A Freeper Review of The Passion of Christ

Vanity | 2/21/04 | John Fields

[savedbygrace]

I won't accept the books of the Apochrypha as scripture, or as authoritative.

[jonboy]

One scene in the movie shows Satan in Hell screaming his rage and frustration immediately upon Christ's death. He may have been laughing it up until then, but after His death Satan was NOT a happy camper.

[savedbygrace]

The issue concerns offering prayer to those who have died. The Catholic response seems to be a series of word games. You, and others, say these are not prayers, or those being prayed to aren't dead, so it's OK.

The sinless death of Jesus led to one important thing, among other important things. It provided direct access to God, the Father. Why would you want to offer prayer to others, when you have his permission (I would say his deep desire) to speak directly with him?

At Jesus' death, the veil of the temple was split open from top to bottom. This symbolizes the opening of the way directly to God, formerly accessible only by the High Priest one day a year. (I would suggest it is also a poignant picture of God the Father rending his garment in grief for the agony of his Son.)

So my question is: Why? Why would you want to take an indirect route to God, when you have his permission to go directly to him?

[BoozeHag]

Haven't seen the movie, but as I think about its making and the hoopla surrounding it, I have a question? What if Christ came to earth in this cynical world...it would take a lot of faith and bravery to believe it, so much more if he were a family member, etc... Is this even addressed in the movie? How can blame be placed on anyone.

[savedbygrace]

As others have pointed out, if you ask other people to pray for your intentions, then you are doing nothing different than Catholics do when we pray for the intercession of the Angels and Saints.

The difference is significant. You are communicating with someone who has died. That is the crux of the discussion.

Why don't you just agree to disagree with Catholics and leave it at that?

You certainly could follow your own advice, true?

[jonboy]

Another thing that was mentioned in Isaiah was that He had given His cheecks to those who pluck the beard. So that was something else that was left out, He apparently had His beard either entirely or partially plucked from His face. What wasn't done to our Savior?!

[savedbygrace]

Thank you for that post. It's the closest to my request for the scriptural basis for Catholic beliefs of all so far. Each of the responses contains flawed logic or is non-responsive to the issue at hand, though. I'll briefly cover each one.

1) I'll begin by clearly stating that I don't accept the books of the Apochypha as authoritative or as scripture. Even so, the issue is not whether angels or saints offer prayers to God for those on earth, but rather, those on earth offering prayers to anyone other than God. So, #1 is non-responsive.

2) There are two communications described here. The first is from John to others on earth. The second is from the throne of God to those on earth. So, #2 is non-responsive.

3) There is no indication in those passages that the prayers from those on earth were offered to any but God. I disagree with your interpretation, based on the lack of scripture supporting the concept that we are to pray to anyone other than God.

4) The direction of the prayers are from those in heaven, to the throne of God. I see no logical extension of that to conclude that prayers from those on earth should go directly to those in heaven. None.

5) Angels never died, and the Bible gives us plenty of instances in which angels and those on earth communicated. That's not the issue at hand. So, #5 is non-responsive to that degree. I accept the communication with God's angels is scriptural, but reject the illogical leap you make to include those who have died in that allowance.

6) The distinction here is that Moses and Elijah were speaking with the Son of God. There is a longer discussion involved here concerning the fact that Elijah never died, but I'll not get into it because of the very different situation with Moses. (It is argued that he didn't die, but we'd have to hash out the mention of his burial by God, so let's not go there, OK?)

Again, thank you for a great post.

[savedbygrace]

Necromancy is a special mode of divination by the evocation of the dead, which is the seeking after knowledge of future or hidden things by inadequate means. Catholics never do that.

You're right. I was taking a broader meaning for the word, communicating with those who have died. I probably should've been more precise.

[Unam Sanctam]

Yes Mary is a saint. A saint is not divine.

[narses]

Is this movie Catholic? Yes and no. Those who see the relationship between Jesus and Mary who are Catholic will likely see Mary as divine.

Thank you for your review. Please study the Catholic Dogmas and beliefs. I recommend Scott Hahn's book "Rome Sweet Home" as it is written from an originally anti-Catholic, anti-Marian perspective. Catholic's revere Mary with a higher respect than any other human being. She is entitled to that. She is not divine, nor has any Catholic I've ever met claimed divinity for her. Her Son is divine, part of the Triune God. She is just His sinless mother.

[narses]

"You are communicating with someone who has died."

Died and reborn in Heaven. The Communion of the Saints is an essential part of Christianity. The human part of Heaven, the Church Triumphant, certainly exists and certainly adds their prayers to the Church Militant (the mortal elect here on Earth) fighting for the Reign of Christ the King.

[savedbygrace]

Non-responsive. Nothing there indicates that those prayers were offered by those on earth to anyone but God.

[savedbygrace]

None of that offers support for the concept of offering prayers to those who have died. I agree that they are alive in heaven; that is not the issue.

[savedbygrace]

Again, that is not the issue at hand. Does scripture teach that those on earth are to pray to those who have died and are now in heaven? I say, no. Others have said, yes, but to this point there has been no effective sourcing of that concept in scripture.

[savedbygrace]

Be glad to respond to that just as soon as you answer my question. What is the scriptural source for offering prayers to those who have died and are now in heaven?

[bray]

Great Review. I am anxious and scared to see the movie this Weds. Have my ticket and my sin. Jesus Christ is the King of Kings and Lord of Lords. God Bless You and your ministry.

Pray for W and The Passion of Christ

[P.O.E.]

Thanks for the review. I, too, have trepidations about the violence. I already tremble and weep at the thought, never mind actually seeing it.

[BraveMan]

It erects in the imagination a simulacrum of Jesus and reacts to it, imagining that the reaction is essentially the same thing as, or as good as, having actually encountered Jesus.

Please accept this comment in the spirit it is given.

I would disagree with your contention that the WWJD crowd is imagining their nefarious reaction is essentially as good as having actually encountered Jesus. Some delusional souls perhaps; at best a very small minority. Most would base their conclusions to the question WWJD on their own personal understanding of things taught in scripture. Posing the question to others (by displaying the logo) is for most just another form of witnessing.

When faced with a situation, "what would Jesus do" is a valid question, the answer to which may well be "I don't know". This would be the personal affirmation that more study is in order. To categorize this as a plectrum of the imagination to divine the future or to decide what to do, is quite harsh and applies an assumed conclusion with an illegitimate basis.

[pgkdan]

Those who see the relationship between Jesus and Mary who are Catholic will likely see Mary as divine.

Thanks for the review...but for the gazillionth time...CATHOLICS DO NOT BELIEVE THAT MARY IS DIVINE!!!!!

[WFTR]

I read another review recently that talked about a couple of the liberties taken with the Biblical story. The most serious inaccuracy that I heard was that the earthquake that occurred after Jesus's death caused tremendous structural damage to the temple and killed some priests but that the movie didn't show the veil being ripped in two. To me, the ripping of the veil is one of the most significant incidents of the crucifixion. Admittedly, I don't really practice the faith anymore on a personal level, but I'm still interested in the integrity of what is presented. Can you comment about this scene?

The same review said that the Jewish leaders in the movie went into the Roman buildings. The Bible says that they wouldn't go into the Roman buildings because they were purifying themselves and that Pilate had to come out to them. Was this departure from the scripture also taken.

Finally, the review suggested that Caiphus was responsible for the sign that said "This is the king of the Jews" written above Jesus's head. The Bible said that Pilate had written that statement and that the Jewish leaders didn't like it. While I see less significance to this point, it's still a real departure from the story. What do you remember?

WFTR
Bill