Pastor friend describes "The Passion of the Christ"

Okay, DonnA:

Thanks. Actually I thought you were referring to me. Yeah, I've read these somewhere. Far as I'm concerned, won't think of stepping into a moviehouse, for the passion or whatever.
I'm not saying watching a movie is sin, I do rent tapes and stuff, but, select them carefully.

But, I just don't feel comfortable anymore inside a moviehouse.

Anyway, thanks.

 

My friend how can theology not affect eternal destiny. As I noted before please save the cal/arm debate for that forum. Concerning your second quote I don't care if you agree with it or not, the Bible says faith cometh by hearing and hearing by the word of God. So please explain how you see this.
Murph

 

Too much emphasis on "predestination" logically results in ZERO evangelism. Right? I mean, we are to preach to everyone the Good News. God wants ALL humans to be saved and come to a knowledge of the truth, not just those "predestined" to be saved.

It's doctrine AND application that counts with God. Not one or the other.

We get saved by grace through faith, not works.

We prove our salvation is genuine by faith and works, otherwise the alleged "faith" is phony and dead.

Mental assent and belief systems...lacking disciplined application...are meaningless.

Doctrine itself is nothing. Even salvation doctrine is empty and worthless, if you don't reach out and receive Christ as personal, not theoretical, Lord and Savior.

Faith is a verb. Love is a verb. The passive states are counterfeit nonsense.

Bible state repeatedly we are to have correct doctrine, but that we will be judged for eternal rewards according to our deeds, not our doctrinal creeds.

Eternity in heaven, with no Christian deeds of charity and evangelism on earth, with no eternal rewards, will be a huge loss, I'd even say a disappointment to some extent.

Heaven will NOT be the same for everyone. Eternal rewards by deeds will determine the quality and responsibilities we will enjoy forever. Some citizens of heaven will be broom pushers, others will be galaxy producers, to speak in human limited earthly terms.

See A LIFE GOD REWARDS by Bruce Wilkinson or Erwin Lutzer's books on heaven for good teaching. Or Revelation, etc. in Bible.

 

As a woman, I feel the presence of Mary is believable. What mother would not want to be close to his suffering son? I believe Jesus' relationship with his mother is very similar to any mother-son relationships we see--loving, caring, nurturing. The Bible does not detail every, single occurence of Jesus' life.

 

In fact, FaithSeeker, John said: John 21:25 And there are also many other things that Jesus did, which if they were written one by one, I suppose that even the world itself could not contain the books that would be written. Amen.

As a mother of 4, I certainly agree with you! I've VERY close to my 3 boys and my daughter.

Diane

 

Hello everybody !

Just wanted to stop in and say high, and get a breath of fundy fresh air ! Didn't know there was a passion thread over here. Nice to see some reality like comments. Also, hey to Granny G

 

Well, hey right back at ya, Spirit and Truth!

 

Excellent point Greg.
Murph

 

Granny G said:

Well, hey right back at ya, Spirit and Truth!

S&T:

You know maam, I was reading your profile and it reminded me of a time when Baptists stood for something. People like my grandpa and gran mammy, who built churches in the south and served the Lord with zeal, and did NOT chase every wind of doctrine like many of todays "Baptists" are doing. I know that you have seen my Passion threads on the other end of "town", and quite frankly, I often times feel like a stranger in a strange land, and then I look up and see the Baptist board logo and snap out of it momentarily. This movie can be proven to be heretical by using scripture alone. I have spoon fed this information to many, but they still keep "choking" on it. I do not consider myself to be smarter than anyone else, but sometimes I just don't understand how they, with good conscience can support this, much less the so called Baptist "leadership". God forbids mysticism and divination. This movie is based on those sources. God forbids idol worship, and clearly says that He is a Jealous God. This movie is a Marian "shrine". God says not to add or subtract from His Word. This movie does both. The Bible warns against another Jesus and another Gospel. This movie promotes both. We are told that the heart is deceitful, so we should not trust our "feelings", but with many, that is all I see. What am I missing?

 

Hi all.
Spirit& Truth...you apparently have recovered from last nights "I've fallen and can't get up."

You said " We are told that the heart is deceitful, so we should not trust our "feelings", but with many, that is all I see. What am I missing? "

You are missing the Scriptures that pro-passion movie people MUST have, that says 1) God approves divination as a source of His Truth 2) divination is a Biblical source of spreading the Truth of Jesus Christ. 3) God approves that way of spreading the Truth

Perhaps if you ask nicely, some of this sound doctrine will be expounded to you...straight from the Word of God, from which we are all to get our doctrine.

 

"I feel the presence of Mary is believable. What mother would not want to be close to his suffering son? "

It might be believable except that the Scriptures say that everyone abandoned Christ, including those closest to Him--which also means Mary...In fact all the Mary closeness scenes in the movie, like the scourging,etc. comes from the demonic writings of Emmerich and Agreda..

Not a good thing to be in agreement with.

If you look at Scripture, when Jesus turned Mary over to the apostle, while on the cross...that is the last time she is ever referred to as His mother. From then on in Scripture, she is referred to in relation to her other children.

 

The word from the Word says---that at the cross---the women "stood afar off"----some Greek scolar "skippin'" across those words expound upon them for me-----then try, try, try to read into it the exact spot in "afar off" where Mary kisses the feet of Jesus and gets that blood all over her face.

 

Matthew 27:55 says that "many women" were "afar off."
Mark 15:40 says that there were "women looking on afar off."
Luke 23:49 says that the women "stood afar off, beholding these things."
But John 19:25 says Jesus' mother, her sister (Mary the wife of Cleophas), and Mary Magdalene, all "stood by the cross", not faroff.

 

JohnV:

But John 19:25 says Jesus' mother, her sister (Mary the wife of Cleophas), and Mary Magdalene, all "stood by the cross", not faroff.

S&T:

Hey Johhny. I read that passage, and I kept reading hoping that I could find the part about Mary kissing His bloody feet, and then taking the body down from the cross. I couldn't find it there, so could you kindly direct me to the Gospel that has that in it.

Thanks in advance

 

I don't see where the depiction contradicts scripture. This is dramatice license that does not counter scripture, but does portray what would have been expected.

Since Mary (with John) was the family member at the cross, it would have fallen upon her to be resonsible for removal of the body. That's the historical norm when it came to crucifixions during the Roman era. While Nicodemus and Joseph of Arimathea are said to have removed Jesus' body, it would by tradition have been the responsibility of family to be responsible for the body. In the film, "Jesus of Nazareth", I believe Mary was also depicted to be there when Jesus' body was removed. Funny how that issue wasn't raised then. As I've said many times on this board, the case with "the Passion" is simply one of selective condemnation. The "mary at the cross" thing is just another example.

 

Johnv " quote:
--------------------------------------
Originally posted by blackbird:
The word from the Word says---that at the cross---the women "stood afar off"...
------------------------------------

Matthew 27:55 says that "many women" were "afar off."
Mark 15:40 says that there were "women looking on afar off."
Luke 23:49 says that the women "stood afar off, beholding these things."
But John 19:25 says Jesus' mother, her sister (Mary the wife of Cleophas), and Mary Magdalene, all "stood by the cross", not faroff"

end quote

Not exactly Johnv.

You said Mtt 27:55 >>>but it should be Matt 27:55 And many women were there beholding afar off, which followed Jesus from Galilee, ministering unto him:
56 Among which was Mary Magdalene, and ***Mary the mother of James and Joses, and the mother of Zebedee's children. [***meaning his mother]

You said Mark 15:40 >>>but should be Mark 15:40 There were also women looking on afar off: among whom was Mary Magdalene, and Mary the mother of James the less and of Joses, and Salome; [***meaning his mother]
41 (Who also, when he was in Galilee, followed him, and ministered unto him and many other women which came up with him unto Jerusalem.[also v 47--mary again no longer referred to as His mother]

YOU said Luke 23:49 >>> but should include v 27, 28, 48 And all the people that came together to that sight, beholding the things which were done, smote their breasts, and returned.
49 And all his acquaintance, and the women that followed him from Galilee, stood afar off, beholding these things. [and also v 55]

You said "John 19 says Jesus' mother, her sister (Mary the wife of Cleophas), and Mary Magdalene, all "stood by the cross", not faroff"

John 19:25 Now there stood by the cross of Jesus his mother, and his mother's sister, Mary the wife of Cleophas, and Mary Magdalene.
26 When Jesus therefore saw his mother, and the disciple standing by, whom he loved, he saith unto his mother, Woman, behold thy son!
27 Then saith he to the disciple, Behold thy mother! And from that hour that disciple took her unto his own home.

When Jesus looked at Mary from the cross, it was to declare to her and the apostle, that she was now his mother, and he her son. John 19:23-30. There is no conversational interaction between them. But, in the movie, while he is hanging on the cross, Mary says to Jesus, "Flesh of my flesh, Heart of my heart, My son, let me die with you"

She kisses his feet and then stands there looking up at him with blood on her lips and face. Contrary to Luke 23:43-55, and the above Scriptures

That is full catholic doctrine and also found in the divination of emmerich and agreda

In the movie, depicting Station Thirteen and the Catholic pieta, Mary holds Jesus in her arms after he is taken down from the cross. That is contrary to Luke 23:47-56, and John 19:38-42. And in the movie, the women get his body instead of Joseph and Nicodemus, as shown in several Scriptures. Matthew 27:57-60, Luke 23:47-56, John 19:38-42

Jesus was abandoned by all---including Mary.

Psalm 31:11 I was a reproach among all mine enemies, but especially among my neighbours, and a fear to mine acquaintance: they that did see me without fled from me.

Psalm 38:10 My heart panteth, my strength faileth me: as for the light of mine eyes, it also is gone from me.
11 My lovers and my friends stand aloof from my sore; and my kinsmen stand afar off.

John 16:31 Jesus answered them, Do ye now believe?
32 Behold, the hour cometh, yea, is now come, that ye shall be scattered, every man to his own, and shall leave me alone: and yet I am not alone, because the Father is with me.
33 These things I have spoken unto you, that in me ye might have peace. In the world ye shall have tribulation: but be of good cheer; I have overcome the world.

[ March 24, 2004, 08:11 PM: Message edited by: sharpSword ]

 

John,

I have one little problem with this. First of all, Shabbat was approaching, so there was no time for hanging around as the Shabbat preparation had to be done, which was the job of the women. Secondly, if you check the Jewish customs in first century Palestine, I doubt it highly that it would be acceptable for a woman to be smearing the blood of a dying man on her face and lips, especially right before Shabbat, and with a High Holy day approaching. They did say that this movie was historically correct, didn't they?


Luke 23

49 And all those known to Him stood at a distance, and the women, those who accompanied Him from Galilee, were seeing these things.
50 And, behold, a man named Joseph, being a councillor, a good and righteous man.
51 This one was not assenting to their counsel and deed ( he was from Arimathea, a city of the Jews), and who himself was eagerly expecting the kingdom of God,
52 coming near to Pilate, this one asked for the body of Jesus.
53 And taking it down, he wrapped it in linen, and placed it in a quarried tomb, where no one was ever yet laid.
54 And it was Preparation Day, and a sabbath was coming on.
55 And having followed, also the women who were accompanying Him out of Galilee, watched the tomb, and how His body was placed.
56 And returning, they prepared spices and ointment. And indeed they rested on the sabbath, according to the commandment.

Mark 15

44 And Pilate marveled if He had already died. And calling the centurion near, he asked him if He died already.
45 And knowing from the centurion, he granted the body to Joseph.
46 And having bought a linen cloth, and having taken Him down, he wrapped Him in the linen, and laid Him in a tomb which was cut out of rock. And he rolled a stone against the mouth of the tomb.
47 And Mary Magdalene, and Mary of Joses, saw where He was laid.

It says in scripture that the women did not participate in the first part of Jesus being removed from the cross and entombed. Who supervised the preparation of a Jewish body for burial? Would it be a priest? The term "artistic license" is being very kind to this "fantasy". I personally would have no problem with this film, if Mel, and the so called "leadership" did not say that it was Biblically and historically accurate, because it is neither.

[ March 24, 2004, 08:47 PM: Message edited by: Spirit and Truth ]

 

Was Mary given the Body of our Lord according to the Scriptures?

Mark 15:45 43 Joseph of Arimathaea, an honourable counsellor, which also waited for the kingdom of God, came, and went in boldly unto Pilate, and craved the body of Jesus.
44 And Pilate marvelled if he were already dead: and calling unto him the centurion, he asked him whether he had been any while dead.
45 And when he knew it of the centurion, he gave the body to Joseph.
46 And he bought fine linen, and took him down, and wrapped him in the linen, and laid him in a sepulchre which was hewn out of a rock, and rolled a stone unto the door of the sepulchre.
47 And Mary Magdalene and Mary the mother of Joses beheld where he was laid.

***the centurion gave the body to Jospeh, and he took it down from the cross, wrapped and placed it in the sepulchre

Matthew 27:57 When the even was come, there came a rich man of Arimathaea, named Joseph, who also himself was Jesus' disciple:
58 He went to Pilate, and begged the body of Jesus. Then Pilate commanded the body to be delivered.
59 And when Joseph had taken the body, he wrapped it in a clean linen cloth,
60 And laid it in his own new tomb, which he had hewn out in the rock: and he rolled a great stone to the door of the sepulchre, and departed.
61 And there was Mary Magdalene, and the other Mary, sitting over against the sepulchre.


Luke 23:49 And all his acquaintance, and the women that followed him from Galilee, stood afar off, beholding these things.
50 And, behold, there was a man named Joseph, a counsellor; and he was a good man, and a just:
51 (The same had not consented to the counsel and deed of them he was of Arimathaea, a city of the Jews: who also himself waited for the kingdom of God.
52 This man went unto Pilate, and begged the body of Jesus.
53 And he took it down, and wrapped it in linen, and laid it in a sepulchre that was hewn in stone, wherein never man before was laid.
54 And that day was the preparation, and the sabbath drew on.
55 And the women also, which came with him from Galilee, followed after, and beheld the sepulchre, and how his body was laid.

John 19:38 And after this Joseph of Arimathaea, being a disciple of Jesus, but secretly for fear of the Jews, besought Pilate that he might take away the body of Jesus: and Pilate gave him leave. He came therefore, and took the body of Jesus.
39 And there came also Nicodemus, which at the first came to Jesus by night, and brought a mixture of myrrh and aloes, about an hundred pound weight.
40 Then took they the body of Jesus, and wound it in linen clothes with the spices, as the manner of the Jews is to bury.

Johnv you said " While Nicodemus and Joseph of Arimathea are said to have removed Jesus' body, it would by tradition have been the responsibility of family to be responsible for the body."

The problem was--this wasn't a normal crucifixion or burial. The Scriptures do not lie about who got the Body and who handled the Body and who watched.

Jesus said in Matthew 13:47 Then one said unto him, Behold, thy mother and thy brethren stand without, desiring to speak with thee.
48 But he answered and said unto him that told him, Who is my mother? and who are my brethren?
49 And he stretched forth his hand toward his disciples, and said, Behold my mother and my brethren!
50 For whosoever shall do the will of my Father which is in heaven, the same is my brother, and sister, and mother.
13:1 The same day went Jesus out of the house, and sat by the sea side.

It was more than appropriate and symbolic for Joseph to get the Body of our Lord , John 19:38 And after this Joseph of Arimathaea, being a disciple of Jesus,----because he was family--acording to Jesus.

 

I doubt very highly that Mary was going to run off to prepare a sabbath meal. Her mind was pressed with slightly more important matters, methinks. Although, normally, you're right about the custom. Women, generally, had to have the sabbath table prepared by the time the sun set.

You hit a nail on the head here regarding the dramatice license use of this scene. The OT and Jewish customs refer to the blood of the slain lamb having sacraficial significance. Also, it was common for an abandoned lamb to be smothered in lamb's blood, to be adopted by another sheep as one of its own. These historical references contribute to our usage of the phrase "lamb of God". Indeed, John referrs heavily to Jesus as being the paschal lamb, the sacrificial lamb, etc. The pictoral significance with this scene in the movie plays upon that. Mary, being somewhat covered by Jesus' blood, just like all of us are.

This plays very well off the dramatice license Mel takes with Jesus in the Garden, where he stomps on the serpent's head (referencing the Genesis prophecy of the serpent striking his heal, while he strikes the serpents head).

Generally, yes, it is. But the audience is smart enough to know what is dramatic license and what isn't.

Again, while these elements aren't referred to in scripture, the inclusion of them doesn't counter scripture.