Are those accounts in "Passion of the Christ" accurate?

[Monk Brendan]

As to Rome being the center of christianity? I'm not convinced that it is. It is certainly the center of the Roman Catholic form of 'christian' faith. But there are questions as to whether that brand of 'christian' faith is really what God is asking of us.

Rome was one of the largest empires at the time Jesus was around. There were Chinese, Japanese and Indian civilizations, but it is the Roman civilization that is most imprinted on us, because, for the most part, they were the successful ones. As far as Roman Catholics, just because YOU haven't formed yourself to that particular model doesn't mean it isn't the best for others.

 

[Vicomte13]

and why would Rome in particular be the center of Christianity?

Because Rome converted. The Romans as an Empire eventually went over to Christ.

 

[jmldn2]

Worse than that? How could Jesus have been tortured any worse than what was shown in that movie?

Also that led me to thinking that the Jewish sages were blamed for the crucifixion and rightly so but since it was the Romans who done it, why would they be exempt from blame and why would Rome in particular be the center of Christianity?

The Romans were just pawns in the hands of the Pharisees - The movie IMHO was true to scripture.

 

[miamited]

Rome was one of the largest empires at the time Jesus was around. There were Chinese, Japanese and Indian civilizations, but it is the Roman civilization that is most imprinted on us, because, for the most part, they were the successful ones. As far as Roman Catholics, just because YOU haven't formed yourself to that particular model doesn't mean it isn't the best for others.

Hi brendan,

I would agree with everything that you have said. I never claimed that the RCC brand of faith didn't work for others. In fact, the numbers show that it works for probably a larger number of people across the globe than any other brand. However, that fact alone doesn't make it to be the truth, just that a lot of people believe that it is.

God bless you,
In Christ, ted

 

[miamited]

Ted, it wasn't the Jews OR the Romans that crucified Christ. WE are the ones responsible. Remember that ALL have sinned.

Hi brendan,

Yes, absolutely agreed that all of us are the reason that Jesus had to die. However, I'm speaking of the event portrayed in the Passion movie and the many Passion plays. On that day that Jesus stood at the Praetorian colonade with his fate hanging in the balance under that justice of men, it was the Jewish leaders who the Scriptures tell us worked up the crowd to demand that Jesus be crucified. I'm merely recounting what the Scriptures say about those hours immediately preceding his death.

Yes, I agree that all believers understand that the root cause for 'why Jesus had to die' is our great sin.

God bless you,
In Christ, ted

 

[miamited]

I believe that the Gospels are an interpretive narrative that may or may not correspond to the actual details of history.

Hi jack,

Then you and I likely have a different understanding of the truth of the Scriptures. However, whether one believes what is written in the Scriptures, most any historian of ancient Roman life will tell you that the act of flogging a man and the act of an actual crucifixion were likely very much handled as Mr. Gibson has portrayed it in his movie. Such historians have actually found evidence that the whips used for flogging had bone and pottery shards tied up in knots along the length of the cord of the whip. They have been used on actual animal meat and skin and shown to be quite effective at shredding human skin and muscle. Historians have read accounts of other crucifixions and they weren't happy events for the accused. Most will tell you that when a human body is affixed to the crossbeams, they were stretched to the point that in order to breathe, hey had to lift themselves up to expand their lungs. For one who had been flogged, this would mean that their raw back would be scratching against the rough hewn upright as they stretched up and then relaxed to expel the air in their lungs. Many will tell you that it was a very slow and painful death. In fact, the Scriptures seem to account that everyone was surprised that Jesus was already dead when the Jews made their request to have the bodies removed before the Sabbath.

So yes, one could deny that Jesus was actually flogged or crucified, but that's really a mighty big stretch of one's imagination, to me. If, however, he was in fact flogged and crucified, then it was likely carried out pretty much as is portrayed in the movie and described in the Psalm. But, each is certainly free to believe the truth is whatever they'd like to believe the truth is.

God bless you,
In Christ, ted

 

[miamited]

Thanks for the explanation Ted. I think I am having trouble understanding if God himself had said he needed Jesus to die for us or if it was Paul and man's "opinion" that Jesus died for us?

Hi mike,

Well, I've often held that Jesus and God didn't make any mistakes. The Scriptures tell us that Paul was Jesus' chosen man to preach the truth to the Gentiles. So, I'm a bit wary of making some claim that what Paul wrote might have only been the 'opinion' of a man. But, just in case one might, then we would also have to contend with John's proclamation that Jesus died for our sin. As I understand the Scriptures, God always knew, from the very beginning that man was going to sin and that a proper sacrifice would be needed at some point to satisfy God's justice. When Jesus spoke the words, "It is finished!", it is my understanding that he was speaking of God's great plan of salvation was what was finished. A plan that was begun through a man named Abraham through whom God built up a nation to write down his oracles, which also is what Paul tells us. A plan that would culminate in the death of Jesus as that proper sacrifice for sin. It was when Jesus died for our sin that the plan that God had begun with Abraham to bring His salvation to all the earth, was finished.

In the Jewish law, the passover was always merely a representation of what was to come. If we read the law carefully, we find that God never promised Israel eternal life by keeping the law. When God finished giving Israel the law, He said that if they would keep it, things would go well with them on the earth. They would have plentiful crops and fruitful women and peace and prosperity among their enemies. That their enemies would flee before them even when they weren't being pursued. Not a word of promise that the keeping of the law, as established under the old covenant, would gain anyone peace with God and eternal life. The promise of eternal life with God has always and only been possible with the blood sacrifice of God's Son. This is why it is written that he carried men up in his train.

God bless you,
In Christ, ted

 

[miamited]

I suspect the "Jewish crowd" was a packed house of people under the employ of the Jewish hierarchy.

First, the trial occurred on "Preparation Day" for Passover, when working people were concerned with making themselves righteous, not risking uncleanness in the vicinity of pagans.
Second, it occurred in the courtyard of the despised Roman governor, who did no working Jew any good.
Third, it was just another occasion of the Romans killing yet another Jew. Whether criminal or not, his crimes would have been against hated Rome.

I strongly doubt there were any working-class Jews in that courtyard except those who personally knew either Jesus or Bar-Abbas. But we do know that there were more than enough priests, scribes, guards, and others in the hierarchy--hundreds--who could have packed the courtyard on command.

Hi RD,

Possibly so. They would have been the very people that Pilate would have been most fearful of reporting
him to the Caesar for his conduct. I'm not really prepared to make any definitive claims as to what 'kind' of Jews were standing in that crowd. The Scriptures don't make that clear. They merely tell us that it was the Jewish leaders that encouraged them to call for Jesus' death. I'm good with that.

God bless you,
In Christ, ted

 

[Cat Loaf You]

Hey guys, I looked at this movie for the first time over the w/e and it simply horrified me. Just checking to see if Mel Gibson used accurate info from the bible for everything in there?

Not really

Passion shows Christ Jesus as man who is suffering but it does not show him as God who died for sins of whole world and redeemed humanity .

 

[JackRT]

Hi mike,

Well, I've often held that Jesus and God didn't make any mistakes. The Scriptures tell us that Paul was Jesus' chosen man to preach the truth to the Gentiles. So, I'm a bit wary of making some claim that what Paul wrote might have only been the 'opinion' of a man. But, just in case one might, then we would also have to contend with John's proclamation that Jesus died for our sin. As I understand the Scriptures, God always knew, from the very beginning that man was going to sin and that a proper sacrifice would be needed at some point to satisfy God's justice. When Jesus spoke the words, "It is finished!", it is my understanding that he was speaking of God's great plan of salvation was what was finished. A plan that was begun through a man named Abraham through whom God built up a nation to write down his oracles, which also is what Paul tells us. A plan that would culminate in the death of Jesus as that proper sacrifice for sin. It was when Jesus died for our sin that the plan that God had begun with Abraham to bring His salvation to all the earth, was finished.

In the Jewish law, the passover was always merely a representation of what was to come. If we read the law carefully, we find that God never promised Israel eternal life by keeping the law. When God finished giving Israel the law, He said that if they would keep it, things would go well with them on the earth. They would have plentiful crops and fruitful women and peace and prosperity among their enemies. That their enemies would flee before them even when they weren't being pursued. Not a word of promise that the keeping of the law, as established under the old covenant, would gain anyone peace with God and eternal life. The promise of eternal life with God has always and only been possible with the blood sacrifice of God's Son. This is why it is written that he carried men up in his train.

God bless you,
In Christ, ted

I was questioning the details of Gibson's portrayal not the passion itself. I have read that some took as long as a week to die on the cross but, as you mentioned, the death of Jesus took a surprisingly short time. This suggests to me that he was severely debilitated by either savage treatment or a long incarceration or both.

 

[JackRT]

Not really

Passion whows Christ Jesus as man who is suffering but it does not show him as God who died for sins of whole world and redeemed humanity .

I think that the final scene accomplished that.

 

[RDKirk]

JackRT's critique rests on the assumption that Jesus was primarily a political revolutionary.

Jesus was a religious revolutionary and in that day and age, that had political implications. The Jewish religious elders and the Roman state had a complicit relationship, they had for some time.

Yes the Jewish hierarchy had to invent the political accusation essentially out of thin air. Pilate didn't see it.

 

[RDKirk]

Not really

Passion whows Christ Jesus as man who is suffering but it does not show him as God who died for sins of whole world and redeemed humanity .

"The Passion of the Christ" in Catholic doctrine defines a specific period from Jesus' entrance into Jerusalem to His crucifixion. The movie took it just a bit farther, but that was the only period it was intended to cover, as designated by the name of the movie.

 

[Heart2Soul]

In my humble opinion it does portray the vile contempt of hatred of one human upon another. Even in modern times we learn of such horrific acts of violence upon human life. If we see it on those who are not The Christ how much more would He have had to suffer in order to take the sins of the world upon Him. I do not believe it portrays even half of what He suffered for our sakes.

 

[miamited]

I was questioning the details of Gibson's portrayal not the passion itself. I have read that some took as long as a week to die on the cross but, as you mentioned, the death of Jesus took a surprisingly short time. This suggests to me that he was severely debilitated by either savage treatment or a long incarceration or both.

Hi jack,

I'm fine with that. One should never shy away from asking questions, the problem generally arises when one has to determine who they will believe from differing accounts. I agree that he was severely beaten, which left him in a terribly debilitating state. We know that he didn't suffer any incarceration to speak of. Pilate saw him fairly early in the day and by that afternoon he was dead on the cross. I believe the Scriptures paint us a picture that he was likely arrested very, very early in the morning or even late the evening before.

In Matthews account Jesus sits with his disciples at the place they had arranged to share the passover. Immediately after this, they left to go out to Gethsemane where he asked his disciples to pray with him but they kept falling asleep. A good indication that it was very, very late at night by now. Possibly into the next day. Then Judas comes and betrays him and he is arrested and taken away. As I have said, this would likely leave us in the very, very early morning of the day before the sun came up. He is first taken immediately before the Sanhedrin where a very short discussion was held as to the disposition of Jesus.

Peter's denial seems to have been concurrent with Jesus' appearance before the Sanhedrin. While the Sanhedrin were trying to decide what to do with him, Peter was in the courtyard denying the Lord. Then Jesus is bound and led to Pilate. Pilate has a few words with him and then wrings his hands for a bit trying to figure out what to do because his wife has just told him not to do anything to this 'innocent' man. That she has had a dream about him. So Pilate hits upon the plan to offer Barabbas or Jesus to be freed by the customary law. He expects all the people to ask for Barabbas death because he's a murderer. But, that isn't how it happened.

Now we are sometime in the mid morning and the guards take Jesus away and begin their mocking and the making of the crown of thorns that they push down on his head. Mocking him as to this claim that has come up that he is the king of the Jews. Then we are told that he was led away to be crucified. There honestly isn't any indication that there was a 'next day' or the 'following day' in any of this. It all seems to have happened pretty much bang bang done.

So, I say all this to say that really the only thing that could have led to his being debilitated was the flogging, as far as the Scriptures seem to portray. Then we get into the discussion of what day all this did happen? John is the only one who mentions that the Sabbath that everyone was worried about was a 'special' Sabbath. So, by his presenting it this way, it's very likely that this Sabbath for which they wanted the bodies taken down, wasn't the regular Friday evening to Saturday mid day Sabbath. We do know that the women didn't visit the tomb until the first day of the week. Having been precluded from preparing the spices for his body because of the Sabbath. It's possible that this particular week had two Sabbaths back to back. One for the feast of unleavened bread, which did require a Sabbath at the beginning and then again at the end of it. The other the regular weekly Sabbath.

So, it's possible that Jesus was crucified on Thursday and not Friday. This would allow us to more cleanly fit in that he was in the earth for three days and three nights. Quite frankly, though many have tried, it really is impossible to get three nights into a Friday crucifixion scenario. In Matthew chapter 12, Jesus pretty clearly says that as Jonah was in the fish for three days and three nights, so would he be in the earth for three days and three nights. A Friday crucifixion pretty much destroys that testimony.

God bless you,
In Christ, ted

 

[Marvin Knox]

Hey guys, I looked at this movie for the first time over the w/e and it simply horrified me. Just checking to see if Mel Gibson used accurate info from the bible for everything in there?

There was nothing overtly wrong in the depiction - even though it is not complete accurate as I understand things.

But you need to be aware that Gibson belongs to a very stringent branch of Roman Catholicism (even "cultish" by many Catholic standards) and a few of the things we see are based on his bias in that regard.

For instance the events follow the station of the crucifixion as strict Catholics celebrate them. Bu,t if you notice, there is some rather overt attention Mary and her supposed role in the work of Christ at Calvary.

For instance her getting His blood on her etc. lays the groundwork for the teaching of Mary as supposed "co-redemptrix" etc.

It's good to be moved in a general sort of way by the travails of Christ on our behalf. Most Protestants have been moved and brought to a deeply worshipful position by the scenes in the movie.

But you should be aware that there are more than a few of what we would call "cultist elements in the movie.

In addition, IMO, Christ likely suffered spiritually in ways we cannot possibly imagine in the transaction which took place between the Father and the Son on our behalf.

But that doctrine goes beyond the intent of you OP question as I understand it.

 

[Yeshua HaDerekh]

Also that led me to thinking that the Jewish sages were blamed for the crucifixion and rightly so but since it was the Romans who done it, why would they be exempt from blame and why would Rome in particular be the center of Christianity?

Who says Rome is the center? The Pope? LOL

 

[Yeshua HaDerekh]

The Romans were just pawns in the hands of the Pharisees - The movie IMHO was true to scripture.

The Priests were appointed BY Rome at that time. Why do you think the Essenes went into the desert? They despised what the Temple priesthood had become...

 

[Yeshua HaDerekh]

Then we get into the discussion of what day all this did happen? John is the only one who mentions that the Sabbath that everyone was worried about was a 'special' Sabbath. So, by his presenting it this way, it's very likely that this Sabbath for which they wanted the bodies taken down, wasn't the regular Friday evening to Saturday mid day Sabbath. We do know that the women didn't visit the tomb until the first day of the week. Having been precluded from preparing the spices for his body because of the Sabbath. It's possible that this particular week had two Sabbaths back to back. One for the feast of unleavened bread, which did require a Sabbath at the beginning and then again at the end of it. The other the regular weekly Sabbath.

So, it's possible that Jesus was crucified on Thursday and not Friday.
God bless you,
In Christ, ted

...that was because the 15th Passover/unleavened occurred on the Sabbath day (Saturday)...for that Sabbath day was also a "high" day. So not only was it the Sabbath day but also the 1st day of unleavened. They had to get the bodies off the cross before sundown on Friday the 14th (the day of preparation). We also know that He died on Friday because the 2 witnesses on the road to Emmaus said so.

 

[SolomonVII]

It was a very powerful movie. I think that we need to remember that we are watching it as Christians, and identifying with Christ. It is because people began to do that, that humanism was instilled in us. Before humanism, people more identified with the aggressor.

It is a movie of course, and every movie is an artistic recreation of real life. This does not pretend to be a Blair Witch project, with the camera running on and capturing the actual scene. It is inspired by people who themselves were inspired by the Bible.

The Bible is a very violent story too, even without the use of a whole lot of adjective to describe what was as brutal a death as any death could be.

It should be remembered though that in Roman times, this was all part of the bread and circuses too. It was for entertainment purposes, and for the purposes of terrorizing anyone who dared opposed the powers the be too. The violence was planned to maximize the dramatic effect of the gore and the horror.

People enjoyed the violence and the spectacle, and screamed for the blood. I imagine it would have to have been even more powerful in real life than the digital versions of violence that people entertain themselves with these days.

This is what a crucifixion was like. The only thing more real than this movie would be to have actually been there