What is it with the harassment? ("Passion" movie)

  • Thread starter Thread starter Reformed_Rob
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
R

Reformed_Rob

Guest
Hey, I’ve got a question. Based on your thoughts, what’s the deal with all the hating on Mel Gibson’s “Passion” movie? Maybe not many of yall feel it, but I’ve been given things to read, heard negative statements, and listened to part of sermon/lecture from sermonaudio.com where the whole movie and concept of the movie is referred to as “a wicked thing,” “blasphemous,” “extra-Biblical,” etc. Mel Gibson is compared to Ahab, one of the wicked kings!!

Anyways, Here’s a few reasons that come up over and over:
  1. Image of Christ / God
  • That’s a reasonable objection, until perhaps you think about it for a few minutes.
  1. Roman Catholic “agenda” is pushed, supposedly
  • I’m glad that some people see that as a potential problem, maybe we all need a little less warm fuzzies.
  1. Well, I’m tired of typing about this. Some people just don’t like anything Roman Catholic, and they believe that the Passion movie was at root an evil movie that made religion bow in comprimise to the world and secular media… Anyways,
Your thoughts?? I’m glad I saw and now have the movie. It’s a great “hit you and wake you up” movie.
 
The Passion is an awesome movie that shows the true pain and suffering that Jesus went through for us. Too many people forget about that and are stuck on the “warm and fuzzy” side of religion. This movie is great to help people stuck in that mindset realise how much Jesus suffered for them. In fact, my cousin, after watching the movie, commented, “I can’t beleive how much Jesus suffered!”

I think that was the point of the film. To remind everyone that Jesus isn’t just a smiling figure in Heaven, but that He came down from Heaven and went through so much pain and suffering, even unto death on cross, for US .
 
I think two things have got some people who think the way you cited all worked up:

Firstly, a Catholic made a film that knocked everyone’s socks off about a subject they thought all their own. No other “Christian” film portraying Jesus came close to the intensity and reality of Gibson’s film nor stirred so much feeling and conversions. So, chalk some of it up to plain old anti-Catholic sentiment and jealousy.

And secondly, the story was told from the Virgin Mother’s point of view, not an Evangelical’s point of view. There are many who barely acknowledge that Mary bore Jesus in her womb let alone had anything more to do with his life and ministry. Having Mary so prominently a part of the story and so sympathetic a character shocked a good many of these folks. It scared them into thinking the impossible–that Mary truly was an integral part of Jesus’ sacrifice, and worse, that she still is!
 
40.png
Della:
And secondly, the story was told from the Virgin Mother’s point of view, not an Evangelical’s point of view.
Click to expand...
Yeah, right said… I didn’t catch that so much the first time, and only a little more the 2nd time.

Also, I understand that the film follows the Stations of the Cross once Christ is condemned. I’m new to this, so give me some time before I see that.

But yeah, about Mary, that’s unique. Having a little Marian understanding and such, should really richen my next watching of the movie. Never thought I’d say that!!
 
Well, a man, and yes he is Catholic, attempted to express what he actually had come to terms with in his own life and wished to share. He believed in the message deeply, and wanted it to be his own love letter to the lord of his understanding of this event. The fact that the message was delivered with such intensity, is a mark of this mans work. He has changed over the years, and believed if he was going to do it, he wanted to express it less in words (as they are more debateable) and more in actions, expressions, and feelings. He wanted us to take with us, a very close visual into the accurately painful last hours of Jesus Christ. Especially the devotion to following through with such incredible passion. I will not be the same because of this movie.

My son and i had planned to see it, he was terminally ill, and suffering (and latter died from) strep throat. He accomplished so much in his near 19 years with me. I could do nothing, simply support his wishes for doing it the way God wanted of him, and not fall to pity and extend his life and be without God. He died on Jan 9th, 2004. The movie was out on the March Break of the same year. I was so very lost! With so many questions, mostly how can this loss be so, and what was my purpose anymore. I could not focus on my role as a mother anymore. I was sure that he was where he should be, i trusted God to take my baby home, I knew he was out of pain, and free to “run” now. I felt i had faith, but slowly i was loosing faith in myself.

When i watched the movie, please remember that in no way am I thinking my son or myself to to be equal to their station, but i was able to see through their eyes. I could relate to the suffering of a son so quietly done…all for the Glory of God. I was beyond tears identifying with Mother Mary clasping her mouth from crying out her pain while watching her son be beaten and in so much pain, and then to die. She could not help him, just let him know she was there and believed in him.

It was all i could do as well. I left the theatre knowing, that not only God, but Mother Mary was someone who understood my pain more than i could have hoped. In it, i gained new access to my prayers. I had something to share with them!

God Bless the transformations Mel Gibson has made possible for so many. It was not a denomination he was promoting, it was the passion!

Allana
 
Rammy, that was beautifully said.
I have another friend who lost her son three years ago and she too said that now she could identify even more with the Blessed Mother, such pain and suffering that is beyond words.

and for you reformed Rob, it sounds like the “usual suspects” complaining about something that they know not of.(Father forgive them, for they know not what they do.)
If they haven’t gone to see it, they ought to.
The Passion of Christ movie reminds me of the song, “How Great Thou Art.”…especially this part…"and when I think, that God, His Son not sparing, sent Him to die, I scarce can take it in, that on that Cross, he bled and died for me, then sings my soul, my Savior, God to Thee, How great Thou art, how great Thou art…
I think Mel Gibson is a very nice and good man to have given us this movie and I thank God for his talent. (Mel surely realized that his talent came from God and he wanted to return it to HIM.) That’s what I think.
 
right back at ya alhers…i too believe he was simply trying to give something back. In his heart of hearts, he believed so strongly in the message, that he wanted to share it. So in Mel Gibson style, he made it as real as the moment depicts. I for one was glad of the Acting…you HAD to feel the movie move you.
 
Well, if this thread gets lost under newer threads, that’s ok, I’ve been encouraged by the stories of the positive impacts that the new movie portraying Christ’s last hours has had on some people. And from the Mary perspective.
 
Reformed Rob:
Hey, I’ve got a question. Based on your thoughts, what’s the deal with all the hating on Mel Gibson’s “Passion” movie? Maybe not many of yall feel it, but I’ve been given things to read, heard negative statements, and listened to part of sermon/lecture from sermonaudio.com where the whole movie and concept of the movie is referred to as “a wicked thing,” “blasphemous,” “extra-Biblical,” etc. Mel Gibson is compared to Ahab, one of the wicked kings!!

Anyways, Here’s a few reasons that come up over and over:
  1. Image of Christ / God
  • That’s a reasonable objection, until perhaps you think about it for a few minutes.
  1. Roman Catholic “agenda” is pushed, supposedly
  • I’m glad that some people see that as a potential problem, maybe we all need a little less warm fuzzies.
  1. Well, I’m tired of typing about this. Some people just don’t like anything Roman Catholic, and they believe that the Passion movie was at root an evil movie that made religion bow in comprimise to the world and secular media… Anyways,
Your thoughts?? I’m glad I saw and now have the movie. It’s a great “hit you and wake you up” movie.
Click to expand...
Jesus said that sinful man hates the light and loves darkness - because darkness hids his sin. (not an exact quote) I think this explains why some people hate ‘the passion’.
 
Personally, I haven’t met any Protestants (and believe me, I have constant contact with anti-Catholic ones) who resent The Passion for being too Catholic. All the hatred I’ve seen of it has come from non-Christians.
 
That’s true. I once heard it said that sin loving man will believe anything you tell him, as long as it’s NOT in the bible.

I think the film presented the crucifixion in a way that both Catholics and non-Catholics can appreciate. That’s the brilliance of Mel Gibson’s work.
 
Chris LaRock:
That’s true. I once heard it said that sin loving man will believe anything you tell him, as long as it’s NOT in the bible.

I think the film presented the crucifixion in a way that both Catholics and non-Catholics can appreciate. That’s the brilliance of Mel Gibson’s work.
Click to expand...
now im not knocking the movie, but his portrayal of Jesus’ beatings and sufferings seemed to go well beyond that of what HUMANS are able to tolerate.

Jesus was human right? now ive seen plenty of people flat pass out from the pain of just a compound femur fracture. lose about 1500cc of blood or the pain causes them to go out.

what gibson portrayed seemed to defy logic as to what a human can tolerate as far as pain and blood loss go.

Navy SEALs and Us Army special forces are taught methods to help cope with pain and blood loss, but i doubt that that knowlegde was around 2000 yrs ago. and then again, it can help only so much.

after the scene of him being flogged with the metal cat-o-9-tails thing, i said to myself that i could have started 2 large bore IV’s, given dopamine infusions, and pumped Jesus full of 1:10,000 epinepherine, and theres just no way he could have stayed conscious, or even alive much longer.

anyone have an idea why Mel would go so far outside the realm of possibility when trying to pain such an accurate portrait of the passion?
 
Since there was some mention - I just wanted to comment that I saw the Passion when it first came out with an entire theater full of students staff and faculty from the Protestant college I attended at the time, and I never heard any statement about the movie being “Catholic” - I mean we all knew Mel Gibson was Catholic - but no one seemed to think that it went one way or the other. For that matter, until I began to read about Catholicism and came on this board, I didn’t realize that he had any inspiration for the movie other than the Bible! I think some might have had some issues if they had known that some of the inspiration was the vision that a Saint had, but no one seemed to know about it, and no one cared who was doing the movie, as long as they were a Christian.

But then as I’ve said before - I have been very lucky never to be in a group of Evangelical Protestants who were Anti-Catholic
 
In reality, Jesus suffered far worse than the film portrayed.

Jesus is God, after all. 😛
 
I’m not sure you can describe Gibson as simply “a Catholic”. I understand he is a schismatic, or at least asociates with and donates money to a schismatic church.

Gibson has a habit in ALL his movies of dwelling on graphic violence. I haven’t seen this movie because I know that if I did I would be so revolted by the relentless graphic violence that I would miss the very valid points Gibson is making. I do not seek to minimise the terrible sufferings Christ underwent, but I don’t have to have the blood spattered in my face for two hours to convince me to believe in Him. A better filmmaker would have been able to convey the reality of Christ’s sufferings without the continuous graphic gorefest.

That aside, most of the other criticism of the movie seems to spring from atheists horrified that large numbers of people might be at risk of being persuaded of the truth of Christianity by it.
 
40.png
Petergee:
Gibson has a habit in ALL his movies of dwelling on graphic violence. I haven’t seen this movie because I know that if I did I would be so revolted by the relentless graphic violence that I would miss the very valid points Gibson is making. I do not seek to minimise the terrible sufferings Christ underwent, but I don’t have to have the blood spattered in my face for two hours to convince me to believe in Him. A better filmmaker would have been able to convey the reality of Christ’s sufferings without the continuous graphic gorefest.
Click to expand...
I have watched ‘King of kings’ and ‘The greatest story ever told’ and I feel that neither of them really managed to bring Christ’s love for us to the big screen nearly as well as ‘The passion’. But thats just my opinion.
 
40.png
BioCatholic:
now im not knocking the movie, but his portrayal of Jesus’ beatings and sufferings seemed to go well beyond that of what HUMANS are able to tolerate.

Jesus was human right? now ive seen plenty of people flat pass out from the pain of just a compound femur fracture. lose about 1500cc of blood or the pain causes them to go out.

what gibson portrayed seemed to defy logic as to what a human can tolerate as far as pain and blood loss go.

Navy SEALs and Us Army special forces are taught methods to help cope with pain and blood loss, but i doubt that that knowlegde was around 2000 yrs ago. and then again, it can help only so much.

after the scene of him being flogged with the metal cat-o-9-tails thing, i said to myself that i could have started 2 large bore IV’s, given dopamine infusions, and pumped Jesus full of 1:10,000 epinepherine, and theres just no way he could have stayed conscious, or even alive much longer.

anyone have an idea why Mel would go so far outside the realm of possibility when trying to pain such an accurate portrait of the passion?
Click to expand...
You can not really say what any particular human can or can not endure, especially one that is more than human. Men have survived combat-related injuries that were FAR worse than anything depicted in the movie.
 
Based on the majority of comments above, I realize that I come from a faith tradition that is more adamantly against peculiar Reformation related doctrines, such as not making images of God. The reasoning is, since Jesus was fully God, having a statue of Jesus, or heaven forbid, having a person portray Him in a movie, that’s seen as idolatry.

I’m not wanting to get into that discussion. But things like that are what many “true-blue” Protestants have issues with. The fact that so many non-Catholic evangelicals love the movie, that just makes it that much harder for them to stomach.
 
Reformed Rob:
Based on the majority of comments above, I realize that I come from a faith tradition that is more adamantly against peculiar Reformation related doctrines
Click to expand...
ALL Reformation-related doctrines are peculiar.
 
40.png
Petergee:
I’m not sure you can describe Gibson as simply “a Catholic”. I understand he is a schismatic, or at least asociates with and donates money to a schismatic church.
Click to expand...
I wouldn’t NOW - but to Protestants - a Catholic’s a Catholic and all we understood was that he went to a Catholic Church that still held Mass in Latin - we had no clue about schismatic or not 😃
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top