The Sacrelige of the Christ

[Breton Thief Oriana]

It took long enough, but now there is a religion-ish debate again. Let those keyboards burn with the tips of your angry fingers!

 

The Pasion: Is this not sacreligious in itself? why do we need to see and worship the way christ died? If we do that, it makes us seem like we are glad a great man died. But, I got an idea...let us, the american people, commit even more sacrelige! lets go there in yammachas (SP? sorry hewbrew community...) and turbans, I know our religions hate each other, but let us cheer in the name of god/allah for the death of christ, and cheer just as loudly as all you hyppocritical uber-christians who praise his name but don't care how he lived--only how he died. Let us go and recite the sutra, let us go and ponder the esscense of yin and yang on christs last hours, let us go and drink the poisoned koolaid and die for these "fine" christian people's sins just as their messiah did. They obviously feel every love in their soul for him, because they made a mockery of his last hours by making a movie about it. Let us go further still, watch it another time, as some other religion that it has no worshiping of christ's death (Im sure I missed a couple).

 

Ive seen people get heart failure from seeing this! is that a coincidence? they've been normal-weight, non-smoking people in their thirties that did. This is like the arc of the covenant or something. They even set up shelters at the movie theatre for people who watched it, and they give free milk and cookies and everything. Well, its not like bread and wine, but itll do for your nightly, loving-of-christ's death communion.

[Darnoc]

Interesting that you mention that. I also heard a lot that people complained about this. And you are probably also right: Gibson should have not only showed us Jesus' death, but also his live. Then it would be clear, why he was killed (because he annoyed the ruling guys of the time, he went to the outcasts of society and gave the ruling guys answer they didn't like; hey, Jesus was a real revolutionary, wasn't he?). In Gibson's film you only see how he dies. No real mentioning of the reasons and of what he has done during his lifetime (only hinted and only visible who have some knowlegde of the bible).

 

For example, why couldn't they have shown the scene with Maria Magdalena and how they wanted to stone her to death in full? I think, Jesus' answer is still absolutely genious: "Whoever is without sin shall throw the first stone!" Right, this is the way of talking to those bastards! Jesus the rebell! Jesus the revolutionary! He showed those bastards, how hypocritic they acctually were. I think, we need also today some people who say "Whoever is without weapons of mass destruction shall tell other countries to stop building them or having them!" or "Whoever is without terrorism shall tell other people to stop terrorizing others!" and of course "Whoever is without war shall help making peace!".

 

I often wonder, what Jesus would do, if he came today. Would he tell Bush and his guys such things as he told the rulers of his lifetime? Would he go into the slums and gettos? And would he be fried by the today's rulers on an electric chair?

[Breton Thief Oriana]

I often wonder, what Jesus would do, if he came today. Would he tell Bush and his guys such things as he told the rulers of his lifetime? Would he go into the slums and gettos? And would he be fried by the today's rulers on an electric chair?

 

I think you DO know the answer to that: yes he would, to all of them. Also, If came here without living in that time before, yes the U.S. government would fry him to squelch the revolution...or, maybe they would only execute him in secret, that's how the United States really is. If he came back, we would be turned into a full fledged theocracy because no one could have the heart to kill jesus a second time...they love him, right? wrong. They would still kill him, he's an enemy to the wellbeing of the conservative one-sided government of the U. S. They also would have no guilt about it because theyd be exicuting him for their sins.

 

Vive jasoos! Vive la Revolucione! Ive never thought of Jesus as a renegade and rebel, now I like him a lot more. Maybe im not the best christian....dont answer that, thank you...(agnostic in parodise)

 

I can say this: at least it didnt tell the story of the BIRTH of jesus starring Mel Gibson, that would be just plain WRONG!

 

EDIT: I think that I will email mr W himself, saying what you said. how would you like me to quote you? not that he reads it anyway, but if he does than its perfect.

[Breton Thief Oriana]

Heh, I did it. Lied through my teeth too...he probably wont answer, though.

 

Here is what I wrote--

The above is a quote I copyed here to ask you a question that I am sure you know an answer to. I support your morals, sir, but I had wondered wether you would do these things to Jesus Christ. I am a pro-life fifteen year old adolescent practicing abstinence having a definity of faith in the life of such a great man (This time being Jesus, not you, although you are a great man yourself sir). Well, I was thinking, and when I thought about it, I wearilly concluded that you might have him put to death for commiting an act of revolution. Well, sir, I would not like to have such ill thoughts of you, but I know that things look bad for your reputation, with that horrible man %&$! Clarke saying such things, and the way the great empire of american business is starting to turn into a grassless plain. We are losing all hopes and morals, and time is slowly spiraling towards a nation with a glorious history and little more. I wondered about these questions, sir. I would like to know how you would answer them yourself, and how you would anticipate your esteemed opponent, John Kerry, would answer them if he were of your great position. I am sure you will not let me lose my faith in my government, because you will not leave a single child behind; you are a great man, perhaps the greatest I have seen except for Jesus Christ himself.

 

This included your post on the subject, Darnoc.

and, to the mods, sorry for double posting.

[Darnoc]

Great one, Breton!!!!

 

Jesus really was a revolutionary. And also his disciples were, mostly Paul. Look what he has written: "Everything is allowed, but not everything is useful." This just plainly means: You can do everything you want, you have to decide for yourself what is right and wrong and nobody can tell you what to do!

 

And look at this sentence: "Love your next one as yourself. This is the conclusion of law." This just means: If every person loves every other person, we don't need the law anymore. My only conclusion: The first christian were anarchists!!! Yeah!!! The Revolution of Love!!! Let's found the Christian Revolution Party!!! Or even better: The Christian Revolution Army!!!

 

Jesus was killed, because he told the truth to the ruling guys, the truth they didn't want to know. This is the reason, why they killed him. And it doesn't matter who killed him, because everywhere he would have went he would have been killed, and as you said, even today. Because the guys who rule don't like such persons as Jesus who tell such things. They don't want to hear anything about sharing everything (this is called communism!) or absolute love and the abolishment of every law (this is called anarchism!). Paul even says that whoever is under the law is damned. He says that we are free and no longer need any laws. Right he is! Let's abolish the government, the police and the law! Let's all live in the absolute love Jesus talked about and we won't have any problems anymore anywhere!

[Malchik]

I'm not sure from your first post Breton whether you realise that Christ features in both Jewish and Islamic religions already.

 

Darnoc, I assume your last remark was tongue-in-cheek. I fear human nature is not equal to the 'no laws' policy, sad though it is to admit it. I imagine you'll be setting up your own pastoral commune in time? Let me know how it goes.

 

As for public reaction in the UK, most people can't understand what the fuss is about. We just shake our heads over the Americans and wonder why they are all so up-tight about everything.

 

I note Breton doesn't relish the idea of a film on the birth of Christ. Feels it would be an immaculate misconception I suppose! :lol:

[Breton Thief Oriana]

Didnt say a film on the birth of christ wouldnt be good, just dont want Mel Gibson to play jesus. and, the white house auto-replied me...

 

The idea that religion has become about faction rather than belief is why I put the islamic/hebrew thing there. Its just for comic fodder, but we did say that our god was better than allah (or the christians did).

 

The fuss over the movie about the death of christ is that it was ment to reaffirm faith in jesus by depicting how he died. Thats wrong, we should do a movie about how he lived...and the actors shouldnt be paid. All the other religions didnt have any messiah movies either, why are we pushing this one? if they did, they wouldnt gross 40 million dollars from just the box office! and this didnt show anything of what JC did himself...just how he died....its sacrelige. Understand that that is what I meant by my first post. Remember the good old days when movies were fictisous?

[Malchik]

Actually that last comment was a joke - immaculate conception/misconception. But it would take more than a Caesarian Section (Roman joke) to get Mel Gibson out of Mary's womb! The mind boogies!!!!

 

Besides wasn't the man only about 33 when he died. You'd need someone who is about 30 now, cos by the time the film was made and...

 

30? That could be...

 

Aaagh! No! No!!!! DiCaprio for crucifixion maybe but not for christ!

 

Back on topic. I'm not sure why you think it is a sacrilegious film. I'm sure the director never intended that, he's a fundamentalist. {BTW - fundamentalist derives from fundament (the buttocks) where they keep their brains.} It may be nasty and gratuitously violent but I cannot see where it disrespects (verb archaic) either christ or christianity.

 

I am not a believer but I did have a lot of religion poured into me when I was young. I also studied comparative religion. Part of the significance of the story of christ to the christians is that the man supposedly died to save humankind from sin. Therefore the death is of great importance. If MG wants to make believers realise how much he suffered to save them surely it is a valid, even a laudable idea in theory.

 

I'm just not sure the way it turned out is not too voyeuristic.

 

At the end of the day let's be pleased that at least one religion allows films like it to be made. Christianity does not (yet) need mediaeval laws and closed minds to survive - unlike some others. That is something all christians should be thankful for.

[Zmid]

Didnt say a film on the birth of christ wouldnt be good, just dont want Mel Gibson to play jesus.

Just a small correction - Mel Gibson doesn't play Jesus, he's the director. Jim Caviezel plays Jesus.

[thanateros]

Mel Gibson doesn't play Jesus

Right, instead he plays God.

 

When people discuss the necessity for Jesus' life to be examined I think that it would also let people know that originally Jesus practiced Judism. His doctrine sought to fix the steep criteria of the Jewish faith (such as fasting, eating requirements etc.). It blows my mind that people get so caught up in the anti-semetic element when really Christianity is a simplified offshoot of Judism.