office in New York, or maybe even the Simon Wiesenthal Center. Every time I hear of a suicide bomber killing jews in Israel I think to myself YES!”

    “We fully understand that the crucifixion is central to the belief of more than a billion Christians and in no way do we want to impede Mr. Gibson’s right to make a film,” said Rabbi Hier. “However, we urge that he make some of the changes suggested to him by the distinguished group of Catholic and Jewish experts in the field to help ensure that the Jewish people are not yet again falsely singled out as being responsible for the death of Jesus,” Hier concluded.

    The Center is also seeking a dialogue with leading Christian leaders to discuss the matter further.

    The Simon Wiesenthal Center is one of the largest international Jewish human rights organizations with a membership of over 400,000 families in the United States. The Center is an NGO at international agencies including the United Nations, UNESCO, and the OSCE.

    For more information, contact the Wiesenthal Center's Public Relations department, 310-553-9036.

    http://www.wiesenthal.com/social/press/pr_item.cfm?ItemID=8058
     
  2. KenH

    KenH
    Expand Collapse
    Active Member

    Joined:
    May 18, 2002
    Messages:
    32,485
    Likes Received:
    0
    Jesus was a Jew. The first Christians were Jews.

    Mel Gibson has a right to make this movie anyway he wants. The crucifixion of Jesus is an historical event. I find it amazing that people don't want an historical event to be portrayed accurately. I hope he doesn't end up watering it down to satisfy these whiners.

    Maybe we Southerners should have protested during the making of the movie "Gettysburg" to have it changed to reflect the Confederate army getting at least a draw in that battle; after all we could have argued that showing the Yankees winning could lead to violence and hate mail against Southerners. :cool:
     
  3. mioque

    mioque
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    May 23, 2003
    Messages:
    3,899
    Likes Received:
    0
    "Our scholarly panel's "agenda" was hardly sinister: We were concerned with biblically fidelity, historical accuracy, and the avoidance of anti-Semitism. While I have not seen Mr. Gibson's film, I have seen a script that has anti-Jewish components. Here are three examples that are already part of media coverage:

    * Jesus' cross is manufactured in the Temple. this unbiblical and a-historical scene is analogous to asserting that the ovens of Auschwitz were constructed in the Vatican itself under the watchful eyes of Pius XII.
    * The Roman governor Pilate--who, like all Roman governors of Judea, had the authority to appoint Jewish high priests--is intimidated and manipulated by a luxuriously garbed priest Caiaphas. Analogy: Those poor Nazi occupiers of mid-20th century Rome could not resist Vatican pressure to rid the city of Jews.

    The problem with lumping all first-century Jewish leaders together is illustrated in Linda Chavez's August 6th CNSNews.com commentary. She said, among other things, that "Christ's death on the cross may have been ordered by Pontius Pilate at the urging of the Pharisee Caiaphas--following the judgment of the Sanhedrin, the Jewish religious court that judged Jesus guilty of blasphemy..." Any "New Testament 101" student knows that Caiaphas was not a Pharisee; he was, rather, part of the priestly aristocracy in league with Rome. That the Pharisees are the group who give rise to Rabbinic Judaism and ultimately the Judaism of today only makes her mistake worse. As for Pilate, he could not possibly have cared less about blasphemy: he executes Jesus as a political threat, the presumed "King of the Jews" as the inscription on the cross reads.

    * Jews repeatedly and spontaneously torture Jesus, whereas the Romans need Satan's prompting. This is tantamount to saying that "the Jews" in Dachau tortured fellow Jews just because they felt like it, whereas the Nazis needed supernatural incitement. "

    http://beliefnet.com/frameset.asp?pageLoc=/story/130/story_13051_1.html&storyID=13051&boardID=62129

    http://www.bc.edu/research/cjl/meta-elements/texts/news/dramatizing_the_death_of_jesus.htm
     


    Example: Will the proposed script take Pilate washing his hands of the Jesus question (found only in Matthew) and combine it with Pilate having Jesus whipped to try to release him (found only in John) and combine that with Herod Antipas being unwilling to condemn Jesus (found only in Luke)?


    * Will the proposed script enlarge upon gospel episodes in order to intensify the drama?


    Example: Will those Jewish individuals who demand Jesus’ crucifixion, whose numbers none of the gospels specify, be portrayed as a few dozen people led by the Temple leaders, or as a Cecile B. DeMille-like cast of thousands? Will incidents in the gospels describing Jesus as struck by Jewish individuals be turned into Jesus being beaten nearly to death by them?


    * Will the proposed script be informed by the best historic knowledge currently available?


    Example: Will the undisputed historic fact that Caiaphas the high priest relied on Pilate’s good will to retain his position as leader of the Temple be made clear in the proposed script? Or will the high priest be depicted as intimidating or bullying a weak and spineless Pilate, contrary to historical evidence that Pilate was not slow to use violence to maintain Roman order? Will the script make clear that imperial Rome ruled Jewish lands, and that Rome brutally crucified many persons during its rule?


    "after all we could have argued that showing the Yankees winning could lead to violence and hate mail against Southerners."
    I would assume it would lead to bad feelings towards the folks from the north. [​IMG]
     
  4. Major B

    Major B
    Expand Collapse
    <img src=/6069.jpg>

    Joined:
    May 6, 2003
    Messages:
    2,294
    Likes Received:
    0
    Those events "found only" once are still true events, if the Bible says they did occur.

    As far a Gibson's movie, I eagerly await its release to see what it really depicts. If it includes non-historical events such as constructing the cross in the Temple, I will join the chourus against it. However, if the objections amount to the kind of unwarranted PC attacks that shortened the theatrical run of "Gods and Generals," I will defend it.
     
  5. Mike McK

    Mike McK
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Sep 14, 2001
    Messages:
    6,630
    Likes Received:
    0
    By their own admission, they haven't seen the film and the script they refer to was an unauthorized rough draft so do they really have any credibility to speak on this?
     
  6. Ps104_33

    Ps104_33
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Sep 3, 2001
    Messages:
    4,005
    Likes Received:
    0
    I think it is highly hypocritical of them to subject people (rightly so I might add) year after year to holocost documentaries too remind us of mistreatment of Jews and then to be overly sensitive because of an historically accurate portrayal of Christ's passion.
     
  7. LadyEagle

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

    Joined:
    Feb 7, 2002
    Messages:
    22,028
    Likes Received:
    1
    I'm with the good Major B on this one. Want to see the film for myself before making any judgments. Heresay is still only heresay. Let's wait and see.... [​IMG]

    PS: I really don't believe Mel has any political anti-Jewish axes to grind.

    Besides, it was technically the Romans who crucified Jesus. Historically, the Romans were masters at crucifixion, and crucified thousands of people. Death by stoning was Jewish law.
     
  8. Grasshopper

    Grasshopper
    Expand Collapse
    Active Member

    Joined:
    Apr 19, 2002
    Messages:
    3,348
    Likes Received:
    14
    Acts 2:
    36 Let all the house of Israel therefore know assuredly, that God hath made him both Lord and Christ, this Jesus whom ye crucified.

    Luke tells us who crucified Him.
     
  9. mioque

    mioque
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    May 23, 2003
    Messages:
    3,899
    Likes Received:
    0
    "By their own admission, they haven't seen the film and the script they refer to was an unauthorized rough draft so do they really have any credibility to speak on this?"
    Actually they claim what they read was probably the shooting script.

    Actually my personal interest in this film is going to be 'professional'. I have a degree in church history and I have read the works of Anna Catherina Emmerich.
    I am actually surprised that all those Evangelical Christians are so positive towards this project. The little reliable information that has come out suggests a very Roman Catholic movie.
    I don't know what amazes me more, Gibson making a film that would have been considered outdated in the late 1930's, or all those US Protestants that usually despise Catholicism to a degree that is unwaranted being so happy about it.
     
  10. LadyEagle

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

    Joined:
    Feb 7, 2002
    Messages:
    22,028
    Likes Received:
    1
    Well, grasshopper, if you want to be SUPER technical about it (seems like you missed my point) - He gave Himself.

    Gal.1
    [4] Who gave himself for our sins, that he might deliver us from this present evil world, according to the will of God and our Father:


    [​IMG]

    You know what eagles do to grasshoppers? [​IMG] [​IMG] [​IMG]
     
  11. Mike McK

    Mike McK
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Sep 14, 2001
    Messages:
    6,630
    Likes Received:
    0
    No, it wasn't the working script, it was an unauthorized rough draft.
     
  12. mioque

    mioque
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    May 23, 2003
    Messages:
    3,899
    Likes Received:
    0
    "No, it wasn't the working script, it was an unauthorized rough draft."
    That's what Gibson's side claims. I am in no position to find out who is telling the truth.
     
  13. KenH

    KenH
    Expand Collapse
    Active Member

    Joined:
    May 18, 2002
    Messages:
    32,485
    Likes Received:
    0
    Making a movie about the gospel of my Lord Jesus Christ is never outdated. [​IMG]
     
  14. mioque

    mioque
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    May 23, 2003
    Messages:
    3,899
    Likes Received:
    0
    "Making a movie about the gospel of my Lord Jesus Christ is never outdated."
    Absolutely true. Making a film about the death of Jezus based on the visions of Anna Catherina Emmerich on the other hand...


    I will be very surprised if the film doesn't follow the stations of the cross
    http://198.62.75.1/www1/jsc/TVCmain.html
     
  15. Johnv

    Johnv
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Oct 24, 2001
    Messages:
    21,321
    Likes Received:
    0
    Not that long ago, there was a lot of hooplah over a movie called "Bruce Almighty". Many who had not seen the movie accused it of mocking GOd, and being blasphemous. As it turns out, those who criticized the movie without seeing it were dead wrong. I reserved judgement until I saw the movie for myself, and was not surprised to find out that those who were against the film were mistaken.

    If I've learned one thing, it's to reserve judgement until I view it for myself. On this film I will see it for myself and reserve judgement until then. Those who critique the movie without seeing it have no basis with which to critique. As such, I don't consider their critiques authoritative.
     
  16. Mike McK

    Mike McK
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Sep 14, 2001
    Messages:
    6,630
    Likes Received:
    0
    I agree. One of the things I thought was funny about "Bruce Almighty" was that the people who condemned it so loudly here on Baptistboard had never even seen it and were basing their objections on things that never even occured in the movie.

    In the same way, to a man, those who condemn "The Passsion" have not seen it and those who have, including Jews, Michael Medved and Rabbi Daniel Lapin (often referred to as the "Jewish Billy Graham) have been enthusiastic in their praise for the movie.
     

Share This Page

Loading...