""But if a believer is wrong, he has lost nothing. If you are wrong, you will have lost everything.""

So basically religious belief is a default mode based on a fear tactic. You're back to the age-old "Believe or you shall burn in hell" routine. Its tedious, its logical nonsense, and its morphed too often into "Believe or we shall burn you right here on earth."

"If evolution is real Why are there still monkey's."

Tut tut. There goes the widely held belief that the Canadian school system is superior to ours. Hon, we do not have a direct straight line lineage to rhesus monkeys. Our simian relatives evolved just as we did on a different track. But you do have a point. If there is evolution, why do we still have the present Bush administration?

Also, if you ever read the Bible, you would notice that God will not be interested in listening to ANYTHING coming from a dead atheist.

Huh? Yes it does...

3:20 For everyone who does evil hates the light, and doesn’t come to the light, lest his works would be exposed.

In my opinion, that is a clear metaphor for an atheist arguing with God.

Oh wait, you don't think I'm right? But isn't all religion about HUMAN interpretation?

If evolution is real Why are there still monkey's.

You mean monkies I suppose. If evolution is "real"? Evolution IS real and is exists. Bear in mind that mutations can aid species, but mutations aren't nessecarily required for the continuation of a species.

If God is real, why did he bother with monkies, and leaving so much evidence supporting evolution?

777236ER,

You always make the same boring points. Everyone gives you the same replies, so I just think you're trying to get a rise out of people here...quite sad.

As for the movie being anti-semitic, isn't almost everything considered anti-semitic nowadays? It's perfectly fine to generalize about priests and mock Christians, but somehow stating real facts and history is anti-semitic  

It's also funny considering I'm a Christian and a semite. Jews are not the only semites, that word is just tossed around and means nothing anyway.

I'm torn as to if and when I will see this movie, but from the trailers I have seen, the rating kind of takes care of whether children should see this movie or not!

What I don't understand is why ANY view that even remotely slights the Jewish faith its deemed ANTI-SEMITIC?

Without getting on rant about the who killed Jesus, Jews or Romans, don't we all think its a little silly to think that this will lead to violence against Jews?

I would like to think we are more evolved as a society and can just view this a movie!
JEEZ

You always make the same boring points. Everyone gives you the same replies, so I just think you're trying to get a rise out of people here...quite sad.

Points about the Bible being subjective are boring? Well I suppose so...if you don't make the book the cornerstone of your religion.

Speaking of boring points, ideas about how we're all going to burn in hell get a little boring after a while. It's not going to happen.

Saw it last night. Aside from a couple of intense scenes, it's pretty average filmmaking. Not for the squeamish as there is one extremely bloody and powerful scene and the movie in general is quite violent. I wouldn't want to actually go back to the original topic after all the religious wisdom spouted forth, but I would not suggest bringing a small child to the theater. The religion crybabies (surprise, surprise) blew the whole thing out of proportion, as tends to happen with any religious movie. 3/5

Csavel said it best. Gibson relies on how the New Testament and Gospels both of which are fairly anti-semitic. Just think about history for a minute.

Back then christianity was an offshoot religion of Judaism and if they accepted blame for Christ's death the religion would have more or less ended. So of course the easy answer was to blame the Jews.

If you look back at historical evidence (which IMO is the only evidence to trust with this matter), Gibson's movie is just very off in accuracy.

The film is utterly disgusting, innaccurate, and extremely irresponsible film making in general. While it has certainly created a discussion, the film is extremely one sided, and not only does it completely condemn the jews, it absolved arguably the most brutal race in history of any responsibility in order to truly single out the jews.

As most people that go to films are extremely impressionable, this is just extremely biased, and as Mel Gibson and no ones else that walks this earth was around during that time, it is a pretty bold statement to make. If you consider than even in this day and age, when journalists have digital recorders, video cameras, they still remember and portray most things wrong, yet Mel Gibson, who wasn't there, is insisting that his interpretation is the truth. He is saying that it doesn't portray the jews in bad light... what a joke...

The part that saddens me most is that every Pastor that I see being interviewed on tv is insisting that their congregation see it, and so much so that they ARE PAYING FOR THEIR MEMBERS TO SEE IT. The last one I saw said that the Christians really need to see what they are up against with the jews !!

This film will not make you a better person

J

[Edited 2004-02-26 00:13:07]

It's a movie people... MOVIE! Sit back, relax, enjoy it, and shut up.

"No Child Should See This Movie"-Passion Of Christ

Not exactly a powerful statement. Children shouldn't see most of the shows broadcast on TV or on morning radio which are easily accessible.

Statements like this are so common place these days its lost all meaning.

I also have to agree that "most" children should not see a movie as intense as this film is by some reports, I would say tha it might be better if the parents were to see the film first and then decide if their children where able to "handle" such a film.

It is not in the same league but I remember seeing the South Park film in a theatre and hearing complain about how vulgar and crude the film was and how it was not for children, I have to say that they said this after sitting through the entire film. I wonder if they had any idea what the film was about and if their approx' 10 year olds could handle it.

Again I think that the film might be OK for one child but not OK for another of the same age, it is up to the parents to make up their own minds and make an informed choice as to what is proper for THEIR children.

Yours,
IHadAPheo

(darn that spellchecker is acting up again)

[Edited 2004-02-26 04:31:26]

Where is Jeffery??
-(God bless through Jesus)

But if a believer is wrong, he has lost nothing. If you are wrong, you will have lost everything. That was priceless Cfalk. Much respect to you.

Heard another reviewer today on the radio call it "Passion Christ Chainsaw Massacre" SOunds pretty on target I think considering.

"You can say you have faith that this film is true to you, but to declare it as absolute truth is to disrespect another's beliefs."

This is the problem. We don't believe in absolute truth anymore for fear of causing offence. I could say that in "my truth" cruise missiles are made of cheese, or gravity doesn't exist and anyone who states otherwise in infringing on my human rights! Seems rather silly to argue that truth doesn't exist doesn't it.

The Jews didn't kill or crucify Jesus and the whole story behind this universal event is clearly told in Quran;the sacred book of Muslims,themselves strongly believing in all the messengers that preceded Prophet Mohammed and all the previous devine book,tells the story of Virgin Mary,Jesus,and their message to the descendants of Israel in several Surates,Chapters,and you may have a better explanation of the real circumstances.

You may read verses of Surate 3,Surate 4 and Surate 5.

- Surate 3,Al-Imrane/The Famil,the House,of Imran,Verse 52-Verse 56 :

"When Jesus found Unbelief on their part He said:"Who will be my Helpers to the work of (for) Allah?" Said the disciples:"We are Allah's helpers:We believe in Allh and do thou bera witness that we are Muslims.(Those who followed Jesus as it should be are called Muslims too.)
...
"And the unbelievers plotted and planned,and Allah too planned,and the best of planners is Allah." * "Behold Allah said:"O Jesus! I Will take Thee and rase Thee to Myself and clear thee (of the falsehoods) of those who blaspheme;I will make those who follow thee superior to those who reject faith,to the Day of Resurrection:Then shall ye return onto Me,and i will judge between you of the matters wherein ye dispute."

- Surate 4,An-Nisaa/Women,Verse 153 - Verse 176 : (short excerpts) :

...That they (the Jews) said (in boast),"We killed the Christ Jesus son of Mary,the Messenger of Allah",but they killed him not,nor crucified him,but so it was made to appear to them,and those who differ therein are full of doubts,with no (certain)knowledge,but only conjecture to follow,for of a surety the killed him not :" * "Nay Allah raised him up unto Himself,and Allah is exalted in Power,Wise;" * "And there is none of the People of the Book but must believe in him before his death;and on the Day of Judgment he will be a witness against them;"

...,and say not,Three.Desist,it is better for you;Allah (God) is only one Allah:Glory be to Him (far exalted is He) above having a son.To Him belong all things in the heavens and on earth.And enough is Allah as a Disposer of affairs."

- Surate 5,Al-Maeda / The Table Spread, Verse 110 - 120 : (Sorry for the lack of translation).


I hope that this could solve the conflict,the doubt,and the dilemna behind the story of Jesus,the last but one Messenger of God to the entire world.

Ts-ior,

...That they (the Jews) said (in boast),"We killed the Christ Jesus son of Mary,the Messenger of Allah",but they killed him not,nor crucified him,but so it was made to appear to them,and those who differ therein are full of doubts,with no (certain)knowledge,but only conjecture to follow,for of a surety the killed him not :"

Thanks for that passage, but I would appreciate a clarification - surely the translation doesn't quite convey everything.

The passage above speaks of the Jews thinking that they killed Jesus but did not? Or that they simply boasted of it while knowing that they did not? Or am I missing something?

Charles

The historic relevance of the Gospels can't be called into question. As after the resurrection there was observed and recorded over 500 accounts of people seeing Christ alive. In a modern court room only one eye witness is needed. 500 now that is history. Also archaeology vindicates the methods used to torture Christ. Some of which were reserved for the most wicked of offenders, however Christ was not wicked.

I have seen the movie and if you don't want to that is your business if you are on the fence about going. My advice is GO. It was an amazing experience. It is not just a movie but an experience.

In Christ
Garen B.

The historic relevance of the Gospels can't be called into question
***

I think the point people are making is what is the intent of this film. While I would agree that much of what Gibson put in the film was from the gospels or scriptures etc, but there are thousands of scriptures, and he picked a very select few, and a very specific few to make a very one sided story.

Mel Gibson is well known for his extreme religious views, this is well documented

J

I hate to take away from the off topic debate but back to the subject.

I saw this movie last night, I firmly believe taking a child to this movie should constitute child abuse. It is possibly the most bloody, violent movie I have ever seen. The torture and crucifiction scenes make Saving Private Ryan look like an episode of the Teletubbies. But it never fails, some fuckwit took their kids and the little bastards screamed through half the movie. Yes it's a good story, yes its extremely well told, it is probably really powerful if you believe in that stuff.

Be prepared to read, there is not one damn word of English in the whole movie. Whole thing is in Latin and Aramaic.

Artsyman : You seem to like that phrase well documented without showing any documentation to prove it. I also disagree with you that the movie portrays Jews in a bad light. I see it showing them and the Romans in a brutal light. I offer up the scene when the Roman licters were beating the tar out of Jim Cavescel (spelling) Jesus. It was a very good film and to ridicule it and propagate thoughts that make others believe this film is a horrible film without even seeing it shows me that you have a lack of tolerance towards something other than the movie.

In Christ
Garen B.

but there are thousands of scriptures, and he picked a very select few, and a very specific few to make a very one sided story.

Artsyman, I don't know which Bible you're reading, but there are not thousands of scriptures Mel could have chosen from the Gospels. Yes, there are thousands of scriptures in the Old Testament, there are thousands of scriptures in the New Testament. There are not thousands of scriptures that pertain to the story of the passion of Christ. I know you have an axe to grind, but your facts are kind of messed up. You have every right to be upset about this film, but many Jews as well as the Anti-Defamation League don't find this film to have an anti-Jewish message. Mel Gibson is gaining overwhelming support for this film and it's rightly deserved.

Saw it last night. Great movie, but like Startvalve pointed out, anyone who takes their kids is a fool. Well done, and I really respect Gibson for standing up to all the criticism.

Artsyman, even a Jewish columnist from US Today said Jews were criticizing the movie before they even saw it...then he saw it and said he could not call it anti-semetic. Get over it, really...it's history..a History that he and many Christians believe in.

Cfalk, judging from the passage, Muslims believe that they thought they killed Jesus, but in reality they killed someone who they only thought was Jesus. I remember being told that Muslims believe that who the Jews actually crucified was one of the men who betrayed Jesus. God made him look like Jesus while the real Jesus was taken up to heaven..or something like that. Don't really remember 100%, maybe someone else can confirm.



FSP

Actually, you know I've only had one semester of Latin, but I actually understood some of the Romans. You don't know how cool that is for a Latin student...given the lack of people with whom to converse today!

I just saw the movie tonight. I wouldn't take anyone under 16 to see it, at least. I'm 19 and I will never forget seeing this movie for the rest of my life. Watching the scourging and those nails being driven in is the worst thing I have ever seen in cinema. Because unlike the typical Hollywood blockbuster...this was real. It actually happened.

There are thousands of scriptures. I believe that the King James Bible was translated from about 5300 manuscripts. That doesn't mean there are over 5000 different books in the Bible, but that there are many to support the Bible's accuracy. Trust me, Artsyman, no book has ever been more closely researched, debated, or scrutinized than the Bible. And it still stands as the truth.

The best thing about the movie is that knowing the whole time while you're watching it that He died for each and every person in the theater, that all might be redeemed. He didn't die just because he threatened to undermine some Jewish leaders.

Ts-ior

Actually I would rather believe the Biblical version, since it dates back to that era. The Koran was written after andvarious events that happened back then make me question its accuracy. So maybe you could rephrase your post to "we Muslims believe that this happened...". It sounds less offensive and arrogant that way.

Rjpieces,

Actually the historical evidence makes it very clear who killed Jesus. It's quite accurate. But that doesn't justify hating Jews.

Saw the movie this weekend.

There were lots of kids in the audience. Some were even eating those large tubs of popcorn through the crucifixion scene which went on for 40 minutes. One kid in front of me fell asleep. I guess kids nowadays have seen it all.

Jesus Christ Superstar was an uplifting film that made one want to know the radical Jesus. This film was a dark journey where the major protagonist wasn't Jesus, but a rather dour God, and a director who clearly couldn't stop showing the pain of crucifixion. The best performance was that of the actress who played Mary. Her pain at seeing her son's death was a truly emotional scene in the film.

I think this film spoke to the converted. Its power to evangelize, IMHO, is quite limited.

Artsyman, even a Jewish columnist from US Today said Jews were criticizing the movie before they even saw it...then he saw it and said he could not call it anti-semetic
****

So one jew says it is not anti-semetic, yet the rest of them feel the intent behind the film was, but the one that suits your argument, means that you tell everyone else to get over it ?

Mel's religious beliefs are fairly well known, and were in advance

j

As far as the film being anti-semitic - well, it made Caiaphus seem like Khan from the Star Trek films (i.e., a cruel, cunning SOB). But it also showed civilian Jews in a positive light. So, I do not think it was anti-semitic.

In the end Caiaphus and the conservative religious orthodoxy came off as being incredibly nasty, bigoted power hungry tyrants out to annihilate Jesus, the radical who professed love, tolerance and forgiveness - ideals that were really lacking in that time and place.

Funny how that notion seems to be lost on Mel Gibson in his pursuit of radically conservative Catholicism.

Artsyman:

yet the rest of them feel

How do you know, Dr. Hyperbole?

Mel's religious beliefs are fairly well known, and were in advance

How do you know, Dr. Unsubstantiated Hyperbole ?

- Jeff