From
http://christiananswers.net/spotlight/movies/2004/thepassionofthechrist.html is this information unedited there is more information on their site
Biblical details include, but are not limited to:
Peter?s denial of Jesus (I said there was no profanity in the film, but in one denial Peter says ?damn you,? which faithfully reflects the account in Matthew 26:74).
The Sanhedrin (the council of Jewish chief priests and elders) being called into an illegal session in order to condemn Jesus (but we see that some members were not invited; and some who WERE invited object to the proceedings, and then leave in protest or are kicked out).
The false witnesses who misunderstood Jesus? prophecy of His own death (John 2:19-22), and THOUGHT He?d said that He would destroy the Temple and build it again in three days.
Caiaphas (the High Priest) tearing his garments, and the Sanhedrin condemning Jesus for blasphemy, because He admitted that He was the Messiah (the ?anointed one,? the prophesied King who would inherit the Throne of David). [?Christ? is the Greek translation of the Hebrew word ?Messiah.?] This claim WOULD be blasphemy if it were not true. But in Jesus? case, it WAS true.
The priests taking Jesus to Pontius Pilate, the Roman governor (because as a subjugated people, the Jews had no authority to carry out death sentences), and slyly translating ?blasphemy? into something the governor would care about, namely ?sedition,? by claiming that since Jesus was perceived as a King, He was a threat to Roman rule.
Judas repenting when it?s too late, claiming that he?s betrayed innocent blood, throwing the money back at the priests, and hanging himself. [There?s a lot of extra-Biblical creative license in the Judas sequences; for instance, Judas is confronted and tormented by children who turn out to be demons.]
Pilate being warned by his wife not to get involved in condemning Jesus, because she in turn was warned in a dream. Pilate repeatedly acquitting Jesus, then passing Him off to Herod Antipas because Jesus was a Galilean and belonged to Herod?s jurisdiction. Herod (who is shown as a degenerate sicko) passing Him back to Pilate. [By the way, although the Herod family were rulers of the Jews, they themselves were Idumeans (Edomites).] Pilate attempting to satisfy the bloodthirsty crowd by just ?chastising? Jesus.
The Roman scourging (including the use of a cat-of-nine-tails, which is not a Biblical certainty but a good educated guess). The Crown of Thorns, the mocking, the spitting. The crowd choosing the murderer Barabbas rather than Jesus in the Passover prisoner-release. Pilate finally giving up, literally ?washing his hands? of the matter, and assenting to the crowd?s chant of ?crucify him.? Pilate says that he?s innocent of the blood of this man (he isn?t, of course). [In an early cut of the film, Caiaphas responds with ?His blood be on us, and on our children,? which is taken from Matthew 27:25. The inclusion of those ?blood curse? words drew strong objections from some Jewish leaders, and the nature of the final cut was in doubt. In the theatrical version, an unidentified person (not shown on screen) responds to Pilate, but the dialogue isn?t subtitled, so only someone who knows the language can tell us whether the response was the ?blood curse? or not.]
Simon of Cyrene being forced to help Jesus carry the cross. The nailing. The two thieves crucified along with Jesus, one angry and defiant, and the other expressing faith. Several of Jesus? words on the Cross. The darkening of the sky. The earthquake, and the veil (curtain) in the Temple being torn in two (Matthew 27:51). [The veil in the Temple separated the Holy Place from the Most Holy Place, where at one time the Ark of the Covenant was kept. The symbolism of the veil, and of many other things in Temple worship, was the separation between God and sinful man.
Hebrews 10:1-22 makes the point that Jesus? flesh was ALSO a veil between God and man (paralleling it with the Temple veil), and that when Jesus? flesh was torn (which occurred at the same time the Temple veil was torn), the blood sacrifice of Jesus opened up a way for man to have direct fellowship with God. The animal sacrifices of the Law of Moses, which were inadequate to solve the problem of sin, foreshadowed and were replaced by the all-sufficient sacrifice of Jesus, which forever takes care of the sin problem in anyone to whom it?s appropriated by faith.]
Jesus? teachings (most seen in flashback), including those about forgiveness and loving your enemies, and about how no one takes His life from Him, but He?s voluntarily laying it down, how He has power not only to lay it down but to take it up again.
The Resurrection. It?s EXTREMELY brief, but it?s there. And it even includes the detail of Jesus having ?dematerilized? out of the constricting graveclothes and then ?rematerialized,? which seems to be the point of the description of the graveclothes in John 20:3-8.
What we have here is a film taking the position that Jesus WAS exactly Who He said He was. Before considering any negatives, we need to step back a moment and appreciate how rare that is!
