Hey buddy, I change my clock more often than I drive my tractor to school :finger, well at least since they kicked me out of the 6th grade for being 21...

And to think of all those girlie crushes you just broke by getting kicked out. Now why did you have to get all old on us?

I was raised Catholic (no longer practicing for opinions I have on the Catholic Church) and went to Catholic grammar and high schools. I was schooled on the Bible for approximately an hour a day for 12 years. In those 12 years I can recall without referencing the bible:

 

1.) Jesus was jewish.

2.) The jews were of the opinion that the Son of God would never be a poor, humble-man-of-means carpenter. Rather, they thought the Son of God would be a rich, powerful, omnipotent but fair, king.

3.) The jews wanted Jesus crucified for blasphemous claims of being the Son of God.

4.) Pontius Pilate (sp?) saw no reason to crucify Jesus.

5.) The jews insisted.

6.) Pontius Pilate "washed his hands" of a crucifixion he disagreed with but allowed it to happen.

 

If this is the anti-semitism portrayed by Gibson in his movie, hold up the bible as an anti-semitic documentation of reportedly historical events..... not Gibson or his interpretation of them.

I was raised Catholic (no longer practicing for opinions I have on the Catholic Church) and went to Catholic grammar and high schools. I was schooled on the Bible for approximately an hour a day for 12 years. In those 12 years I can recall without referencing the bible:

 

1.) Jesus was jewish.

2.) The jews were of the opinion that the Son of God would never be a poor, humble-man-of-means carpenter. Rather, they thought the Son of God would be a rich, powerful, omnipotent but fair, king.

3.) The jews wanted Jesus crucified for blasphemous claims of being the Son of God.

4.) Pontius Pilate (sp?) saw no reason to crucify Jesus.

5.) The jews insisted.

6.) Pontius Pilate "washed his hands" of a crucifixion he disagreed with but allowed it to happen.

 

If this is the anti-semitism portrayed by Gibson in his movie, hold up the bible as an anti-semitic documentation of reportedly historical events..... not Gibson or his interpretation of them.

That's what I remember as well from my years in Catholic schools (grammar and high school).

 

I have no idea if I plan on seeing this or not. Brian mentioned something about renting it if/when it comes out on DVD, but I don't think we will be going to the theatres to see it.

If this is the anti-semitism portrayed by Gibson in his movie, hold up the bible as an anti-semitic documentation of reportedly historical events..... not Gibson or his interpretation of them.

But that's the problem with the Bible. It is a book of FAITH, not a book of HISTORY. When Christians want to deepen their faith they should look to the Bible. When they want to learn History they should read history books. The truth is Romans used crucifixtion to kill those who broke ROMAN laws. I have no problem with the Bible--it's a beautiful work of art and it inspires millions of people to better themselves. But it is not a history book--and we do no service to ourselves as people who are trying to learn to treat it as such. I am not saying people need to look at Jesus as a historical figure--but the ROMANS crucified Jesus, NOT the Jews. Even the sign the bible says hung above Jesus (INRI) seems to imply a crime against ROME. (King of the Jews--he was usurping ROMAN rule...)

But that's the problem with the Bible. It is a book of FAITH, not a book of HISTORY. When Christians want to deepen their faith they should look to the Bible. When they want to learn History they should read history books. The truth is Romans used crucifixtion to kill those who broke ROMAN laws. I have no problem with the Bible--it's a beautiful work of art and it inspires millions of people to better themselves. But it is not a history book--and we do no service to ourselves as people who are trying to learn to treat it as such. I am not saying people need to look at Jesus as a historical figure--but the ROMANS crucified Jesus, NOT the Jews. Even the sign the bible says hung above Jesus (INRI) seems to imply a crime against ROME. (King of the Jews--he was usurping ROMAN rule...)

 

He said that the Romans did the actual crucifixtion, but that it was at the behest of the Jews, which is what the Catholic religion has taught (whether they still do or not, I couldn't tell ya).

 

I don't think either of us are claiming the Bible is a history book.

just because you are jewish doesnt mean you practice that religion it is a race.

Yes.

Yes.

:headshake

around Holy Week and the general antiSemitism always began with "they killed Jesus didn't they"

 

Don't forget about making matzot out of Christian babies' blood.

 

Oh wait, that is Mel Gibson's NEXT project. Nevermind.

 

He said that the Romans did the actual crucifixtion, but that it was at the behest of the Jews, which is what the Catholic religion has taught (whether they still do or not, I couldn't tell ya). 

 

I don't think either of us are claiming the Bible is a history book.

Oh, fair enough. Sorry, that's just my pet peeve about this movie and well Christianity in general. And I don't think it's just the Catholic Church. I go to an ELCA Lutheran school--and you'd be surprised by the number of "Liberal" protestant demoninations that produce kids that believe the same thing...

Oh, fair enough. Sorry, that's just my pet peeve about this movie and well Christianity in general. And I don't think it's just the Catholic Church. I go to an ELCA Lutheran school--and you'd be surprised by the number of "Liberal" protestant demoninations that produce kids that believe the same thing...

lol - nothing to be sorry about. Like I said, the teachings might have changed since I last went to church regularly (it's been about 10 years now). But what I typed was generally what was pounded into our heads in grammar school (high school taught more spirituality and morality rather than bible study after freshman year).

but the ROMANS crucified Jesus, NOT the Jews.

The Romans carried out the crucifixion of Jesus at the behest of Pontius Pilate. Roman soldiers physically crucified Jesus, but it was the jews that caused the crucifixion of Jesus.

 

I'm not saying the bible is a historic document. I said it is a reportedly historic document of events during the time of Jesus Christ (New Testament).

Jewish/Hebrew is an ethnicity (probably what whoever that was, was trying to say rather than race). You can be a Jew who doesn't practice Judaism. Einstein, for example.

The Romans carried out the crucifixion of Jesus at the behest of Pontius Pilate. Roman soldiers physically crucified Jesus, but it was the jews that caused the crucifixion of Jesus.

 

I'm not saying the bible is a historic document. I said it is a reportedly historic document of events during the time of Jesus Christ (New Testament).

I guess we'll just have to agree to disagree. I think that it was almost entirely done by the Romans at their own initiative. I also disagree that the Bible was ever meant as a historical document. The earliest Gospel wasn't even begun to be composed during Jesus' lifetime--so I don't necessarily think that makes it the most accurate record of history.

But that's the problem with the Bible. It is a book of FAITH, not a book of HISTORY. When Christians want to deepen their faith they should look to the Bible. When they want to learn History they should read history books. The truth is Romans used crucifixtion to kill those who broke ROMAN laws. I have no problem with the Bible--it's a beautiful work of art and it inspires millions of people to better themselves. But it is not a history book--and we do no service to ourselves as people who are trying to learn to treat it as such. I am not saying people need to look at Jesus as a historical figure--but the ROMANS crucified Jesus, NOT the Jews. Even the sign the bible says hung above Jesus (INRI) seems to imply a crime against ROME. (King of the Jews--he was usurping ROMAN rule...)

I don't understand. So, no movie should ever be made that isn't historically correct?

Probably not if you're going to claim it is.

We're going to see it. It's a movie. Entertainment. Nothing more, nothing less.

I guess Birth of a Nation and Triumph of the Will were entertainment, nothing more, nothing less....too.

 

Eh?

I guess Birth of a Nation and Triumph of the Will were entertainment, nothing more, nothing less....too.

 

Eh?

I know of 'Birth of a Nation' (saw parts of it on a PBS special about it), but what is the other one about?

I don't understand. So, no movie should ever be made that isn't historically correct?

I just meant the Bible shouldn't be looked at as a HISTORY book--but as a book to inspire faith. And that people might take this movie to be actual history. I think that movie makers should have some responsiblity--especially when there is such a strong and dangerous anti-Jewish feelings.

yea it is

they have there own little nose, and personality. noone counts them has there own because they get thrown in the no hispanic race

 

 

Izzy is dizzy!

I don't understand. So, no movie should ever be made that isn't historically correct?

Or any movie that contains anti-semetic overtures.

I was raised Catholic (no longer practicing for opinions I have on the Catholic Church) and went to Catholic grammar and high schools. I was schooled on the Bible for approximately an hour a day for 12 years. In those 12 years I can recall without referencing the bible:

 

1.) Jesus was jewish.

2.) The jews were of the opinion that the Son of God would never be a poor, humble-man-of-means carpenter. Rather, they thought the Son of God would be a rich, powerful, omnipotent but fair, king.

3.) The jews wanted Jesus crucified for blasphemous claims of being the Son of God.

4.) Pontius Pilate (sp?) saw no reason to crucify Jesus.

5.) The jews insisted.

6.) Pontius Pilate "washed his hands" of a crucifixion he disagreed with but allowed it to happen.

 

If this is the anti-semitism portrayed by Gibson in his movie, hold up the bible as an anti-semitic documentation of reportedly historical events..... not Gibson or his interpretation of them.

I was also born and raised Catholic but, I got over it. (Hi. my name is Flaxx, I am a recovering Catholic and I have been clean for 19 years.)

 

Go back and dig into the now-infamous Palistinian-Israeli thread (if you dare), to see cw's and Soxy's educated responses to these claims.

 

John Dominic Crossan is a former priest who has written 3 books on the historical, rather than the mythical, Jesus. His most recent book is Who Killed Jesus ?: Exposing the Roots of Anti-Semitism in the Gospel Story of the Death of Jesus. It is controversial in that it flatly calls the Gospels' insistence on Jewish responsibility for Jesus' death "Christianity's longest lie."

 

But the fact that Crossan is focusing extensively on the historical facts and not the Gospel's claims makes it a hard book to refute on any grounds other than faith-based grounds. He drives home the point that the Gospels are "prophesy historicized" and not accurate history, they look at the prophesies of the Old Testament and then make the current events of the day fit in with those prophesies. He points out that the early Christians were persecuted by the more numerous Jews, so a healthy dose of anti-Semitism tossed into the Gospels is not hard to understand. Crossan's chief contention is that it was the Romans that did the deed out of fear of civil unrest Jesus and his followers would bring to Judea. I started into the book sitting at Barnes and Noble one day last month and need to go buy it and read it through.

I just meant the Bible shouldn't be looked at as a HISTORY book--but as a book to inspire faith. And that people might take this movie to be actual history. I think that movie makers should have some responsiblity--especially when there is such a strong and dangerous anti-Jewish feelings.

Dang, Soxy! I try to put together a response and you're already on the case!

Dang, Soxy!  I try to put together a response and you're already on the case!

Heck, beats doing my homework.

I guess Birth of a Nation and Triumph of the Will were entertainment, nothing more, nothing less....too.

 

Eh?

We don't go to the movies to learn about faith or history. We go for entertainment.

I guess we'll just have to agree to disagree. I think that it was almost entirely done by the Romans at their own initiative. I also disagree that the Bible was ever meant as a historical document. The earliest Gospel wasn't even begun to be composed during Jesus' lifetime--so I don't necessarily think that makes it the most accurate record of history.

well said - I will also need to agree to disagree with my good friend CubKilla

 

under Roman law -

 

and it was irrelevant who did it because of the atonement requirements of the action

 

however

 

it was almost 2000 years and people still blame and hate the Jews today for an event that happened all that time ago - the blood guilt -

 

there are ways to tell the story without inferring "the Jews" killed Jesus and there are ways of telling it in a antiSemitic hate version and by all accouin ts of the script Gibson has gone for the latter way which is his andf his father's long held personal theology

 

but this is being peddled as if it were "just facts" when it has a particular interpretation that I find theologically and hsitorically very questionable and not supported

 

if a prson sees it with discernemtn, then there is no problem but people seeing it as "just facts" that is the problem

 

the 4 Gospels by the way diverge tremendously on what happened that Thursday and Friday - there is no one "historical" account possible from the Bible - the fact that this movie is billed as that is the first thing that makes it ludsicrous - lay out your Passion stories from all 4 Gospels and see how they all factually conflict at some major points.

 

Which is also to say I deeply believe in the reality of Calvary but to draw out one account and say "this is what happened" is an absurdity and in Gibson's case, where done to make money is also done to push the unique theological views of the anti Vatican 2 chrch body to which he belongs which rejects the Roman Church's teachings on Jewish "responsibility" to the point that it believes the blood guilt is still there - go back and read my first post which includes the name of the antiSemitic visionary they follow ass revelation

 

theologically, PA said it a long time ago in this thread - we all killed Christ. Unless we see ourselves as the Christ killers, then Calvary means nothing. Christ dfied because of the sin of all of us. To me to say that "so and so" killed Christ is theologically wrong and has led to hate and Holocaust in our human experience.