The book that the "Passion" was based on

[simchat_torah]

I'll say this, though: I don't think for one minute that any Jew will be receptive to Yeshua because of this movie... unless he/she was already inclined toward Yeshua, and the Ruach was already working to call him/her before the movie.

I think I'd have to whole heartedly agree with you ma lady.

 

[Higher Truth]

Written by a former Catholic priest:

http://www.bereanbeacon.org/articles/mel_gibsons_vivid_deception.htm

If you go to the main page you can see pictures of him.

 

[simchat_torah]

I have.

 

[Higher Truth]

Pray4:

So lemme get this straight, HT. Are you saying that this movie in no way Glorifies G-d?


HT:

It is irrelevent whether God gets glorified as a by product of lies mixed with some truth. His Truth mixed with untruth and idol worship is an adulteration, and His Word forbids it. God can use whatever He wants when He wants to do His will and show His Glory. It does not make it righteous.

 

[ShirChadash]

Not I, at this point. Nor am I "for" or "against it, either.

 

[simchat_torah]

I want to debate someone who is against the movie, since I am in full support of the movie.

I'm not entirely sure if I want to debate as I'm not against the movie... nor am I for it.

I agree with HT (surprise!) that a good portion of the movie is adapted to extra-biblical accounts from Ann Catherine Emmerich. However, I don't think this makes the movie necessarily evil. I do see hints of antisemetism, but at the same time, I also see a lot of Judaic support.

I found it rather interesting the way that HaSatan was portrayed, but yet the movie as a whole wasn't as moving for me personally as many proclaim it to be. On the surface, as a movie, it isn't as emotional as it could be. People were only wrapped up into the emotional level because it meant something to them personally, it wasn't a response brought about by the actors or director. What I mean is that people were only crying because "jesus" was being whipped, not because the actor was able to garner your emotional response in such a powerful way that you shed a tear. It was more of an emotional attachment to the figure in the movie, not the quality of acting portrayed on the screen.

Don't get me wrong, its definatley NOT a bad movie by any means. I just didn't see it as that powerful as a film (soley as a film). However, it is great to see someone with the courage to do such a film.

Again, I'm not really interested in debating either side, I am more 'middle of the road' on this film. I truly enjoy most of Gibson's work, and I respect him for taking such a bold stance. The movie also varies from the gospel texts on a number of accounts, but it took a lot of guts for him to even make a movie portraying the death of the messiah as its sole theme.

Shalom,
yafet

 

[Higher Truth]

Pray4:

So then answer the question please. Are you saying that this movie in no way Glorifies G-d?

HT:

Jim Jones, David Koresh, Jim and Tammy Faye Bakker, and a host of others at one time had the appearence of glorifying God. Would that make you want to run out and get their materials to study? When satan quoted scripture was his intent to glorify God? It is all about perspective. The enemy never throws a hook out there without a little tasty bait on it. Prove that this movie is of God according to scripture. My opinion really doesn't matter in the final chapter as we all stand alone before The High Righteous Judge .

 

[simchat_torah]

HT, you always amaze me.

How about you shock us all and answer a direct question for once?

 

[Hix]

My fiance says that whilst there were a few "hollywood" additions, for the most part it stuck well to the Bible. That cant be bad, right?

 

[Higher Truth]

Parts of the movie may glorify God, but it teaches another Gospel because of its error. God is not in the fruit mixing business. If they had not said that it was scripturally accurate, it probably wouldn't matter so much.

Another interesting read:

http://www.nationalreview.com/frum/diary022904.asp

 

[Higher Truth]

Simchat:

I agree with HT (surprise!) that a good portion of the movie is adapted to extra-biblical accounts from Ann Catherine Emmerich.

HT:

We must truly be near the end of the world.

 

[ubermandy]

It seems to me, that G-d is not willing that any should perish. I wonder if he is truly concerned by the means in which a person is moved to find the truth.
There are people who have read books written by atheist who espouse their reasons for not believing in G-d, and came away more convinced that he does exist.

These times are confusing, indeed. There are many denominations, many theological beliefs, many opinions, but one G-d, one Yeshua, one truth. The search for THE truth, can only be guided by the Spirit. I for one, cannot figure it all out alone.

May the Spirit guide us all on our journey,
Mandy

 

[simchat_torah]

We must truly be near the end of the world.

lol.. must be...

 

[simchat_torah]

HT,

Let me just shed some perspective on this...

So, you require that one must have 100% perfect doctrine/theology/ideology?
Would that not cancel out 99.9999% of christians?

Seems to me like when we have discussed the paganism that christianity is involved in before you ran to their rescue in order to defend them. But now, when an example is exhibited, that goes against your tastes (catholic) you want to cast it off as evil?

Isn't this a conflict? Isn't this a double standard?

I mean, the gospel portrayed in Gibson's film is that Y'shua (ha! he even got the name right!) died for sin, is here to forgive us, etc etc etc...

Yet, because of a few intricacies you want to cast off the film as an evil one.

Granted, I agree with you, there are some flaws. However, I see a double standard you have set yourself into.

 

[his excellence]

The Way I see it is this......... Mel Gibson made a film that he prays touches many lives, there is a reason for the timing of this film, and Gibson's extreme leap of faith knowing it could end his career. If this film brings salvation to even one person it is all worth it.

 

[blessed2]

Because parts of the movie that were scripturally incorrect, were based on visions of those that he prays to. It is nice that Mel has Jesus AND Mary AND the saints in his heart, but scripture clearly forbids this.God is a jealous God, as it is written.

I'm not Catholic for one. I agree on the point the parts of the movie etc, I'm just stating that his prayers are between G-d and him and the consequinces are his as well. I'll neither be saved nor doomed by the prayers of Mel Gibson.

Even better, maybe we can just get a one world religion where everyone can have what they want. A little compromise never hurt anyone...did it? Better ask Eve.......

That was an offensive statement. If I'm correct, the bible clearly demands that we love one another.....not to judge each other, that's His job. Not one of the attributes that I listed was against scripture.
I may not agree with Mel on all points but it shouldn't deminish my responsibility to love him, understand that his beliefs may not be my own and i can still greet him with acceptance and pray for his enlightenment.
Regardless of his short comings, Chr-st died for him too and desires him in the household of G-d and G-d reaches people through love not accussation and strife.
I feel that you misunderstand my point on that statement and assume it's partially my fault as it is difficult for me to express my thoughts in writting.

I love everyone as well, but I love The Almighty more, so if there is apparent error, I must discuss it as commanded by Him.

Love you too and do not begrudge in the least the discussion....only trying to inject that we not let points of disagreement over a movie cause us to stumble.

 

[blessed2]

I'll say this, though: I don't think for one minute that any Jew will be receptive to Yeshua because of this movie..

May I inject without offense...
The movie is by chr-stian for christians. I don't think intended to convert anyone.

It is irrelevent whether God gets glorified as a by product of lies mixed with some truth. His Truth mixed with untruth and idol worship is an adulteration, and His Word forbids it. God can use whatever He wants when He wants to do His will and show His Glory. It does not make it righteous.

What satan means for harm, God can turn to good. It may not make the thing in and of itself, good, but can still be recieved to glorify.

I've seen it......I have not ever been anti-semitic. I feel the anti-semitic attitudes are contrary to the word of G-d and thus is impossible to be a true Chr-stian if you do.
The only thing that was important to me was the realization of what He suffered FOR and BECAUSE of me. What great love is this? ....and I had become complacent? or had taken that for granted in some ways.
Nothing more.


I'm reading a great deal about the "unscriptural content".
I think it would open up a finer discussion and more effective if we could discuss
the spacific "unscriptural content" in question.

Too, I was more offended by Mel's statement that although his wife loved the L-rd, followed H-s teachings and lived H-s way and prayed etc. that she would not go the heaven because she wasn't Catholic.

 

[Higher Truth]

Simchat:

Let me just shed some perspective on this...

So, you require that one must have 100% perfect doctrine/theology/ideology?
Would that not cancel out 99.9999% of christians?


HT:

The people promoting this movie that claim it to be "The way it was", "true to Scripture" and "historically correct", while it is none of the above. Throw in the Catholic mysticism and what do you have? I read this quote today and thought it was interesting:


"Wastewater is 99.99% pure, but I sure wouldn't recommend anyone drink of it. The "Passion" movie is far more than .01% Roman Catholic, and I sure can't recommend anyone drink of this contamination."



Simchat:

Seems to me like when we have discussed the paganism that christianity is involved in before you ran to their rescue in order to defend them. But now, when an example is exhibited, that goes against your tastes (catholic) you want to cast it off as evil?

Isn't this a conflict? Isn't this a double standard?

HT:

Produce one thread where I have done this.


Simchat:


I mean, the gospel portrayed in Gibson's film is that Y'shua (ha! he even got the name right!) died for sin, is here to forgive us, etc etc etc...

Yet, because of a few intricacies you want to cast off the film as an evil one.

Granted, I agree with you, there are some flaws. However, I see a double standard you have set yourself into.


HT:

I do not care if it is Evangelical Christian, Catholic, Jewish, Messianic Jewish, Roots, etc. If it is error, I will discuss it. I have been equal across the board, as you are aware every time the kabbalah issue comes up. Would you like me to list all of the errors in this movie. [may take me a week]

 

[his excellence]

What would God say about us cutting down the efforts of our brothers and sisters??

 

[Higher Truth]

Sorry to inform you all, but according to Mr Gibson, nobody on this forum is saved, unless you are a Catholic:

[7] On being asked by Peter Boyer, interviewing him for a New Yorker article, whether being a Protestant disqualified him [Boyer] from salvation, Gibson responded simply: "there is no salvation outside the Church." He then went on to talk about his non-Catholic wife. "My wife is a saint. She's a much better person than I am. She's Episcopalian, Church of England. She prays, she believes in God, she knows Jesus, she believes in that stuff. And it's just not fair if she doesn't make it, she's better than I am. But that [outside the Church there is no salvation] is a pronouncement from the Chair. I go with it."7 Things could not be more clearly articulated - both Gibson's going with the Chair and his innate discomfort with the Chair's teaching, maybe even with God, if his wife is not saved.


9 Traditionalist Catholics believe only Catholics go to heaven (without every considering where that leaves Jesus the Jew); the contemporary Catholic Church believes, on the basis of what it considers the revelation of God, that God saves whom God saves. It is here that the core of the opposition to Gibson's film is founded.

http://www.unomaha.edu/~wwwjrf/2004Symposium/Lawler.htmium/Lawler.htm