The Passion of The Christ

*** THIS WAS THE REVIEW I SENT TO MY CHURCH ***

Well, as promised, here is my review of The Passion of The Christ.

But first, let me address the "theatre" issue. Should you go to a
theatre to see this movie? Well, according to God the whole world is a
theatre - we are a spectacle to angels - so whether you go to a
theatre or not, you can't avoid the fact that you are already in one.
Ellen White warned against theatres in a day when there was drinking,
smoking and lewd behavior occurring in these venues. Today, they are a
socially acceptable environment where nothing other then WATCHING the
film takes place. Theatres aren't evil, and movies that are shown in
them can have either evil or good overtones. Paul says to grow up and
learn how to discern between good and evil. Avoiding theatres in the
name of righteousness is a sign of spiritual immaturity and many
people miss the incredible blessings of those movies that teach us
things about our social culture - a necessity if we are to evangelize
the world. I expect some will disagree with me strongly, and I respect
your freedom to choose what to think, but this is the position I take
with my youth and I believe Jesus Himself would use movie analogies
within His parables if He walked the earth today.

That being said, GO SEE THE PASSION OF THE CHRIST!

It was fantastic. Despite the many negative opinions expressed by
some, I found it to be Biblically accurate with a few minor
discrepancies.

I didn't like the way the Jewish crowd consisted of many poor people,
because we know that it was a group of Sanhedrin council members,
scribes and Pharisees that made up the majority of the mob. Let's be
honest, the whole reason why the Jewish leaders felt the need to
arrest Christ in secret was because they feared the common people who
had come to love what Christ was doing to turn the Jewish economy
upside down. It was in this scene where they were screaming "crucify
Him" that I could see why some felt the movie was Anti-Semitic. Yet, I
feel that Mel Gibson redeemed Himself with the journey that Christ had
to make bearing His cross. As Christ traveled further out of town into
the more impoverished sections of Jerusalem, you could detect a change
of demeanor from those watching. No longer were there as many stones
being thrown at Christ, and some of the poor where trying to help Him.
Much more weeping took place as Christ traveled through The Jewish
ghettos.

There was a little Hollywood thrown into the mix - most of it with the
character that played Satan. I wish Mel had put more emphasis on
making Satan an Angel of Light instead of a "sickly side-show freak"
who reminded me more of Marilyn Manson then Lucifer the Great Light
Bearer. Yet, that was to be expected and it didn't detract too much
from the film because at least Satan was present at all of the events
- something that The Bible and Ellen White both attest to. In fact, we
know that Satan was trying to make this experience as painful as
possible so that Christ would exercise His power to save Himself -
giving Satan the evidence He needed to accuse God of being selfish
with His power. I did not get the feeling that Mel was portraying each
lash of the whip and each pounding of the nail as somehow being
satisfaction to an offended Father, which I confess was my worst fear
going into The Passion. Definitely, Mel makes it VERY CLEAR that Satan
is the one who is responsible for the torturing, beating, and
whippings of Christ.

I know what you all are most interested in. What about the violence?
As someone who has been stabbed, beaten, and left for dead, I don't
know if I can offer an opinion that is objective. First, let me make
it quite clear that the violence is no worse then that which you would
see in The Lord of the Rings Trilogy. What makes it difficult to watch
is NOT THE VIOLENCE as much as whom the violence is directed at. When
The Witch Lord in Lord of the Rings gets his head cut off - most of us
can accept that rather easily. You start whipping and beating The God
of The Universe - well - that's a different story. Nevertheless, this
is what happened, but this is NOT WHAT THE MOVIE IS ABOUT. I must
reiterate: I did not get the sense that Mel was trying to portray a
gang lynching by a bunch of blood thirty demoniacs. The movie was
about how our gracious God deals with sinful, hateful people that
would murder Him. Does He execute wrath and vengeance on them? Does He
use His power to save Himself? No, He takes sin in its most hurtful
form head on and absorbs it with love and kindness. You weep in
between scenes as Mel portrays Jesus washing dirty feet and
articulating on The Mount of Olives.

Judas was well done, although, a little too much Hollywood with the
whole "evil looking demons" bugging him. Ellen White DOES say that
happened, but I doubt they were visible and looked like goblins. Of
course, this was a very brief scene and you might not even have caught
it if you weren't paying attention.

The portrayal of the disciple John was EXCELLENT, and he was
definitely aged as a teenager. This gave me great happiness because it
was the teenager that stuck around to watch the whole thing transpire
as the adults ran for their lives.

As for those that have called this a Catholic movie, I must tell you
that it is NOT TRUE. Mary has a few minor scenes which are not built
upon Biblical evidence, but so what, this is a movie for pity sakes.
She is not deified in any way and other then wiping up some of the
blood of Christ (didn't really see what the point of that was) I
thought her role was well dramatized.

Bottom line? Go see this movie. You would do yourself a great
disservice by not watching it.

For those that think a theatre is a horrible place to go, remember
that a TV and a living room also constitute a theatre.

SEE THIS MOVIE.

So many people had questions after the film and I couldn't even go to
the bathroom without speaking on behalf of our gracious God.

In conclusion, I feel like the film is a success or a failure
depending on which theological premise the viewer enters into the
theatre with. Even The Bible itself has been used for evil purposes,
and those that murdered Christ knew more about the scriptures then
many of us. Right premise equals right promise. Wrong premise equates
wrong promise. It really is that simple. For me, this film served as
further evidence that I have no reason to fear a God who rides a
donkey to His own death and that the tactics of coercion, force and
manipulation can NOT stand up to The Power of Love, Liberty and
Freedom. Which side do YOU fall on?

In Service,

Pastor Marco Belmonte

[ # ]

I have read this article and one produced by Cameron Law. I have to say that I was totally won over by the film. I believe it was very well scripted, acted and directed with no overly exaggerated poetic licence taken.
As a Police Officer in the UK, I have seen both first and second hand some of the physical cruelty one human beinf can inflict on another. I have seen people with their heads crushed, their limbs mutilated through assaults and even worse things done in the names of jealousy or greed. These acts were doubtless inspired by Satan and for some of our ministers, including my Union President who I respect deeply,to believe GIBSON went too far in depicting the level of Satan inspired venom against the Son of God makes me feel that they really are not going into real communities enough to see how far the enemy will go to destroy peoples lives and dampen the potential for receiving Hope.
I agree catagorically with your conclusions and shall continue to encourage people to see what I thought was a well balanced film.

[ Parent | # ]

I can relate to your perspective very easily. As a person who used to contribute to what you are talking about I can not help but think that it is more important then ever to understand what is REALLY going on in the world - how pain and violence exist outside most people's houses without them even realizing it.

Thank you for your comments. God bless you as you help minister to your people as a police officer. What an opportunity you have to show Christ's love within the confines of your job description.

God bless you.

- Marco

---
"HeavenlySanctuary.com - Surf The Innernet!"

[ Parent | # ]

I only recently started to look at this website (although I knew about it since its creation), so my comment on the film comes a bit late, but I felt like posting it anyway.

I went to see The Passion as soon as it came out, and I was really curious to see what Mel Gibson did with such an important theme. I have thought about the movie a lot since I saw it, and I have to say I'm still a bit ambivalent towards it. Here are the reasons: First of all, the movie couldn't be more Catholic, and I will tell you why; second of all, despite this, the movie has been a great springboard for witnessing for many people -- it sparked a Biblical interest in many of the viewers.

Now, I just wanted to address Marco in his comment that he didn't see anything Catholic in the movie. I would like to challenge that, because there is a whole lot of Catholicisim in there:

1) Veneration of Mary. Marco, you missed some scenes that definitely venerated Mary.
For example, Peter, upon denying Christ, comes up to Mary and says "Mother, forgive me, for I have denied thy son,"... that is a blatant message that Mary is able to forgive sins.
Also, throughout the entire movie, Mary is seen to have a mystical, spiritual connection to Jesus. When Jesus is in the dungeon, Mary is able to mystically sense that Jesus is right below the ground she is walking on, and she bends down and puts the side of her face on the pavement.
Next, besides Jesus, Mary is the only other person who is able to see Satan... this is made evident about 3/4 of the way into the movie, I think about the time Christ must carry His cross ..
Did you notice, by the way, that Mary resembles a Catholic nun way more than she does a poor, Jewish woman?

There are many more examples, and I will not go into them. But in general, Mary and Christ have this mystical, unearthly connection that is displayed throughout the entire movie -- how could you miss that. And that, sir, is not biblical at all.

Now to some of the other Catholic content.

Mel Gibson himself stated in a few of his interviews that much of the material on which he based his movie were sources other than the Bible. For instance, he used the visions of Catholic nuns ages ago -- ex. Mary of Agreda.
Many of the non-bliblical scenes, such as the shroud of Turin scene, and some others come from these visions.

Furthermore, the entire thematic focus of the movie is totally Catholic. Catholicisim focuses on suffering -- of Christ and the believers ... that's why there is a whole lot of suffering going on in the convents. People are led to believe that the more suffering they endure the closer to God they will be and the more God will accept them.
Being that the movie was The Passion, it did focus entirely on Christ's suffering. Now, surely Christ suffered more than any one of us can imagine. But because the story centered around only that, viewers, especially those who are not acquainted with the Bible, leave the theatre with an anticlimactic feeling... the redemptive quality of the movie is not sufficient to make up for the suffering.
Catholicism has always focused on Christ hanging on the Cross, and in case you didn't know, the Pope (along with others who make up the power of the beast, and in general, satanism) uses that to celebrate Christ being defeated on the cross. You should look into that.
Enough about that.

Now, as some have said in other reviews, The Passion, although it contains truth, is a mass-advertisement for the Unviersal Catholic church. Although it is a great springboard for witnessing, as I've said (and, I do not doubt that God will even use this movie to work on people's hearts and use it to lead them to people who can share truth) .. the movie is still, however, one of the many things that will help focus the people's minds on the Catholic Church and its power. It, along with other things, is bringing about a religious awareness, especially in North America... There are many things that must take place before everyone, except God's people, will bow down to the Beast. This movie is excellent to pave the way for the Beast's growing earthly power and the institution of the Sunday Law.

Think back to the Catholic Counter-Reformation in the 15th and 16th centuries. The Catholic Church wanted to stop the Reformation and bring its flock back to the Church. What is a major thing the Catholic Church implemented to bring its people back? ART. If you ever studied art, which I did, you will see that the Church employed many artists to paint Christ, with a focus on his suffering and crucifixion, to build an emotion that will draw people back to the Church. It's history, man.

How is this any different? It's a more modern form of the same thing.

So, what is the point of what I'm trying to say? Gibson's The Passion of the Christ is Cathlic through and through --and why is that significant? Well, it fits into the prophetic fulfillment of the Beast and its growing power on the planet. Now that does not mean that God cannot use this movie to spread the truth. He can, because while Satan will try to gear people towards the worship of the Beast, God will do everything in His power to reveal the Beast to them and in turn reveal Himself and His love and hopefully lead that person to give his/her life to the true God. That is why I am ambivalent about the movie. there are 2 sides to it, but the purpose of my comment was to show that the movie IS Catholic at the core. Can't believe people missed that.

There are whole lot of other details, but I have seen the movie months ago, so they are not all fresh in my mind.

Principessa

[ Parent | # ]

Sorry, I just realized that I made a typo regarding the centuries for the Counter-Reformation.

I meant 16th and 17th centuries, not 15th and 16th. Just wanted to clarify that.

Principessa

[ Parent | # ]

First off, thanks so much for commenting! I think it is important that people share their views - I learn so much from others!

I agree with you, that many of the scenes are Catholic in nature, but as someone who is NOT a Catholic I viewed things through the eyes of a non-Catholic. For example, I noticed the same qualities about Mary that you did, but instead of elevating her in status like Catholic do, I simply viewed it as the special bond between a mother and her Son. In fact, I noticed that many of the scenes in the movie could've been taken out of Desire of Ages.

What I REALLY agree with in your comments is the fact that the movie focused on the suffering of Christ - the physical torture He endured. Many Catholics believe that focusing in on this is very important - but I disagree (and agree with you). In my article "Why Did Jesus Have to Die?" I layout several things that I feel are revealed at The Cross - physical torture NOT being one of them. I'd like to hear your comments on it. You can read the article in our "Articles" section.

I must say that after seeing the movie a second time, I do see many of the things that you have pointed out. I also believe, like you, that the movie has brought the minds of many to a place where they can be ministered to. Unfortunately, The Devil is beating many of us to the punch.

Please, keep coming back and visiting!

- Marco

---
"HeavenlySanctuary.com - Surf The Innernet!"

[ Parent | # ]

Hey Marco and Anonymous, Here is a review that I really appreciated:

From: Wresch
Date: Sunday, March 14, 2004 05:26:01
Subject: Not Another Passion Review
14 March 04

Dear Friends,

Last week our Monday evening Bible study group viewed Mel Gibson's "Passion of Christ." And I don't really wish to plague you with yet another review of the movie. But I am stimulated by some of the reviews I have read.

If this film is written, directed and produced by a committed Roman Catholic, we should expect to discover Roman Catholic influence. Yes, it is there, as many have pointed out.
Some of the events depicted are not recorded in the gospels, but are based upon the visions of medieval mystics. And Gibson includes all twelve of the stations of the cross, including the legend of St. Veronica, even though this devotion is of modern invention.

The "Passion" has been roundly criticized for depicting Jewish leaders as hostile to Jesus, and bent on his destruction. Yet in this, Gibson is only being faithful to the gospel texts. In fact having filmed Matthew 27:25, Gibson chose to cut this episode from the picture, before its final release.

Jesus, his disciples, and his enemies, were all Jews. Of course Jesus would not condone anti-semitism, and I do not find such in this movie. We Christians know that we are each responsible for the death of Jesus. Gibson has pointed out that the hand which holds the nail is his own.

Yes, the film depicts shocking and almost continuous brutality. But wasn't that the whole idea behind Roman scourging and crucifixion? The Romans had crucified hundreds after the Spartacus rebellion, and would later crucify Jews by the thousands.

Some have condemned the film by invoking the second commandment, which forbids the worship of images. Having given the commandments, God went on to direct the decoration of the tabernacle with figures of angels, and even specified two graven images for the lid of the ark. The book of Leviticus scripts religious drama in minute detail. So has God really forbidden all religious art or drama?

I have wondered how the "Passion" might be different if it were produced by a Seventh-day Adventist like me. Would I stick strictly to the biblical text, or would I be tempted to include extrabiblical material from my own tradition? Of course I would not include the visions of medieval mystics, but might I reveal my appreciation for Ellen White?

The Bible does not mention that Satan came personally to Gethsemane to tempt Jesus. But Mel Gibson does. And in The Desire of Ages, so does Ellen White.

"Now the tempter had come for the last fearful struggle." And the book goes on to quote Satan's specific arguments. (DA 686, 687)

The Bible does not mention that Jesus clung to the ground as he prayed. But Mel Gibson does.

"He clings to the cold ground, as if to prevent Himself from being drawn farther from God." (DA 687)

The Bible does not mention that Jesus was drenched with dew. But Mel Gibson does.

"The chilling dew of night falls upon His prostrate form, but He heeds it not." (DA 687) "From their leafy branches dropped heavy dew upon His stricken form, as if nature wept over its Author wrestling alone with the powers of darkness." (DA 689)

The Bible does not mention that Jesus staggered as he approached his sleeping disciples. But Mel Gibson does.

"Rising with painful effort, He staggered to the place where He had left His companions. (DA 688)

Some have condemned Gibson's film as excessively brutal, arguing that no one has ever been treated that badly.

"Never was criminal treated in so inhuman a manner as was the Son of God." (DA 710) "Then came the third scene of abuse and mockery, worse even than that received from the ignorant rabble. In the very presence of the priests and rulers, and with their sanction, this took place. Every feeling of sympathy or humanity had gone out of their hearts." (DA 714)

The Bible does not dwell on the mob's unrelenting fury, but Mel Gibson does.

"When the condemnation of Jesus was pronounced by the judges, a satanic fury took possession of the people. The roar of voices was like that of wild beasts. The crowd made a rush toward Jesus, crying, He is guilty, put Him to death! Had it not been for the Roman soldiers, Jesus would not have lived to be nailed to the cross of Calvary. He would have been torn in pieces before His judges, had not Roman authority interfered, and by force of arms restrained the violence of the mob." (DA 715)

The Bible does not depict the physical effects of the crown of thorns, but Mel Gibson does.

"Occasionally some wicked hand snatched the reed that had been placed in His hand, and struck the crown upon His brow, forcing the thorns into His temples, and sending the blood trickling down His face and beard." (DA 734)

The Bible does not depict the active role of Satan in stirring up the crowd, but Mel Gibson does.

"Satan led the cruel mob in its abuse of the Saviour." (DA 734)

The Bible does not depict the personal response of the Cyrenian Simon, as he confronts the suffering Jesus, but Mel Gibson does.

"He stops in astonishment at the scene; and as he expresses his compassion, they seize him and place the cross upon his shoulders." (DA 742)

The Bible does not show Jesus' mother following him along the via dolorosa, but Mel Gibson does.

"The mother of Jesus, supported by John the beloved disciple, had followed the steps of her Son to Calvary." (DA 744)

The Bible does not depict great violence as the cross is erected, but Mel Gibson does.

"As soon as Jesus was nailed to the cross, it was lifted by strong men, and with great violence thrust into the place prepared for it." (DA 745)

The Bible does not depict the dripping of Jesus' blood, but Mel Gibson does.

"From His hands and feet the blood fell, drop by drop, upon the rock drilled for the foot of the cross." (DA 760)

Yes, it is clear that Mel Gibson did not stick to the gospel accounts. He not only used his imagination, but included many pieces of extrabiblical material. And some of these might have come from The Desire of Ages.

If my prime concern is that I not witness the shock of inhuman brutality, I should skip this film. And of course for the same reason, I would have skipped the actual flogging and crucifixion of Christ.

Our responses to this movie will differ, because of our differing backgrounds and previous understanding. And certainly no movie watching can substitute for a personal experience with our risen Lord. Still....

"It would be well for us to spend a thoughtful hour each day in contemplation of the life of Christ. We should take it point by point, and let the imagination grasp each scene, especially the closing ones. As we thus dwell upon His great sacrifice for us, our confidence in Him will be more constant, our love will be quickened, and we shall be more deeply imbued with His spirit. If we would be saved at last, we must learn the lesson of penitence and humiliation at the foot of the cross.

"As we associate together, we may be a blessing to one another. If we are Christ's, our sweetest thoughts will be of Him. We shall love to talk of Him; and as we speak to one another of His love, our hearts will be softened by divine influences. Beholding the beauty of His character, we shall be 'changed into the same image from glory to glory.' 2 Cor. 3: 18." (DA 83)

When I told a friend that I was planning to attend this film, he said, "Enjoy the movie!"

No, I didn't enjoy it at all. But I'm glad I went.

© 2004 R. Wresch, M.D.

I saw the movie the second week it was out. I wonder how it would look if Mel was an Adventist.

God Bless, Scott

[ Parent | # ]

Hi Marco,

I appreciated your reply to my thoughts on The Passion of the Christ. I did read your article "Why Did Jesus Have to Die," and I have to say that you brought to the forefront some of the important things that happened at the cross.

I totally agree with you that many have a misconception about God's character -- it's sad, really. What's even sadder is that most of the time, people who call themselves followers of God are the ones responsible for painting those misconceptions. Just think back into history, distant or recent, and you can probably find many examples of cruel things that people did "in the name of God." For example, the persecutions the Protestant Reformers endured are all a result of what was being done "in the name of God." Of course, we know who was the prime power behind all of that.

Interestingly enough, in the end time, when Bible believing Christians who stand on God's side will endure persecution, just before Christ returns, these acts of persecution, Mrs. White said, will also be done in the name of God and peace. (I'm sure you know this, but if you want me to document it, I can go and find it). Literally, the entire world that will follow the Beast will think that the calamities and disasters that come upon the Earth are a result of the disobedience of Bible-believing Sabbath keepers. They will think that by killing us, they will bring peace on earth.

Anyways, back to the point ... all I meant to say was that, yes, people have a misconception about God, thinking that He is a cruel being who likes to inflict pain and punishment, which could not be further from the truth. It is our job, as loving, caring, sympathetic Christians to reveal whom we serve. And unfortunately, many have failed in that.

You make that point in your paragraph where you say that the people who crucified Christ were "commandment-keeping, tithe-paying, health-reforming, bible-quoting, Sabbath-keeping Adventists."

Now, where I want to make my point is that although there is truth to what you say, you should be careful as to what kind of picture you paint of Adventists. Try not, now, to paint a misconception about Adventists (ironically in the same article that you try to straighten out misconceptions about God). Not everyone who visits your site is an Adventist, remember. I realize, very well, that there are many Seventh-day Adventists who are very legalistic, just like the Jews in Christ's time. There have been many people hurt by those people, that's for sure. And that's very SAD! Because those kind of Seventh-day Adventists definitely don't have Jesus in their hearts.

However, not all Seventh-day Adventists who are Bible-believing, health-reforming, etc. are legalistic and mean. Yes, I do believe that there are many Adventists who need an attitude-reform from Christ (a heart transplant from Christ), though their doctrinal beliefs are sound. But believe you me there are also many Adventists who are as loving as can be and yet conservative (I hate using that label) in their thinking. And my point is, simply, that you have to be careful as to how you portray them, especially in your article.

Jesus stuck to the Word, yet He had the most loving attitude (of course because He is the God of infinite love). We have to ask Him to make us like Him. Sound followers of the Bible yet bursting at the seams with love from above. We have to uphold God's Holy Word and His love at the same time. To uphold the Bible without love is actually not upholding the Bible at all, because its author is a God of the most supreme love in all the universe.

I very much agree with you when you say that "fear is the most destructive force within the human consciousness ..." As 1 John 4:18-21 states:

"There is no fear in love; but perfect love casteth out fear: because fear hath torment. he that feareth is not made perfect in love. We love him, because he first loved us. If a man say, I love God, and hateth his brother, he is a liar: for he that loveth not his brother whom he hath seen, how can he love God whom he hath not seen? And this commandment have we from him, That he who loveth God love his brother also."

Now this text, I believe, not only speaks to those who have fear in themselves, but those who inflict fear. (In many cases, I guess, people do both)

The last point that I want to make is that although God expects us to serve Him out of a love-response, not fear-response, that does not mean that we cannot count on God when He says that He will destroy, in the end, the Devil and His followers. Yes, God is a God of love, but He is also a just God, who always does what He says, and if that means He will give people what they opted for (such as damnation), He will grant it to them.
I realize that was not the focus of your article. But just so you remember, always, to take into account the full picture. Just because one particular point is a point of truth, does not mean that the truth in its entirety is constricted to that point --> I'm saying this in response to your discussion on the Sabbath with Bible Believing Christian. Yes, uphold the symbolism of the Sabbath, because it points to the vast importance of it, but don't deny the literal. Don't fail to comprehend God's truths by zeroing in on a particular point of truth and discarding all other points of truth in regards to the same matter.

I say all of this,

In Christian Love :)

Principessa :)

[ Parent | # ]