This absolutely disgusts me.

[Merf]

http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&cid=1541&e=1&u=/afp/lifestyle_us_film_gibson

I know that this is Mel Gibson's father's beliefs, but Gibson really owes the public an explaination about this-- especially considering all the talks of anti-semitism in the media lately. He said to Diane Sawyer that being an Anti-Semite was un-Christian, and against his beliefs. Well obviously his father thinks differently.

I know this is a very controversial topic but I had to vent here. I just don't see how some people can be so disgusting.

[strandinthewind]

That is pretty bad. It also raises the age old argument of "Did the Jews exxgerate the concentration camp deaths to make themselves more pitiable in the eyes of the world." I do not buy that argument because while I am sure that some people could not be accounted for and were presumed to have been killed in the camps (it was after all a war and records were not really kept), these numbers are irrelevant because so many did actually die. I mean how can these people think a million people are organized enough, esp. in the state of mind they were in once released from the death camps, to be in on a conspiracy and never fould it up once. :cool:

[CarneVaca]

I almost want to laugh at these statements, but unfortunately there are still enough people out there who believe this nonsense.

But let's keep something in perspective here. Mel Gibson is coming across as a real fanatic these days, what with the anti-Vatican II talk and the wide-eyed glazy gaze, but can we hold him responsible for what his 83-year-old father says? I think not.

[strandinthewind]

Originally posted by CarneVaca
I almost want to laugh at these statements, but unfortunately there are still enough people out there who believe this nonsense.

But let's keep something in perspective here. Mel Gibson is coming across as a real fanatic these days, what with the anti-Vatican II talk and the wide-eyed glazy gaze, but can we hold him responsible for what his 83-year-old father says? I think not.

I agree his father is his own man. But, did you see that interview with, I think, Diane Sawyer. I was like WTF - he looks crazy as a loon :laugh: He has always been a little fanatical, but to say his wife is going to hell or at least cannot get into heaven because she is not a Catholic :confused: Do people really still think this way, esp. since Protestantism was created to rememdy the corruption of the old Catholic Church? :laugh:

I would like to see the movie, but apparently it is full of gore (not AL :laugh: ) and is very, very violent. I do not handle those two things very well, esp. when it is a "real story" like this as opposed to something like Lord of the Rings, which is fantasy, etc. I may rent it when it comes out on DVD so I can take it in small doses :laugh:

Finally, most people who have seen it and commented on it have said it is not anti-sementic. I think the fear is the film is so violent that it will again raise the spectre of Jews being persecuted as "Christ killers" - which is a sad thing.

[dissention]

While Mel Gibson cannot be held accountable for his fathers words and actions, it does raise some questions. Gibson has said that his father is very close to him and that his fathers beliefs were preached to the family often. With the release of The Passion (which I personally believe to be anti-semitic), it makes people wonder if his fathers beliefs rubbed off on Gibson.

A friend of mine got a preview DVD that was sent to churches (it isn't the entire film, just some select scenes and a Mel Gibson interview thing; nothing special, really) and I was a bit shocked when I watched it. I'm not religious at all, but I was curious about the movie. My impression from what I saw was that the Jews were completely responsible for the death of Jesus and that they will forever be damned for it. I found it to be absolutely ludicrous and it's going to fuel the hatred towards Jews that some religious zealots already feel. The second shocking thing was the violence. It's *extremely* violent and I mean graphically violent.

I think mel Gibson needs to take a couple of years retirment and stop shoving this horse **** down our throats. Jews view this as offensive and I can't blame them. The fact that Gibson won't take responsibility for its anti-Jews message is shocking in itself.

Ask your church if they have the preview DVD, I was told it was sent out to churches everywhere.

[dissention]

Originally posted by strandinthewind
I agree his father is his own man. But, did you see that interview with, I think, Diane Sawyer. I was like WTF - he looks crazy as a loon :laugh: He has always been a little fanatical, but to say his wife is going to hell or at least cannot get into heaven because she is not a Catholic :confused: Do people really still think this way, esp. since Protestantism was created to rememdy the corruption of the old Catholic Church? :laugh:

He looked more coked up than Whitney during that interview; I was amazed. :nod:

[strandinthewind]

Originally posted by dissention
While Mel Gibson cannot be held accountable for his fathers words and actions, it does raise some questions. Gibson has said that his father is very close to him and that his fathers beliefs were preached to the family often. With the release of The Passion (which I personally believe to be anti-semitic), it makes people wonder if his fathers beliefs rubbed off on Gibson.

A friend of mine got a preview DVD that was sent to churches (it isn't the entire film, just some select scenes and a Mel Gibson interview thing; nothing special, really) and I was a bit shocked when I watched it. I'm not religious at all, but I was curious about the movie. My impression from what I saw was that the Jews were completely responsible for the death of Jesus and that they will forever be damned for it. I found it to be absolutely ludicrous and it's going to fuel the hatred towards Jews that some religious zealots already feel. The second shocking thing was the violence. It's *extremely* violent and I mean graphically violent.

I think mel Gibson needs to take a couple of years retirment and stop shoving this horse **** down our throats. Jews view this as offensive and I can't blame them. The fact that Gibson won't take responsibility for its anti-Jews message is shocking in itself.

Ask your church if they have the preview DVD, I was told it was sent out to churches everywhere.

But, I am at a loss to understand why showing the agony of Christ is per se anti-semitic. I mean if you believe The Bible, particularly the Gospels, which is what this film apparently pretty much exactly follows, then the Jews are responsible for Jesus' death. The Romans certainly had a hand in it (or at least a washed PP hand :laugh: ) , but the Jews organized it, etc. So, while I think maybe the tone may be anti-semitic (I have not seen it), to say it is per se anti-semitic (which I am not sure you are saying but clearly some are) would mean the story of Christ could never be told as portrayed in The Bible out of fear that the Jews would be cast in a poor light. I think that is wrong.

Interestingly, I do believe the Biblical version of events in the Gospels are probably mostly accurate because the Herrod was a Jew, but I also think the Catholic Church hyped up the Jews' role to make people hate Jews and want to be Catholic. Certainly the CC tried other ways, albeit later, to convert Jews a la the Inquisition.

[dissention]

Originally posted by strandinthewind
But, I am at a loss to understand why showing the agony of Christ is per se anti-semitic. I mean if you believe The Bible, particularly the Gospels, which is what this film apparently pretty much exactly follows, then the Jews are responsible for Jesus' death. The Romans certainly had a hand in it (or at least a washed PP hand :laugh: ) , but the Jews organized it, etc. So, while I think maybe the tone may be anti-semitic (I have not seen it), to say it is per se anti-semitic (which I am not sure you are saying but clearly some are) would mean the story of Christ could never be told as portrayed in The Bible out of fear that the Jews would be cast in a poor light. I think that is wrong.

Interestingly, I do believe the Biblical version of events in the Gospels are probably mostly accurate because the Herrod was a Jew, but I also think the Catholic Church hyped up the Jews' role to make people hate Jews and want to be Catholic. Certainly the CC tried other ways, albeit later, to convert Jews a la the Inquisition.

I'm not religious and I've never even picked up a Bible (I guess that's a red herring that I'm a liberal :laugh: ), so I won't presume to know what it says.

BUT, being a non-religious person and seeing parts of that vile film, I was left with an awful taste in my mouth. It made *everyone* but the Jews seem like good guys. They even made the Roman emperor (I don't know his name) as a person who sympathized with Jesus and wouldn't take part in his crucifixtion! Sorry, I was appalled.

And regardless what the Bible says, I could care less. it's a known fact that people believe what they want to believe when it comes to the "Book." :rolleyes:

[strandinthewind]

Originally posted by dissention
I'm not religious and I've never even picked up a Bible (I guess that's a red herring that I'm a liberal :laugh: ), so I won't presume to know what it says.

BUT, being a non-religious person and seeing parts of that vile film, I was left with an awful taste in my mouth. It made *everyone* but the Jews seem like good guys. They even made the Roman emperor (I don't know his name) as a person who sympathized with Jesus and wouldn't take part in his crucifixtion! Sorry, I was appalled.

And regardless what the Bible says, I could care less. it's a known fact that people believe what they want to believe when it comes to the "Book." :rolleyes:

Pontius Pilate is a fascinating story. Here is a cite that tells it

http://www.keyway.ca/htm2002/pilate.htm

Note the line "Let His Blood be on us and on our children!" is why many persecute the Jews for the crucifixion of Christ.

Also, the movie is meant to horrifying because it was a horrifying event and the Jews were the bad guys :shrug: Interstingly, Chist forgave them in his final dying exclamation "Forgive them Father for they know noe what they do." That is good enough for me :shrug:

[dissention]

Originally posted by strandinthewind
Pontius Pilate is a fascinating story. Here is a cite that tells it

http://www.keyway.ca/htm2002/pilate.htm

Note the line "Let His Blood be on us and on our children!" is why many persecute the Jews for the crucifixion of Christ.

Also, the movie is meant to horrifying because it was a horrifying event and the Jews were the bad guys :shrug: Interstingly, Chist forgave them in his final dying exclamation "Forgive them Father for they know noe what they do." That is good enough for me :shrug:

Thanks. :D

In the preview DVD, they kept the line you just quoted above, but in the Primetime interview, Gibson said that it will be cut from the theater prints.

I just don't like what I've seen and judging from the reaction the film has had on audiences, I don't know if it will do a service or a dis-service.

[strandinthewind]

Altough I think the line should be in there, I am not upset he is cutting it. People like Hitler used this line to persecute the Jews. So, it is a good thing it is being cut even if inaccurate.

[wondergirl9847]

I'm a Christian...not Catholic tho. I don't like to put myself in any category. :shrug: Anyways, I don't believe the Jews killed Jesus....the entire human race from the beginning of time to now to the future "killed" him. Sure, there were probably Jews (as well as others) at his crucifixtion, but to "blame" a certain type of people is absurd.

Jesus came to earth to die. That was his "secret ambition", to die for our sins so that we may go to be with Him in Heaven for eternity. God sent his only Son to die that whosoever believed in Him, will live forever. That was his purpose....and it was our sins that "killed" Christ.

Your Bible lesson for the day, kids. :laugh:

I wanted to add that not every single fact that happened in history is stated in the Bible, so we have come to ASSUME many things as in....Jews were the ONLY ones who persecuted and were at Christ's death. How do we know this for 100%? We don't, we weren't there.

God will answer questions for us when the time comes...IMO. I have TONS to ask. :)

[darklinensuit]

As a Jew, a history teacher, and a person with quite an interest in and respect for Christianity, Mel Gibson's recent choices offend me on many levels. I won't even get into the subject of his dad. And I'm going to leave it at that.

- Jake

[strandinthewind]

Originally posted by wondergirl9847
I'm a Christian...not Catholic tho. I don't like to put myself in any category. :shrug: Anyways, I don't believe the Jews killed Jesus....the entire human race from the beginning of time to now to the future "killed" him. Sure, there were probably Jews (as well as others) at his crucifixtion, but to "blame" a certain type of people is absurd.

Jesus came to earth to die. That was his "secret ambition", to die for our sins so that we may go to be with Him in Heaven for eternity. God sent his only Son to die that whosoever believed in Him, will live forever. That was his purpose....and it was our sins that "killed" Christ.

Your Bible lesson for the day, kids. :laugh:

True and that is consistent with Christianity and its teachings. In other words, God is omnipotent - therefore he knew man would fail and kill his Son, who was part of Him in the Holy Trinity. But, it begs the question of why did God chose the Jews as his instrument when the Romans were pagans and antagonistic toward the Hebrew God of Abraham?

I find it all fascinating, esp. the point of view that the story of the agony of Christ can be told while still painting the jewish faith at that time in a good light :cool:

Note: The Jewish like the Catholic faith is no longer ruling bodies. Therefore, they are not like they were prior to about 200 years ago. So, comparing the faiths today to the faiths then is like comparing apples and oranges for the most part. Now the fundamentalist christians have taken over and are trying to assert their doctrines as the law.

[wondergirl9847]

Originally posted by strandinthewind
But, it begs the question of why did God chose the Jews as his instrument when the Romans were pagans and antagonistic toward the Hebrew God of Abraham?

I find it all fascinating :cool:

Me too!!

I would say, perhaps, God was trying to show that even though the Jews were the chosen people....they have faults, just like every human on earth?

:shrug:

I'm not God, I dunno. LOL

[strandinthewind]

Originally posted by wondergirl9847
Me too!!

I would say, perhaps, God was trying to show that even though the Jews were the chosen people....they have faults, just like every human on earth?

:shrug:

I'm not God, I dunno. LOL

ITA AND Christ forgave them all - Romans, Jews, mankind in general. So who are the people who still blame only the Jews think they are following when they chose to ignore Christ's teaching and not forgive what Christ forgave. :shrug:

[wondergirl9847]

As God forgave us for our ugly sins, so we should forgive...70 times 70. :)

[CarneVaca]

Well, folks, the Jews didn't kill Jesus and neither did the Romans. Probably. If it happened, it most likely would have been the Romans anyway.

Unless you literally believe that Jesus died on the cross and was resurrected three days later, there's just simply no way it happened. Now if you believe that it literally happened, great. Read no further.

If you're like me and don't believe it, this presents a problem. Just how did the crucifixion story get its wings? One theory is that it was staged, that it actually took place in private land, which would be highly unusual for the Roman practice of very public crucifixions. So if you accept it was staged, no problem there. I'm not sure I accept that yet.

One could also conclude that when the prophet Jesus died on the cross, that was that. No resurrection took place, but as myths often do, this episode took on mythical proportions and over the ages it became accepted as fact. The Gnostic Gospels don't really deify Jesus the way the Bible seems to. And by the way, the four gospels chosen for the New Testament were heavily edited. There are other gospels that weren't included, and you have to ask why. Why? Because the Catholic Church knows they would be too tough to explain away if you want people to keep believing Jesus was god. As it is, the four gospels they picked have lots of contradictions and inconsistencies.

Now, some of the newer Christian churches have every right to believe that Jesus is God. After all, they don't have the documents the Catholic Church is keeping. But believing don't make it a fact.

Eh?

[DrummerDeanna]

Originally posted by CarneVaca

.

And by the way, the four gospels chosen for the New Testament were heavily edited. There are other gospels that weren't included, and you have to ask why. Why? Because the Catholic Church knows they would be too tough to explain away if you want people to keep believing Jesus was god. As it is, the four gospels they picked have lots of contradictions and inconsistencies.

Eh?

That right there is why I do not believe the Bible is something to be taken literally. It was written by man...and though it can be a great tool or whatever, it is not meant to be taken word word as literal....just my opinion :)

Anyway, because of all the hype I am super curious about Mel Gibson's movie....and as for Mel's father...I really have nothing to say to that :)

[DeeGeMe]

Once again I'm blown away by the eloquence of my fellow Ledgies. You've all posted some very though-provoking responses. I have no interest in seeing the film--sounds too violent for me and I'm not a big fan of biblical recreations.

Personally, I've always had problems with the literal interpretation of the Bible and have always thought we'd should look to the message and the meaning if not the actual logic behind it. I guess that's why they call it a "belief" system. One of my favorite quotes goes something like this--You have to have doubt to have faith, because without that doubt, how would you know you had faith?

[wondergirl9847]

I believe in the literal translation of the Bible because it says to.

"First, you must understand this: No prophecy in Scripture is a matter of one's own interpretation. No prophecy ever originated from humans. Instead, it was given by the Holy Spirit as humans spoke under God's direction." - I Peter 1:20-21 (The Message)

[strandinthewind]

Carne - I am pretty sure thousands of crucifixions took place under Pilate in that area of the world (Judea). So, it is possible that Jesus was cruicified by the Jews under Pilate if he was indeed punished according to the Scripture.

You, as always :cool: , raise an interesting issue in that I think the whole Pilate washing his hands thing and the blood on the Jews thing was a perhaps due to Christianity first got its major start in Rome (it had been spreading elsewhere - but Constantine's adoption of it set it in stone so to speak). What better way to seduce the Romans into Christianity and away from Judaism at the same time than by effectively exonerating Pilate and instead blaming the Jews by saying Pilate gave the Jews the choice to let Jesus go, but they instead chose as a public group to crucify Him. That kind of makes sense to me.

Also, Jesus clearly was a Jew and His mission was not to overturn Judaism. For example, in Matthew 5:17 "Think not that I am come to destroy the law, or the prophets: I am not come to destroy, but to fulfil." He then makes a new covenant between God (which He is part of) and mankind. Thus, Jesus makes the Old Testament somehwhat irrelevant in that He is what the Old Testament was talking about and He sets forth some codes to live by (See Matthew 5:17-46.

In sum, I think there is a greater overall thruth in The Bible that cannot be denied at least to me. I mean if we all strived to be Christlike and minister to the poor and try to help our fellow man without hate, the world would be a better place. But, people do not do that. They take a literal translation of The Bible when it suits them (hating gay people) and ignore the parts that are inconvenience (animal sacrifice, eye for an eye, stoning both the adulterer and adultress, marrying your sister, etc.). :cool:

[CarneVaca]

Originally posted by wondergirl9847
I believe in the literal translation of the Bible because it says to.

"First, you must understand this: No prophecy in Scripture is a matter of one's own interpretation. No prophecy ever originated from humans. Instead, it was given by the Holy Spirit as humans spoke under God's direction." - I Peter 1:20-21 (The Message)

Hmm... what about the prophecies predating Peter?

[strandinthewind]

Originally posted by CarneVaca
Hmm... what about the prophecies predating Peter?

And Christ said He fulfilled the prophecies in Matthew 5:17-18?

[CarneVaca]

Originally posted by strandinthewind
Carne - I am pretty sure thousands of crucifixions took place under Pilate in that area of the world (Judea). So, it is possible that Jesus was cruicified by the Jews under Pilate if he was indeed punished according to the Scripture.

Yes, it is possible. I left that door open. What I suggest can't possibly have happened is the resurrection. Nor the immaculate conception. Nor the ascendance to heaven by Jesus and, later, Mary. Sorry, didn't happen.

What better way to seduce the Romans into Christianity and away from Judaism at the same time than by effectively exonerating Pilate and instead blaming the Jews by saying Pilate gave the Jews the choice to let Jesus go, but they instead chose as a public group to crucify Him. That kind of makes sense to me.

That is pretty much historically established. But with hindsight, it is questionable Pilate, who was considered a fairly tough character, would have abdicated this punishment to the Jews. Crucifixions, after all, were a Roman punishment. Also, the gospel would have us believe that Pilate was open to the idea that Jesus was the Messiah, the king of the Jews. A pagan Roman believing in the Messiah? A Roman actually caring that someone proclaimed himself king of the Jews? Questionable. So either Pilate saw the whole thing through or it didn't happen.

In sum, I think there is a greater overall thruth in The Bible that cannot be denied at least to me. I mean if we all strived to be Christlike and minister to the poor and try to help our fellow man without hate, the world would be a better place.:cool:

I'm all for that, my friend.

[CarneVaca]

Originally posted by strandinthewind
And Christ said He fulfilled the prophecies in Matthew 5:17-18?

Yes. My point was about the reference to the Holy Spirit. That is a Christian invention. So how could the Holy Spirit have been the bearer of all prophecies?

[strandinthewind]

Originally posted by CarneVaca
Yes. My point was about the reference to the Holy Spirit. That is a Christian invention. So how could the Holy Spirit have been the bearer of all prophecies?

Well, the Holy Trinity is the Christian invention. But the Old Testament refers to Ruah or "God's Breath," which has been analogized to the Holy Spirit. It is an interesting concept because God himself appears throughout the Old Testament in a different forms (burning bush, pillar of fire, etc.) . Yet God breathed life into Adam, etc. So, the Holy Spirit was there.

Here is an article from a website I know nothing about :laugh: that goes into this

http://servus.christusrex.org/www1/ofm/jub/JUBpizz.html

Can you tell I find all of this fascinating!!!!! :cool:

[wondergirl9847]

When Jesus came before Pilate, he said, "Do you know that I have the power to crucify You, and power to release You?" Jesus replied, "You could have no power at all against Me unless it had been given you from above. Therefore, the one who delivered Me to you has the greater sin." - John 19: 10-11

It was all supposed to happen the way it did. Pilate was supposed to ALLOW him to be crucified.

[CarneVaca]

Originally posted by strandinthewind
Well, the Holy Trinity is the Christian invention. But the Old Testament refers to Ruah or "God's Breath," which has been analogized to the Holy Spirit. It is an interesting concept because God himself appears throughout the Old Testament in a different forms (burning bush, pillar of fire, etc.) . Yet God breathed life into Adam, etc. So, the Holy Spirit was there.

Here is an article from a website I know nothing about :laugh: that goes into this

http://servus.christusrex.org/www1/ofm/jub/JUBpizz.html

Can you tell I find all of this fascinating!!!!! :cool:

Frankly, I'm just a little shocked to find that the Holy Spirit is something that can be treated with a drop of Listerine.

[Oops... was that blasphemy?] :laugh:

[CarneVaca]

Originally posted by wondergirl9847
It was all supposed to happen the way it did. Pilate was supposed to ALLOW him to be crucified.

Almost like they were following a script. Yes?

[strandinthewind]

Originally posted by wondergirl9847
When Jesus came before Pilate, he said, "Do you know that I have the power to crucify You, and power to release You?" Jesus replied, "You could have no power at all against Me unless it had been given you from above. Therefore, the one who delivered Me to you has the greater sin." - John 19: 10-11

It was all supposed to happen the way it did. Pilate was supposed to ALLOW him to be crucified.

True, but I think God gave mankind the chance to refuse to crucify Him. Again, God is omnipotent, so He must have known man would fail - hence the new covenant in the Gospel or "Good News" as opposed to Lathspell or "Bad News" (this is a Grima Wormtoungue reference for you LOTR fans!! :cool: )

[strandinthewind]

Originally posted by CarneVaca
Frankly, I'm just a little shocked to find that the Holy Spirit is something that can be treated with a drop of Listerine.

[Oops... was that blasphemy?] :laugh:

Lord Child - if lightening from whatever source has not struck either of us yet . . . this comment will not provoke it :laugh:

[wondergirl9847]

Script?

How do you mean?

Life overall, is "scripted" in a figurative sense, IMO. Adam and Eve sinning and falling from grace, the Great Flood, Christ's death and resurrection....all part of the great plan. God's plan.

Like strand said, God is omnipotent, He knows everything that happened, is happening and will happen.

[Johnny Stew]

Not making light of the bible's importance, but one of the biggest questions I've always had... that no one has ever been able to answer for me.... is how the world became populated, when, according to the bible, God created Adam, and then Eve, who then bore two sons, Cain and Abel. And then much later, they gave birth to another son... Seth.

Now, with four men and one woman, how did the Earth become populated, if not by incest??? Even if Adam and Eve had daughters who weren't mentioned in the bible by name, it's still incestuous.

And the devoutly religious would much rather think that every single one of us is a product of incest, rather than believing the conclusion of science, that we were evolved?

In my opinion... for whatever it's worth... I believe the bible is, in many ways, like a book of parables, with it tales of wickedness and righteousness.
In the end, the moral of the story is to live your life as best you can, in order to be worthy to make your way to Heaven.

But I think some people take everything in the bible far too literally, and because of this, they cause some of the biggest problems in this world.
Their refusal to see the bible in a more abstract way, causes narrow-mindedness and intolerance.

When even the KKK can point to passages in the bible to excuse their hatred and bigotry, you know something is amiss.

[CarneVaca]

Originally posted by wondergirl9847
Script?

How do you mean?



Just teasing you a little, Chrissy. Though I don't share your faith (and I do have faith, just different) I respect your position.

[wondergirl9847]

Originally posted by strandinthewind
True, but I think God gave mankind the chance to refuse to crucify Him. Again, God is omnipotent, so He must have known man would fail - hence the new covenant in the Gospel or "Good News" as opposed to Lathspell or "Bad News" (this is a Grima Wormtoungue reference for you LOTR fans!! :cool: )

Yes, we have a choice whether to ask God for forgiveness and be "cleaned" of our sins, but Adam and Eve didn't give a choice to be completely without sin ala born without sin. Man is born sinful, and we choose, when we get of a certain maturity level, to either continue being sinful or ask God to cleanse us.

I'm glad we can discuss this w/o being rude and mean. :)

[wondergirl9847]

Originally posted by CarneVaca
Just teasing you a little, Chrissy. Though I don't share your faith (and I do have faith, just different) I respect your position.

It's all good. :D

[wondergirl9847]

Originally posted by Johnny Stew
Now, with four men and one woman, how did the Earth become populated, if not by incest??? Even if Adam and Eve had daughters who weren't mentioned in the bible by name, it's still incestuous.

That is something I've questioned myself. Who did Cain and Abel have relations with to populate the earth!?!? I figure it WAS incest. Either that or there are women we don't know about. LOL It says in the Bible, all mysteries will be revealed in the end.

When even the KKK can point to passages in the bible to excuse their hatred and bigotry, you know something is amiss.

God warns us of false prophets...I think the KKK peeps qualify. LOL

[CarneVaca]

Originally posted by Johnny Stew
In the end, the moral of the story is to live your life as best you can, in order to be worthy to make your way to Heaven.


Bingo, Johnny! And what is heaven but the self-satisfaction of a mind and heart at peace with the knowledge that you have lived with integrity, compassion and a sense of stewardship for the those around you and the environment?

[CarneVaca]

Originally posted by wondergirl9847
Yes, we have a choice whether to ask God for forgiveness and be "cleaned" of our sins, but Adam and Eve didn't give a choice to be completely without sin ala born without sin. Man is born sinful, and we choose, when we get of a certain maturity level, to either continue being sinful or ask God to cleanse us.

I'm glad we can discuss this w/o being rude and mean. :)

Chrissy, I'm glad you mentioned original sin. Here's one of my biggest problems with Christianity. OK, so I look at my innocent little girl who has never so much as hurt a fly or even wasted a single moment to ever devise or act on anything "bad." Her little developing brain just has no room for it. What it has room for is the relentless pursuit of life, lunging for whatever catches her interest at any given moment. If she's sitting on the coach and something catches her eye across the room, she is going to throw herself off unless I catch her. What could possibly be more innocent than not even realizing that you can seriously hurt yourself in acting on your impulses brought on by that relentless pursuit of life? How can anyone possibly associate sin with anything this innocent little being ever does?

[wondergirl9847]

Carne, God loves children more than we can ever know. He wants us all to love through a child's heart in that they don't see evil and hate on their own. They are TAUGHT it.

We are told to have faith like a child. As when a kid trusts an adult to feed, clothe and shelter them, so we should trust in our God.

Children have a greater understanding (along with people with mental disabilities, IMO) of God than we do, I believe. It's hard to explain what I mean about that.

"Train up a child in the way he should go and when he is old, he will not depart from it." - Proverbs 22:6

When a child reaches a certain age, they can choose to either accept God or not.

[strandinthewind]

Originally posted by wondergirl9847
Carne, God loves children more than we can ever know. He wants us all to love through a child's heart in that they don't see evil and hate on their own. They are TAUGHT it.

We are told to have faith like a child. As when a kid trusts an adult to feed, clothe and shelter them, so we should trust in our God.

Children have a greater understanding (along with people with mental disabilities, IMO) of God than we do, I believe. It's hard to explain what I mean about that.

"Train up a child in the way he should go and when he is old, he will not depart from it." - Proverbs 22:6

When a child reaches a certain age, they can choose to either accept God or not.

I agree, but a child that is not baptised can never enter the Kingdon of Heaven and cannot, therefore, be reuinted with the faithful at the end of the End Days. I just do not get that. I never have. Its one of those things I just coose, perhaps foolishly, to ignore like the animal sacrifices, etc. :cool:

[CarneVaca]

Originally posted by strandinthewind
Its one of those things I just coose, perhaps foolishly, to ignore like the animal sacrifices, etc. :cool:

Well, I guess I won't be inviting you over for a little ritual we perform on my birthday. :distress: :laugh:

[wondergirl9847]

Originally posted by strandinthewind
Its one of those things I just coose, perhaps foolishly, to ignore like the animal sacrifices, etc. :cool:

We're not supposed to sacrifice animals? :confused:

[strandinthewind]

Also, other people (alot of them actually) suddenly appeared once Adam and Eve were thrown out of Eden. For example, in Genesis we have Adam and Eve who bore Cain and Able. Cain kills Able, leaving three people in the world. Yet, we then have

Genesis 4:16 And Cain went out from the presence of the LORD, and dwelt in the land of Nod, on the east of Eden.

Genesis 4:17 And Cain knew his wife; and she conceived, and bare Enoch: and he builded a city, and called the name of the city, after the name of his son, Enoch.

Where did Cain's wife come from? Moreover, Genesis indicates most of these people lived well over 100 years, which seems next to impossible.

So, I just take all of that as like in all religions, there is some creation story, etc., that is symbolic and very powerful like the story of Adam and Eve's fall from grace, etc.

[strandinthewind]

Originally posted by wondergirl9847
We're not supposed to sacrifice animals? :confused:

God required animal sacrifices so that man could receive forgiveness for their sins in Leviticus 4:35 and Leviticus 5:10.

Here is a website http://www.gotquestions.org/animal-sacrifices.html

[wondergirl9847]

I was joking, strand. :laugh:

[strandinthewind]

Originally posted by wondergirl9847
I was joking, strand. :laugh:

Oops!!!!!! :wavey: :wavey:

[estranged4life]

of hearing abut this movie each night on the local tv stations (Along with how the religious a-holes here in Oklahoma want marriage to be between a man & woman only, Which is another story), Seems all-of-the-sudden the news channels here have become even more obsessed with religion.

I am not RELIGIOUS or have ANY religious affiliations of ANY type (I even <b>REFUSED</b> to be married in a church because of my non-religious views...I believe in a "higher power", just not one that cares about the $$$ in my bank account like others do in this hell-hole called "O-k-l-a-h-o-m-a"!!!) nor do I actually care to see this movie...But being Anti-Semitic is absolute utter B.S.!!!

Brian "When all is said and done...I will be burning in hell" j.

[wondergirl9847]

Originally posted by strandinthewind
Oops!!!!!! :wavey: :wavey:

Sokay.

I though the winky at the top and the wait a minute was enough.

I should have put in a ;).

[strandinthewind]

Originally posted by wondergirl9847
Sokay.

I though the winky at the top and the wait a minute was enough.

I should have put in a ;).

LOL - I was like going into explanation mode!!! :laugh:

Also, Brian - I agree with ya there and will pass you a bucket of water in Hell :laugh:

[wondergirl9847]

Originally posted by estranged4life
I believe in a "higher power", just not one that cares about the $$$ in my bank account

But being Anti-Semitic is absolute utter B.S.!!!

You can have 1 penny or a trazillion in your bank account, dudn't matter. God said our riches are stored in Heaven, not here.

Hating Jews is BS and hating anyone is BS. We are supposed to love everyone, including our enemies. :eek: :laugh:

[CarneVaca]

Originally posted by strandinthewind
Genesis 4:16 And Cain went out from the presence of the LORD, and dwelt in the land of Nod, on the east of Eden.

He soon grew tired and his neck muscles stiffened.

[estranged4life]

Originally posted by wondergirl9847
You can have 1 penny or a trazillion in your bank account, dudn't matter. God said our riches are stored in Heaven, not here.


Wished these IDIOTS here in the "Bible F--king Belt" would realize that too, BUT...

Brian " 'God said if I don't raise 7 million dollars he will call me home'...Hey Oral, Ya should've died already right? Btw, LOVED yer mansion in Tulsa" j.

[darklinensuit]

Originally posted by strandinthewind
Carne - I am pretty sure thousands of crucifixions took place under Pilate in that area of the world (Judea). So, it is possible that Jesus was cruicified by the Jews under Pilate

I am sharing, not preaching, and not arguing that anybody should have to defend his/her Scripture to me. It is highly unlikely that Jews murdered Jesus.
A few thoughts, my bias notwithstanding:
- Hundreds of thousands of Jews were crucified by the Romans.
- Crucifixion was a Roman practice, never a Jewish one.
- The Sanhedrin would not have been in session during the first days of Passover. Work is forbidden.
- Jesus committed no crime against the Jews. Calling yourself the messiah is not a crime under Jewish law, and Jesus lived at a time of many fringe movements. None of the many others who denied the authority of the Jerusalem Temple - from the Essenes, for example - is recorded as having been crucified by the Jews.
- The Jews would not have handed "one of their own" over to the Romans. The great majority hated the Romans, and even a "bad Jew" - which Jesus was not (at worst he was a very "Reform" Jew before his time) - is still considered to be within the faith. Jews had very little autonomy in government. To try a fellow Jew and then hand him over to the Romans would have set a precedent that the Jewish court had no authority to carry out its own sentencings after convictions.
- Jesus was sentenced to death on a charge against Rome.
- Under Jewish law, the death sentence was very difficult to execute. There had to be three different eyewitnesses, each of which had to prove he told the perpetrator that the crime was punishable by death before the crime happened. But that doesn't come up in the account of the Sanhedrin trial.
- The High Priest was a puppet of the Romans, not the other way around.
- Jason is correct in that the teachings that are credited to Jesus supercede the old covenant of the Jews at Sinai. Testament means covenant in the context of the New Testament. According to Jewish tradition, this teaching would not warrant stoning.
- Pontius Pilate was so cruel that even the Romans recalled him at one point. But according to the story he sure seems relatively soft on Jesus, a guy who was supposedly attempting to usurp his authority over the Jews.

Every religion demands a leap of faith. I respect yours. I just want to state a case against The Passion story as history. No disrespect intended. As Christy stated, none of us can know for sure.
Glad to be part of the discussion.

- Jake

[strandinthewind]

Originally posted by CarneVaca
He soon grew tired and his neck muscles stiffened.

AAARRRRRGGGGHHHHHHHH :rolleyes: :laugh: :laugh:

Also, Christy, I agree 100% in that God does not care about your pocketbook, etc. But, I think Brian J. was referring to people like Pat Robertson saying that he speaks to God and if you paind him some $$$$$ in a thing called "Operation Prayer Shield" he would tell God your prayer perhaps only in general. I mean puuuhhhhllleeezzzeee :laugh: :rolleyes:

[darklinensuit]

Originally posted by wondergirl9847
You can have 1 penny or a trazillion in your bank account, dudn't matter. God said our riches are stored in Heaven, not here.

Hating Jews is BS and hating anyone is BS. We are supposed to love everyone, including our enemies. :eek: :laugh:

You hear that, Marissa? You HAVE to love me.:nod:

- Jake

[strandinthewind]

Originally posted by darklinensuit
I am sharing, not preaching, and not arguing that anybody should have to defend his/her Scripture to me. It is highly unlikely that Jews murdered Jesus.
A few thoughts, my bias notwithstanding:
- Hundreds of thousands of Jews were crucified by the Romans.
- Crucifixion was a Roman practice, never a Jewish one.
- The Sanhedrin would not have been in session during the first days of Passover. Work is forbidden.
- Jesus committed no crime against the Jews. Calling yourself the messiah is not a crime under Jewish law, and Jesus lived at a time of many fringe movements. None of the many others who denied the authority of the Jerusalem Temple - from the Essenes, for example - is recorded as having been crucified by the Jews.
- The Jews would not have handed "one of their own" over to the Romans. The great majority hated the Romans, and even a "bad Jew" - which Jesus was not (at worst he was a very "Reform" Jew before his time) - is still considered to be within the faith. Jews had very little autonomy in government. To try a fellow Jew and then hand him over to the Romans would have set a precedent that the Jewish court had no authority to carry out its own sentencings after convictions.
- Jesus was sentenced to death on a charge against Rome.
- Under Jewish law, the death sentence was very difficult to execute. There had to be three different eyewitnesses, each of which had to prove he told the perpetrator that the crime was punishable by death before the crime happened. But that doesn't come up in the account of the Sanhedrin trial.
- The High Priest was a puppet of the Romans, not the other way around.
- Jason is correct in that the teachings that are credited to Jesus supercede the old covenant of the Jews at Sinai. Testament means covenant in the context of the New Testament. According to Jewish tradition, this teaching would not warrant stoning.
- Pontius Pilate was so cruel that even the Romans recalled him at one point. But according to the story he sure seems relatively soft on Jesus, a guy who was supposedly attempting to usurp his authority over the Jews.

Every religion demands a leap of faith. I respect yours. I just want to state a case against The Passion story as history. No disrespect intended. As Christy stated, none of us can know for sure.
Glad to be part of the discussion.

- Jake

I was hoping you would jump in and thank you for the historical references in the Jewish faith. I, too, think there is something not quite right about the story of the persecution and subequent crucifixion in the four officially recognized Gospels. I think, as I mentioned, that was a conscious effort to draw the Romans into Christianity and forsake if you will the Jews who perhaps were seen as competing interest, etc.

Again, I find it all fascinating.

[darklinensuit]

Originally posted by strandinthewind
I was hoping you would jump in and thank you for the historical references in the Jewish faith. I, too, think there is something not quite right about the story of the persecution and subequent crucifixion in the four officially recognized Gospels. I think, as I mentioned, that was a conscious effort to draw the Romans into Christianity and forsake if you will the Jews who perhaps were seen as competing interest, etc.

Again, I find it all fascinating.

Not a competing interest, but you're close. I'll post on this again later when I have time.

- Jake

[wondergirl9847]

Originally posted by strandinthewind
Also, Christy, I agree 100% in that God does not care about your pocketbook, etc. But, I think Brian J. was referring to people like Pat Robertson saying that he speaks to God and if you paind him some $$$$$ in a thing called "Operation Prayer Shield" he would tell God your prayer perhaps only in general. I mean puuuhhhhllleeezzzeee :laugh: :rolleyes:

BWAH to the neck joke!! Perhaps, he was a metalhead? :laugh:

Anywho...yeah, the whole televangelist thing is a VERY touchy subject. I can see asking for money to send people overseas to preach the gospel and such, and also to help people in Africa who have AIDS and who are starving. I've given money to Operation Blessing, which sends food to starving countries. I don't do it often, just occasionally. I have also given money to send Bibles to other countries.

It's conflicting in these days....you wanna help in terms of food and people in pain with diseases, but then, there are people like Robert Tilton and Jim Bakker who steal. I just have to say, "Well, they have to face God."

[wondergirl9847]

Anyone who thinks sending money to someone to pray FOR them...needs their head examined. LOL

Pray to God yourself!! Ask and you shall receive!! DUR!! LOL

[CarneVaca]

I must jump off this discussion and try to do some work for the last half-hour of my day.

May Allah be with you all.

[estranged4life]

Originally posted by strandinthewind

But, I think Brian J. was referring to people like Pat Robertson saying that he speaks to God and if you paind him some $$$$$ in a thing called "Operation Prayer Shield" he would tell God your prayer perhaps only in general. I mean puuuhhhhllleeezzzeee :laugh: :rolleyes:

I am referring to ALL the <b>televangelists</b> that make up the population of my former beloved & home-town of Tulsa, OK (aka-'the REAL Sin City'). These slimes used the "fear of God" to make their bank accounts grow more rapidly than the budget deficit under the current adminstration (!!!), And if you were not a Christian you were nothing more than a piece of s--t to these shmucks!!! If ya turn on TBN (aka-'Gimme Me Yer Money Central') now you will see that they think the movie "Passion Of Christ" is the best thing since Christ himself existed!!!

Ya have to realize that Tulsa has more churches per capita than Los Angeles, New York City, Houston & Chicago combined (Sad but true!!!) Ya can't go around the block without passing a church!!! Too bad those churches werent JOBS!!!!!!!

Brian "TACIT" j.

ps-"TACIT" is the nickname that my older brother gave me...Wanna guess what it means??? :laugh:

[strandinthewind]

Originally posted by darklinensuit
Not a competing interest, but you're close. I'll post on this again later when I have time.

- Jake

Here is a fascinating (at least to me) article.

http://www.archaeology.org/online/features/romanworld/

[strandinthewind]

Originally posted by estranged4life
I am referring to ALL the <b>televangelists</b> that make up the population of my former beloved & home-town of Tulsa, OK (aka-'the REAL Sin City'). These slimes used the "fear of God" to make their bank accounts grow more rapidly than the budget deficit under the current adminstration (!!!), And if you were not a Christian you were nothing more than a piece of s--t to these shmucks!!! If ya turn on TBN (aka-'Gimme Me Yer Money Central') now you will see that they think the movie "Passion Of Christ" is the best thing since Christ himself existed!!!

Ya have to realize that Tulsa has more churches per capita than Los Angeles, New York City, Houston & Chicago combined (Sad but true!!!) Ya can't go around the block without passing a church!!! Too bad those churches werent JOBS!!!!!!!

Brian "TACIT" j.

ps-"TACIT" is the nickname that my older brother gave me...Wanna guess what it means??? :laugh:

I thought that is what you meant - only you said it better!!! :laugh:

As for these people, I fully recognize that Pat Robertson, oral Roberts, etc. may do alot of good in the world, but even the Nazis were nice in that they fed the Jews before burning or gassing them alive. I realize there are some good teleevangelists, although I have yet to see one IMO. I think these people are in it solely for the money and they prey on people's true faith. It just sickens me because how are "we" supposed to trust Christian charities like Covenant House, which is a GREAT organization.

[Rob67]

Originally posted by darklinensuit
As a Jew, a history teacher, and a person with quite an interest in and respect for Christianity, Mel Gibson's recent choices offend me on many levels. I won't even get into the subject of his dad. And I'm going to leave it at that.
- Jake

My whole take on this is that IT IS JUST A MOVIE!:D

I am not very religious, per say, although I was raised Catholic. Two of my best friends are Jewish. We are all pretty amazed by the outrage against this film, especially from those who either have never seen it or know absolutely nothing about the Bible (or both).

Gibson has stated, repeatedly, that he isn't anti-semitic and neither is the film. Until we see it, we should leave it at that.

From what I hear, the movie follows the Gospels pretty closely. And, I like Gibson. Braveheart was one of the best films of the 90's and he is an amazing director.

This kind of reminds me about the Gay groups that went after Gibson over Braveheart because of the king's son in the film. They claimed that he was homophobic because of the way he presented Edward II as a gay character. What they failed to take into consideration was thatthe historical Edward II was exactly the way he was potrayed in the film and his relationship with his father(Edward I) was also accurate.


Just my 2 cents

Rob:cool:

[tommer]

i won't get into all this theological stuff because personally i hold very little respect to ANY religious belief whatsoever. the thought that religion can still today generate such hatered is really beyond me.

i am appalled that in 2004 antisemitism is used as a public relations tool in order to promote a movie.

i was shocked to see mel gibson's interview. the part i liked the most was the part where he said something like 'we shouldn't hate the jews for what happened the same way we should not hate germans for what they've done'. don't get me wrong, i hold nothing against germans (at least those under 85 years old or so), but EXCUSE ME? do you see the parallelization here? hey, we shouldn't hate them, but they were proven morally and technically responsible to a collective horrendous crime.

you know what i find ironic? i guess (jewish) goldie hawn won't be jumping to his bed in any more movies. or in other words, this movie's gonna be a smash, yes, but in 5 years mel gibson will be weeping to diane sawyer of how jewish hollywood managed to ruin his career and kick his butt down to oz, and you know what? he's gonna be right this time around.

[tommer]

Originally posted by Rob67

Gibson has stated, repeatedly, that he isn't anti-semitic and neither is the film. Until we see it, we should leave it at that.

Braveheart was one of the best films of the 90's and he is an amazing director.

Just my 2 cents

Rob:cool:

i'm sorry pal, but if he's donating millions to his dad's antisemite church he IS practically antisemite. what he claims means ****, it's what he does which counts.
and another thing, nobody's gonna deny that lenny riefenstahl was a great director too. surprisingly, it didn't make her a great human being.

[darklinensuit]

Originally posted by Rob67
My whole take on this is that IT IS JUST A MOVIE!:D

I am not very religious, per say, although I was raised Catholic. Two of my best friends are Jewish. We are all pretty amazed by the outrage against this film, especially from those who either have never seen it or know absolutely nothing about the Bible (or both).

Gibson has stated, repeatedly, that he isn't anti-semitic and neither is the film. Until we see it, we should leave it at that.

From what I hear, the movie follows the Gospels pretty closely. And, I like Gibson. Braveheart was one of the best films of the 90's and he is an amazing director.

This kind of reminds me about the Gay groups that went after Gibson over Braveheart because of the king's son in the film. They claimed that he was homophobic because of the way he presented Edward II as a gay character. What they failed to take into consideration was thatthe historical Edward II was exactly the way he was potrayed in the film and his relationship with his father(Edward I) was also accurate.


Just my 2 cents

Rob:cool:

We're all entitled to our opinions. Here are mine:
- Calling this just a movie is like calling the Passion plays just plays. Many people over the years did not see the plays and go to dinner. They saw the plays and destroyed Jewish homes & businesses and killed Jews. The week of Easter was the scariest time for Jews in most parts of Europe. And with antisemitic hate crimes on the rise, I see nothing wrong with offering an alternative position to the one offered by Gibson. Whether or not Gibson or the movie is antisemitic - and the ADL position is that they are not - history shows a connection between this portrayal of Jews and Jew-hatred. Hitler looked at the German Passion plays with glee. Yes, I'm worried. Regardless of Mel's intentions - and my feeling is that they are suspect - the effect of the film on Jewish people could be more of the same ugly patterns.
- I know a few rabbis here in Houston who have seen the movie, and I have gone to see other viewers (including Abe Foxman and a Catholic priest) who spoke against it. None of them claims that the movie follows the Gospels very closely. Many, many incidents depicted in the film do not appear in the Gospels at all. Funny, most of these moments from Mel's imagination depict the cruelty of the Jews. Take from that what you will.
- Mel's ability to direct well is not the issue. Gone With The Wind is a damned entertaining movie - visually stunning, for example - but I don't argue that black people have no right to call its portrayal of blacks inaccurate or racist. Hitler's war propaganda movies have amazing cinematography; that doesn't mean we shouldn't see them for what they are. Mel is a capable movie-maker, but in my opinion that doesn't mean he's above reproach.

- Jake

[darklinensuit]

Originally posted by tommer

and another thing, nobody's gonna deny that lenny riefenstahl was a great director too. surprisingly, it didn't make her a great human being.

Looks like we made the same point.

- Jake

[darklinensuit]

Jason, here's that follow-up I promised:

Judaism & Christianity were certainly in competition for converts in the Roman empire. In fact, before Constantine, some estimates say that as much as 10% of the empire was Jewish, including many prominent noble families in Rome. Many Jews today are unaware of our missionary history.
A pivotal event in the Jewish-Christian dynamic was the revolt that led to the destruction of the Second Temple and exile to the diaspora in the year 70 CE. It made sense that Christianity, which had been scapegoated by Nero and company, would complete its break from Judaism. And with Christianity offering a new covenant that would take the place of Temple sacrifice, one that included the attractive Pauline tenets of no kosher laws, no circumcision, etc., Christianity had no reason to maintain ties to a Jewish community that was in exile, in search of a way to redefine itself once again, and apparently doomed to assimilation without any Temple. New converts to Christianity at this point were coming chiefly from the pagan communities, less so the Jewish ones. Certainly many (likely most) of the Jews had been hostile to proselytizing Christians, barring them from synagogues, etc. And with the Christian emphasis on the devil - with no real equivalent in the Jewish doctrine - it made sense to paint the Jews as the spawn of the devil, the persecutors of the savior they continued (and continue) to reject. A great book on this subject is "The Satanizing of the Jews" - written by a Christian.
Hope this makes sense. I am badly in need of food!

- Jake

[GypsySorcerer]

I have not read this entire thread, but I'm throwing in my .02

Who cares what Mel Gibson's dad thinks? If Mel weren't a celebrity we wouldn't even have this thread. And, for that matter, who cares what Mel Gibson thinks? He is another celebrity vocalizing his beliefs, and they all think their opinions matter more than other people's. (And I don't dislike Mel or Susan Sarandon or Bruce Willis or anybody.) But seriously, what is the big deal? Opinions are opinions. Ignore the ones you don't agree with.

I'm Christian, but I'm not planning on seeing the film. I hate violence and do not watch violent films anymore, period. However, I can see both Christians and non-Christians getting something from the film. I do not expect atheists/agnostics/non-Christians to change their beliefs because of a motion picture, but perhaps it will make them think. Not about religion, but a universal truth that from what I understand, the movie depicts: If you sit back and do nothing about corruption/evil, you are just as guilty as the persons doing it. I think it can also remind us to think about being accepting of other people's beliefs, no matter what they are, as long as they are not hurting others. Jesus was not hurting anyone, although others were threatened by his message, hence all the politics in the film. (But I digress.)

As far as who killed Jesus, well I think all Christianity believes he died for everyone's sins. Holding Jews responsible is like holding Germans today responsible for the Nazis.

JMHO

[strandinthewind]

Originally posted by darklinensuit
Jason, here's that follow-up I promised:

Judaism & Christianity were certainly in competition for converts in the Roman empire. In fact, before Constantine, some estimates say that as much as 10% of the empire was Jewish, including many prominent noble families in Rome. Many Jews today are unaware of our missionary history.
A pivotal event in the Jewish-Christian dynamic was the revolt that led to the destruction of the Second Temple and exile to the diaspora in the year 70 CE. It made sense that Christianity, which had been scapegoated by Nero and company, would complete its break from Judaism. And with Christianity offering a new covenant that would take the place of Temple sacrifice, one that included the attractive Pauline tenets of no kosher laws, no circumcision, etc., Christianity had no reason to maintain ties to a Jewish community that was in exile, in search of a way to redefine itself once again, and apparently doomed to assimilation without any Temple. New converts to Christianity at this point were coming chiefly from the pagan communities, less so the Jewish ones. Certainly many (likely most) of the Jews had been hostile to proselytizing Christians, barring them from synagogues, etc. And with the Christian emphasis on the devil - with no real equivalent in the Jewish doctrine - it made sense to paint the Jews as the spawn of the devil, the persecutors of the savior they continued (and continue) to reject. A great book on this subject is "The Satanizing of the Jews" - written by a Christian.
Hope this makes sense. I am badly in need of food!

- Jake

Why thank you sir!!!! :cool: I kind of thought that was what you were talking about at least in general when you posted earlier. The Curch went through alot to become the Roman Catholic Church didn't it :laugh:

Also, while I was on the treadmill earlier, I had a thought. Was your argument earlier about the timing being all wrong for the Jews to have participated in the crucifixion based on the current Easter dates. The reason I ask is that many believe the current Easter dtae, like the date for Christmas and the other RC holidays, was choseen to correlate with pagan holidays?

Also, I agree with you that passion plays have been used to promote horror for centuries.

[sparky]

Originally posted by Johnny Stew
In my opinion... for whatever it's worth... I believe the bible is, in many ways, like a book of parables, with it tales of wickedness and righteousness.


Well, of course it is. As it was rewritten, and rewritten, more times and with more political bent than the script of a typical Hollywood film, it became the strange cultural weapon people use it for today.
What is fascinating to me is the built in failsafe mechanism of "believe it or ELSE". You question it, you deny it, you are not a true Christian, and therefore not "saved." Brilliant concept, really. Kudos the architects of the system. It's genius.
As far as Gibson goes, he is clearly a nut bag. The telltale blank stare as he answered certain theological questions was hilarious. Stepford pod man. Good on him. He needed something to believe in, and he found it. Evidently it works for him, and scores of others.
At a certain point in any discussion of religion though, logic flies out the window, and there is no convincing anyone of anything.
You have faith in it, you buy it. You don't have faith, you can't. End of discussion.
That being said, there is a lot of good in those stories. Sad that it can't be divided from the destructive, historically specific nonsense that people use to hurt each other.

Gotta run and get back to destroying the institution of marriage.

[strandinthewind]

Originally posted by sparky
Gotta run and get back to destroying the institution of marriage.

Were you in SFCA last weekend :laugh:

[sparky]

Originally posted by strandinthewind
Were you in SFCA last weekend :laugh:

LOL. I should have been. But I think my mere existence is plenty !
Seriously, it holds scant interest in my own life. But is is fun to watch. Inevitable and dramatic, without a doubt.

[strandinthewind]

Here is an interesting site containing a timeline of the development of the Roman Catholic Church. The site is very pro-RC, which is a little alarming at times, but the timeline is interesting at least to me.

http://www.geocities.com/Athens/Ithaca/6461/

[darklinensuit]

Originally posted by sparky
At a certain point in any discussion of religion though, logic flies out the window, and there is no convincing anyone of anything.
You have faith in it, you buy it. You don't have faith, you can't. End of discussion.
That being said, there is a lot of good in those stories. Sad that it can't be divided from the destructive, historically specific nonsense that people use to hurt each other.


Well said, though I do believe the good in those stories can be separated from the hurtful misuses. I have to hope.

- Jake

[darklinensuit]

Originally posted by strandinthewind
Was your argument earlier about the timing being all wrong for the Jews to have participated in the crucifixion based on the current Easter dates.

No I'm referring to the Gospel account that Jesus was tried by the Sanhedrin during Passover (and that the Last Supper took place during Passover, though, contrary to popular belief, it was not a seder), which as I wrote, would have been pretty unthinkable. (Did I understand your question?)

- Jake

[darklinensuit]

Originally posted by strandinthewind
Why thank you sir!!!! :cool: I kind of thought that was what you were talking about at least in general when you posted earlier. The Curch went through alot to become the Roman Catholic Church didn't it :laugh:

I love Church history. Houston PBS has been rerunning the series on the Medici, including the Medici popes. Have you seen it? It's been great (though I have missed parts.)

- Jake

[strandinthewind]

Originally posted by darklinensuit
No I'm referring to the Gospel account that Jesus was tried by the Sanhedrin during Passover (and that the Last Supper took place during Passover, though, contrary to popular belief, it was not a seder), which as I wrote, would have been pretty unthinkable. (Did I understand your question?)

- Jake

Yes you did. I misunderstoof your earlier post. Thanks for clarifying as I know little enough Jewish ceremonial stuff to be dangerous!!! OY! :cool:

I have missed the Medici thing. But, talk about your religious rulers!!!!! :laugh: Actually, most of the world's most beautiful art came from the people they hired - so, I guess they are forgiven :laugh:

[darklinensuit]

Originally posted by strandinthewind
Actually, most of the world's most beautiful art came from the people they hired - so, I guess they are forgiven :laugh:

That's what the series focuses on, mainly. That and the mafia-style operations. Catch it!

- Jake

[darklinensuit]

Originally posted by strandinthewind
Also, other people (alot of them actually) suddenly appeared once Adam and Eve were thrown out of Eden. For example, in Genesis we have Adam and Eve who bore Cain and Able. Cain kills Able, leaving three people in the world. Yet, we then have

Genesis 4:16 And Cain went out from the presence of the LORD, and dwelt in the land of Nod, on the east of Eden.

Genesis 4:17 And Cain knew his wife; and she conceived, and bare Enoch: and he builded a city, and called the name of the city, after the name of his son, Enoch.

Where did Cain's wife come from? Moreover, Genesis indicates most of these people lived well over 100 years, which seems next to impossible.

So, I just take all of that as like in all religions, there is some creation story, etc., that is symbolic and very powerful like the story of Adam and Eve's fall from grace, etc.

You must read The Book Of J (a bestseller). I don't agree with it, but it will fascinate you. And maybe piss you off a little.

- Jake

[CarneVaca]

Though I've participated a bit in this thread, I still find it hard to comment on The Passion of the Christ. I'll wait till I see the film. That's going to be a few months because I won't go to the theater for it. I reserve the theater-going experience to my neighborhood independent theater, which brings in foreign and independent films. No Hollywood bombast for me.

Be that as it may, Mel's motives are at the very least suspicious partly because of the pre-Vatican II adherence, especially considering the historical attitude of the Vatican toward Jews. But I shall reserve jugment in the meantime.

As for the Bible, one thought often strikes me. Aside from well-meaning folks like our friend Chrissy, isn't it sad that a lot of the people who are the most vocal about living by the Bible tend to be the least godly in their actions and their judgments?

I am not quite an atheist yet, but I am fast going in there. I find it hard to believe there is a god, and believe it or not, I am actually happier by concluding that there is no god. It's hard for me to reconcile so many of "god's children" living in horrible circumstances in so many places. Hey, look, Dubya's Pentagon now says we could see the start of a new ice age within a decade or two. You know what that means. Most of us are f***ed anyway.

[dissention]

Originally posted by CarneVaca
Nor the immaculate conception.


You know, when I was in grade school (about 11), my grandmother told me that story and I actually asked my teacher about it. She said she didn't know anything about it and I asked if a straw was used. :laugh: I got detention.

Now, the thing that always fascinated me about that story is the idea that a woman could get pregnant without being penetrated. It just doesn't make sense to me. Yet, the same people who believe in it do not believe in ghosts or the like. :laugh:

[dissention]

My word. I feel like Madeline Murry O'Hare at Sunday Mass. :laugh:

[wondergirl9847]

Originally posted by dissention
Now, the thing that always fascinated me about that story is the idea that a woman could get pregnant without being penetrated. It just doesn't make sense to me. Yet, the same people who believe in it do not believe in ghosts or the like. :laugh:

If you believe that God made the earth and everything in it and around it, etc...you can believe that Mary was blessed with Jesus in her tummy. Miracles happen everyday. :nod:

I just don't see how a person can look around at the world/space and NOT believe in God, but that's just me. :shrug:

[strandinthewind]

Originally posted by dissention
You know, when I was in grade school (about 11), my grandmother told me that story and I actually asked my teacher about it. She said she didn't know anything about it and I asked if a straw was used. :laugh: I got detention.

Now, the thing that always fascinated me about that story is the idea that a woman could get pregnant without being penetrated. It just doesn't make sense to me. Yet, the same people who believe in it do not believe in ghosts or the like. :laugh:

:eek: :laugh: :laugh: :laugh:

I, too, had a rather practicle thought about it. I thiugh, well what if Mary just "got in trouble" and made up this big lie and fortunately her Son was a great man. But, then I thought even is Mary was born without the symbolic original sin, it could have happened. But, I chose to focus on the goodness of the story and not the actual event etc. becuase for me it is not all that relevant that it actually occurred. But, that is just me. :cool:

[dissention]

Originally posted by wondergirl9847
I just don't see how a person can look around at the world/space and NOT believe in God, but that's just me. :shrug:

Disclaimer ( :laugh: ) : These are my personal beliefs and I mean no offesne or insult to anyone who practices an organized religion or believes in God. :cool:

I don't believe in God at all. I think that the Bible is the stuff of tall tales and is no more believable than the Grimm Fairy Tales are. I was raised as a person who could choose to subscribe to a religion or not, it was never dictated that I had to be this or that. I attended church a few times and just decided that it wasn't for me. My grandmother and my mom used to tell me stories from the Bible and I even attended a Catholic school for two years. :eek: I found the beliefs to be absolutely ridiculous and the people who practiced it to be highly hypocritical and judgemental. I never bought into the claim that this person from above created us all; it's too wild a tale to believe. I don't believe that God created man and woman, I believe in evolution (don't shoot me!). I'm skeptical of whether or not Jesus even existed, too. I do not believe in praying and think that it is a waste of time; life will do what it wants to do and no one from above has any hand in it. I don't believe in Heaven or Hell, I think they are things that were made up to give people hope of life beyond life on this planet. I think that God was created to give people the answers they want about life and to give them a sense of understanding about the life they lead and they planet the live on.

Having said all of that, I believe that there is a life beyond the ones we lead now and that our spirits go somewhere when we die. I believe in a higher power, but I do not believe that it has any part in what happens in our lives while we live on earth. I believe that our lives are in our hands and we are here to make something of it.

Just my thoughts, though. :)

[dissention]

Originally posted by strandinthewind
:eek: :laugh: :laugh: :laugh:

I, too, had a rather practicle thought about it. I thiugh, well what if Mary just "got in trouble" and made up this big lie and fortunately her Son was a great man.

Yeah, "Mary and the Stable Boy: The Untold Story". :laugh: j/k

[wondergirl9847]

Originally posted by dissention
I don't believe that God created man and woman, I believe in evolution (don't shoot me!)

Can you explain to me then, how the world was created out of nothing? :confused: If there was a "big bang" theory, where did those molecules or whatever come from?

[dissention]

Originally posted by wondergirl9847
Can you explain to me then, how the world was created out of nothing? :confused: If there was a "big bang" theory, where did those molecules or whatever come from?

No, I cannot explain it and I don't believe it will *ever* be explained. But, if I am certain of one thing, the explanation given in the Bible isn't a true explanation, it's a story that has been passed down. Sorry, it's too big of a tale. :(

[wondergirl9847]

Originally posted by dissention
No, I cannot explain it and I don't believe it will *ever* be explained. But, if I am certain of one thing, the explanation given in the Bible isn't a true explanation, it's a story that has been passed down. Sorry, it's too big of a tale. :(

"Cuz ya gotta have faith, faith, faith, you gotta have faith ah faith, ah faith...BABY!!..."

:D

:laugh:

[dissention]

Originally posted by wondergirl9847
"Cuz ya gotta have faith, faith, faith, you gotta have faith ah faith, ah faith...BABY!!..."

:D

:laugh:

:laugh: LMAO!

[tommer]

Originally posted by dissention
Disclaimer ( :laugh: ) : These are my personal beliefs and I mean no offesne or insult to anyone who practices an organized religion or believes in God. :cool:

i'm sorry, but it's about to get worse.

over all, i think that we jews' fault is not the rejection of christ. i do not think we are to blame for communism, the holocaust, nor the oppression of the palestinians.
our blame is the invention of "our" now-collective monotheistic "god". we were the ones to open this door.
with this bright idea, we doomed both occident and orient to thousands of years of useless wars, animosity, hostility and misery. all on "his" behalf.
we ****ed big time, didn't we... :confused:

[strandinthewind]

OMG - Jake - I was reading Newsweek cover story in the February 16, 2004, U.S. Edition, by Jon Meacham called "Who Killed Jesus?" The article is good IMO and points out that although Gibson clearly followed the four Gospels, he embellished in what they thought was a way negative to the Jews. The article went on to point out the mistranslations, etc., referring to some Jews (like Caiaphas and his posse) as opposed to "all Jews." They also go into the Sanhedrin and indicate that it is not clear whether they were the acutal group. In any event, if it is still around, its worth reading, at least it was to me :cool:

[darklinensuit]

Originally posted by strandinthewind
OMG - Jake - I was reading Newsweek cover story in the February 16, 2004, U.S. Edition, by Jon Meacham called "Who Killed Jesus?" The article is good IMO and points out that although Gibson clearly followed the four Gospels, he embellished in what they thought was a way negative to the Jews. The article went on to point out the mistranslations, etc., referring to some Jews (like Caiaphas and his posse) as opposed to "all Jews." They also go into the Sanhedrin and indicate that it is not clear whether they were the acutal group. In any event, if it is still around, its worth reading, at least it was to me :cool:

Yeah, I've had it sitting on my desk for some time but haven't gotten to it yet. Copies were given to all the students two weeks ago.

- Jake