Krauthammer: "Gibson's Blood Libel"

Washington Post ^ | Mar. 5, 04 | Charles Krauthammer

[churchillbuff]

Gibson's Blood Libel

By Charles Krauthammer Friday, March 5, 2004; Page A23

Every people has its story. Every people has the right to its story. And every people has a responsibility for its story. ...[snip]

Christians have their story too: the crucifixion and resurrection of Christ. Why is this story different from other stories? Because it is not a family affair of coreligionists. If it were, few people outside the circle of believers would be concerned about it. This particular story involves other people. With the notable exception of a few Romans, these people are Jews. And in the story, they come off rather badly.

Because of that peculiarity, the crucifixion is not just a story; it is a story with its own story -- a history of centuries of relentless, and at times savage, persecution of Jews in Christian lands. This history is what moved Vatican II, in a noble act of theological reflection, to decree in 1965 that the Passion of Christ should henceforth be understood with great care so as to unteach the lesson that had been taught for almost two millennia: that the Jews were Christ killers.

[Abundy]

I take it you thought the visual message was that Satan was trying to get close to Christ, rather than poisoning the minds of the mob, or equating the mob to Satan, as Satan. Perhaps we all see what we "want" to see.

First, I not sure "what" I "wanted" to see. I had heard too much of the Media BS, and quite frankly, I was not looking forward to seeing the movie. What I saw was for the most part an accurate depiction of what I was taught in Sunday school. [Methodist, but pre-political correctness]

Given my education [BA in History, with a smattering of classical literature for the fun of it] and background in theatre I began to evaluate the movie (days later) for the "point."

A Christian believes that Satan works/walks among all of us until Christ's return. Unfortunately, there weren't too many Christians around during Christ's crucifiction for Satan to meander through.

Futher, Gibson went out of his way to portray Satan as "Everyman" - the Romans had Roman facial characteristics and the Hebrews looked, well Hebrew. Satan looked like neither group. Satan was sexless.

Mel's trying to say something there and whatever it is, he is NOT saying that Satan is Jewish, or a woman, or a man.

Just my $.02.

[AnalogReigns]

I just sent this to Dr. Krauthammer--someone who's oppinions I usually respect highly:

Dear Dr. Krauthammer,

I'm surprised you find The Passion of The Christ so anti-Semitic. I realize the history-within-a-history that the Bible story is related to, and Christians should be careful to tell the truth tactfully--as cultural Christians (not necessarily real ones) have persecuted the Jewish people for a long time. However, other than the Satan figure (which kind of bothered me--as it is extra-biblical--but seems wholly unlinked to anyone around him, and fully ignored by the Jewish crowds) Gibson's portray IS very faithful to the gospel accounts.

Assuming a Christian understanding of inerrancy of the texts, of course the accounts need to be harmonized, in which case one leaves out nothing, but adds in everything that one can work in that any of the 4 Gospels mentions. The scourging is this way, as is the plotting and real hatred of certain Jewish leaders in the day of the Jewish Jesus, of the party of Pharisees and Saduccees. Did this include all of them? No. And Mel Gibson also adds Jewish leaders DEFENDING Jesus in the counsel (that's not in the Gospel accounts).

All the key player heroes (Jesus, Peter, John, other disciples, Mary, Mary Magdalene etc.) were all clearly JEWISH. Gibson bent over backwards to make that clear. Nicodemus, Joseph of Aramathea, (Pharisees the Bible tells us who opposed Jesus' execution) and probably the 2nd biggest hero of the film, Simon of Cyrene, who carries the cross, are also all in the film, and are also clearly identified as Jewish.

The Roman scourging was the most brutal part in the film....and we know historically scourging was incredibly horrifying -- those skilled in it would try to bring their victim to the edge of death, and leave him there; such was what Gibson portrayed. The Bible is often very terse in its historic accounts. Perhaps it was written that way on purpose, so are imagination would fill in the blanks vividly. Everything Gibson portrayed COULD have happened that way (or it could have happened another way)...nothing that I can find clearly CONTRADICTS the Gospels. I honestly did not notice Gibson adding that Caiaphas watched the scourging....which you're right is an addition....but why would it be surprising that one man who hated another (as the Gospels clearly indicate of Caiaphas) would watch such an event? It is totally faithful to the gist of the story. How can a history of one group of people killing the leader of another group, in their same nation--over religious jealousies--be told tactfully?

Gibson's portrayal IS as brutal as it possibly could have been. That is a legitimate criticism--that maybe the brutality was overly done. However, every single other portrayal I have ever witnessed downplayed the reality of Jesus suffering, of who it was said, "Just as there were many who were appalled at him--his appearance was so disfigured beyond that of any man and his form marred beyond human likeness- so will he sprinkle many nations" (Isaiah 52:14, 15)

Christians genuinely believe, "Surely he took up our infirmities and carried our sorrows,yet we considered him stricken by God, smitten by him, and afflicted. But he was pierced for our transgressions, he was crushed for our iniquities; the punishment that brought us peace was upon him, and by his wounds we are healed." and that also, "We all, like sheep, have gone astray, each of us has turned to his own way; and the LORD has laid on him the iniquity of us all." (Isaiah 53: 4-6)

I know that is highly offensive to those of the Jewish faith, but it is an essential, no, THE essential to following the Jewish carpenter-rabbi Jesus.

Any familiarity at all with the New Testament will admit the bitter opposition the Jewish followers of Christ got from some of the very powerful Jewish leadership. Christians in the early church for a couple generations were mostly all Jews, hence it was during that time an internecine quarrel. Any rational look will not consider this story, or this movie, anti-Semitic.

You don't have to like the Gospels, and you can try to disprove them, but trying to say Gibson was being anti-Semitic, you have to say the Gospels themselves are anti-Semitic.

I'm sorry Dr. Krauthammer; I agree with your tempered perspective most of the time but in this case you've lost your temper and your edge.

Sincerely,

[Abundy]

Granted, I have not seen the film, so I am just pounding the keyboard.

Seriously Stan, you ought to see the film. I would enjoy a discussion with you post-viewing. I think it would be enlightening for me.

While I don't expect (nor is my suggestion an attempt at evangalism) the film to convert you, having read the comments on this thread the film might help put them in perspective.

[Cold Heat]

I'll be following Krauthammer to see if he reconsiders at all

That would be interesting.

One wonders what opinion would be like if a protestant had made this film?

I cannot explain this venom in any other way.

[Abundy]

What does annoy me though is the Christian belief that no matter how morally a G-d fearing person one may be, if you don't accept Christ as your savior you are doomed to hell

Why does a Christian's belief annoy you if you are truly secure in your Faith?

If they do annoy you, how can you say that you respect our beliefs?

[Agnes Heep]

If that's directed at me you've spilled a lot of virtual ink to no particular purpose. I've got a pretty good knowledge of what the Nazis were and how they thought. No one to my mind has suggested (at least I haven't) that their persecutions of Jews were motivated by Christian sentiment. The problem was that they used Christian sentiment to facilitate their rise to power, and much of it was predicated on the rather widespread anti-Semitism of the time.

Even in this enlightened time, people need to be on their guard against being used in a similar manner.

[Torie]

I too dissent from the Christian belief, or those of some Christians, although I think it has been watered down, that their way, is the only way to heaven for those who have been exposed to the Christian message, even those others who believe in God, and try to follow his teachings. Such is life. Not everybody subsribes to a more universalist Bhuddist approach. But then I don't think there is a heaven in all probability. We are all going to return to dust, and leave only memories, and the residue of our works on this mortal coil.

In any event, my best advice is to accept Christians as trying to do good, in a loving way, however misguided per your compass or mine, and realize that in this great land of ours, we in the end, will all choose our own way, without coercion, and protected from such by not only the force of law, but the very and essential ethos upon which this land was created and consecrated. I trust the good spirit of most of my fellow citizens, to let me find my own way.

[Wormwood]

Even in this enlightened time, people need to be on their guard against being used in a similar manner.

I doubt that'll be a problem among present-day Christians in the United States.

After all, which group is more prone to hating Jews these days: the Secular Left or the Christian Right?

[macJoyful]

Part of the problem is that Jews and Christians view two different movies when they see The Passion. This according to The Chosen People Ministries can be addressed by a better understanding of Jewish concerns.

To get a better understanding, go to their web site:
http://www.chosenpeople.com/debate/tips.html

Here's a brief excerpt from their web page:

"How should you respond to your Jewish friends who are concerned about the impact of the film, The Passion of the Christ, on the worldwide Jewish community?

"As you may know, the release of the film, The Passion of the Christ, greeted with great enthusiasm among Christians, is causing some deep concerns among Jewish people worldwide.

"The following suggestions will help you respond to your Jewish friends in understanding and love, and enable you to use the message of the film to bring those you love closer to the Messiah Jesus.

"Below are a few common responses well-meaning believers have shared with their Jewish friends, not fully understanding how these responses are being understood. "

"The Well-Meaning Response:

"Pointing out to your Jewish friends that "our sins killed Jesus."

"The Misunderstanding:

"This presumes that Jewish people are familiar with the New Testament, but most often they are not.
This assumes Jewish people accept Christian theological views of sin, guilt, and substitutionary atonement.
This also assumes Jewish people accept New Testament documents as true history and authentic.

"The Well-Meaning Response:

"Pointing out that Jesus is God and no one could kill Him

"The Misunderstanding:

This presumes your Jewish friend accepts that Jesus is God.
This underestimates the abhorrence and complete lack of understanding of Jewish people to this doctrine.

"The Well-Meaning Response:

"Pointing out that His death was predicted in the Hebrew Scriptures.

"The Misunderstanding:

"This presumes that your Jewish friend is familiar with the Bible (Old Testament).
This presumes your Jewish friend believes in prophecy.
This presumes your Jewish friend believes in two comings of the Messiah and that Messiah had to suffer.
This presumes your Jewish friend believes that Jesus fulfilled these prophecies."

[mercy]

You talking to me?

[Forgiven_Sinner]

Yes, the idea that everyone who dies who is not a Christian is condemned seems to be unscriptural to me. God is not limited to this life to save people. The scripture it violates is:

Ezekiel 33:9 Then he said to me, "Prophesy to the breath; prophesy, son of man, and say to it, 'This is what the Sovereign LORD says: Come from the four winds, O breath, and breathe into these slain, that they may live.' " 10 So I prophesied as he commanded me, and breath entered them; they came to life and stood up on their feet-a vast army.

11 Then he said to me: "Son of man, these bones are the whole house of Israel. They say, 'Our bones are dried up and our hope is gone; we are cut off.'

12 Therefore prophesy and say to them: 'This is what the Sovereign LORD says: O my people, I am going to open your graves and bring you up from them; I will bring you back to the land of Israel. 13 Then you, my people, will know that I am the LORD , when I open your graves and bring you up from them. 14 I will put my Spirit in you and you will live, and I will settle you in your own land. Then you will know that I the LORD have spoken, and I have done it, declares the LORD .' "

Here we have the slain of Israel resurrected. They died without hope. God says specifically He will resurrect them, and put His Spirit in them, and put them in their land. This sounds like salvation being offered after death to me. And if God offers it to the unsaved of Israel, will he not also offer it to the rest of mankind?

This interpretation is not widely accepted. But I have never seen it refuted.

The ones condemned to hell fire in the New Testement are those who know Jesus, and then reject Him. See Romans 1.

[SoCar]

My faith is not weak and has in no way been threatened by this film. What truly annoys me is the Christian superiority complex that some carry that believes that any objection means we are threatened.

I can criticize Mel Gibson, his beliefs, and his movie without being threatened by your "superior" beliefs. Can you not grasp your own righteous indignation??? Go back and read my previous posts.

Sometimes Christians can sound as intolerant as fundamentalist Muslims, Everyone is convinced they are "right" and all others must accept what they believe or suffer the eternal consequences. The Muslims want to kill me and the Christians want to pray for my soul or better yet convert me. Golly Gee, thank you all very much!!

[Radioactive]

I bet Krauthammer hates Germans.

Why else would he be called a Kraut Hammer?

[Abundy]

I take it you thought the visual message was that Satan was trying to get close to Christ, rather than poisoning the minds of the mob, or equating the mob to Satan, as Satan.

I realized I didn't touch on this question. The answer is a qualified "sort of."

Accepting the premise that Satan walks among us, one should ask "why?"

Satan walks among us always tempting us. God created us with the ability to choose to follow Him.

Satan always works to affect that choice. Daily.

I found this part of the movie particularly illustrative of that belief. (again, you really should see the movie, as Satan walks among the crowd but the crowd is oblivious to his presence.)Satan was tempting Christ right up to the end; he was tempting Him to come down from the cross; he tempted Him to walk away from the scourging; he tempted him to put down the cross. At one point Satan is pictured holding a baby with an adult head. (It was the most disturbing part of the movie to me - the violence I could understand and deal with...the kid was just butt ugly and evil.)

My wife asked about that and after thinking about it, that brief glimpse occurs about the time Jesus appears to be questioning God's plan to crucify Him. I took that to be illustrative of a "what if." What if Jesus would have succumbed to temptation and walked away from God's plan. Would he them have become the son of satan? Seems plausible to me.

It would be interesting to buy Gibson a beer and ask him about it.

[Wormwood]

The Muslims want to kill me and the Christians want to pray for my soul or better yet convert me.

Whow is being killed by a Muslim in any way equivalent to being annoyed by a Christian?

[Agnes Heep]

After all, which group is more prone to hating Jews these days: the Secular Left or the Christian Right?

A couple of weeks ago I could have told you right off the bat.

[mercy]

****But then I don't think there is a heaven in all probability. We are all going to return to dust, and leave only memories, and the residue of our works on this mortal coil.****

Not trying to start any trouble nor am I going to prosltyse. I figure every man makes his own decisions about such things and the info is out there.

Given your quote above, what do you decide to do with the man Jesus of Nazareth. Was he insane? A charlatan? Or was the whole thing made up by the Apostles and disciples?

[Sabertooth]

Good points all, but cinematically, there is a difference between ordering execution (it's a dirty job, but someone has to do it), and witnessing it, with seeming pleasure. You do so the difference, no? Granted, I have not seen the film, so I am just pounding the keyboard.

After the Crucifixion, when the earthquake strikes the Temple and the Veil before the Holy of Holies is torn, we see Caiaphus and other priests weeping and wailing, with what might be viewed as conviction and regret. It's open to interpretation.

BTW, Caiaphus' tomb and corpse were actually found a few years ago. Fairly stunning discovery.

[sfRummygirl]

You are shamelessly trying to shove a wedge between Christians. This is so obvious to me.
No, you don't know a darn thing about Evangelicals. I am one, and all the churches I know support this. They acknowledge that what he put in that was not specifically written in the bible, was his artistic passion.

I really don't respect you for this.

[Cold Heat]

I suggest you seek some answers from your Rabbi or whatever.

You really do not understand the criticism of your posts, although, it has been explained.

I am not indignant, nor a fundamentalist anything and you don't appear to have any knowledge of faith, much less your own.

These criticisms were leveled at you, and not at your faith.