Five Reasons Not to Go See The Passion of Christ

The Banner of Truth: Biblical Christianity through Literature ^ | February 19, 2004 | Andrew J. Webb

[MegaSilver]

Long article, but well said. The movie may be worth seeing and may help evangelize, but it is also worth thinking about carefully.

Well said??

This article is nothing but pure and simple Romophobia from start to finish.

[MindBender26]

I get the impression this was written by an Ego-gelical.

[MindBender26]

Me thinks there might be a touch of the Branch Dividians here.

[narses]

What year was your church founded? What version of the Bible is your choice? When was it written and why is that somehow not "the frying pan"?

Christ appointed the Apostles. The Holy Ghost guided them and helped them select their successors, starting with the replacement of Judas in the very first days of the Catholic (Universal), Apostolic Church. Their direct, lineal successors are the Bishops of the Catholic and Apostolic Church of today, led by the first among them, the Vicar of Christ, His Holiness Pope John Paul II.

[kcvl]

Andrew J. Webb

info@banneroftruth.org

[DallasMike]

The anti-Catholic rant of the century. Read it, weep and critique please.

It's not even worth the time because it represents the view of a very, very tiny minority. Evangelicals are going to the movie in droves and 99.99% of us don't care whether Mel Gibson and Jim Caviezel are Catholic or Southern Baptist. It's a Christian movie made by a Christian man.

[Alberta's Child]

Why should not The Son of David (Luke 18:38) have been a relatively small man like His great ancestor? It never seems to have occurred to most image-makers that Jesus could be relatively short, or stout, or even have had a receding hairline.

If the Shroud of Turin is any indication, Jesus Christ was, in fact, a man who was extraordinarily tall for that period of time. The image on the shroud doesn't seem to have a receding hairline, either.

[MEG33]

Oh,please.We have enough atheists and knee jerkers slamming a film about Jesus Christ.I , a Protestant, am not proud of this article.There are are multitudes of protestants who have a different view.It is not those things that divide us that seem to be what is important about this film.

[Servant of the 9]

Sounds like this guy has a real problem with Catholics.

You'll hear the same radical fundamentalists all the time.
To them, Roman Catholics are not Christians, but followers of the Anti-Christ.

The only quibble I have with the movie, and it is only a quibble is about Latin being used, instead of Greek.

Greek had been the working language of the area since Alexander the Great and was the language of choice of Roman Aristocrats everywhere.

So9

[Alberta's Child]

That's what I thought at first, but then I saw that this letter is, in fact, directed specifically at Evangelicals and is written from a strictly Evangelical viewpoint.

[MindBender26]

Nah, just my evening rant.

I'll sleep better..... :~)

Be well.

[Hillarys Gate Cult]

6. Because the movie puts Hollywood on notice that they will have to start working for a living. They can't have that.

[MegaSilver]

This article is nothing but pure and simple Romophobia from start to finish.

One more thing I should add. One of the biggest reasons Christians are struggling to stay afloat in the culture war is because we allow ourselves to become divided over trivial issues. I understand what the author was getting at, but it was nothing but Romophobia, and that will do nothing but drive a wedge into Christendom even more.

Contrast this with the left and its intricate, carefully constructed network of NOW, ACLU, PAW, MoveOn.org, CRR, etc. all making sure not to work against each other.

[unspun]

"Teacher," said John, "we saw a man driving out demons in your name and we told him to stop, because he was not one of us." "Do not stop him," Jesus said. "No one who does a miracle in my name can in the next moment say anything bad about me, for whoever is not against us is for us. I tell you the truth, anyone who gives you a cup of water in my name because you belong to Christ will certainly not lose his reward.
-----------------
An argument started among the disciples as to which of them would be the greatest. Jesus, knowing their thoughts, took a little child and had him stand beside him. Then he said to them, "Whoever welcomes this little child in my name welcomes me; and whoever welcomes me welcomes the one who sent me. For he who is least among you all--he is the greatest." "Master," said John, "we saw a man driving out demons in your name and we tried to stop him, because he is not one of us." "Do not stop him," Jesus said, "for whoever is not against you is for you."

[nmh]

I'm not a Catholic and have NO intentions of becoming one. I couldn't become a Catholic since I am Bible based. The author raises many valid points that other non-Catholics need to be aware of.

"Even the worst physical torments inflicted by the Sanhedrin and the Romans upon Jesus were nothing by comparison to the anguish of having the sins of all the elect imputed to Him and making full satisfaction for them. "

This is very true. His death was horrible yet the focus is misplaced. The above phrase has it right. By far the physical was tolerable compared to the emotional pain.

[MegaSilver]

What year was your church founded? What version of the Bible is your choice? When was it written and why is that somehow not "the frying pan"?

< devil's advocate>I just want to point out that the Protestant claim regarding the Church is that it is the body of believers in Christ as a whole, not some central institution. The concept of God sanctioning of a particular institution (i.e., the Catholic Church of the Roman Bishop) means little, if anything, to most Protestants.< /devil's advocate>

[tbird5]

Is it wrong to think many Protestants have a problem with the Catholic Church and it's teachings? I am a Catholic and I feel that many protestants think my religion is weird. I think what he has to say many Protestants would agree, if they really understood Gibson's film. He's right, it is a very Roman Catholic film.

[michaelt]

Based on this one passage:

The first reason why all visual representations of Jesus are lies is because the only wise God went to great lengths not to leave us with any description of the physical appearance of His Son lest we fall into the sin of image making. Therefore all of our representations of Jesus are inevitably speculations usually based upon our own desires. We create an image of Jesus that says more about the Jesus we want than the Jesus whom God sent.

it seems to me that for evangelicals (and even for Catholics?) no movies should be made about Jesus, or at least they shouldn't watch them or take them as anything more than pure entertainment (and why would you then want to be entertained by something that is the core of your faith?).

So that makes all of the rest of the author's reasons superfluous and gratuitous.

And maybe just a reason to bash the Catholic faith.

[Nick Danger]

In a society where the government is so hostile to religion that even the Ten Commandments are not welcome; where every cultural megaphone from Disney to the Teacher's Union preaches nature worship to children, this guy gets torqued because it was a Catholic who rammed a movie about Jesus Christ past the Hollywood "elite" and onto 4,000 movie screens.

Hello? The threat to Evangelical Christianity is not Mel Gibson. Never mind whether he's Catholic. Worry about Mel Gibson when you're done with the ACLU and the liberal judges. In case you haven't noticed, those people are out to stamp out Christianity altogether, and they are getting real good at it.