|
Author
|
Topic: "The Passion" Movie
|
Gramajo320
unregistered
|
posted
Mel Gibson is a christian and I've listened carefully to what all he had to say in a very lengthy interview.
In Christ's love,
Gramajo320
IP: Logged | 
|
|
redkermit
Advanced Member
Member # 4059
|
posted
Believe it or not, I did think about it before I posted. Why are you so defensive of Mel Gibson, when you do not know him either? Of course only God knows his heart. But, that doesn't automatically wash away the facts of what he has done before. The Bible says that we will know someone by their fruits. To be honest, I am anxious to see what is to come in the future from Mel. To see what direction he goes in now after the Passion movie. Maybe this movie reflects a change in his heart from previous movies he has made.
--------------------
I would rather be a doorkeeper in the house of my God than dwell in the tents of the wicked. (Ps. 84:10b)
1 John 2:6
Whoever claims to live in him must walk as Jesus did.
Listen Online:
www.wmuz.com
www.997flr.org
Posts: 604 | From: Michigan | Registered: Nov 2004
| IP: Logged |
|
|
Gramajo320
unregistered
|
posted
The true fact still remains that there is a world of difference in acting in a movie as opposed to what truly is in the heart of the actor! You do not have any knowledge whatsoever of what is in Mel Gibson's heart and therefore you cannot say that he is "condoning" whatsoever! Think about it!
Yes The Passion Of The Christ has won many many souls to Jesus Christ for by seeing the movie, they began asking questions, reading the bible, going to church, and accepting Jesus Christ as their Lord and Saviour which is very most important! This movie did indeed bring about a world wide revival!
In Christ's love,
Gramajo320
IP: Logged |
|
|
redkermit
Advanced Member
Member # 4059
|
posted
Mel Gibson has indeed portrayed sinful acts in movies, therefore condoning them (such as sex outside of marriage).
I think the statement that the movie brought about "world-wide revival" can be debated, although it assuredly brought world-wide attention to the crucifixion story.
I agree that the movie cannot "save" someone, but if the movie aided in one soul being led to Christ, was it not worthwhile? For in the apostles' day, others were preaching with wrong motive, but they were still preaching.
1 Phil. 1:15-18 "It is true that some preach Christ out of envy and rivalry, but others out of goodwill..The former preach Christ out of selfish ambition, not sincerely...But what does it matter? The important thing is that in every way, whether from false motives or true, Christ is preached."
--------------------
I would rather be a doorkeeper in the house of my God than dwell in the tents of the wicked. (Ps. 84:10b)
1 John 2:6
Whoever claims to live in him must walk as Jesus did.
Listen Online:
www.wmuz.com
www.997flr.org
Posts: 604 | From: Michigan | Registered: Nov 2004
| IP: Logged |
|
|
Gramajo320
unregistered
|
posted
Volodymyrdolgoruki,
It is a very well know fact of truth that The Passion Of The Christ brought about a world wide revival therefore leading many many non-believers so ask questions, begin reading the bible, attending church, accepting Jesus Christ as their Lord and Saviour! The Passion Of The Christ is about Jesus Christ and His crucifixion! You surely must be aware of that fact and that's entirely bibical!
In Christ's love,
Gramajo320
IP: Logged |
|
|
volodymyrdolgoruki
Advanced Member
Member # 4400
|
posted
The movie itself CAN NOT lead unbelieving people to Salvation In Christ.
The Gospel IS NEVER PRESENTED in this movie.
Romans 10:13-17
(13) for "WHOEVER WILL CALL ON THE NAME OF THE LORD WILL BE SAVED."
(14) How then will they call on Him in whom they have not believed? How will they believe in Him whom they have not heard? And how will they hear without a preacher?
(15) How will they preach unless they are sent? Just as it is written, "HOW BEAUTIFUL ARE THE FEET OF THOSE WHO BRING GOOD NEWS OF GOOD THINGS!"
(16) However, they did not all heed the good news; for Isaiah says, "LORD, WHO HAS BELIEVED OUR REPORT?"
(17) So faith comes from hearing, and hearing by the word of Christ.
They did NOT hear the Gospel in this movie so they could NOT have been saved from the movie.
God COULD have used the movie to get them into a Church to hear the Gospel, or used the movie to have them pick up a Bible and read the Gospel.
--------------------
Don't wish for a better day
Be glad and use the one you're in
Fear God and do exactly what He says
That's what matters
All else fades like the flowers
Posts: 73 | From: God's Kingdom | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged |
|
|
Gramajo320
unregistered
|
posted
Nobleweb,
The Passion Of The Christ has brought about a world wide revival and it has won many many souls to Jesus Christ! This movie is not of satan whatsoever! It is most assuredly a very powerful movie about Jesus Christ and how He shed his blood and was crucified on the cross!
In Christ's love,
Gramajo320
IP: Logged |
|
|
nobleweb
Advanced Member
Member # 2156
|
posted
I have not seen this movie, nor do I intend to, so I can't really "debate" it. However, if the movie is being used as a tool to lead people to Christ but is scripturally unsound, I can't help but wonder where (or to whom) these people are actually being led.
quote:
It is funny how "believers" work SO HARD to try to tear down something that the Lord has used to bring millions back to Christ - When we should be shouting Praise the Lord instead we are shouting "Catholic!! It's the Devil!!"
How do we know that the Lord is using this film? Is it not just as possible that the devil is using it to deceive millions? From what I've just read here, there are parts of the movie that are scripturally unsound. Does this sound like the work of God? Or like the work of the devil?
Posts: 26 | Registered: Sep 2003
| IP: Logged |
|
|
Gramajo320
unregistered
|
posted
Mohawk and Favorminded,
Amen! Great postings and God bless you!
In Christ's love,
Gramajo320
IP: Logged |
|
|
mohawk
Advanced Member
Member # 2898
|
posted
I have started, and joined in, many discussions about "Passion" here. So I guess it's my turn for my two cents. All movies, religious and secular, are open to the interpretation of the viewer. Everyone who watches a film has the right to make an opinion of it--such is the nature of art.
In my opinion, "Passion" is a powerful (perhaps the most powerful ever) depiction of Christ's sacrifice. The fact that it held court in otherwise secular cineplexes, and touched the souls of a great, unimaginable multitude, should be reason for great rejoicing--not becoming an armchair critic. Mel Gibson, if anything, has put his soul where his wallet is--the career risk he accepted to produce this film was incredible. And the Lord has rewarded him!
I'm reminded here of Luke 9:50, and Mark 9:40. Jesus forbade the disciples from disrupting the ministry of a stranger, who though not an "ordained" disciple himself, was nonetheless spreading the Gospel.
Again, my opinion: some of the controversy over "Passion" may boil down to sectarianism. Some may discard "Passion" because of Gibson's catholicism, claiming it not a "truely Christian" work. Is "sect-purity" so important that we should just dismiss all the conversions and rededications this film has brought about? My answer is no. Bless witnessing the Lord at work, no matter in what form.
I bless Mel Gibson for this movie.
My favorite scene, because when I saw it, I was so overcome by it that I was unsure I could last through the film: Mary runs to Jesus, who has fallen under the cross. Jesus says, "See, Mother, how I make all things new again."
For those who can't seem to withstand such power in a movie about Christ, may I suggest renting the tamer versions...
Posts: 223 | From: california | Registered: Feb 2004
| IP: Logged |
|
|
Favor Minded
unregistered
|
posted
No - Less than a quarter of a 10th of half a percent is not representative -
I see he deleted the post though..
IP: Logged |
|
|
Gramajo320
unregistered
|
posted
This survey was taken only from 1,618 people so it's really not representative of every one as a whole and therefore cannot be considered as fact regarding every person's opinion.
In Christ's love,
Gramajo320
IP: Logged |
|
|
Gramajo320
unregistered
|
posted
The Passion Of The Christ which is a very powerful movie brought about a world wide renewal of revival and it's still doing so.
It has brought millions of people to Jesus Christ and it still is doing so.
In Christ's love,
Gramajo320
IP: Logged |
|
|
Gramajo320
unregistered
|
posted
Caretaker
John 3:16
For God so loved the world that He gave His only Son, so that everyone who believes in Him may not perish but may have eternal life.
This says everyone and it does not say "not catholics!" Your prejudice is so very apparent.
In Christ's love,
Gramajo 320
IP: Logged |
|
|
Favor Minded
unregistered
|
posted
Apparently some "Servants" are unfamiliar with ALL that the Gospels say concerning the death of Jesus Christ -
It is funny how "believers" work SO HARD to try to tear down something that the Lord has used to bring millions back to Christ - When we should be shouting Praise the Lord instead we are shouting "Catholic!! It's the Devil!!"
Pure folly and foolishness and will be tough to explain to Christ how you tried to tear it down...Do you not read the gospels?
It will prove interesting when folks stand before the Lord and give their reasoning for coming against something he has used so mightily. Jesus has not been so in the discussions on secular TV, Radio, and the backyard since he was alive in the flesh.
And being in anguish, he prayed more earnestly, and his sweat was like drops of blood falling to the ground.[3]
The only thing I would say is that modern day science has proven that it is indeed possible to sweat blood - Cases of EXTREME duress, stress, and fear cause it. From a Human perspective - Which Jesus was, although he could have called in a legion of Angels to rescue him, he would not have been fulfilling the Fathers will - How fearful might we be if tonight we knew they were coming for us? We would also know from Isaiah that soon we would not even be recognizable anymore. I believe that although we would be able to rest knowing that we would soon be with the Father, the immense pain anticipation would indeed be very fearful - I felt, considering what he knew was coming, it was a very real depiction of his anticipating his death. He was God in human form, but he was not immune - He was just as much flesh and blood as we are and just as susceptible to pain -
quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
To balance this, Gibson had him smash the head of the serpent which is not scriptural in context to the timing of events.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
True but consider the prophecy in Genesis which stated he will crush your head and you will strike his heel. I saw that as the first fulfillment of prophecy - The serpents head was crushed, symbolizing that with Jesus living in us, while Satan may indeed be able to strike our heels, we will ALWAYS be able to crush his head!
14 So the LORD God said to the serpent, "Because you have done this, "Cursed are you above all the livestock and all the wild animals! You will crawl on your belly and you will eat dust all the days of your life. 15 And I will put enmity between you and the woman, and between your offspring [1] and hers; he will crush [2] your head, and you will strike his heel."
quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Of course it showed Mary always in control, and when he was arrested she proclaims stoicly, "And so it begins." I do not find that in scripture. Yet the movie neglected to show Jesus knocking over all the soldiers when he spoke. Go figure.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Agreed - But consider that side of it - Although I am not Catholic, I am a parent of 6 boys. I could only imagine the immense, nearly intolerable pain she would feel as a mother. And, knowing and having been told, prepared for many years that her son was to fulfill the Prophecy, what else might she have said? How else might she have reacted?
I do think the soldiers should have fallen - And shown a little more fear as a result...
quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Also, Jesus being thrown over the bridge with a demon there was not scriptural.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Luke 22
2and the chief priests and the teachers of the law were looking for some way to get rid of Jesus, for they were afraid of the people. 3Then Satan entered Judas, called Iscariot, one of the Twelve. 4And Judas went to the chief priests and the officers of the temple guard and discussed with them how he might betray Jesus.
John 13:27
As soon as Judas took the bread, Satan entered into him.
Although timing within scripture was different - I thought he (Gibson) was demonstrating the fear that the demons that entered / possessed Judas had of Jesus. When face to face with him, at least one of them fled temporarily - I thought it symbolized the fact that even the Devil FEARS Jesus greatly...
quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
And where in scripture does it show Satan holding a baby which I suppose was suppose to symbolize the coming antichrist...
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Yes - I believe that as well - The Baby was OLD - Very Old - Symbolizing again from Genesis that what was Born in the Garden of Eden is still alive, and still convinced it can win the souls of man...
quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
but who knows? And where in scripture does it show Mary and Satan locking eyeballs as if it were Mary who had the power?
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Here I can agree with the Catholic influence although I think it also provided an "Out" for the audience - Too much beating at one time would have caused many to leave early - This "Out" scene gave them the idea that Mary, His Mother, KNEW he was there and she intended for him to know that she could indeed see him...And we need to keep in mind that a little poetic license should be allowed if you are referring to the relationship of a mother and son - Parental intuition is God inspired and rather surprising at times - Parents know what I mean
Where in scripture does it show Mary being able to see Satan?
It doesn't, but consider how many lines of scripture make up the last 12 hours of Jesus' death.
quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Catholic spin was very obvious to me.
My biggest criticism of the movie is that it was not a powerful witnessing tool as a non-believer would not understand why Jesus is being crucified, nor would he be able to grasp the significance of the resurrection or that Jesus is God by the ending of the movie.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I agree because of where it started, it did raise this question - But as I mentioned in my first post, it did prove to be a VERY POWERFUL tool which God has used extensively. Not to mention the way the entire production was steered by God. I was very close to this movie from the start of production, and even closer during the ADL interference and Hollywood running away. Funny how they would run from this, but embrace all types of borderline and porn and things like it...
quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Would it cause a person to read the Gospels for more information? Perhaps...and God can use any means to communicate his Word...even a donkey. But I still fell like it was lacking and strayed too far from scripture.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
While God could use any means, this Sight and Sound Generation has not viewed Jesus, Listened to him, asked about him., caused Churches to fill beyond capacity, and been in such a world wide uproar like the this movie brought about...The only thing that has ever even came close was Jesus himself, in the flesh...
quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I should add that my biggest praise for the movie is that it graphically showed Christ's love for us and what he willingly went through on the cross for us sinners.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
AMEN Brother - When he crawled onto that cross, no fight, no turning back, how could one not help but "Feel" and know we all placed him there...We all drive those nails...
And I was sincerely glad that they drove the nails into his hands, not his wrists - Mel Gibson was the nail driver by the way, he stated to symbolize his own guilt in Jesus' crucifixion.
quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I agree with you - It did depict the suffering he took willingly for us. Praise His Name forever. But where in the scripture do you read of a bird pecking at the eye of one of the two thiefs on the cross?
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I think he was depicting the Proverb regarding mockery -
Proverbs 30 17 "The eye that mocks a father, that scorns obedience to a mother, will be pecked out by the ravens of the valley, will be eaten by the vultures.
quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Or what about Peter bowing before Mary asking for her forgivness?
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I did not think he was bowing before Mary in the Catholic sense - I think he was simply feeling much remorse for sinning against Jesus, and because he was close to her as they all were, he needed to confess what he had done...
quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
And we all know that Veronicas veil is not in the scriptures.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Not sure what this means??
quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
What about Him telling Mary "Behold I make all things new"? That is in scripture but not at that particular time.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
No, but consider your own child, and how you would desperately want to help them. He of course new this when she wanted so much to help him but could do nothing. He simply reassured her that what he was doing was as he had been preparing her for - Fulfilling the Prophecy of the Messiah. I think we should not try so hard to pick it apart considering the volumes of ministering it has and is still doing throughout the world.
quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I could not find where Pontias Pilates wife took the cloths to wipe up His blood either in scripture.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Claudia does not appear in scripture - Only in Historical records. The White Linen signified purity - Only Royalty and those in High Places were allowed to have or wear it in those days. This was to symbolize the recognition of the innocence of Jesus by Claudia, and to give the viewer a glimpse at the enormity of the sacrifice. Imagine if it were you and your son whose blood you had to clean up. Then, the comfort you would receive from knowing that at least someone on the "Other Side" recognized his purity, Royalty, and innocence. Again I think we are trying too hard to find something wrong - And I can tell you that this movie was indeed spirit led, guided, and directed. It went the way the Father wanted it too, regardless of what they wanted to do - I truly believe that by and large it depicts the actual events...Certainly a little poetic license with things like Satan and the Old Baby however, nothing ever has placed Jesus in this kind of light ever before...
quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The scene where Yeshua and Mary are splashing water on each other signifies to me (You may not agree) that this is in reference to sprinkling instead of immersion. I pray for my catholic brothers and sisters. My best friend in the whole world(Besides Yeshua of course) Came out of the catholic church 8 years ago and she definately voiced to me that she saw the catholic influence in the movie.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
He is Catholic for sure - Fundamentalist Catholic who believes solely in the Old ways - No Vatican II or reforms. He believes in what Paul taught - If you do nothing else, stick to the traditional ways as they will always be correct.
quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I'm not saying that it was a bad thing to want to show the world on screen the Passion that our savior had for us, but as a protestant i do protest if you will those scenes which are not in scripture.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I am very much a Protestant and I just can't see why we would want to pick it apart - Jesus wants the demonimations to torn down - It is time for the Church segregations to end and for believers to come together as one...
quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I do believe its time for the watchmen to stand up and sound the alarm and warn of those things that add to or take away from the scriptures. yall be blessed
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Agreed - I did not see anything specifically added to or taken away though - We have to consider that he had to pray and meditate for more than 15 months on only a few lines of scripture and then depict a complete twelve hours.
How much dialog, activity, etc. would you say is missing from the Word? The Gospels do not depict, line for line, word for word, what transpired over the course of the entire night and next day.
I thought the tear drop from heaven, the darkening of the land to hide the sin that was being cleansed, the time of day, etc. The quake, the Earth Shaking Resurrection Power as he died, etc were all very well done.
And, as I said, the movie was very much steered by the Lord - And to this day and for a very long time to come, at least until the AntiChrist makes it illegal - Will be bringing people to Christ.
I too think it can leave some who may know nothing of Jesus with questions like "What do they have against this guy?" but I also believe that it is as God wanted - I believe the phenomenal reach it has had thus far speaks volumes of how the Lord, in this - A Sight and Sound Generation - Wants to use it as a Wake Up Call, a "This is It!", Now you know what really happened type of Movie because there is little time left...
What I find upsetting more than anything else is how we so desperately try to intentionally destroy something that has served to bring SO MANY to and BACK to the Lord?
As I said, this Sight and Sound generation understands - Do you really think the Almighty God cares about some petty differences like that?
He wants souls saints, he already knows that White linen in those days was reserved for Royalty and to represent purity -
While you are trying to pick apart a tool that served God to win souls back to him - Served to remind people what Christ did - in a capacity FAR GREATER than any of us EVER have, I see a spirit of indignation and jealousy -
Why do we insist on finding differences - What kind of differences did Jesus find amongst his people - Basics were important - The rest is, in my humble opinion, not ours to judge -
If ANYONE can honestly say that they find that movie to be a tool of the Devil, then they need to prove it -
If not, can ANYONE state that they have served God in such a great capacity and brought so many souls to the Lord? Or back to the Lord? Or been able to remind the World of the sacrifice that was made?
One soul is as important as millions, but when we serve to destroy a tool that the Lord has used to restore faith, bring thousands to Christ, restore humility in those who have forgotten the sacrifice, who is wrong?
If we were face to face with God and we said - Well, I don't care how many people were saved or recomitted their life to Christ, I didn't like the Catholic influence, what do you think he would say?
The presentation of Jesus carrying the Cross was not Biblical:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Interesting statement...
In context -
Matthew 27
28They stripped him and put a scarlet robe on him, 29and then twisted together a crown of thorns and set it on his head. They put a staff in his right hand and knelt in front of him and mocked him. "Hail, king of the Jews!" they said. 30They spit on him, and took the staff and struck him on the head again and again. 31After they had mocked him, they took off the robe and put his own clothes on him. Then they led him away to crucify him.
32As they were going out, they met a man from Cyrene, named Simon, and they forced him to carry the cross. 33They came to a place called Golgotha (which means The Place of the Skull).
John 19
17So the soldiers took charge of Jesus. Carrying his own cross, he went out to the place of the Skull (which in Aramaic is called Golgotha). 18Here they crucified him, and with him two others--one on each side and Jesus in the middle.
19Pilate had a notice prepared and fastened to the cross. It read:|sc JESUS OF NAZARETH, THE KING OF THE JEWS.
quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
This movie was a Catholic presentation of the mass, based on false mystical visions. Corruption disguised under Christian labels.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Wow!! Pretty accusatory considering the extent to which it has and is still bringing people to Christ, or back to Christ, reached millins around the world, and has placed Jesus squarely in front of more people around the world than anything in history except Jesus himself in the flesh -
With the advent of the DVD release, it did it all over again. 20 Million COpies the first day - Over half had not yet seen the movie, less than half again were born again believers.
God is using this as a Last Call, a Wake up Call -
Sounds like you (Drew) think this to be a tool of the Devil? Wow, Really?
IP: Logged |
|
|
Caretaker
Advanced Member
Member # 36
|
posted
http://www.wayoflife.org/fbns/melgibson-thepassionofthechrist/evenmore-positive-resp.html
. But as soon as all the Mary beatification started (and was subsequently crammed down my (our) throat), I became increasing disengaged. ... I have even heard that the pastor and the assistant pastor of my independent Baptist church are waiting for the film's release on DVD to take it in. My advocacy for them (and everyone else who will hear me on this subject) will be to just stay away. The film is about ‘another Christ’ based on ‘another Gospel’. I'm so sorry I had anything to do with it but hope to turn my self-inflicted wounds into some positive by sounding a clear warning. Keep up the good work. I am so thankful for the impact your ministry has had on/in my life.”
“Thanks for your repeated warnings about ‘The Passion.’ I was concerned about this movie before it was released. ... My wife and I went to see the movie. ... I actually downloaded ‘Dolorous Passion’ from a Catholic web site so I could compare it with the script. The movie is from the ‘visions’ of Anne Emmerich, and not the Bible. It uses enough of the Biblical text to fool or confuse people who are not well read in the Bible, but it deviates from Scripture so far that I actually watched it like I would a fiction movie, and not a Biblical narrative. It was a bad docudrama. Sadly, many Christian ministries disagree with my evaluations and think this can be used as a great tool. If the ‘Holy Spirit’ directed this as Mel and many of his evangelical friends claim, it is the first time I have seen the Holy Spirit concoct a lie to use as a great tool for evangelism. The ‘Passion’ begins by changing the Gospel accounts of Christ's prayer in the Garden of Gethsemane. I was immediately reminded that Satan's FIRST lie was in another Garden 6,000 years ago and his intention was not to give us a tool to ‘reach the lost,’ but his lie was to delude us into bringing God's judgment upon us because we rejected the Word of God. The movie definitely should have been rated ‘R.’ Partly for the violence displayed in the physical tortures, but mostly for its dark and vicious assaults on the Word of God. ... Thanks again and God bless.”
".....I cannot fathom all the accolades that ‘Evangelical’ leaders have heaped on this flick. It is a Roman Catholic movie from beginning to end. Having served as a missionary in Mexico for all of my life, there is nothing more nauseous to me than to witness the drooling and self-serving adulation of all things Catholic so prevalent in today's ecumenical movement...."
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
The overwhelming emphasis upon the demonic visions of Catherine Emmerich, and the blatant presentation of the Roman Catholic dogma should turn the stomuch of any Believer.
--------------------
A Servant of Christ,
Drew
1 Tim. 3:
16: And without controversy great is the mystery of godliness: God was manifest in the flesh..
Posts: 3978 | From: Council Grove, KS USA | Registered: Jun 2002
| IP: Logged |
|
|
Gramajo320
unregistered
|
posted
I too totally refuse to pick apart The Passion Of The Christ movie. I also highly recommend it because it brought about a renewal of revival around the world and it has brought many many non-believers to Jesus Christ! It's a very powerful movie!
In Christ's love,
Gramajo 320
IP: Logged |
|
|
Caretaker
Advanced Member
Member # 36
|
posted
The visions of the demonicly deluded nun were certainly not from the Lord Jesus Christ.
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
http://www.cryingvoice.com/Gibson_film3.html
Emmerich's dark hallucinations of Jesus Christ's agony
* In Emmerich’s Dolorous Passion, after Jesus Christ took Peter, James, and John in the Garden of Gethsemane, and went a little further, He “beheld sufferings and temptations surrounding him on all sides, and drawing nearer and nearer, under the forms of frightful figures borne on clouds.” Fantasy.
* Jesus left the three disciples and “went a few steps to the left, down a hill, and concealed himself beneath a rock, in a grotto about six feet deep, while the Apostles remained in a species of hollow above. The earth sank gradually the further you entered this grotto, and the plants which were hanging from the rock screened its interior like a curtain from persons outside.” This is a lie, because we read in the Bible that the apostles could see Jesus praying, falling on His face and kneeling down. Moreover it is a blasphemy, since Emmerich suggests here that Jesus Christ was so afraid He hid Himself.
* In the cavern Jesus Christ sees all the sins of the world and the punishment which they deserved, and He takes them all upon Himself. At this moment Satan begins tempting Jesus and says, “Takest thou even this sin upon thyself? Art thou willing to bear its penalty? Art thou prepared to satisfy for all these sins?” These are not in the Bible either.
* “I felt that Jesus, in delivering himself up to Divine Justice in satisfaction for the sins of the world, caused his divinity to return, in some sort, into the bosom of the Holy Trinity.” This is an awful lie, since for the work of salvation to be accomplished, it was absolutely necessary for Jesus Christ to be fully man and fully God at the same time.
* According to Emmerich, “Satan laid to the charge of our Lord, with infernal impudence, a host of imaginary crimes.” He reproached Him for the scandals which He and the Apostles had caused by giving up ancient customs, for having been the cause of the sufferings of His parents in Egypt, for not having saved John the Baptist from death, for protecting men of despicable character, for refusing to cure various sick people, etc. These are all lies. First of all, many of them they did not happen at all. Besides, Satan wouldn't have tempted Jesus with these, since Jesus Christ as God knew exactly what was considered a sin and what wasn't.
* “When he [Satan] spoke of the sale of Magdalene's property, I could no longer keep silence, and exclaimed: 'How canst thou reproach him with the sale of this property as with a crime? Did I not myself see our Lord spend the sum which was given him by Lazarus in works of mercy, and deliver twenty-eight debtors imprisoned at Thirza?'” Another lie. Jesus Christ did not touch money during His ministry on earth (Matt. 17:27; 22:19); Judas “had the bag”. Moreover the Bible does not say anything about some debtors imprisoned at Thirza.
* Contrary to Emmerich's vision, “the conflict in Christ's soul”, which was “dreadful, beyond all expression or conception” (Jonathan Edwards), caused a bloody sweat, but Jesus Christ was in no way awe-stricken or nervous as an ordinary man. To describe Jesus' state of mind and debase Him, Emmerich uses blasphemous expressions: “He fell from side to side, clasping his hands; his body was covered with a cold sweat, and he trembled and shuddered. He then arose, but his knees were shaking and apparently scarcely able to support him; his countenance was pale, and quite altered in appearance, his lips white, and his hair standing on end.”; “Ah, truly did our dear Lord writhe like a worm beneath the weight of his anguish and sufferings!”; “When they looked at him, and saw him pale and exhausted, scarcely able to support himself, bathed in sweat, trembling and shuddering, - when they heard how changed and almost inaudible his voice had become, they did not know what to think, and had he not been still surrounded by a well-known halo of light, they would never have recognised him as Jesus.”
* We read in the Bible, that an angel came from heaven to strengthen Jesus. Emmerich says that “a procession of angels” came to His help – this is a lie –, and that He was praying and “turned towards the consoling angels”, instead of God – this is a blasphemy. Angels are His creatures, infinitely smaller than Him.
* In Emmerich's hallucinations, when Jesus returns to the three for the first time, makes the following statement, which is not in the Bible, and which debases Him again: “Were I to live, teach, and perform miracles for thirty-three years longer, that would not suffice for the accomplishment of what must be fulfilled before this time tomorrow. Call not the eight; I did not bring them hither, because they could not see me thus agonising without being scandalised; they would yield to temptation, forget much of the past, and lose their confidence in me. But you, who have seen the Son of Man transfigured, may also see him under a cloud, and in dereliction of spirit; nevertheless, watch and pray, lest ye fall into temptation, for the spirit indeed is willing, but the flesh is weak.”
* After Jesus returns to the grotto, the three disciples weep, and embrace each other, asking, “What can it be? What is happening to him? He appears to be in a state of complete desolation.” After this, they begin to pray, sorrowfully and anxiously. Another lie, which suggests that Jesus was abandoned by God that night, when in reality He was communicating with Him.
* Emmerich claims to know what Mary and Jesus' friends were doing in Jerusalem that night. Then she says: “She [Mary] felt no doubt of his [Judas] having gone to betray our Lord, for she had often warned him that he was a son of perdition.” This is a lie, because Jesus did not speak with Mary during His ministry (Matt. 12:46–50). She was present at the beginning of His ministry, when He performed His first miracle at the wedding in Cana, and at the end of His life at the cross. Emmerich's statement is also a blasphemy, because it suggests that Jesus Christ had less knowledge than Mary, when in fact He was infinitely wiser than her and knew exactly who the traitor was.
* When Jesus returns to the “grotto” in Emmerich's vision, angels show Him all the sufferings he has to endure to save mankind. The problem is, in this vision Jesus Christ is conversing with angels and not God. Besides this, here Emmerich clearly shows her true colors and that the spirit of Satan was working in her: she, who describes lengthily the sins of the world, page after page, only touches the theme of suffering, but does not even mention hell, the lake of fire or Gehenna.
* Emmerich says that the angels were praying before the throne of God on Jesus' behalf, insinuating that He, who is God, could not pray Himself, or that God didn't want to listen to His Son. This is a blasphemy.
* In the next phrases Emmerich stresses again Jesus' humanity, and repeats the heresy that the divinity of Jesus Christ returned to heaven that night: “I beheld the divine nature of the Son in the Person of the Father, and, as it were, withdrawn into his bosom”; “the Divine Will of our Lord withdrew in some sort into the Eternal Father, in order to permit all those sufferings which his human will besought his Father to spare him, to weigh upon his humanity alone”. Had this happened, Jesus would not have stood the trial, and we would all perish.
* In Emmerich's hallucinations, Jesus asks himself: “And what good will result from this sacrifice?”, which is to say, He, Who created the world and devised the plan of salvation, did not know what He was doing. Blasphemy.
* Emmerich, who did not elaborate on God's wrath, although His wrath was the main reason for Christ's agony, in the next few pages goes on to detail every possible sin committed by future Christians. Jesus, seeing all these sins, cries out and awakes the three disciples. Not in the Bible. Peter runs to the grotto and sees Jesus bathed in his own blood, overcome with mortal fear and anguish, groaning, unconscious to Peter's presence. Jesus humiliated again, Emmerich guilty of blasphemy again.
* In her next vision, Satan takes up different forms, which represent different sins. She describes a gigantic serpent, with a crown on his head(!) and “of unbounded strength.” Occult symbols and a lie: Satan's strength is limited. This creature “led forward countless legions of the enemies of Jesus in every age and of every nation”. These insulted and attacked Jesus Christ and His body, the Church. Emmerich goes on to describe in detail all these assaults and the wickedness of men – it appears as if she delights in describing sin and wickedness.
* When Jesus returns the second time to the three disciples, – according to Emmerich, the blasphemer – He totters, stumbles at every step, trembles and groans, His face is pale and bloody, His hair in disorder. The apostles think He is wandering. Jesus asks them to console Mary and Magdalene. Then He desires to return to the grotto, but has no strength to walk, so John and James have to lead Him back. A flood of lies and blasphemies.
* Emmerich's next occult vision is about a “spiritual communication” between Jesus and Mary, “under the form of rays passing to and fro between them.” Mary senses Jesus' agony and faints several times. Then she sends some messengers to make inquiries concerning Jesus, and goes with Magdalene and Salome to the Valley of Josaphat, and stretches her hands towards the Mount of Olives. Jesus turns His eyes in her direction “as if to seek her assistance.” Lies. Mary presented as greater than God: blasphemy.
* In the next scene, the abyss opens and Jesus sees in “the first part of Limbo” Adam and Eve, the patriarchs, prophets, the just men etc. The terms “abyss” and “Limbo” are not used in the Bible. The Bible speaks about hell, Abraham's bosom, paradise.
* In the next blasphemous vision, Jesus falls on his face “like one at the point of death”, the angels disappear, and another angel, clothed like a priest, appears before Jesus. He holds a “small vase, in shape resembling the chalice used at the Last Supper” in his hand. At the top of this chalice, there is “a small oval body, about the size of a bean,” diffusing a reddish light. The angel places the “mysterious food” in Jesus' mouth and gives Him to drink from the chalice. He then disappears, and Jesus Christ returns to His disciples. This chalice represents the cup of sufferings. Emmerich suggests here, that an angel, one of Jesus Christ's creatures, was a mediator between God the Father and God the Son, and this angel is the High Priest instead of Jesus Christ. This is an awful blasphemy.
Conclusion: Emmerich's vision of Jesus' agony focuses on Satan and sins. She speaks of God and His wrath as little as possible. She suggests that Jesus was communicating with Satan instead of God that night, God being a mere eyewitness to the events, who sometimes sent angels to strengthen Jesus. Emmerich humiliates and debases Jesus whenever she can. The whole sequence of visions is blasphemous.
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
--------------------
A Servant of Christ,
Drew
1 Tim. 3:
16: And without controversy great is the mystery of godliness: God was manifest in the flesh..
Posts: 3978 | From: Council Grove, KS USA | Registered: Jun 2002
| IP: Logged |
|
|
Rich H
Advanced Member
Member # 4313
|
posted
One thing about this movie that always seems to be overlooked is the fact that Mel DID NOT write this movie.. not one bit of it.
He did a great job of putting it on the big screen..
and I beleive that he was inspired by God to do so.
He claims to have gotten his insperation for the movie from the book "The Dolorous Passion of Our Lord Jesus Christ" by Anne Catherine Emmerich.
The truth is he got a lot more than just insperation from this book... it is an almost exact copy of the book itself.
Actually it is a condensed version of the book.
The book is written by a nun that was given images
of Christ and his time on earth. She was also
a stigmata.
You know what they always say.. that the book is better than the movie.. it applies in this case as well.
Since the book is so old it is no longer covered
by copyrights.. and can be downloaded for free from this link.
http://catholicplanet.com/ebooks/index.htm
If you can keep an open mind about a nun who gets
visions from Christ then you would probably enjoy the book.
Peace
Rich
Posts: 30 | From: Metro Detroit | Registered: Jan 2005
| IP: Logged |
|
|
fivefold
New Member
Member # 2976
|
posted
Hi all. I agree with Sky but not with Brother Greg and those who hold similar views, but at least you all exchanged your views as members of one body. Yesterday I read Tony Capoccia's view that were expressed in a different manner and our evangelist, Paul responded as follows:
quote:
Dear brothers and sisters in Christ,
Having read all the comments on Mel Gibson’s movie in Tony Capoccia’s review of the Passion of Christ, I noted all the strong condemnation of it.
We know it is not a true, accurate account of Calvary and the crucifixion of Our Lord Jesus Christ but which of us can give a true and accurate account of what happened on the day of crucifixion?
We know movies are made to shock and excite audiences so that they will tell others to go and see the film, as they are normally made primarily for profit only, to satisfy the financial giants. But how do we know that despite it’s gory beatings of Jesus Christ and the horrific torture, that God cannot reach the unbelieving millions of souls that go to see this movie? And how do we know that the Hand of God will not touch the people by what they see on the screen and then possibly go to seek salvation in Christian Churches?
Is it not better that millions of people go to see this movie than go to see the obscenities and depravity that is rampant in other films of this day? Let each of us use this as a witnessing tool to the true Gospel of Jesus Christ.
God works in mysterious ways and we cannot condemn anything to do with the crucifixion of Our Lord in this film because I believe that if God did not want this movie about His Holy Son to be seen, it would never have gotten off the ground.
We know that Mel Gibson is Catholic and you might say that he’s not born-again but what was each of us before we were born-again – were we not similar?
I believe strongly that all should use every opportunity to proclaim the Gospel of Our Lord Jesus Christ. We do so as I am a world evangelist, but we should be slow to condemn so quickly because we do not know that God is not going to touch this man and use him in the future when he is born-again, to make proper Christian movies, maybe about the disciples and other Biblical characters.
When this man comes to the realisation that the Bible is the Word of God. For you must have compassion on him and realise that at this moment he doesn’t know the Word of God. But what if God was to judge us the way that you are judging him, and had condemned us to hell because we were not born-again, which would have been right? Would you feel that was right?
I believe brothers and sisters in Christ that we should hold our tongues and give it a chance and wait and see what happens. For no matter what you say, when did you last see such a tremendous advertising campaign about Jesus Christ and such intense global media interest – with I believe, Jesus even being on Time magazine.
Despite the gory details of the movie, is this not a great opportunity for each Christian to talk to unbelievers about Calvary? So instead of condemning it because it offends us, let us please give it a chance to see if God is using this movie to reach people that otherwise would be lost.
Your brother in Christ,
Paul.
Evangelist
Five Fold Ministry Ireland
--------------------
JESUS CHRIST, the same yesterday, today and forever. Heb.13:8
Posts: 2 | From: Ireland | Registered: Mar 2004
| IP: Logged |
|
|
Endoxos
Advanced Member
Member # 2929
|
posted
It means "noble" in Greek. ^_^
--------------------
My signature is apisdn umop.
Posts: 362 | From: HELP! I'm stuck in a DOS window! | Registered: Mar 2004
| IP: Logged |
|
|
barrykind
Advanced Member
Member # 35
|
posted
Interesting Endoxos i had not heart that as of yet.
BTW what does Endoxos mean?
Thanks
barry
--------------------
The HEART of the issue is truly the issue of the HEART!
John 3:3;Mark 8:34-38;James 1:27
Posts: 3529 | From: Orange, Texas | Registered: Jun 2002
| IP: Logged |
|
|
Endoxos
Advanced Member
Member # 2929
|
posted
One thing I noticed the other day, is I remember seeing a behind-the-scenes on The Passion on PAX network (if anyone has PAX, and they're still showing it, watch it to see what I mean). Mel said that the only person who could see Satan was Mary, and even then, only out of the corner of her eye.
Then yesterday, it hit me. If Jesus, who is God, cannot see Satan, yet Mary can, does this mean Mary is above both Jesus and God? Does it mean Jesus and God are not omniscient, yet Mary is? Does it mean Satan can hide from God and Jesus, yet not Mary?
In Mel Gibson's eyes, what does this mean? I mean, I could understand if NOONE could see him ("him" for sake of this post, I realize he was played by a she), except the audience, that'd make sense. If Jesus could see him outta the corner of his eye, that'd make sense too. But allow Mary, and noone else save the audience, to see him elevates Mary well above and beyond what is proper.
As to the statement "I don't think this movie was meant to be evil", please think back to what Paul said "Someone might argue, "If my falsehood enhances God's truthfulness and so increases his glory, why am I still condemned as a sinner?" Why not say--as we are being slanderously reported as saying and as some claim that we say--"Let us do evil that good may result"? Their condemnation is deserved."" (Romans 3:7-8). By no means was it intended to be evil. However, sin is hardly ever *intended* to be evil... but Satan is called the "father of lies", and ALL lies come from Satan... even if those lies are intended to glorify God, they still come from Satan, and are still sin.
--------------------
My signature is apisdn umop.
Posts: 362 | From: HELP! I'm stuck in a DOS window! | Registered: Mar 2004
| IP: Logged |
|
|
wonderful_sky
Advanced Member
Member # 1808
|
posted
I refuse to pick this movie apart. I believe that Mary was represented because of Mel's catholic believes. I believe he represented satan in a manner that was fitting. As for the baby, I believe Mel's representation of him is as he says it was.
Here is what I know about this movie... Last Sunday morning, during communion, those that had seen the movie cried, the movie caused them to think about what they were taking part of. Tuesday night when I saw the movie, it changed my life. I have talked to about 5 people this week, since Tuesday, that has also seen the movie, some had fallen away, they too were changed. When people go see this movie, they are looking for someone, seeking. I believe with all my heart that if this changes one person, the movie has served its purpose. There is evil in this world. I don't think this movie was meant to be evil. I will recommend this movie. I already have.
I will say this, I liked the Book better... made the death of my Lord and Savior much "cleaner" in my mind. But seeing it, opened my heart, Jesus was there and He helped me.
In His Love,
Sky ![[dance]](graemlins/dance1.gif)
--------------------
He who kneels down to God, can stand up to anything ![[Prayer]](graemlins/prayer.gif)
Posts: 220 | From: Missouri | Registered: Jul 2003
| IP: Logged |
|
|
Bro. Greg
Advanced Member
Member # 2943
|
posted
I was wondering the same thing! It certianly isn't based on scripture though. Was I just seeing things but was the baby thing not covered with scars? Like stripes all over its back and front? I know I saw that.....did anyone else? If it was stripes/scars was it saying that Satan had won and the Christ what his baby now????? Was a sick scene if you ask me...
Furthermore, the only time Jesus showed everyone his *** was when he rode into Jerusalem on it on Palm Sunday. I am refering to the last scene in the movie. That was absurd....sick and just plain out wrong to depict our Lord and Saviour in nudity like that.......made me sick with the whole movie. If ya ask me it was a Satanic inspired redition of the events that leads people to look to Mary instead of our Lord. Even eluded to Him drawing His strength from Mary on His way to be crucified...sad sad sad....
I DO NOT RECOMMEND THE MOVIE AT ALL!
--------------------
Isaiah 5:20(KJV) 20Woe unto them that call evil good, and good evil; that put darkness for light, and light for darkness; that put bitter for sweet, and sweet for bitter!
Bro. Greg
In and By His Grace
http://www.mychristiansite.com/ministries/pass_it_on
Posts: 527 | From: Montana, USA | Registered: Mar 2004
| IP: Logged |
|
|
Caretaker
Advanced Member
Member # 36
|
posted
http://www.christianitytoday.com/movies/news/040301-passion.html
When asked why he portrayed Satan—an androgynous, almost beautiful being played by Rosalinda Celentano—the way he did, Gibson replied: "I believe the Devil is real, but I don't believe he shows up too often with horns and smoke and a forked tail. The devil is smarter than that. Evil is alluring, attractive. It looks almost normal, almost good—but not quite.
"That's what I tried to do with the Devil in the film. The actor's face is symmetric, beautiful in a certain sense, but not completely. For example, we shaved her eyebrows. Then we shot her almost in slow motion so you don't see her blink—that's not normal. We dubbed in a man's voice in Gethsemane even though the actor is a woman … That's what evil is about, taking something that's good and twisting it a little bit."
But what about the ugly baby?
"Again," said Gibson, "it's evil distorting what's good. What is more tender and beautiful than a mother and a child? So the Devil takes that and distorts it just a little bit. Instead of a normal mother and child you have an androgynous figure holding a 40-year-old 'baby' with hair on his back. It is weird, it is shocking, it's almost too much—just like turning Jesus over to continue scourging him on his chest is shocking and almost too much, which is the exact moment when this appearance of the Devil and the baby takes place."
--------------------
A Servant of Christ,
Drew
1 Tim. 3:
16: And without controversy great is the mystery of godliness: God was manifest in the flesh..
Posts: 3978 | From: Council Grove, KS USA | Registered: Jun 2002
| IP: Logged |
|
|
LiteralD
Advanced Member
Member # 2922
|
posted
I think there is more to the image then, it just being one of the devils agents. Maybe the image in the movie has a deeper purpose or meaning like a warning of something that walks the earth or is to walk the earth.
tell me what you guys think!
God Bless
--------------------
In God's Army
Posts: 25 | From: London, Ontario CANADA | Registered: Mar 2004
| IP: Logged |
|
|
Yvonne
New Member
Member # 2905
|
posted
Several people I've talked to seem to think it was the anti-christ also. Maybe Mel Gibson will speak about it and let us know his thinking someday.
Posts: 2 | From: Texas | Registered: Feb 2004
| IP: Logged |
|
|
Endoxos
Advanced Member
Member # 2929
|
posted
Although I have not seen it yet, I have heard it is as an "anti-Madonna" image...
--------------------
My signature is apisdn umop.
Posts: 362 | From: HELP! I'm stuck in a DOS window! | Registered: Mar 2004
| IP: Logged |
|
|
|
|
Yvonne
New Member
Member # 2905
|
posted
1) I'm new to this site and am not sure I'm using it correctly. In "The Passion" movie, what do you suppose the baby Satan was holding was representing. Or who was he?
Posts: 2 | From: Texas | Registered: Feb 2004
| IP: Logged |
|
|
|
Printer-friendly view of this topic
