'Passions of The Christ'
The controversial Mel Gibson movie is set for a theatrical release on Feb. 25. No one has seen it yet, but everyone seems to have strong feelings about this film.
What are your thoughts on the film? Will you see it? Will you boycott it? Maybe you think it's just a film, and all this hub-bub is unnecessary. Let us know.
I will see the film. The fact is the Jews and Romans were responsible for the death of Christ, therefore this is much ado about nothing. All movies tend to take some poetic license with the facts in order to enhance the entertainment value of the film.
The only thing missing, apparently, is an American flag flying from the cross, and a "God Bless America" bumper sticker at Christ's feet. Have to wonder why this particular gory rendition of the story came out, and why now? If you think it's not "political", then you're either very naive or very shrewd indeed. Hey, all you evangelists out there, no, you're not being persecuted. You have a right to believe in superstition and ignorance. You DON'T have a right to impose it on me. And, no, the government did not have any right to commit the crime at Waco against the Davidians, so don't typecast me, please.
winston, boston, ma
Who is Mel Gibson to be preaching to anyone? He plays and glorifies characters who break just about all the 10 commandements. Just imagine Arnold and Mel as the perfect religious right/Republican ticket in 2008.
This is so unbelieveable! Public outcry over a graphic movie about the death of Christ.
The media is such a JOKE! Where is the public outcry over movies like Pulp Fiction, Resevoir Dogs, Natural Born Killers, etc. You want to talk about graphic violence? Mindless, pointless violence? Tarrantino was heralded for Pulp and Res Dogs and they are two of the most violent, graphic movies EVER made! Shotgun blasts to the face, Male Rape/Sodomy Scene and Michael Madsen singing, dancing and laughing while he brutally tortures and slices a policemans ear off with a razor blade. If these other movies were being challenged by the press I would have no problem challenging Mel on his graphic portrayal but not only are they not challenged, They are heralded triumphs by the media...Now all of a sudden there is a problem.
That problem is Jesus and his enduring message of truth.
And as for the legitimacy of the New Testament Texts...Any of you heard of Alexander the Great? Any of us have a problem accepting the historical accuracy of his life and times? His exploits, accomplishments, etc? Most people don't realize that the primary, endorsed, accepted biography of the Life of Alexander the Great was written 500 years after his death.
The Gospels were finalized 20 -60 years after the crucifixion of Jesus. All of that aside, it does not matter who sent Jesus to the cross...Roman, Jew, Gentile, We are all in need of a redeemer, look at the state of the world today. We have all the answers, but no truth.
Don't rely on what the general press tells you, investigate for yourself.
Read these books by people just like you that have pondered the legitimacy of the historical Christ and his message:
Ravi Zacharias' Can man live without God?
Ravi Zacharias' Who made God?
CS Lewis' Mere Christianity,
Lee Strobel's A Case for Christ , A Case for Faith.
I don't remember the same outrage when The Last Temptation of Christ was released. hmmmmm....
St. Peter, Brockton
How can there be such a fuss when the movie hasn't even been seen yet???!!!! I'll go see it.
Susan Lanney, Revere
I keep seeing the words "biblical" and "historical" used interchangeably. The Bible is NOT a historical document. It is a religious text. There is NO historical, exact, unbiased record of these events.
And this movie is filled with historically incorrect visuals, such as Jesus dragging a whole cross, and being nailed through his palms. Anyone who has read any FACTUAL research into the Roman practice of cruxifiction would understand how nonsensical these scenarios are. Mel Gibson is willing to throw the Jewish community under the bus for "accuracy's sake" but can't portray a plausible cruxifiction? It's all hype, and I think it's pathetic.
Won't go see it. Don't much care for Mel Gibson and prefer not making him any richer than he already is.
I plan on seeing the film this weekend. I can not express an opinion one way or the other about the film. From the interviews of Mr. Gibson, it is obvious how he feels about his work. Although I'd hardly discribe him as a "quack". Mr. Rooney does fit into that category in my humble opinion. I do give Mr. Gibson credit for sticking to his beliefs so strongly and laying it on the line by making this film. I am honestly looking forward to seeing "The Passion of the Christ" and if given the opportunity to return to share my experience, I will. Thank you and God Bless.
Tim, Wyoming, DE
My sentiments echo the sentiments of Linda from Chicago The profund sufferings of Christ needed to be potrayed on the screen. Indeed, most films about the life of Christ, though extremely moving, usually portray Christ with just a trickle of blood on his face. The Scriptures speak of a humiliating, brusing punishment beyond compare. "I am poured out like water, and all my bones are out of joint..." (Psalm 22:14) . Isaiah 50:6 & 52:14 read respectively as follows: "I gave my back to the smiters, and my cheeks to them that plucked out the hair; I hid not my face from shame and spitting." "Just as there were many who were appalled at him-his apperance was so disfigured beyond that of any man, and his form marred beyond human likeness."
He endured all this because He loved us so! I support Mel Gibson'd film . It is a film that needed to be portrayed to a world that is reeling out of control without God in it's sights!
Jorge, West New York