Jesus Christ, Box Office Star?

With The Gospel According to Mel due to open Feb. 25, the controversy over The Passion of the Christ should heat up hotter than a lake of fire over the next week.

The Sunday Cincinnati Enquirer included this useful summary of Jesus pics over the past three or four decades, most of which were box office and critical sins. The Enquirer also ran this interesting story on the grassroots selling of the movie. Will The Passion be a Christian version of Battlefield Earth, the Scientology-friendly flick bolstered by the participation of Vinnie Barbarino as an outer-space alien? Who knows (well, He knows, of course)?

But while picking my son and a friend up after they caught the feel-good Cold War epic Miracle yesterday, I chatted briefly with the manager of the local theater here in small-town USA (i.e., Oxford, Ohio). He told me that for weeks now, he's been getting something 20 phone calls a day about The Passion and tons of church groups have been buying tickets in bulk. It's like nothing he's seen before, all of which suggests that The Passion will open huge.

Comments

[Jean Bart]

Eric,

Eric has a minor problem with Jews.

“My point about the rent-a-mob being miniscule doesn’t undermine my argument at all.”

Certainly it does. To be frank, Roman governors were quite adept at quelling mobs that were dangerous and had been doing so for hundreds of years; why this mob would be any different is for you to explain. I suspect it will continue to come down Jews in league with Satan or some such stupidity.

[Jennifer]

Eric–
If you take the Bible literally, does that mean that the guys at Reason who post this kind of stuff on the Sabbath should be executed? Because you do of course know that the Bible says anyone who works on the Sabbath must be executed. What about slavery?

One more question: however irritating you might find Jean Bart on a personal level, do you agree that he and his fellow Frenchmen bear personal guilt for murdering King Louis the Umpteenth and Queen Marie Antionette? The Bible requires one to obey the King, and will punish people, and even entire countries, who do not. Look at how often the Biblical nation of Israel got the crap smited out of it. So, although the royal murders took place two hundred years ago, anything the French suffer right now could easily be God’s wrath concerning the revolt against His anointed monarchs.

Damn you, Jean Bart, O snooty regicidal bastard! The reason God let World Wars One and Two damage your country is because you deserved it.

[Jean Bart]

Phillip,

Yes, prejudice is common across the spectrum of humanity unfortunately. The story is somewhat like U.S. blood banks refusing blood from black people during WWII.

[Jean Bart]

Jennifer,

Excellent argument; so did the U.S. deserve Viet Nam because of slavery? 🙂 Oh, that’s right; both the Old and New Testaments favor slavery! 🙂 It must be something else.

[Jean Bart]

The comment for Phillip was for Pavel; many profuse apologies. 🙂

[Critic]

“…wouldn’t that put the blame squarely on God’s shoulders?”

Gordon,

I don’t think God has shoulders, being a spirit and all. But he does have a right hand, ’cause that’s where Jesus sitteth.

[Occidental Plaque]

Nick, do you live in Oxford or are you just visiting?

[Just Deserts]

“The film is handicapped since under Islamic law Mohammed is not allowed to be seen or heard.”

Maybe they could put him in a burqua!
Ha, ha, ha, oh my!

[thoreau]

I know most people here aren’t Christians, but there are two very good and very funny libertarian messages from the story of Jesus:

1) If a savior ever comes along with the keys to peace, love, the afterlife, happiness, forgiveness, faith, etc., the government will obviously decide to kill him. “People being happy without our involvement? We can’t have that!” 🙂

2) The government will have to try to kill him twice, and both attempts will be botched. Remember that Herod tried to kill Jesus as a baby, and that obviously didn’t work out. Then, thirty years later, a few days after what seemed like a successful execution, Jesus emerged from the tomb while the government employees ordered to guard him slept through their shifts.

The lesson? Not only is the government incapable of doing anything right, they can’t stand the thought that somebody else might have a good idea.

[Aliandra]

Chris Volkay:

In reply to your comment …. “The value of religion is a negative value, the worst in all of human history ”

Umm .. a lot of damage has been wrought by atheism too. Note Stalin, Mao, communism, etc ..

[anon]

Ben,

The Message was directed and produced by an Arab-American (and yes a Muslim). His name is Mustapha Akkad. He also directed and produced “The Lion of the Desert” (a great film by the way) about the Libyan independence leader Omar Mukhtar. Quinn starred in both movies.

I have never heard about the kidnapping of Jews to protest the Message. Do you mind providing some links?

[Jennifer]

Aliandra–

The evils of Communism were brought about by the Communist desire to control things, not atheism per se. Communism is an evil philosophy which just happens to be atheistic, which isn’t quite the same thing.

[Aliandra]

Jennifer:

Communism is atheistic as you said, but it also forced atheism upon the population.

[Aliandra]

Jennifer:

Communism is atheistic as you said, but it also forced atheism upon the population.

[Jennifer]

Aliandra–

You are absolutely right, but my point is this: there is nothing inherent in the atheist philosophy which calls for the murder of people. Most religions, by contrast, specifically order folks to “smite the unbelievers” or “kill the infidels” or something.

Consider: in Iraq, the US may have done some crummy things in the name of democracy; does this mean democracy itself is inherently bad? I think not.

[dhex]

thoreau: don’t forget the shoddy work by government contractors in building a crucifix that won’t keep a man crucified.

[Gregory Litchfield]

Jean Bart:

I’m not a huge fan of Christianity, or any other religion, for that matter. I find your behavior towards Eric to be, frankly, repulsive. You invent beliefs he has never professed to hold, in order to claim he “has a problem with Jews.”

At no point did he ever state that Jews have any special responsibility, or greater culpability, for the crucifixation of Christ than any other group. He stated his beliefs quite succiently, that being that everyone, with equal proportion, bears guilt. It is his belief, so far as I can tell, that Jesus was crucified due to the actions of a mob, who happened to be Jewish. At no point did Eric ever claim that this action made Jews as a people responsible.

Eric hasn’t made any statements, to my knowledge, that would indicate he is in any way an anti-semite. I think you owe him an apology. You cannot lightly call someone a racist or anti-semite. If you had done this to me in a public place, I’d have an apology from you, or your teeth.

Cheers

[Gregory Litchfield]

Jean Bart:

I’m not a huge fan of Christianity, or any other religion, for that matter. I find your behavior towards Eric to be, frankly, repulsive. You invent beliefs he has never professed to hold, in order to claim he “has a problem with Jews.”

At no point did he ever state that Jews have any special responsibility, or greater culpability, for the crucifixation of Christ than any other group. He stated his beliefs quite succiently, that being that everyone, with equal proportion, bears guilt. It is his belief, so far as I can tell, that Jesus was crucified due to the actions of a mob, who happened to be Jewish. At no point did Eric ever claim that this action made Jews as a people responsible.

Eric hasn’t made any statements, to my knowledge, that would indicate he is in any way an anti-semite. I think you owe him an apology. You cannot lightly call someone a racist or anti-semite. If you had done this to me in a public place, I’d have an apology from you, or your teeth.

Cheers

[garym]

The movie about Mohammed was called “Mohammed: Messenger of God.”

By the way, I find it amusing that the actor who played Jesus was struck by lightning as he was about to do the Sermon on the Mount scene. (http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,111640,00.html) They should have taken the hint. 🙂

Blessed are the cheesemakers…

[scott orrell]

Geez.
Has anyone here ever wandered the halls of any museums? Those things on the wall, they’re called art. They were drawn by artists. To represent their own (or like-minded peoples) perspective or ideas or beliefs. ALLot of them depict scenes from the bible. Why not go sit in front of one of them for a while, then come back to this thread? Historical accuracy is no impediment to art. Nor is it of any particular benefit.

[Jean Bart]

Gregory Litchfield,

People all the time hide behind the “I am not an anti-semite” label, while acting like one; the gospel portrayal of Christ’s death is anti-semitic; indeed it was designed to be so by later Christian propagandists so as to deflect blame from the real culprit in his death – the Roman government, and specifically their local governor Pilate. Eric propagates anti-semitism by defending this story which maligns Jews; whether he does so innocently or not.

[rst]

I think that anyone who asks that question is anti-a-lot-of-things.

What a silly notion, that if you’re not waving the ol’ blue-and-white, you’re a skinhead. Please. No one has an inherent human right to me caring about what they want.

[Pavel]

Historical accuracy is no impediment to art. Nor is it of any particular benefit.

I agree. I always thought Michaelangelo’s Moses looked better with horns anyway.

BTW: At this point I am only posting to see how high we can get the comments.

[D.A. Ridgely]

Jean Bart,

1) If you’re going to bother writing my name, please spell it correctly. Otherwise, one might infer you are careless in your other points.

2) The bald statement that any belief, erroneous or not, has been “as common amongst Christians as Muslims” is (a) unsupported by evidence and (b) irrelevant to my observation, which is that correlation is a poor substitute for causation.

Most people throughout most of western civilization since the fall of the Roman Empire have (a) been at least titularly Christians and (b) held all sorts of preposterous and erroneous views. It may or may not be the case that their faith, however they understood it, led them to some of those views; but it certainly is not necessarily the case that it did so, and your implication, intentional or not, that it did is simply false.

[dhex]

thoreau: don’t forget the shoddy work by government contractors in building a crucifix that won’t keep a man crucified.

[thoreau]

I wonder if Gibson will show in his movie Biggus Dickus, who is close personal friends with the Roman Governor of Judea.

dhex-

Oh, and the shoddy work by contractors who couldn’t even properly seal the tomb. Bad enough that he came back to life. Worse that he was able to escape the tomb before dying of starvation or lack of air.

[Eric]

Jennifer,
For the sake of brevity, I’ll limit my response to this topic only. However, there are answers to your questions (they’re not quite as difficult as you might think).

I will repeat for a fifth time: “the Jews” did not kill Jesus. SOME Jewish religious leaders played a role, as did SOME Gentile people (the Romans). This does not and CANNOT mean that ALL Jews and ALL Gentiles “killed” Jesus. To ascribe anti-semitism to this conventional, responsible, and common view is ridiculous.

[thoreau]

I wonder if Gibson will show in his movie Biggus Dickus, who is close personal friends with the Roman Governor of Judea. I hope they give Jesus a love interest. Liv Tyler would have been perfect for the part.

dhex-

Oh, and the shoddy work by contractors who couldn’t even properly seal the tomb. Bad enough that he came back to life. Worse that he was able to escape the tomb before dying of starvation or lack of air.

[Pope Screw The Poor IX]

Are we there yet?

[Critic]

dhex

I think a wood chipper might have done the trick.

[Gordon Shumway]

“don’t forget the shoddy work by government contractors in building a crucifix that won’t keep a man crucified.”

I’m betting this was likely contracted out to Joseph and Son, who were notorious for shoddy work due to the fact the son was always running about spouting of at the mouth and turning tables in the temples, rather than learning his friggin’ trade.

As the story goes: “In the end, Jesus was crucified on a cross that he himself was likely not competent to build.”

Or maybe he and Joseph were laughing all the way to the bank, resurrection indeed.

[chilly]

The Jews didn’t kill Jesus. Why? Because no such person ever existed. The life of Jesus is a myth.

[Dope]

I vote for a boiling vat of acid.

[garym]

While I think Eric is waffling on whether he ascribes racial guilt to the whole human species, I haven’t been able to spot anything anti-semitic in his comments, and have no idea what Jean Bart is going on about.

[Jean Bart]

D.A. Ridgely,

So you are arguing that Christians and Muslims have not traditionally persecuted Jews and held rather negative views about them, vis a vis their own religion? Talk about historical denial.

I take Christians historically at face value; when they came to slaughter Jews, it didn’t matter whether they were “real” or not, they called themselves that and that is the most important point. If you don’t like your religion’s historical pedigree, then tough shit. Whine to someone else. I mean really; this is a bit like a communist saying – oh, those weren’t “real communists” who slaughtered all those people, they were “fake” communists. The pedigree of Christianity and Islam vis a vis Judaism is fairly clear; historically both groups would just as quickly look at a Jew as they would kill them.

If you want proof of Christian persecution of Jews, well here it is:

?In the middle of the fourth century the first synagogue was destroyed on command of bishop Innocentius of Dertona in Northern Italy. The first synagogue known to have been burned down was near the river Euphrat, on command of the bishop of Kallinikon in the year 388.

?Council of Toledo 694: Jews were enslaved, their property confiscated, and their children forcibly baptized.

?The Bishop of Limoges (France) in 1010 had the cities’ Jews, who would not convert to Christianity, expelled or killed.

?First Crusade: Thousands of Jews slaughtered 1096, maybe 12,000 total. Places: Worms 5/18/1096, Mainz 5/27/1096 (1100 persons), Cologne, Neuss, Altenahr, Wevelinghoven, Xanten, Moers, Dortmund, Kerpen, Trier, Metz, Regensburg, Prague and others

?Second Crusade: 1147. Several hundred Jews were slain in Ham, Sully, Carentan, and Rameru

?Third Crusade: English Jewish communities sacked 1189/90; inhabitants murdered.

?Fulda/Germany 1235: 34 Jewish men and women slain.

?1257, 1267: Jewish communities of London, Canterbury, Northampton, Lincoln, Cambridge, and others exterminated.

?1290 in Bohemian (Poland) 10,000 Jews killed.

?1337 Starting in Deggendorf/Germany a Jew-killing craze reaches 51 towns in Bavaria, Austria, Poland.

?1348 All Jews of Basel/Switzerland and Strasbourg/France (two thousand) burned.

?1349 In more than 350 towns in Germany all Jews murdered, mostly burned alive.

?1389 In Prague 3,000 Jews were slaughtered.

?1391 Seville’s Jews killed (Archbishop Martinez leading). 4,000 were slain, 25,000 sold as slaves. Their identification was made easy by the brightly colored “badges of shame” that all jews above the age of ten had been forced to wear.

?1492: 150,000 Jews were expelled from Spain, many died on their way.

?1648 Chmielnitzki massacres: In Poland about 200,000 Jews were slain.

Once witness stated the following: “Some were flayed alive and their skins were tossed to the dogs as meat. Others were severely wounded and then thrown onto the streets ? Others were buried alive. Babes in their mothers’ arms were stabbed to death ? Large numbers of Jewish children were thrown into the water in order to make the fords more level.

?18th & 19th Centuries: Depradations against Jews common in Eastern Europe; especially Russia and Romania (in the latter, Jews had the same status as they had in the middle ages).

?1942-1943: Croatia runs extermination camps run by Catholic Ustasha under their dictator Ante Paveli?, a practising Catholic and regular visitor to the then pope.

[Jean Bart]

garym,

The story of the so-called gospels is of itself anti-semitic; it was designed to be so. This is why Gibson’s movie is ultimately anti-semitic.

[Jean Bart]

Eric,

There is no responsible view in the gospel story; it is propaganda to lay the blame on Jews for the death of your so-called God. The story is at its base and in its entirety anti-semitic. It was designed to draw attention away from the actions of the Romans and place the responisbility for the actions of that day on Jews because they were a weak, and by the time the gospels were written, persecuted group of people within the Empire.

[Jean Bart]

Eric,

Indeed, treating Jews as the scapegoats for whatever problem a group of Christians or Muslims might be having has been a favorite activity ever since.

[nobody]

In the beginning, man created God.

[D.A. Ridgely]

Jean Bart,

Actually, I prefer to do my own arguing rather than have my views contorted, straw-man fashion, to serve someone else’s views. Call me old fashioned.

Of course Christians have persecuted Jews. Historical fact, no argument. At the sake of what I would think is dead horse whipping at this point, my criticism of your earlier comments went and still goes to your reasoning.

I don’t much care for my species’ pedigree or history, while we’re on the subject of tough shit, but the implication that Christianity causes or is responsible for anti-semitism because there are or have been large numbers of anti-semitic Christians is fallacious as a matter of logic and, even with your impressive catalog of persecutions (nice cut & paste job, that!) all you’ve done is provide selective evidence of the unsurprising fact that whenever “We” prevail(whoever “We” are), it’s likely that sooner or later we make scapegoats out of “Them.”

As for “historically both groups would just as quickly look at a Jew as they would kill them,” don’t you have, as was noted during the screw-up at the philosopher’s funeral, Descartes before the hearse?

Thanks for correcting the spelling.

[Jennifer]

Eric-

I never said the Jews killed Jesus, nor did I accuse you of saying so. I merely pointed out that according to the Bible, all current Frenchmen are guilty of murdering King Louis and Queen Marie, and therefore the destruction of France during World War One and Two was God’s wrath for the crime of murdering an anointed King and Queen.

I would also like to point out that anyone who works on Sunday should be executed, because the Bible says so.

[Ben]

More on the Mohammed movie tumult. Though it was an observant film, it was originally banned in several Middle Eastern nations. In the U.S., a radical group of Muslims, the Hanafis, seized several buildings to try to stop its showing, including a Washington D.C. B’nai B’rith (who had nothing to do with the film). They took hostages. That’s about all I know.

[rst]

The story of the so-called gospels is of itself anti-semitic

Anti-semitic possibly in intent, but not content. The story on its face is that Jewish leaders conspired to convince the Jewish mob that Jesus was not their messiah, that he had betrayed them, etc. etc. But what else would you expect? They weren’t a bussed-in tourist mob in downtown Rome, it was Judea. Christ himself was a Jew. Whom else would you expect to figure prominently in his life story?

You have no tangible evidence that Paul or the writers of the gospels lied to save Roman face; that it seems a reasonable expectation is to ascribe motivations to the men about which you have no idea.

Further, trying to apply your supposed “anti-semitism” to the practicers of these religions en masse is foolish; whether the high priests conspired to kill Christ is not a matter of philosophy, but one of history. It either happened, or it didn’t. Human philosophies have nothing to do with the event. I for one feel no shame for the actions of those who have come before me. I am not complicit, nor will any silly accusation you may have to offer make me culpable for historical atrocities or the philosophies that gave rise to them.

[Jean Bart]

D.A.,

“Of course Christians have persecuted Jews. Historical fact, no argument. At the sake of what I would think is dead horse whipping at this point, my criticism of your earlier comments went and still goes to your reasoning.”

Actually you questioned my statement because I had not presented any evidence of Christian persecution of Jews. There is your evidence.

“…but the implication that Christianity causes or is responsible for anti-semitism because there are or have been large numbers of anti-semitic Christians is fallacious as a matter of logic…”

In what way particularly? Christianity has this very long pedigree of particular persecution of Jews that is very hard to dismiss.

[rst]

The story is at its base and in its entirety anti-semitic.

This implies that you know the story to be patently false, which you do not. You suspect it, because you don’t believe it. But that only means you have an opinion likely more informed than most. As to what actually happened, offering that Tacitus, who “openly lies in his historical works, as well as repeats information that we know now to be untrue,” thought Pilate a brute doesn’t mean that he wasn’t in reality sympathetic towards the Jews, or in a really good mood, or just curious as to why a few rowdy Jews wanted to hang some scrawny carpenter on a cross.

[Jean Bart]

rst,

“You have no tangible evidence that Paul or the writers of the gospels lied to save Roman face; that it seems a reasonable expectation is to ascribe motivations to the men about which you have no idea.”

The inferences from the writings of other authors on Pilate, as well as Christianity’s place in the Roman world, and the ease with which they could scapegoat Jews leads me to these conclusions. Christianity gospels are based in part on anti-semitism. Now perhaps these Christian writers could not have foreseen what damage they would do, but nevertheless it is the case.

[rst]

Christianity has this very long pedigree of particular persecution of Jews

And why should any of this matter to the average moviegoer looking for 2 or 3 hours of celluloid entertainment? I don’t imagine the average Christian carries around too much guilt over the Crusades, or the Holocaust (although “super socially advanced” Europe should have learned something about appeasing tyrants who enjoy killing ethnic groups en masse. Apparently that’s a lesson without weight when it’s outside of Europe), nor should they. They didn’t have anything to do with it.

[Jean Bart]

rst,

Well, its obvious that the argument has moved past the film, and to the story of the so-called gospels themselves.

As to appeasing human rights violators and the like, the U.S. has its own rich and varied history of such.

[Jean Bart]

rst,

I suggest that if we continue this conversation, we do so above. Thanks.

[rst]

The inferences from the writings of other authors on Pilate, as well as Christianity’s place in the Roman world, and the ease with which they could scapegoat Jews leads me to these conclusions.

Come on JB, that’s a stretch. You’re drawing a comparison between how Pilate was in general – as inferred by Tacitus and other historical figures of little more factual consequence than Paul – versus how he was on Good Friday circa 33 AD when presented with this scrawny carpenter to be executed – as the story goes – instead of the murderer Jesus Barabas (sp?).

And that the words as written are apparently damning to the Jewish mob and leaders of the time does not mean they are slanderous or “anti-semitic” unless you can prove them to be untrue. If I call some Jewish guy an asshole, and he really is an asshole, I’m not being anti-semitic, I’m just calling him out for being an asshole.

[disinterested_bystander]

No one seems to have pulled out the “free speech” card yet. Or the capital-A Art card. Anyone?

[joe]

JB, there is more than one kind of truth. The type of truth that’s in TV Guide – Friends is on at 8 on Thursday – is not particularly common in the Bible. Much of the truth requires a great deal more effort to understand than turing to NBC at 8 on Thursday.

“We are all responsible for Jesus’ death,” for example, refers to the fact that the human failings, or sins, that led to the crucifiction of Jesus are present in us all. Poltical scheming, cowardice, grasping for power, intolerance, use of religion as a club, lust for 30 pieces of silver, use of violence to force people to do your will, etc etc etc.

And to JB and others, only some of the gospels can even tangentially be said to be based on, or endorse, antisemitism. Those that proclaimed Jesus to be the fufillment of the Jewish law are philo-semitic attempts to win over Jews. Only by reading history backwards can they be interpretted as having any relationship to antisemitism.

[Mr. Nice Guy]

How about we just say that Jesus commited suicide and call it a day?

[SM]

About references to Jesus in Tacitus’ histories – isn’t there some doubt over whether the Christ referred to in the histories is actually THE Jesus ? I read somewhere that Tacitus makes only the most tangential mention of “Chrestus” which was a common slave name back then and that the whole thing was about a slave rebellion in Judea ?
Any historians out there ?

[Brian]

156 comments???

Jesus!

[Linda]

“What a silly notion, that if you’re not waving the ol’ blue-and-white, you’re a skinhead.”

Where in the hell did you pull that statement from? What I meant by anti-a-lot-of-things is the inherent nature of someone who asks the question, ?Why should I care?? being someone who promotes negativity. Let?s test the theory, shall we?

Who here believes that they feel more positively toward this topic or conversation, in general, by reading rst?s posts?

You even read into my post and intimated that I believed those who don’t fly the ole blue and white are skinheads. What a stunningly negative thing to put into my mouth without even asking for clarification.

Why should you care? You shouldn?t. So don?t!

[kmw]

If you hop on out to the IMDB web site for this film…

http://imdb.com/title/tt0335345/

…you find that the role of ?satan? is played by a woman. Seems to me this misogyny should be a point of controversy as well.

Anyone hear about this before?

[chris volkay]

Jennifer of course is right ragarding stalin and mao etc. and thank you

Humanism and science are the only help for this brain dead planet, not religious garbage.
And again I say for the second time
isn’t anybody aware here that jesus is most likely patent mythology. As in he never existed.
All this debate about the fine points of this specious canard. Heavens. No god no jesus no werewolves. Deal with it, my gutless children. Try standing on your own feet for once, instead of relying on the starman in the sky that you conveniently invented for yourself.

[rs]

JB

“1290 in Bohemian (Poland) 10,000 Jews killed.”

There was no Poland in 1290. And Poland lost
Bohemia in the 11th century (and before that only
held it for a very short period of time).
In 1300 the King of Bohemia, Vaclav II did crown
himself King of Poland however.

“1648 Chmielnitzki massacres: In Poland about 200,000 Jews were slain. ”

Carried out by Cossacks and Ukrainian peasants
who were rebelling against “Poles and their
Jewish servants”.

Sorry, just nit picking.

[Nick B]

volkay,
I see you are the perfect example of tolerance.

BTW, I feel stupid having to say this but I have had problems with people unable to recognize sarcasm in internet posts in the past, the preceding line was indeed intended to be sarcastic.

[chris volkay]

Tolerance, tolerance tolerance, that PC buzzword again. You say I’m not tolerant and then I’m supposed to play the silly game by saying i am too tolerant. I dont fall into your word games.
Tolerant of religious nonsense? I’m not. Proudly.
For religion isn’t the benign nonsense some people would posit, it is absolutely harmful, vicious and deadly.
Chris

[chris volkay]

Tolerance, tolerance tolerance, that PC buzzword again. You say I’m not tolerant and then I’m supposed to play the silly game by saying i am too tolerant. I dont fall into your word games.
Tolerant of religious nonsense? I’m not. Proudly.
For religion isn’t the benign nonsense some people would posit, it is absolutely harmful, vicious and deadly.
Chris

[Franklin Harris]

Several showings in my area are already sold out. I assume this is typical in “flyover country.”

[glenn]

As a kid in Indianapolis, I never knew why every theater company did Godspell and/or Jesus Christ Superstar every season. Then I realized they were the only plays I ever saw, and that they were filled with people, like me, trucked in as church groups.

Movie will do very, very well.

[Clueless]

How does it end?

[rst]

In light of the fact that U-571 would have its viewers believe that a can full of underwear models stole enigma from zee Germans, I’m not sure what the big deal is about. Strictly by biblical interpretation, the Jews did kill Christ – “his blood be upon our heads and the heads of our children,” – but that wasn’t the point. The point was, “Father, forgive them, for they know not what they do.” One who claims to be a Christian but does not take up that cross is no Christian. How it took an entire church 1,930 years to draw a conclusion that followed naturally from the text is quite beyond me.

Many Jews have expressed great concern that the film…may inflame anti-Semitism and set back Jewish-Catholic dialogue.

Ok, why should we as consumers care about this? Catholic leaders can’t get their dinkies out of little boys and Jewish leaders can’t get their campers out of the Gaza strip. Why should we care what movies make it difficult for them to interact? They cause enough problems for us alone, why do they need to have dialogues? Is this essential or helpful enough to us to care what some Hollywood flick is going to do to it? I ain’t so sure.

[Overlord]

Clueless,

I’d tell you how it ends, but that would ruin the surprise for everyone.

[Jean Bart]

rst,

U-571 protrays it as if it was the Americans who did the act; indeed it was the British who did it (or most of it).

Regarding the “gospels,” the fact is there is indeed no clear, consistent story concerning this issue; indeed, they all disagree at one point or another. Furthermore, it has always been apparent to me that the writers of the gospel did have one mind on the issue – minimize the involvement of the Romans in Christ’s death and make the Jews into the scapegoat because it was the Romans who were in power when they were scribbling a hundred years or so after the event.

[Clueless]

Pleeeeeeeeeease?

[Jean Bart]

rst,

BTW, only one “gospel” states that the “Jews” did indeed say what you qouted.

[chris volkay]

Mel Gibson: From Braveheart to Bubblehead

With the release of Mel Gibson?s upcoming movie ?The
Passion,? which depicts the last twelve hours of Jesus of
Nazareth, Mr. Gibson is about to hit the trifecta, the holy
trinity of boobery. ?The Passion? will take its place
alongside his recent offerings of 1997?s ?Conspiracy Theory?
and 2001?s ?Signs.?
?Conspiracy Theory,? from what I could decipher of it,
championed the notion that some conspiracy theories are
true. ?Signs? championed the notion of crop circles, aliens
etc., being real. And now we breathlessly await ?The
Passion.?
On the other side of the spectrum, there are those of us
that champion rationality, humanism, reason and science over
the paranormal, conspiracy theories and the supernatural.
Movies like these simply reinforce humanities endless
descent into delusion and worlds of make believe. Far from
benign, many of these delusions are actually dangerous.
What?s next Mel? ?Piltdown man, the real story.?
Of course the film will do well, for the same reason cartoons and wrestling do well.
Of course, the most interesting part of this whole cauldron of nonsense, is the fact that Mel’s hero, the carpenter, very likely never even existed to begin with, just a fairy tale concocted down through the ages from the Mithra cult. Where’s John Stossel on this one?

[garym]

Even by a strict Biblical interpretation, Jesus was not killed by “the Jews” — he was killed by Jews (and Romans). The entire population of Judaea didn’t drag him onto the cross, or even yell for his execution. A particular mob, no doubt organized for the purpose, did. All the yelling they may have done about the guilt belonging to their descendants doesn’t make it so.

If national guilt were valid, then “the Italians” would be equally guilty of “deicide.”

[Jean Bart]

BTW, passion plays have historically been the epicenter of anti-semitic violence; and given that according to an ABC poll, 1/6th of Americans think that the Jews of today are personally responsible for the death of Christ, well, you see my point.

BTW, regarding Young’s article, what she does not write about is Gibson’s statements regarding a “liberal Jewish” conspiracy against his film. Which of course plays on several old standard tropes about Jews.

[Critic]

I’d like to see an alternate ending in which the Romans change their minds and let him go. He opens a cafe specializing in fish, living out his days in relative obscurity. “Judas” comes to mean all-around good guy, the “Crusaders” are a Double-A baseball team from Hoboken, and nobody has a problem eating pork.

[ctc]

I’m not sure what ABC poll Jean Bart is referring to, but this ABC poll gives the percentage of Americans who blame the Jews of today for the death of Christ as 8 percent.

[rst]

U-571 protrays it as if it was the Americans who did the act; indeed it was the British who did it (or most of it).

Yeah, I meant to say American underwear models. It’s still early in the morning.

1/6th of Americans think that the Jews of today are personally responsible for the death of Christ, well, you see my point.

That sounds like an inflated statistic, even if you mean 1/6th of American Christians and extreme self-hating Jews. But more than 1/6th of Americans cannot name the nine planets in our solar system, cannot do long division, don’t know their representative from their senator, etc., etc. Why do the rest of us need suffer for entertainment because they’re stupid? This is like a 1-900 psychic number…if you can’t read between the lines and get that this movie is for entertainment, then you need to be nailed to two parallel beams and stood upright for a few days.

[Pavel]

I actually got a chance to talk to Mel a few months ago. Although I have the same reservations about what he’s done as most people here, I can’t help but respect the guy for his commitment. You could tell the experience of making this movie probably took like 10 years off his life.

He also let me in on a little secret.

[SPOILER WARNING]

Jesus dies at the end.

[rst]

regarding a “liberal Jewish” conspiracy against his film. Which of course plays on several old standard tropes about Jews.

Conspiracy theories of all kinds play on old standard tropes, be they Jews, republicans, or the military. It’s easy now to force facts to fit a model that says the government lied to use about Iraq, WMD, mad cow, Iran, 9/11, you name it. Doesn’t mean they’re wrong. It just means that the Jews in this case have the added advantage of plausible deniability because “everybody hates the Jews.”

[nobody]

rst

The beams on a cross are not parallel.
That would be the Parallel Beams, an Olympic sport nobody much cares about.

[rst]

perpendicular, man, whatever. It’s not noon yet.

[Clueless]

Pavel

Then what happens?

[D.A. Ridgely]

Why does religious subject matter so often elicit a visceral response from self described rationalists?

[nobody]

rst

Have a drink anyway.

[Eric]

garym is right. “The Jews” who played a role in Jesus’ death were religious leaders who were threatened by Jesus’s teachings and miracles. They were the one who conspired against him and organized rent-a-mobs. The Romans got in the game fairly late, but they had to carry out the execution.

Christianity, properly understood, is anything but anti-Semitic. All humans are responsible for Jesus’ death, because we’re all sinful and need salvation.

Chris Volkay, there’s plent of evidence that Jesus existed outside the Gospels. For example, the Roman historian Tacitus wrote in 110 AD: “Christ whom the procurator Pontius Pilate had executed in the reign of Tiberius.” Also, the Babylonian Talmud notes Jesus? execution “on the eve of Passover ? because he has practiced sorcery and led Israel astray.”

[Critic]

DA

Nothing better to do.

[digamma]

[SPOILER WARNING]

Jesus dies at the end.

Yeah, but you know Hollywood – they’ll find a way to bring him back for a sequel.

[chthus]

I heard a report yesterday that the advanced sales had already reached $30 mil. I don’t have any confirmation on this, but they did interview a minister who’s church had purchased 18,000 tickets to distribute to its congregation on the condition that for each ticket you take, you get some one else from outside the church to go as well (with either you or them buying a second ticket). That’s about $150,000 right there with the promise of at least $100,000 more later. From one church. I’m betting this thing will top $100 mil in two weeks. The controversy has madeup for the lack of advertising, and the bible-geek (or evangelical christian) contingent is even more die hard than their LOTR or Star Wars brethren.

[Jean Bart]

ctc:

Well, I saw that they reported 80% did not have such an idea; so I assumed 20% did.

[Xmas]

Chris V.

Signs wasn’t about Aliens and crop circles. It was about lost faith and miracles.

“…and tell Merrill to swing away.”

[rst]

Why does religious subject matter so often elicit a visceral response from self described rationalists?

It’s better than working.

[Jean Bart]

Eric,

“‘The Jews’ who played a role in Jesus’ death were religious leaders who were threatened by Jesus’s teachings and miracles.”

Christ was a heretic; he threatened to bring down the wrath of the Roman government on Judea.

“Chris Volkay, there’s plent of evidence that Jesus existed outside the Gospels. For example, the Roman historian Tacitus wrote in 110 AD: ‘Christ whom the procurator Pontius Pilate had executed in the reign of Tiberius.'”

It also relatively convenient that Christians forget that Tacitus writes of Pilate as a sadistic bastard; especially when they portray him as a sympathetic figure in their passion plays.

[Clueless]

Why are there no mainstream productions of the life of Mohammad? I hear he has played some minor role in history.

[Karl Kraus]

“jesus the return: this time it’s personal”.

it’s 1630 here in vienna. time for a guilt free beer. in another few hours, you all can join in. happy hour is perhaps the best American Import that there is.

regards,
KK

[Pavel]

Then we learn that the Princess of Rome is pregnant with Jesus’ baby.

Also, the first draft of the script had a scene where Jesus goes around reading the minds of the Pharisees. The working title was What Jews Want

[Jean Bart]

It is also interesting that portions of the movie are drawn from 19th century saints who were unforgiving in their anti-semitism and views that Jews are personally responsible for the death of Christ; deicides in other words.

[Critic]

Jesus II: The Bitch Is Back

[Eric]

Jean Bart,
There’s zero evidence that Jesus worried the Romans in any way. Yes, he amassed a following, but fomented NO rebellion. That’s one reason some Jews were disappointed in him. They were looking for a political or military savior to free them from Roman rule.

My understanding of Pilate is hardly sympathetic. I attended Christian elementary and high schools, and Pilate was a reviled and pitied figure, generally considered a moral coward who was unable to take responsibility for anything. But the fact remains that Tacitus considered Jesus a real person.

[Jean Bart]

Eric,

“Christianity, properly understood, is anything but anti-Semitic.”

The old line from Christians continues to be – “You see, those past Christians who slaughtered you, they really weren’t Christians; and even if we slaughter you today, well those really aren’t Christians either.” It is very convenient for Christians to be able to pick who are the “real” Christians.

“All humans are responsible for Jesus’ death, because we’re all sinful and need salvation.”

You continue to believe that fairy tale; I’ll live in reality.

[Jean Bart]

Eric,

“There’s zero evidence that Jesus worried the Romans in any way.”

Actually, there is a lot of evidence; because the Romans dealt with Christ the same way they dealt with the other rabble-rousing people they caught and killed. It is a very consistent story on how they dealt with such people.

“My understanding of Pilate is hardly sympathetic. I attended Christian elementary and high schools, and Pilate was a reviled and pitied figure, generally considered a moral coward who was unable to take responsibility for anything. But the fact remains that Tacitus considered Jesus a real person.”

And the fact remains that passion plays, including this one, portray him as he was not historically as a means to heap the blame for your god’s death on the Jews. Indeed, that is historically how passion plays have been portrayed, and Gibson has apparently done an excellent job of following in that tradition.

[Jean Bart]

Eric,

Its not like Christ was some singular person crucified by the Romans; they crucified perhaps millions of people; largely because they were either enemies of the state or committed criminal acts that merited such. Its very easy to see why they killed Christ; Christ was like a whole series of social agitants they killed.

[Jean Bart]

Eric,

BTW, simply because Tacitus considered him a real person, doesn’t mean that he was; indeed, Tacitus openly lies in his historical works, as well as repeats information that we know now to be untrue.

[Mohammad]

HEY! WHAT ABOUT ME?!

[Matt]

Eric, please dont include me in

“All humans are responsible for Jesus’ death, because we’re all sinful and need salvation”

Personally, my flaws and actions are my responsibility and I take offense at those who would position themselves as conduits between me and salvation in order to reinforce some ancient authoritarian power structure based on a first century execution of a charismatic that may or may not have happened. There have been many tragedies in The war between the secular and the religious but taken on the whole, the religious have steadily retreated. I expect the opening of this movie not to change that fact.

[Eric]

Jean Bart,
Jesus was considered a rabble-rouser only by many Jewish religious leaders – Pilate himself considered Jesus innocent of any crime. But again, he was too afraid to stand up to those leaders and the rent-a-mob.

But you’re right that many Christians throughout history have practiced anti-semitism, and I have no doubt passion plays have portrayed the same. But that doesn’t mean Gibson’s does. We’ll have to see it and judge for ourselves.

[Jean Bart]

Eric,

“Jesus was considered a rabble-rouser only by many Jewish religious leaders – Pilate himself considered Jesus innocent of any crime. But again, he was too afraid to stand up to those leaders and the rent-a-mob.”

Yes, that’s right; Pilate, the man who Tacitus calls a ruthless, sadistic bastard, with Roman legions at his command, was afraid of a mob? Excuse my incredulity.

[Jaybird]

Josephus also thought that Jesus was a real person as well.

It seems to make more sense to assume that maybe Jesus did really exist than to invoke a conspiracy.

To me, anyway.

[Eric]

Jean Bart,
Pilate may have been all that, but he wanted power as well. If Rome thought he couldn’t control the Jewish population, they’d send a governor who could. The Jewish leaders knew this. Yet another reason for the rent-a-mob.

[dhex]

“All humans are responsible for Jesus’ death, because we’re all sinful and need salvation.”

this brought to mind some sort of python-esque scene where peasants, having watched a passion play, begin violently assaulting themselves.

deicide is a *terrible* band. great name, awful music.

[Linda]

Wow, this is the kind of conversation I wanted to elicit from my post of this topic…I just don’t have the readership though.

I really feel that Mel is trying to feed the spirit seeing as though he has put so much personal passion into this. He’s not trying to make or remake history. He’s trying to express something that is meaningful to him to mainstream America. And, America is conflicted right now.

Being Jewish, I’m going to offer my opinion here…straight from my blog.

************************************
Sexy to Skeptical

With regard to Mel Gibson’s upcoming film The Passion of Christ, I have to say that what worries me more than the possibility of fueling the flame of anti-semitism, is the film’s incredibly poor timing. We’ve got homosexuals flocking to get married in San Francisco, pharmacists refusing to dispense medication for rape victims, pilots using commercial flights as a forum for spreading their religious message and the election year from hell. As a country, we simply don’t need to be more conflicted right now.

My personal opinion with regard to whether or not this film is anti-semitic, is that I don’t think it’s possible to do a film containing aspects of the new testament without it APPEARING anti-semitic. As my husband states (who has taken a college course in anti-semitism), it really depends on what aspects of the new testament the film chooses to focus on. He adds that interpretation plays a huge role as well. If you choose to interpret the new testament literally, you will undoubtedly see more than anti-semitic undertones and go right for the anti-semitic throat.

I will certainly be interested in seeing the film…I think everyone Jewish will be interested in seeing this film. I’ll go back to the timing issue though. I think that this could be a more powerful film if released at a different time. I think that at this time, it will feed conflict instead of feeding spirit.
************************************

To answer a question posed here, “Why should we care…?” I’m not sure I want people who ask that question to care.

[Jean Bart]

Jaybird,

Josephus’ “statement” was a later interpolation. Indeed there are number of problems with Tacitus’ statement as well.

[Grant Gould]

The problem with a corresponding movie about Mohammad would be the difficulty of keeping him off-camera at all times. That would take a director rather more talented than Gibson who is, frankly, a hack.
–G

[R C Dean]

Why are there no mainstream productions of the life of Mohammad?

Any movie that is as faithful to the scriptures concerning Mohammed’s life as The Passion is concerning Jesus would be rated, at best, NC-17, and would be roundly denounced by Muslim activists as anti-Muslim.

Mohammed, whatever virtues can be extracted from the Koran, did not lead a life that Westerners today would regard as exemplary – lots of killing for the faith, conversions by the sword, and miscellaneous empire-building, and as for how he treated women and female children, well, the less said the better.

Actually, it would probably make a hell of a movie, but if we ever see a Hollywood production on Mohammed, you can be sure it will be bowdlerized.

[Jean Bart]

Eric,

Again, excuse my incredulity; it is obvious that you are grasping for anything.

[Goebels]

Is there any truth to the rumor that Jews attending this movie will be required to wear Star of David identification badges?

[Eric]

Jean Bart,
I’m sorry you’ve run out of arguments.

[alkali]

I understand that the picture is supposed to be incredibly graphic in its depiction of the violence of crucifixion — it’s already been rated R. Query whether the church groups going to see it en masse are prepared for that sort of thing.

[Grant Gould]

The notion that the Roman authorities ought to have refrained from executing people merely because they were innocent or harmless would have been utterly laughable to them, and indeed to most people at the time. While intellectual fads like the presumption of innocence or the rule of law had enjoyed occasional surges of popularity in urban Rome, they were largely unknown in the colonies and would have been greeted with derision if suggested.

So anything we moderns have to say about how the Roman authorities “ought” to have behaved does have to be taken with a grain of salt. Crucifying anyone who was even thought likely to be accused some day of causing trouble was regarded by most as simple good sense, and Jesus’ execution mere sensible public policy — carried out belatedly, but better late than never.
–G

[Jean Bart]

Eric,

Oh, I have far more; I’m merely waiting for you start blaming Jews for deicide again.

[Jean Bart]

Grant Gould,

Well, as I recall, after the revolt of Spartacus, thousands of his followers were crucified; it was a common practice, and Christ was a typical person to be crucified.

[Jean Bart]

alkali,

The same ones which saw “Patriot” and “Braveheart” – both pathetically a-historical films (as this one will be I am sure).

[Jean Bart]

Grant Gould,

Indeed, during the reign of Caligula, Jews were crucified en masse for entertainment (which of course was really their own fault, being deicides and all).

[MALAK]

He’s not the messiah, he’s a very naughty boy!!!

[Linda]

“Is there any truth to the rumor that Jews attending this movie will be required to wear Star of David identification badges?”

Yeah, but the badges will only be apparent to members of hate groups, since they seem to have x-ray vision along with delusions of grandeur & unfounded moral superiority.

[Eric]

Jean Bart,
That’s funny – how can I resume “blaming Jews” when I never started? As I’ve said before, all humans are responsible for Jesus’ death. Jesus HAD to die to fulfill God’s plan.

BTW, if Tacitus is so untrustworthy, why rely on him for an accurate description of Pilate?

[Pavel]

JB,

I think you should know better than to argue with a man who calls himself Eric Christ.

[D.A. Ridgely]

At the risk of fueling the “Jews killing Jesus” part of this thread, there is a fairly standard theory of biblical interpretation among Christian Scholars called “progressive revelation” — the notion that God revealed (and perhaps continues to reveal) Himself through time, that this revelation occurred principally through the Jewish people throughout the Old Testament era and that Jesus, as the Christ, could therefore only have been born, lived, preached, died *and* been resurrected in, as and among Jews because no other people would have “gotten the point.”

As sad and tragic as the subsequent history of persecution of Jews by Christians after the church became the predominant power in Western culture is, what has always struck me is how amazingly stupid the whole “Jews killed Christ” notion is. If one takes Christianity seriously (doubtful in this crowd, I know, but I’m only adding a perspective to the discussion), then the crucifiction was an absolutely essential historical event. No Good Friday, No Easter Sunday — no resurrection, no Christianity.

[Jean Bart]

Eric,

I wrote that his passage concerning Christ is probably untrustworthy (indeed, it is likely an interpolation – medieval Christians loved to create such fake statements); Tacitus is not the only one who paints Pilate as a ruthless and sadistic individual (indeed, imperial bureaucratic documents from the time paint him this way); and the reason I use him is because you used him to prop up the silly notion that the Jews forced him to kill Christ. And indeed you have blamed the Jews – they are after all the “rent a mob” you continue to write of.

[bigbigslacker]

Float like a butterfly, sting like a bee. Mohammed is gonna rate up there with the Rocky movies. I can’t wait.

‘might go to Passion just to act like an idiot…
(you know, cheer at the wrong times, laugh uncontrollably, usual self)

[Eric]

Ah, Pavel’s eyes are finally opened… 🙂

Actually, that IS my real name – no cowering behind the skirts of anonymity here! And I pronounce it with a short i sound.

[Jennifer]

I personally like the idea of a fundamentalist Catholic making a Biblically accurate movie. So many people talk about the “family values” of the Bible, but unless your family’s name is Manson you’re not likely to be too Biblical. The Bible hates Jews, homosexuals, women, non-virgins, and anyone who doesn’t worship Christ. There are about a thousand crimes calling for the death penalty. What the world needs is more movies demonstrating exactly how judgmental, narrow-minded, and illogical Christianity requires its worshippers to be.

Concerning Jean Bart’s comments: I am unfamiliar with Tacitus, but concerning Josephus, most modern historians believe Josephus did NOT mention Christ; the sentence in his writings was added later, by a pious translator who was scandalized to think that a man could have lived in Jesus’ day and not met him.

I also like “An Inspirational Poem for Evil Christians:”

http://www.baddaystudio.com/evilchristianpoem.html

[Jean Bart]

Jennifer,

As I wrote, the statement is an interpolation; or an addition as you say.

[D.A. Ridgely]

Jean Bart,

I’ve already explained why I thought what you presented was not evidence in support of your original claim and why I took issue with your logic. I think we’re at the point where, as Dr. Johnson once noted, I’ve given you the explanation; I can’t give you the understanding. I can only refer you to my prior posts.

[Critic]

“Mohammad: The Second-Greatest Story Ever Told”
or
“Who Wants a Fatwah?”

Coming to a theater near you, never.

[Ken]

digamma wrote:

> Yeah, but you know Hollywood – they’ll find a
> way to bring him back for a sequel.

Hey, it worked for Mr. Spock.

[Eric]

Jean Bart,
Your reasoning doesn’t add up. Jewish leaders were against Jesus – there were also a few who were secretly for him. And the numbers in the rent-a-mob were undoubtedly miniscule compared to the Jewish population, virtually all of them who either a) had never heard of Jesus and didn’t even know he was killed, b) heard of Jesus and didn’t care if he was killed c) believed in Jesus as a messiah and didn’t want him killed. I’m sure I’m missing some options, but you get the idea.

I’ll say it a third time. We are all responsible for Jesus’ death. I bear just as much blame as anyone else, Jewish or otherwise, Roman or otherwise. Can I be any clearer?

[Jennifer]

I wonder if Eric takes the entire Bible literally: you know, the world is flat, the sun revolves around it, everybody drowned after forty nights of rain, et cetera. The reason I ask is that I’ve never understood the mindset of so-called modern, scientific Christians, who admit that eighty to ninety percent of the Bible is outright wrong, yet the other ten percent is not merely correct but divine. Even assuming the God of the Bible exists, why would anyone worship a deity so stupid as to forget such simple matters as, “The world that I created (in seven days, natch) is ROUND, not FLAT?”

[nobody]

Don’t blame me.
I was in Cleveland at the time.

[Rick Barton]

chris volkay at 10:01 AM :

“there are those of us that champion rationality, humanism, reason and science over the paranormal, conspiracy theories and the supernatural.”

There are also those of us who champion rationality, humanism, reason, science, liberty and conspiracy theories over the paranormal, the supernatural and power.

To believe that political conspiracies don’t occur is as self delusional as belief in superstition.

We need to engage in conspiracy analysis to understand political power. Political power is frequently transmitted via the machinations of hidden collusion and miss-direction. We need to ask the question; who benefits? I like Rothbard’s extension of common sense volitional analysis from small political situations to things like entry into war, the creation of the Fed. etc.

When you debase conspiracy analysis, you’re throwing out an invaluable tool for understanding real politic. In fact, often, conspiracy theorizing is the only way to apprehend political reality.

[Gordon Shumway]

If Jesus HAD to die to complete God’s plan, then wouldn’t that put the blame squarely on God’s shoulders? Didn’t he orchestrate the whole thing? He also likely tricked his own son into thinking he would be pulled out of the fire at the last minute, hence Jesus crying about being foresaken.

Jesus’ Death: God planned it, Romans executed it, Jews approved of it, and Christians benefitted from it.

That benfit is somewhat curious though. Jesus died for the sins of believers so that they might enter the kingdom of heaven. Question is, why couldn’t people get in previously. Answer, God wouldn’t let them (still cheesed off about some fruit apparently). So God made his only son human in order that he might see him tortured and killed, in order to scapegoat him for the sins of mankind.

If I had a neighbor who beat his kid every time the dog peed on the carpet, I’d call it child abuse and call the cops, even if he was the one who built my house. Others, apparently, would worship him.

[Jean Bart]

Eric,

“Jewish leaders were against Jesus…”

Because they feared the wrath of the Roman government and because was a heretic.

“And the numbers in the rent-a-mob were undoubtedly miniscule compared…”

Which completely undermines your point regarding Pilate fearing the mob.

“We are all responsible for Jesus’ death.”

You may be, but I am not; nor are any Jews responsible for his death. The Roman government executed him for the reasons they executed most people – he was a malcontent of one variety or another.

[Jean Bart]

Gordon Shumway,

You are truly brilliant. 🙂

[Warren]

Gibson has made films giving credence to popular myths (Conspiracy Theory, Signs), and he has made movies revising actual history to better advance a particular agenda (Braveheart, The Patriot). This one seems to be both.

[D Riendeau]

“His blood be upon us and on our children.”

That one line has been used for centuries to condemn all Jews for the murder of the son of God but it is a misinterpretation. Reading the passage within the context of Matthew 26 and 27 it is clear that all Jews were not responsible for the crucifixion. Only three groups are saddled with the responsibility; Judas, the Jewish leadership who fueled the mob and the Romans.

[Nick B]

Chris Volkay,
I hate to sound like my brother the English major, but you know there is a life outside of your biology textbook. Just because something is not based 100% on fact doesn’t mean it has no value to our culture. Books most likely not based on fact, from Plato’s Republic to Orwells’s 1984, have inspired people, challenged old ideas, and help move society forward.

[Jennifer]

I can’t find my old childhood Bible to compare the crucifixion stories in the four gospels, but I seem to recall that at least one version places the blame pretty exclusively on the Romans, while the most anti-Semitic version is in the Gospel of John, which was also the last gospel written.

Originally Jesus was viewed as a god ‘for Jews only,’ and if you wanted to become a Christian you first had to become a Jew. (Paul later wrote many letters against this, arguing that Christian converts need not be circumcised.) Paul is the one credited with changing Christianity from an obscure Jewish sect to THE main religion.

Thus, the gospels that are blatantly anti-semitic and blame all Jews for Jesus’ death tend to be the ones written to appeal to Gentiles, when Christianity was trying to expand.

Concerning Gordon Shumway’s marvelous analogy of God as an irrational, abusive parent, the idea of making children suffer for the sins of their parents or ancestors is all over the Old Testament. That’s how the primitive nomads answered the questions “Why do bad things happen to good people” and “why do bad people prosper while good folks suffer?”

There was not yet belief in an afterlife to settle earthly scores. Thus, if you are a complete S.O.B. in this life, yet nothing bad happens to you. . .well, just wait a century or two, and SOMETHING bad is bound to happen to one of your descendants, right? That’s Yahweh’s way of punishing you, thus PROVING that Yahweh exists.

[garym]

Eric either didn’t understand what I was saying, or intentionally tried to turn it into its opposite.

Jesus was killed by specific people (accepting, at least for the moment, that he actually existed and was crucified). For the same reason that “the Jews” cannot be held guilty for the acts of specific people, “the humans” cannot be held guilty. All forms of racial guilt are absurdities, and racial guilt for the entire species is the most absurd of all. I don’t know Eric’s age, but I wasn’t even alive when Jesus was executed.

[rst]

I don’t think it’s possible to do a film containing aspects of the new testament without it APPEARING anti-semitic.

Why should we care whether it’s anti-semitic? If the Jews don’t like it, the Jews don’t have to go see it. What good reason is there for all of us to tiptoe around over a movie and its impact on a bunch of people accused of an atrocity? Who gives a rat’s ass? Go plunk down your $10 and be entertained. A movie will not capture the objective facts behind the gospels any more than our 2,000-year-delayed commentary. It does not matter who killed Christ. You will get no satisfaction or peace from the answer; your problem is not that you don’t know but that you’re still asking. It is a movie…Mel will probably toss out a Director’s Cut by XMas so he can get a new Jag.

And Tacitus might have called Pilate a sadistic bastard, but plenty of Nazis called Hitler a hero, too. Doesn’t make it so.

[Your Boss]

This thread has now officially reached critical mass.
Everyone: Back to work!

[Jennifer]

Today’s issue of Salon.com just posted an interview with Mel Gibson on this very subject, but if you want to read it you must sit through a ten-second commercial:

http://www.salon.com/ent/feature/2004/02/17/mel/index_np.html

[Jean Bart]

rst,

“Why should we care whether it’s anti-semitic?”

You don’t have to. Which of course doesn’t mean that others have to share your attitude. Freedom of speech; grow to accept it.

[Jean Bart]

garym,

The idea that Jews are cursed – as Eric seems to think – by their “blood” is common in Christian thought; of course, the entire notion is ignorant given that Jews come from such a variety of ethnic backgrounds (I don’t believe in the concept of race, so I don’t use the term).

[Linda]

“Why should we care whether it’s anti-semitic?”

Again, I don’t want someone who asks that question TO care. I think that anyone who asks that question is anti-a-lot-of-things. I’m happy having you keep that to yourself and not caring.

[Jean Bart]

“Sawyer: You said at one point, ‘The big dark force didn’t want us to make this film.’

Gibson: Sure.

Sawyer: What was the force?

Gibson: What was the force? It’s the thing you can’t see. I’m a believer, by the way. So if you believe, you believe that there are big realms of good and evil, and they’re slugging it out.”

The concept that Jews are in a pact with Satan is also an old trope; SEE Chaucer for an example.

[Pavel]

The idea that Jews are cursed – as Eric seems to think – by their “blood” is common in Christian thought

Uhm…it seems to be more applicable to current Jewish thought. Not to many of those happy-go-lucky Sephardic types around these parts.

And yes, Jews come in all shapes and colors. Except black.

[D.A. Ridgely]

Neither Chaucer nor Gibson represent “Christian thought,” regardless of what they think except in the fairly trivial sense that they were / are Christians who happen(ed) to think this or that. Arguing (especially by example) that because X is a libertarian and a racist, therefore X is a racist because he is a libertarian makes about as much sense.

[Jean Bart]

D.A. Ridgley,

Actually it has been as common amongst Christians as Muslims.

Pavel,

There are black Jews; they are from Ethiopia; there are some smatterings of Chinese Jews and Jews in other parts of East Asia.

[God. Yes, THE God.]

Don’t make me come down there!

[Ben]

There actually was a film made about Mohammed, entitled The Message. It stars Anthony Quinn and was released in 1976.

The film is handicapped since under Islamic law Mohammed is not allowed to be seen or heard. The whole story is told from Mohammed’s point of view. Nevertheless, the film enraged many Muslims. One radical Arab group kidnapped some Jews (who, needless to say, had nothing to do with the movie) to try to stop its release.

[Phillip Winn]

Jennifer, about Josephus: In fact, early translations of Josehpus into Arabic have been found which essentially resolve the dispute. It seems that Josephus did originally write about Jesus, but not in quite the glowing terms we read today. The Arabic version contains essentially the same facts, but with less “sparkle.”

I can look up the exact English translations of both later if needed.

[chris volkay]

xmas
that’s your take on that piece of garbage “signs” I disagree with your view.
to Nick B
Just because something isn’t based 100% on fact doesn’t mean it has no value to our culture.”
That’s true, all religion across the board is false mind numbing garbage. This in turn gives “value” to our society by keeping people stupid, self-righteous, delusional, and prompting idiots to climb into planes and fly them into buildings. The value of religion is a negative value, the worst in all of human history.

[chris volkay]

xmas
that’s your take on that piece of garbage “signs” I disagree with your view.
to Nick B
Just because something isn’t based 100% on fact doesn’t mean it has no value to our culture.”
That’s true, all religion across the board is false mind numbing garbage. This in turn gives “value” to our society by keeping people stupid, self-righteous, delusional, and prompting idiots to climb into planes and fly them into buildings. The value of religion is a negative value, the worst in all of human history.

[Eric]

Jean Bart has a minor problem with the truth, I think. I’ve never suggsted Jews were cursed by blood – that’s a crock, Mr. Bart, and you know it. So easy to throw around smears behind a fake name, isn’t it?

My point about the rent-a-mob being miniscule doesn’t undermine my argument at all. A mob that’s miniscule in comparison to the population can still be large, dangerous, and capable of inflicting damage. Sound reasoning, Jean Bart!

To garym, I understood what you said the first time. Jesus was killed by specific poeple, of course, but he died for all of us because we are all sinful.

To Jennifer, yes I do take the Bible literally, except in obvious cases where the language is imagery, such as Revelations. I’m sure my admission will invite heaps of scorn and ridicule from the kind, tolerant folks on this thread, but it’s nothing I haven’t heard before.

[chris volkay]

xmas
that’s your take on that piece of garbage “signs” I disagree with your view.
to Nick B
Just because something isn’t based 100% on fact doesn’t mean it has no value to our culture.”
That’s true, all religion across the board is false mind numbing garbage. This in turn gives “value” to our society by keeping people stupid, self-righteous, delusional, and prompting idiots to climb into planes and fly them into buildings. The value of religion is a negative value, the worst in all of human history.

[Shag]

Re: why no similar movie about Mohammed.

They did do one. I forget the title. I understand it’s an interesting movie, since it was made with consultation with religous authorities from Saudi Arabia. Which meant no images of the prophet onscreen. Or his immediate family. Not even any shots of Mohammed’s horse….

[Jean Bart]

Phillip Win,

The earliest extant version is from the 4th century; Josephus wrote the work in the 90s CE. And to be blunt, yours is a minority view.

[Pavel]

JB,

I recall an event where Israel’s blood bank got caught throwing away blood donated by Ethiopians. Seems like no matter what your religion, it isn’t easy being a darkie.

[joe]

Volkay, for someone who lectures others on being childish, you sound an awful lot like your spritual development is stuck in the adolescent poseur rebellion stage. As in, Mommy and Daddy would sure be shocked to hear you talking like that.

Been there. Done that. Grow up.

[chris volkay]

Joe
you should listen to my lectures they may do you some good
you’re simply an ass, and an idiot
one of the hundreds I have run over in these sites
read my words carefully you may increase your iq
further time isn’t warranted on something such as you.
chris