S
ShaolinWolf
Guest
Ok, I think I'm keeping my mouth shut on all this, because I'm already in trouble with plenty of people on this site...lol...I've ticked off plenty of you...heheheh
The Passion of The Christ
- Thread starter hardheadjarhead
- Start date
I am not mad nor ticked off. Yet, I might think bad of you if your laughter is because you intentionally was trying to piss people off.ShaolinWolf said:
loki09789
Senior Master
The fact that Islam, Christianity and Judaism are dead on is in fact true in a theological sense, not necessarily a 'political' sense.
All three faiths share the old testament as the foundation for religious texts. This is commonly called the Pentuigent (sp?) or the first five books of the old testament. Jews call this the Torah, Islamics call it Koran, and Christians call it the Old ... well you know that already.
Politically, each of these faiths have picked and chosen, interpreted and justified behaviors for earthly and political reasons.
This was one of Jesus's criticisms of the old Jewish institution (please take the time to look at the current views and practices and you will find a practice and ideology similiar to most current faiths).
His point about his movement being like a mustard plant wasn't a message of flourishing and growth, but a message of being a stubborn pain in the 'garden of the Jewish faith'. Mustard plants are tough, weed like plants that are near impossible to get rid of when you try and grow something else there. It is not a beautiful, flowering or nourishing plant, it is a weed that is bitter to taste and tenacious.
Please remember that Jesus was as much a political radical as he was a religious radical of his day because church WAS state.
Christian, Jew, Islamic all promote the personal choice/free will aspect of the faith. Since this is one of the key components, individual followers of each of these faiths are imperfect - including me - it in not my place to tell others that they are wrong if they don't agree. It is my place to be an example of why I think I am on the right track. Do not judge, lest you be judged... sound familiar?
Paul M.
All three faiths share the old testament as the foundation for religious texts. This is commonly called the Pentuigent (sp?) or the first five books of the old testament. Jews call this the Torah, Islamics call it Koran, and Christians call it the Old ... well you know that already.
Politically, each of these faiths have picked and chosen, interpreted and justified behaviors for earthly and political reasons.
This was one of Jesus's criticisms of the old Jewish institution (please take the time to look at the current views and practices and you will find a practice and ideology similiar to most current faiths).
His point about his movement being like a mustard plant wasn't a message of flourishing and growth, but a message of being a stubborn pain in the 'garden of the Jewish faith'. Mustard plants are tough, weed like plants that are near impossible to get rid of when you try and grow something else there. It is not a beautiful, flowering or nourishing plant, it is a weed that is bitter to taste and tenacious.
Please remember that Jesus was as much a political radical as he was a religious radical of his day because church WAS state.
Christian, Jew, Islamic all promote the personal choice/free will aspect of the faith. Since this is one of the key components, individual followers of each of these faiths are imperfect - including me - it in not my place to tell others that they are wrong if they don't agree. It is my place to be an example of why I think I am on the right track. Do not judge, lest you be judged... sound familiar?
Paul M.
S
ShaolinWolf
Guest
no, my intentions were not to tick anybody off...and I'm not happy that I did Rick...ok?!
Wolf,ShaolinWolf said:
All is well. If not I would not have asked.
You see I have to accept what you say, until you either prove it otherwise or show me otherwise.
Peace
PS: It is Rich,
S
ShaolinWolf
Guest
The rick thing was a typo, sorry...
No Big Deal, I did not take offense hence theShaolinWolf said:
in the PS.
psi_radar
Black Belt
ShaolinWolf said:
No one expects the Spanish Inquisition!
or the Children's Crusade
or the Crusades...
Most religions have bones in their closets, so it's best leaving the doors closed.
Your faithful agnostic,
Pete
I walked out of the theater last night and noted that everyone was silent. None of the usual banter about this scene or that one or how good/bad the movie was. The people I was surrounded with were all silent as if they witnessed an actual execution. This is the profound effect this movie has had on audiences in Provo Utah (aka Mormon Central).
For me, watching this movie was basically unnecessary because I already know how brutal Christ's "Passion" was, I know how he died and I find that not as important as to WHY he died. The atonement for our sins.
Critically speaking of the film: It was very well made. Very brutal and realistic (but that is Gibson's style). Good moments with the flashbacks and revealing the inner-struggles of Judas Iscariot and Pontius Pilate as well as his wife Claudia. There were some errors that by my (personal) studies that were "forgivable". The trial scene with the Sanhedrin was inaccurate as the trial was reportedly done in private and in the middle of the night. Also Jesus had a huge arresting party. Caiaphas had enlisted the help of Pilate who had sent a small contengent of soldiers (approx. 50) to arrest a "dangerous rebel". Jesus was then taken to the house of Annas (Caiaphas' father in law) and held there (illegally) until members of the Sanhedrin were summoned from their beds.
My source of this and other information comes from many, many books dealing with the "Passion Of The Christ" over the years. One of my favorites is "The Christ Commission" written by Og Mandino (author of The Greatest Salesman in the World). I highly recommend it.
I found the information in it to be very revealing and furthers (my) understanding of the horrible miscarriage of justice that Jesus had to endure along with his physical suffering.
For example: (keep in mind that these were laws at the time of Jesus)
1. The arrest was illegal according to Jewish laws. No formal charges were ever brought before the Sanhedrin for the issuance of a warrant, so the arrest took place without one.
2. When he was arrested he was not informed of his crime.
3. The arrest took place at night.
4. It involved the treachery of another.
5. He was tried at night and according to the Mishnah it is written that a capital offense may be tried during the day but must be suspended at night.
6. No case involving a man's life can be tried on the day before the Sabbath, but Jesus was tried in the early hours of the day before the Sabbath.
7. It is forbidden a relation or a friend or an enemy of the accused to sit in judgment of a prisoner and yet many of those present at the trial had plotted for weeks to destroy Jesus.
8. At the mouth of two witnesses or three, shall he that is worthy of death be put to death. But they had been unable to find two witnesses to agree on anything and since the power of accusation is vested solely in witnesses they had NO case at all.
9. No one can bring an accusation against himself, according to Jewish law but if they do, it still cannot be used against him unless it is properly attested by two witnesses.
10. It is forbidden to put a question to a prisoner that would condemn him if he answered.
11. When Caiaphas asked the Sanhedrin for a verdict after Jesus responded they all cried "For Death!" A majority of one vote is required for acquittal, two for conviction, but the Mishnah also states that a unanimous verdict of guilty has the effect of an acquittal and a sentence of death forbidden.
12. Jesus was tried and convicted in one sitting of the Sanhedrin. The Mishnah says that a criminal case resulting in the acquittal of the accused may end on the day it begins, but if the sentence is death the trial cannot be concluded before the following day so that a full review of the evidence may be made.
13. After Jesus was found guilty, Caiaphas neglected to impose formal sentence on him.
All of these and more made the crucifixion of Jesus of Nazereth a gross miscarriage of justice in every sense of the phrase.
He was oppressed and he was afflicted yet he opened not his mouth. <paraphrased> from the Bible.
:asian:
For me, watching this movie was basically unnecessary because I already know how brutal Christ's "Passion" was, I know how he died and I find that not as important as to WHY he died. The atonement for our sins.
Critically speaking of the film: It was very well made. Very brutal and realistic (but that is Gibson's style). Good moments with the flashbacks and revealing the inner-struggles of Judas Iscariot and Pontius Pilate as well as his wife Claudia. There were some errors that by my (personal) studies that were "forgivable". The trial scene with the Sanhedrin was inaccurate as the trial was reportedly done in private and in the middle of the night. Also Jesus had a huge arresting party. Caiaphas had enlisted the help of Pilate who had sent a small contengent of soldiers (approx. 50) to arrest a "dangerous rebel". Jesus was then taken to the house of Annas (Caiaphas' father in law) and held there (illegally) until members of the Sanhedrin were summoned from their beds.
My source of this and other information comes from many, many books dealing with the "Passion Of The Christ" over the years. One of my favorites is "The Christ Commission" written by Og Mandino (author of The Greatest Salesman in the World). I highly recommend it.
I found the information in it to be very revealing and furthers (my) understanding of the horrible miscarriage of justice that Jesus had to endure along with his physical suffering.
For example: (keep in mind that these were laws at the time of Jesus)
1. The arrest was illegal according to Jewish laws. No formal charges were ever brought before the Sanhedrin for the issuance of a warrant, so the arrest took place without one.
2. When he was arrested he was not informed of his crime.
3. The arrest took place at night.
4. It involved the treachery of another.
5. He was tried at night and according to the Mishnah it is written that a capital offense may be tried during the day but must be suspended at night.
6. No case involving a man's life can be tried on the day before the Sabbath, but Jesus was tried in the early hours of the day before the Sabbath.
7. It is forbidden a relation or a friend or an enemy of the accused to sit in judgment of a prisoner and yet many of those present at the trial had plotted for weeks to destroy Jesus.
8. At the mouth of two witnesses or three, shall he that is worthy of death be put to death. But they had been unable to find two witnesses to agree on anything and since the power of accusation is vested solely in witnesses they had NO case at all.
9. No one can bring an accusation against himself, according to Jewish law but if they do, it still cannot be used against him unless it is properly attested by two witnesses.
10. It is forbidden to put a question to a prisoner that would condemn him if he answered.
11. When Caiaphas asked the Sanhedrin for a verdict after Jesus responded they all cried "For Death!" A majority of one vote is required for acquittal, two for conviction, but the Mishnah also states that a unanimous verdict of guilty has the effect of an acquittal and a sentence of death forbidden.
12. Jesus was tried and convicted in one sitting of the Sanhedrin. The Mishnah says that a criminal case resulting in the acquittal of the accused may end on the day it begins, but if the sentence is death the trial cannot be concluded before the following day so that a full review of the evidence may be made.
13. After Jesus was found guilty, Caiaphas neglected to impose formal sentence on him.
All of these and more made the crucifixion of Jesus of Nazereth a gross miscarriage of justice in every sense of the phrase.
He was oppressed and he was afflicted yet he opened not his mouth. <paraphrased> from the Bible.
:asian:
S
ShaolinWolf
Guest
Yeah, it stinks. Jesus didn't deserve 100% it at all. And he had the power to just make them all go flying back. That's just the tip o' the iceberg. But he loved/loves us so much that he was willing to die for us. I mean, yeah I agree about it being illegal 100%. And he could have said so, even before everyone he was presented to. But he didn't say anything that would get him to be blasphemous to the people, other than what they didn't want to hear. It's amazing that words from God's mouth condemn's God to death for being blasphemous to God. That's what's so amazing. That's what they think, anyways. Kind of cancels out any need for demands of Jesus' death. And to think they missed that entirely. If they had only known the truth, even after he came back to life, I'm sure there would have been more Deaths like that of Judas Iscariot.
S
ShaolinWolf
Guest
Oh yeah, and I'm hopefully going to see it Sunday...YIPPEE!!!
One of the local theaters here had a reporter recording some of the conversations that were occuring after a screening of the Passion. There was one person who described himself only as an "unbeliever". This guy asked questions like, "Would all these people go and see a movie about the life of Muhammed?" My personal answer is absolutly yes. Especially if it turns out to be a wonderful peice of entertainment and art, not to mention the opportunity to see why he was seen as such a glorious savior for a good percentage of the world. Still it is a good question to examine. I'm going to see it tonight.
There have been stories circulating that some people have actually died in the theaters during the crucifixion scene. Do these have any merit? I have come across one on MSN. A woman in her 50s in Missourri. What do you all think this is about?
S
ShaolinWolf
Guest
Well, I don't have any plans to see a Mohammed movie...maybe a mohammed ali movie...lol...but not an islamic movie...the only reason MIGHT be for historic data, but other than that, there is no reason why I would see an islamic movie
ShaolinWolf said:
Many people would see it just for the reason you stated, percieved historical data on the life of a man that has had a tremendous impact on the world, but it would also be a good way to help understand the outlook of musilims and their roots of the religion.
loki09789
Senior Master
Oulobo,
I would be there too. This idea came up during a meeting at my church right after 9/11. The possibility of visiting an Islamic service and building a relationship to promote understanding. The goal was to break down the stereotype of the fanatical Islamic terrorist. Unfortunately the idea was not recieved well.
The one common thread that connects all cultures and faiths is hospitallity. I would be a hospitible guest and hope that they would be hospitible hosts... lead by example, do unto others and all that.
I say if you are strong and confident in yourself and faith, go for it. Jesus did not exclude 'non believers' when he asked for forgiveness on the cross, he sat with whores and money changers... he wanted to understand and be understood on a personal level. How can that be a bad thing?
Paul M
I would be there too. This idea came up during a meeting at my church right after 9/11. The possibility of visiting an Islamic service and building a relationship to promote understanding. The goal was to break down the stereotype of the fanatical Islamic terrorist. Unfortunately the idea was not recieved well.
The one common thread that connects all cultures and faiths is hospitallity. I would be a hospitible guest and hope that they would be hospitible hosts... lead by example, do unto others and all that.
I say if you are strong and confident in yourself and faith, go for it. Jesus did not exclude 'non believers' when he asked for forgiveness on the cross, he sat with whores and money changers... he wanted to understand and be understood on a personal level. How can that be a bad thing?
Paul M
S
ShaolinWolf
Guest
Ok then, I guess that's a large reason to see it, but I'd probably wait til it got to a cheap theatre or there wasn't any other good movie out at the time...it'd probably be one of those late night, almsot midnight kind of things...lol
OP
hardheadjarhead
Senior Master
- Thread Starter
- #58
Rebirth of hate feared after 'Passion' film
Jews brace for new wave of anti-Semitic sentiment
By Gwen Florio
Denver Post Staff Writer
It's been two decades since white supremacists murdered a Jewish talk-show host in his Denver driveway; a quarter-century since the Klan marched on an Orthodox synagogue here.
Nonetheless, the Ash Wednesday release of Mel Gibson's "The Passion of the Christ" makes some in the area's Jewish community wary.
Those fears were heightened Wednesday when the Lovingway United Pentacostal Church posted a billboard along South Colorado Boulevard proclaiming, "Jews killed the Lord Jesus ... Settled."
Article: http://www.denverpost.com/Stories/0,1413,36%7E24769%7E1979021,00.html
Regards,
Steve
Jews brace for new wave of anti-Semitic sentiment
By Gwen Florio
Denver Post Staff Writer
It's been two decades since white supremacists murdered a Jewish talk-show host in his Denver driveway; a quarter-century since the Klan marched on an Orthodox synagogue here.
Nonetheless, the Ash Wednesday release of Mel Gibson's "The Passion of the Christ" makes some in the area's Jewish community wary.
Those fears were heightened Wednesday when the Lovingway United Pentacostal Church posted a billboard along South Colorado Boulevard proclaiming, "Jews killed the Lord Jesus ... Settled."
Article: http://www.denverpost.com/Stories/0,1413,36%7E24769%7E1979021,00.html
Regards,
Steve
OP
hardheadjarhead
Senior Master
- Thread Starter
- #59
I read the speculation of a sceptic that suggested that the "trial" Jesus received was contrived by the authors of the Gospels...that they weren't fully aware of Jewish law and as a result wrote scenarios that wouldn't have actually taken place. He also took exception to the accounts of machinations of the Sanhedrin, Caiaphas, Pilate. Who witnessed these events to give account of them later? This was in the days before electronic survelliance....
This scepticism is supported by Pilate's behavior, which was unlike historical accounts of him...he wouldn't have "washed his hands" of Jesus' blood. He was a murderous thug who wouldn't have hesitated to crucify someone he thought seditious...AND he wouldn't have necessarily sought the counsel of the Sanhedrin.
I read in Lee Strobel's "The Case For Christ" the following by Craig Blomberg: "It's important to acknowledge that strictly speaking, the Gospels are anonymous."
We literally don't know who witnessed what, or when...and have to take it on faith that it was indeed witnessed. The accounts of Jesus' trial and execution are literally unverifiable.
Regards,
Steve
Isn't this how "The Historical Jesus" thread got locked?
:jedi1:
Time to fight....
:jedi1:
Time to fight....
