The Passion

[andrewducker]

Mel Gibson's latest, for those of you who don't follow film news as maniacaally as I do is "The Passion", a teling of Christ's Death told entirely in Latin and Aramaic. The trailer looks fantastically authentic. However there's a fair amount of controversy about it.

Mel Gibson's new movie The Passion has been given the official thumbs down by America's Anti-Defamation League. The controversial film, about the final hours of Jesus Christ's life, was screened for select religious leaders Monday, and Adl officials were far from happy with what they saw. Abraham Foxman, who has been among those heaping criticism on the ambitious project - shot in Italy in the ancient languages of Aramaic and Latin - is convinced the film will infuriate and upset religious people. Foxman says, "We are deeply concerned that the film, if released in its present form, will fuel the hatred, bigotry and anti-Semitism that many responsible churches have worked hard to repudiate." Fellow ADL official Rabbi Eugene Korn, who also saw the movie, adds, "This is not a disagreement between the Jews and Mr. Gibson. Many theologically-informed Catholics and Protestants have expressed the same concerns regarding anti-Semitism and that this film may undermine Christian-Jewish dialogue and could turn back the clock on decades of positive progress in interfaith relations."

So, lacking any precise details about the anti-semitism, I went looking at the New Testament to see what the original sources say. Guess what - all four apostles agree that the guiding force of the crucifixion was the Jewish Priesthood and Mark states categorically (15:11) that the pristehood stirred up the crowd to have Jesus crucified. So unless the complaint is basically that the New Testament is both false and anti-semitic (which the Anti-defamation League doesn't seem to be going for this week) I'm wondering where there complaint lies.

I'm now rather looking forward to this, just to see what happens. Maybe there'll be a double bill with Life of Brian so we can compare and contrast.

Comments

[wolflady26.livejournal.com]

Guess what - all four apostles agree that the guiding force of the crucifixion was the Jewish Priesthood and Mark states categorically (15:11) that the pristehood stirred up the crowd to have Jesus crucified. So unless the complaint is basically that the New Testament is both false and anti-semitic (which the Anti-defamation League doesn't seem to be going for this week) I'm wondering where there complaint lies.

Maybe they're just hoping people will forget that bit....

[andrewducker]

There are apparently other bits that are offensive, and apparently there's generally stereotyping of the jews. But I think I'll wait and see.

[wolflady26.livejournal.com]

I don't really understand how people can use that as a reason to be anti-semetic, personally. I mean, come on, that took place 2,000 years ago! And, it was a group of people in power being "threatened" by an unorthodox viewpoint. Group of people in power often react in a violent way to people who threaten that power, irregardless of their race or religion.

Finally, if Christ had to die on the cross to save humanity and do away with original sin, then it was God's plan for them to react in that way, so you might as well blame Him.

Get over it, people.

[nickys.livejournal.com]

I presume you've seen the Not The Nine O'Clock News sketch about Life of Brian?

[andrewducker]

I have no idea why you'd presume that :->

My parents were both huge NTNOCN fans.

I have a couple of videos of their stuff too.

I even used to have the calendar.

I am 30 you know :->

[nickys.livejournal.com]

> I have no idea why you'd presume that :->

to quote the sketch: "Britain is fundamentally a Python worshiping nation..."

[andrewducker]

And I just realised I put an extra "not" in your sentence.

Sorry!

heh

[josephgrossberg.livejournal.com]

Leviticus 20:13 "If a man also lie with mankind, as he lieth with a woman, both of them have committed an abomination: they shall surely be put to death; their blood shall be upon them."

If a film was released, accurately focusing on that part of the (King James) Bible, would it not be clearly anti-gay and likely to stir up hatred toward homosexuals?

So why can't the ADL justly level similar complaints toward passages that blame Jews for Christs' murder?

Re: heh

[andrewducker]

Because it's not saying "The bible is anti-jew!" it's saying "Mel Gibson's film of this bit of the bible is anti-jew!" and it's putting it across as somehow unexpected.

[allorin.livejournal.com]

You might find this article interesting then....

If you're gonna look at it THAT way,...

[ekatarina.livejournal.com]

There was an interesting series of lectures on CBC radio around Christmas last year regarding the Bible and the Gospels in particular.

It would be very interesting to have a movie that is accurate to the Gospels, but not to the history of the events in question.

One guest in particular has focused on Pontius Pilate. There is a lot of primary documentation about and regarding Pontius. He can be studied and tracked and examined. He was a strong willed man. He was straight-laced and hard nosed. It could be said that he was the perfect sub-commander of an area who has authority and control. To have him look to the public let alone a mob of Jews, not Roman citizens, for guidance let alone even thinking about not executing a convicted criminal is very very odd. Many modern debaters like to make a big deal about crucifixion and how Jesus died and where. As far as I have read and studied, this was the usual way of dealing with executions. (St. Peter was unusual in being head-down but that seems to be part of a move to specifically humiliate Peter.)

So, I'm having the same reaction I do to people who complain about the "lack" of women in the Bible. Well, that was the culture of the time. Women were treated a particular way and considered in a certain light. (Remember all those Biblical love stories where they meet at the well? It's about the only place to be in the company of a man you are not related to.)

Also, the people who argue against women participating the the Church because "there were no female disciples." A: see previous remark, Todays' culture is different. B: there are women in Christ's life who are influential and important. Mary M was the only one to believe C's saying he would be back and the first one to understand what was going on when he did appear.

And this "comment" is far too long.

Ekatarina

Re: If you're gonna look at it THAT way,...

[andrewducker]

Nooo! Long comments good!

And you're right on all counts.

Except that women are obviously inferior and should be kept away from churches.

Sorry, I mean't that that women are obviously superior and should be kept away from churches.