Skip to comments.FR MOVIE REVUE: THE PASSION OF CHRIST (post your comments here)
Posted on 02/24/2004 11:28:50 AM PST by Liz
All the world is waiting for the powerful message in Mel Gibson's ground-breaking film, The Passion of Christ.
Post here your own personal reactions after seeing the film set to open tomorrow, Ash Wednesday. Passion has previewed in some areas.
Also post reviews and pertinent comments from your state and area's newspapers and publications.
I did not post to you! Free Republic is an open forum. No one made you read my post. You posted specifically to me. Why can't you just leave me alone?
By the way, where did I say I was not a Christian?
Pray for W and The Passion of Christ
I am in no way trying to shut down discussion. I am trying to promote it. Please learn the difference.
And if you think that "no one here" is attempting to shut down discussion, you have obviously missed the posts saying, "Why can't you just leave the Christians alone?", "Take a hike, Bunky. I don't think anybody cares what you think", "You disgust me... You truly do...", "I came to this thread to read reviews about the film, not wade through self-absorbed posts by atheists", and "Since most people on this thread are too kind, I will say it. I wish you weren't here."
What's that saying about motes and beams?
You have belittled and ridiculed post after post because they failed to grovel at the feet of your atheistic brother.
No, I have not. Again, try to be less defensive. When I haven't understood a poster's view, I have asked them how they arrived at that view.
I have had discussions with MineralMan before and he is quite capable of handling himself.
I don't doubt that.
He doesn't need an incomprehensibly smug and superior fellow atheist flaming those who have posted disagreements with his words.
And I don't need someone jumping to conclusions about what I do or do not believe, nor am I "flaming" people when I ask questions about their views.
But if that's how you feel, doesn't it cut both ways? Shall I point out that "[the people I'm responding to] don't need an incomprehensibly smug and superior fellow [Christian] flaming those who have posted disagreements with [their] words"? Beware the double standard.
And speaking of being "deeply offensive", as you do in this post, isn't that rant of yours rather plainly offensive?
Smugly dismissing someone's faith, for which they would die, as a mere "myth" is deeply offensive to some.
I don't see that he did so. He neither "dismissed" anyone's faith, nor called it a "mere" myth, in the sense of calling it a fiction.
myth ( P ) Pronunciation Key (mth)You're choosing to be insulted by interpreting his usage of the word as having been meant in senses 3 or 4. From his post, however, it seems clear that he means it in sense 1. When used in that manner the word "myth" is nonjudgmental about the value or truth of the belief system being described.
- A traditional, typically ancient story dealing with supernatural beings, ancestors, or heroes that serves as a fundamental type in the worldview of a people, as by explaining aspects of the natural world or delineating the psychology, customs, or ideals of society: the myth of Eros and Psyche; a creation myth.
- Such stories considered as a group: the realm of myth.
- A popular belief or story that has become associated with a person, institution, or occurrence, especially one considered to illustrate a cultural ideal: a star whose fame turned her into a myth; the pioneer myth of suburbia.
- A fiction or half-truth, especially one that forms part of an ideology.
- A fictitious story, person, or thing: German artillery superiority on the Western Front was a myth (Leon Wolff).
Again, try to be less defensive about the fact that other people hold different views. Even if he had meant it in sense 3 or 4, it should not be "deeply offensive" for someone to merely express their disbelief in something you happen to believe, unless it is done in a truly disrespectful manner, which MineralMan's posts were not. He even prefaced his comment with "for me", clearly indicating that it was only his own view, and was not meant to be a claim about the absolute truth/falsity of the story. Surely no one should be surprised, shocked, offended, or "disgusted" by the mere reminder of the existence of nonbelievers.
The fact that they would have the audacity to post that within your eyesight is no invitation for a wannabe-intellectual smackdown.
Again, you presume much, and read things into text that aren't there, apparently due to the defensiveness I mentioned earlier. Nor was the issue someone being "offended", it was their declaring that they found him "disgusting", which is another thing entirely. I didn't understand how that reaction would be caused by the post to which he was replying, thus my question about why he felt that way.
My question was in no way prompted by any consideration of "audacity" nor was I trying for a "smackdown".
As for your accusations of "wannabe-intellectual", I find it interesting that you would consider attempts to understand someone's post as somehow worthy of derision. Are people who think about what they read intimidating to you somehow?
We have all come to this thread to read reviews by those who have seen the movie.
And so have I.
You came here to be a hall monitor to keep the small-minded little superstitious Christians in line.
WOW, that's a mighty big chip you have on your shoulder. No, I have no such belief or motivation.
But neither do I understand apparent attempts of others to play "hall monitor to keep the smug little Christian-hating atheists in line", if that's what the attempts are. Your post seems a good example, unless you can convince me otherwise.
In short, religious tolerance is a two-way street. Or at least it should be. I am as uncomfortable with attacks on Christians for being Christians as I am with attacks on non-Christians merely for being non-Christians.
You misunderstand me.
Okay, I'll bite. Where on Earth did you get the idea that I in any way faulted you (or anyone) for "not responding within" a "defined amount of time" or expected anyone to be on "my leash" or "at my beck and call"?
I'm completely at a loss as to where this interpretation of yours comes from.
And you had *already* responded to my question, in your post #119, seventeen short minutes after I posed the question. Have you forgotten?
I will pray for your soul Ichneumon; as trying as it might be; regardless of your arrogance; and your ignorance.
Um, thanks, I think, although I'm doing just fine, thank you.
I'm sure you'll laugh and show your utter contempt for us simpletons;
I'm sure you'll continue to believe that even when I don't
but you go through life knowing nothing; and having no spiritual life whatsoever. And so you shall pass; into the nothingness you so devoutly desire.
Again, I'm baffled as to how you could arrive at such a bizarre conclusion from my posts. Where do these presumptions come from?
Enjoy your Nothingness Pal
Enjoy your superciliousness, I guess.
BTW; Ive been here on FR since April 1998 and Ive posted over 790 replies Certainly not a Newbie;
I've been here since September 1998, and posted 8934 replies. What was your point again?
been here, seen your ilk many, many times before
That's fine, I've met lots of folks like you too -- people who can read all sorts of strange things into posts that aren't actually there.
And like I said, you will fade into the nothingness you so apparently and devoutly desire.
If you get satisfaction out of imagining that my soul will be destroyed, I hope it brings you some sort of peace, my friend. I will not attempt to disillusion you.
I am not sure. He seems to be interested in the subject but doesn't want to taint his views. As if he is afraid that the movie will make him think differently. Just the feeling I got from his previous posts. But I am not the touchy, feely type, so take my observation with a grain of salt.
I got the impression that his interest in the subject was more about other people's views than it was about whatever might be in the film itself. So watching the film wouldn't answer his curiosity, while chatting on the thread would be more likely to.
Just the feeling I got from his previous posts. But I am not the touchy, feely type, so take my observation with a grain of salt.
Heh -- and mine as well. We'll have to wait until he returns and lets us know.
Thanks for your thoughtful response.
I can understand why someone would think that Christians would be all for revenge, but we're honestly not. Even the disciples were not after "revenge" -- it went against everything they were taught by the Lord and thus believed.
Peter gave a sermon to those in Judea and Jerusalem in the presence of the eleven other disciples, found in Acts 2:22-40. He begins by saying,
"Men of Israel, listen to these words: Jesus the Nazarene, a man attested to you by God with miracles and wonders and signs which God performed through Him in your midst, just as you yourselves know -- this Man, delivered over by the predetermined plan and foreknowledge of God, you nailed to a cross by the hands of godless men and put Him to death.
But God raised Him up again, putting an end to the agony of death, since it was impossible for Him to be held in its power" (Acts 2:22-24).
After continuing by pointing out that Christ's resurrection was foretold in the Old Testament (v. 25-35), Peter ends with this declaration,
"Therefore let all the house of Israel know for certain that God has made Him both Lord and Christ -- this Jesus whom you crucified" (v. 36).
Now the Jewish people were pierced to the heart when they heard this, and so they asked Peter and the disciples "Brethren, what shall we do?" (v. 37).
It's important to note the important word "brethren" here, because it is true. The disciples were Jewish, as was the Lord. Romans 1:16 tells us that the Gospel "is the power of God for salvation to everyone who believes, to the Jew first and also to the Greek."
The Apostle Paul specifically warns Gentile believers in Romans 11:17-25 not to become arrogant toward Jewish people, because the Gentiles are what he describes as the branches of a wild olive tree that have been grafted into a natural olive tree (Christ). The meaning is clear -- Jewish people were still being saved and are still being saved, and one day "all Israel will be saved" (v. 26). Further, the arrogance of the Gentiles could cause them to be cut off from the Lord (v. 20-21).
Paul stilled loved his Jewish brethren. In fact, he had "great sorrow and unceasing grief in his heart" because of their unbelief (Romans 9:2). Listen to these words: "For I could wish that I myself were accursed, separated from Christ for the sake of my brethren, my kinsman according to the flesh" (9:3). In Romans 10:1, he says, "Brethren, my heart's desire and my prayer to God for them (Israel) is their salvation."
All of us alike are under sin (Romans 3:9), and we have all fallen short of the glory of God (3:23). As the Bible says, "The wages of sin is death, but the free gift of God is eternal life in Christ Jesus our Lord" (Romans 6:23).
Jesus came to this earth to die a cruel and bloody death, but also to rise from the dead as proof that He was everything He claimed to be. He is the model of humility, as Paul relates in Philippians 2:3-11:
"Do nothing from selfishness or empty conceit, but with humility of mind regard one another as more important than yourselves; do not merely look out for your own personal interests, but also for the interests of others. Have this attitude in yourselves which was also in Christ Jesus,
"Who, although He existed in the form of God, did not consider equality with God a thing to be grasped, but emptied Himself, taking on the form of a bond-servant, and being made in the likeness of men.
"Being found in appearance as a man, He humbled Himself by becoming obedient to the point of death, even death on the cross. For this reason also, God highly exalted Him, and gave Him the name that is above every name, so that at the name of Jesus every knee will bow, of those who are on heaven and on earth and under the earth, and that every tongue will confess that Jesus Christ is Lord, to the glory of God the Father."
We are to model Christ's humility, gentleness, and compassion, all while speaking the truth in love (Eph. 4:15).
So how did Peter respond to the Jewish cries of "Brethren, what shall we do" (Acts 2:37)? He spoke the truth in love, saying, "Repent, and each of you be baptized in the name of Jesus Christ for the forgiveness of your sins; and you will receive the gift of the Holy Spirit. For the promise is for you and your children, as many as the Lord our God will call to Himself" (2:38).
There was, and is, no room for hatred of anyone. There is only room for this loving promise:
"That if you confess with your mouth Jesus as Lord, and believe in your heart that God raised Him from the dead, you will be saved; for with the heart a person believes, resulting in righteousness, and with the mouth he confesses, resulting in salvation.
"For the Scripture says, 'Whoever believes in Him will never be disappointed.' For there is no distinction between Jew and Greek, for the same Lord is Lord of all, abounding in riches for all who call on Him; for 'Whoever believes in Him will never be disappointed'" (Romans 10:9-12).
Amateurs! I've only been here since October 2000, and I still managed to post 16,498 replies.
We also have to gear up for a major freep when the People's Choice Awards show comes up. Mel has won Best Actor quite a few times there, when he has been stiffed by the Oscar's. The people love Mel, and love his movies. Let's make sure this movie wins Best Picture at the PCA!
Mel Gibson discusses The Passion with Dr. James Dobson: http://boss.streamos.com/real/swn/oneplace/rm/ffd/ffd20040223.ram (RealPlayer)
I don't know about her, but my fear is from a lack of faith on my part. Sure, I believe and try to lead moral life. I have raised my childern to be kind, honest, polite, and respectfull of others, but I have never completely understood the faithful (my best longterm friends is an Ordained Minister so I had plenty of discussions on the topic believe me). So, my fear is that this movie will change me. I don't think I am alone.
2 Corinthians 3:17-19
Now the Lord is the Spirit, and where the Spirit of the Lord is, there is freedom. And we, who with unveiled faces all reflect the Lord's glory, are being transformed into his likeness with ever-increasing glory, which comes from the Lord, who is the Spirit.
After all the time and work they've put in marginalizing Christians, they're going berserk that its all for naught.
This is true. My direct ancestor was a minister and owned two houses in Charlestown, MA. The Brits burned him out.
I was not being defensive about anything. I couldn't care less that others hold different views. I responded to the flames you diligently posted to several people. You seemed offended that they disagreed with your point of view, so you had to set them straight. The air of smug superiority snorted by some atheists (as if theirs is the only "intellectual" viewpoint) annoys me.
Believe what you will, but please don't lord it over the rest of us as if you are the only enlightened one and we believers are too backward and unsophisticated to understand. It gets under my craw for some reason.
But, I've slept since then.
I base it on what I have read on some of the previous Passion review threads of FR. Why? You'd have to ask the people who engage in this sort of "review".
I believe CS Lewis once held that position. Then he actually looked into the facts.
My point exactly. Thank you for your support.
Have a little respect. This thread was about those who have gone to the movie and their reviews. Go crap all over your own thread.
Here are some snippets....
"Blood splatters. Skin rips open. Eyes swell shut. Gibson's thesis is that Jesus suffered for people's sins, and his focus is on the suffering.
The relentless brutality is likely to put off many viewers, but it also gives the film a haunting power. The images are difficult to get out of your mind. You will leave the theater feeling emotionally exhausted and probably will spend the next few hours processing what you've witnessed."
"People who think this R-rated movie should be shown to children as part of their religious education should first see the movie and then give the question serious thought. The imagery is challenging enough for adults. This is one Sunday-school teacher who's not showing it to his students. If you do, good luck in dealing with the nightmares."
"Jim Caviezel ("The Count of Monte Cristo") plays Jesus. His specialty is playing quiet but powerful figures, which means he's excellently cast here. His also is the only face likely to be recognized by American viewers. Unlike many star-studded religious movies, Gibson's production went the opposite direction, casting actors from Italy (where the movie was shot) and Eastern Europe, an approach that keeps the focus on the story rather than the people enacting it."
"The word "Passion" is fitting for the title. Even if you didn't know that Gibson sunk $25 million of his own money into the project when no one else would back it, his fervor for the subject matter is evident. Regardless of how you feel about the movie's message, you're certain to leave the movie feeling something about the movie itself."
Snotty personal attack, ten yard penalty.
Why is it so hard to comprehend what the point of this thread WAS?
I understand just fine what the point of this thread is. Go vent your wrath on the people who started the personal attacks, not me.
I frankly don't want to have to trudge through posts about why people are not going to go to this movie nor about posts defending others who post about not going to this movie.
How about people who complain about people who... Oh, never mind.
Have a little respect. This thread was about those who have gone to the movie and their reviews.
Look, son, as I tried to say succinctly in my last post (which was apparently too subtle), whether you realize it or not, we're on the same side on that point. So stop trying to pick a new fight over it today by jumping on one of YESTERDAY'S posts and, you know, talk about the movie or something. Or if you feel you must post to "hear yourself type", as you've done several times now and only added to the noise ratio, go after some of the folks who *started* the gripefest and dragged it off topic.
Go crap all over your own thread.
If I ever need that done, I'll sure know who to call.
(If anyone else feels the sudden urge to take some shots at me, I suggest FreepMail.)
We now return you to your regularly scheduled thread.