Mel Gibson

[southsider2k5]

Could this be combined with Mel Gibson thread?

Done.

[BrandoFan]

Done.

You da man.

[BrandoFan]

I do not believe Mel Gibson is an anti-semite

 

He certainly says he isn't.

 

[Ishmookie]

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).

no, the jews had ABSOLUTELY no power to carry out any order. PONTIUS PILOT MADE IT CLEAR THAT HE WANTED JESUS DEAD. DO YOU KNOW THAT THOUSANDS OF JEWS WERE CRUCIFIED DURING THAT PERIOD! THE ROMANS WERE IN CONTROL, AND THE RMANS CARRIED OUT THE ORDER!

[cwsox]

no, the jews had ABSOLUTELY no power to carry out any order. PONTIUS PILOT MADE IT CLEAR THAT HE WANTED JESUS DEAD. DO YOU KNOW THAT THOUSANDS OF JEWS WERE CRUCIFIED DURING THAT PERIOD! THE ROMANS WERE IN CONTROL, AND THE RMANS CARRIED OUT THE ORDER!

Ishmookie,

 

 

thank you

 

you got it right

[cwsox]

no, the jews had ABSOLUTELY no power to carry out any order. PONTIUS PILOT MADE IT CLEAR THAT HE WANTED JESUS DEAD. DO YOU KNOW THAT THOUSANDS OF JEWS WERE CRUCIFIED DURING THAT PERIOD! THE ROMANS WERE IN CONTROL, AND THE RMANS CARRIED OUT THE ORDER!

The high priest and the Jews had no power, zero, zilch, none.

 

About the time of Jesus' birth the Roman armies had devastated Galilee and Judea to put down rebels. And to exercise total contriol, that is why the Romans placed a Roman governor in Judea (Jerusalem and environs) while letting vassal rulers beholder in Rome in charge of other areas such as Galiilee (hence, Herod).

 

When Pilate became governor, after some more problems with the locals, Pilate erected the Roman ensigns in Jerusalem - never done before - never was a symbol of other gods especially the self-proclaimed Son of God Ceasar allowed iin Jerusalem. There was resistance to this and Piate slaughtered all the resisters. Pilate sezied the Temple and the Temple vestments. Pilate appointed on an annual basis the high priest who served purely at Pilate's pleasure. Pilate only let the high priest have the priestly vestments when when Pilate decided - and that meant the high priest could only act as priest when Pilate decided. Annas and Caiphas were quislings, toadys, sychophants who only did what Pilate wanted them to do. They had no power whatsoever so to add lines about Caiphas leading a revolt is absolute invented falsehood. If Pilate suspected Caiphas of such a thing, Caiphias and every person conencted with the Temple would have been on a cross. Pilate had no compunction, no reservation on killing the people fo Judea. he was famous for his slaughters. To imply that Caiphas was responsible for the crucifixion is the beginning of implying the guilt of the J.e.w.s and it is absolutely historically not true.

 

Crucifixion was not a Jewish practice. It was a Roman practice reserved for rebels (terrorists, insurrectionaries, etc). Remember Spartacus ----- anyone who rebelled against Rome was hung up on a cross for all to see. For other criimes, dispatch with a sword was the method. Crucifixion was reserved for rebels.

 

Note the internal evidence in the Biblical texts. "We have no king but Ceasar" was never a phrase uttered by any J.e.w. of the time - not even Caiphas and Annas would have saiid that. "You are no friend of Ceasar." That was not somerthing that any J.e.w. of the day would have wanted to be. Remember the story of the coin, what shoudl be rendered to Ceasar - that was a political question and nnote thta Jesus didn;t even carry a coin on his person. No J.e.w other than traitors would carry Roman coins because on each Roman coin was the inscription that Ceasar was the Son of God.

 

Caiphas and Annas would have had no concern for a new "Messiah." Judea in 30 CE (Common Era) was crawling with self proclaimed Messiahs.

 

What would get Pilate's attention is a Galilian coming down from the north with a large following who talked about a kingdom. It may have been a kingdom not of this world but Pilate was no theologian. The words of Jesus to Pilate, "you have no power over me, any power you have is from my Father" was exactly revolutionary talk that would get the person who said it crucified post haste. To imply therfe was a stroner power than Rome - that J.e.w.i.s.h peasant was dead meat to Pilate.

 

External evidence: who was responsible, accoprding to the creeds? "He was crucified under Pontius Pilate." Why not name Caiphas if the early Christians who lived through that at thought Caiphas was responsible? No, they knew who killed Jesus: imperial Rome because Jesus was considered by them to be a revolutionary who spoke of a Sovereign that was greater than Rome.

 

To add lines like Gibson does about Caiphas is to distort the story and one reason why this movie is antiSemitic because it adds and goes out of its way to say "the Jews" killed Christ. And the blood guilt was passed down from generation to generation culminating in Inquistion, pograms, Holocaust.

 

Since all of the Gospels were written after the fall of Jerusalem and were written knowing Rome was reading every word, it was expedient to make Caiphas and the Temple folk look guilty and play down Rome. Caiphas had his pomp and ceremony as Pilatge's lap dog and would hardly have concerned himself with another Jewish peasant messiah which were a dime a dozen in those days. But the intrinsic evidence is all there in the Scriptures.

 

Remember Pilate controllled the Temple. Pilate was skimming (or a surcharge or user fee or tax) off of all the transactions in the Temple for revenue. When Jesus cleansed the Temple and through the money changers over - who were placed there by Pilate, not by whoever Pilate allowed to be high priest that year - the challenge was to Rome, not to the Temple.

 

Again, check out conservative Biblle scholar Paul Maier. Yes, I know Paul Maier. Hey, this is my vocation and so to enough seminars, you meet people. Actually Paul and I once tried really fast to figure out from memory the exact words of the Aaronic blessing at a prayer breakfast we were at because at the last second they said I was to do the benedictuiona nd we had no Bible or book of liturgy at hand -- so we both tried to remember what it was and we wrote it ona napkin for my use.

 

Paul Maier is a most conservative scholar, he is Missouri Synod Lutheran which is very conservative, Paul wrote First Christmas, First Easter, etc. Paul has not weighed in yet on the Gibson movie to my knowledge but to get a fuller account of what happened in those hours, in that week, that it was Rome and not the J.e.w.s - then read his books. He writes very well, it is very readablle, I think he is way too conservative, but you won't!!!! :-) But I know you and I know Paul's work and you will realy enjoy, please trust me and do yourself a favor on this one.

 

Irony is that after Jerusalem fell, Christianity has no "center" and to fill the vacuum, the Christian community in Rome became preemminent and you know what they developed into... being the power center in the Roman capitol of Rome, it served them well to downplay Pilate's role and make the J.e.w.s responsible. Although they could not change the creeds - "he was crucified by Pontius Pilate." That is why it was so momentous when in Vatican II (and ina post Holocaust world) Rome through John XXIII and Paul VI said the old teaching was wrong, it was not the J.e.w.s,

 

And it was then that Gibson's family broke away from the Roman Catholic Church and said a false pope was on the throne. Of course, the elder Gibson has denied the Holoicaust ever existed and how I do say this nicely, who enies the Holocaust other than Nazi sympathizers and extreme antiSemites?

 

And then rememeber that Anna Catherine Emmerich's visions (which were laced with antiSemitism and the warnings that a false pope would arrive and steal the church) of the crucifixion that informs Gibson, not the Bible as prime text. Anna C Emmerich had stigmata (as they say) and thus her ecstatic revelations based on the stigmata are the authority that what her visions say haopened are indeed the reality.

 

If the movie had been billed Anna Cartherine Emmerich's Version of the Passion a lot less concern and a lot less profit. So it is that Gibson for the purpose of hype says "it is what it is" when it is not, it is not based on the Gospels, he ahs added things and showing it through his own lens which is not one that is the Gospel lens.

[BrandoFan]

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).

 

no, the jews had ABSOLUTELY no power to carry out any order. PONTIUS PILOT MADE IT CLEAR THAT HE WANTED JESUS DEAD. DO YOU KNOW THAT THOUSANDS OF JEWS WERE CRUCIFIED DURING THAT PERIOD! THE ROMANS WERE IN CONTROL, AND THE RMANS CARRIED OUT THE ORDER!

Jews are blood-thirsty and power-hungry.

 

They make matzot out of Christian babies' blood.

 

Of course they killed Jesus.

 

Everyone knows that.

[Ishmookie]

Jews are blood-thirsty and power-hungry.

 

They make matzot out of Christian babies' blood.

 

Of course they killed Jesus.

 

Everyone knows that.

I sure hope u are joking or else i have lost all respect for you and think you are a big racist.

[cwsox]

I sure hope u are joking or else i have lost all respect for you and think you are a big racist.

brandofan is being ironical, ripping on antiSemitic hatred - don't take it at face value.

 

Bernard Malumud's book "The Fixer" of antisemitism in Russia is as I see it the source of what brando is saying - of course Malamud pointed to the greater reality of annual Holy Week pogroms in eastern Europe and Russia -

[BrandoFan]

I sure hope u are joking or else i have lost all respect for you and think you are a big racist.

Jews think they are better than everyone else.

 

Israel says that a dead Jew is worth 400 Palestinian criminals. Such chutzpah!

 

They think they are so precious and God-chosen that they should be controlling all the banks and make all the movies. They use their natural advantages to dominate the sport of boxing. And when they get mad, Rob Lowe, er, Reb Loew unleashes his mud warriors on y'all's asses.

 

It's just not fair.

 

**cues Jaws theme, with an E replacing an A....as a plainfully familiar black hat is creeping up to an unsuspecting goy standing in the flea market crowd....TA-DUM, TA-DUM**

[BrandoFan]

Bernard Malumud's book "The Fixer"

 

The Natural is better.

[baggio202]

read romans 9.... those who "find salvation", were just elected to begin with. God chose them from the outset. some were chosen for heaven, some were chosen for hell.

curious what denomination you are...there area group of baptists (at least im pretty sure it was baptists) that broke away from the southern baptists (?) back in 50's i think...i think they started out in nebraska...they call themselves the two seeds....they believe at birth that God chooses either a good seed or a bad seed for each child born...and nothing on this earth can change the outcome...it sounds like thats who you are talking about...

[BrandoFan]

read romans 9.... those who "find salvation", were just elected to begin with. God chose them from the outset. some were chosen for heaven, some were chosen for hell.

D'oh!

 

Stupid, sexy Christians...

[cwsox]

curious what denomination you are...there area group of baptists (at least im pretty sure it was baptists) that broke away from the southern baptists (?) back in 50's i think...i think they started out in nebraska...they call themselves the two seeds....they believe at birth that God chooses either a good seed or a bad seed for each child born...and nothing on this earth can change the outcome...it sounds like thats who you are talking about...

pre destination out of that source was really big for Zwingli and especially Calvin of the Reformed (Reformed Church, Presbyerian Church) reformers and crops up in the 1801 Episcopal Articles of Religion

[BrandoFan]

The high priest  and the Jews had no power, zero, zilch, none.

 

About the time of Jesus' birth the Roman armies had devastated Galilee and Judea to put down rebels. And to exercise total contriol, that is why the Romans placed a Roman governor in Judea (Jerusalem and environs) while letting vassal rulers beholder in Rome in charge of other areas such as Galiilee (hence, Herod).

 

When Pilate became governor, after some more problems with the locals, Pilate erected the Roman ensigns in Jerusalem - never done before - never was a symbol of other gods especially the self-proclaimed Son of God Ceasar allowed iin Jerusalem. There was resistance to this and Piate slaughtered all the resisters. Pilate sezied the Temple and the Temple vestments. Pilate appointed on an annual basis the high priest who served purely at Pilate's pleasure. Pilate only let the high priest have the priestly vestments when when Pilate decided - and that meant the high priest could only act as priest when Pilate decided. Annas and Caiphas were quislings, toadys, sychophants who only did what Pilate wanted them to do. They had no power whatsoever so to add lines about Caiphas leading a revolt is absolute invented falsehood. If Pilate suspected Caiphas of such a thing, Caiphias and every person conencted with the Temple would have been on a cross. Pilate had no compunction, no reservation on killing the people fo Judea. he was famous for his slaughters. To imply that Caiphas was responsible for the crucifixion is the beginning of implying the guilt of the J.e.w.s and it is absolutely historically not true.

 

Crucifixion was not a Jewish practice. It was a Roman practice reserved for rebels (terrorists, insurrectionaries, etc). Remember Spartacus ----- anyone who rebelled against Rome was hung up on a cross for all to see. For other criimes, dispatch with a sword was the method. Crucifixion was reserved for rebels.

 

Note the internal evidence in the Biblical texts. "We have no king but Ceasar" was never a phrase uttered by any J.e.w. of the time - not even Caiphas and Annas would have saiid that. "You are no friend of Ceasar." That was not somerthing that any J.e.w. of the day would have wanted to be. Remember the story of the coin, what shoudl be rendered to Ceasar - that was a political question and nnote thta Jesus didn;t even carry a coin on his person. No J.e.w other than traitors would carry Roman coins because on each Roman coin was the inscription that Ceasar was the Son of God.

 

Caiphas and Annas would have had no concern for a new "Messiah." Judea in 30 CE (Common Era) was crawling with self proclaimed Messiahs.

 

What would get Pilate's attention is a Galilian coming down from the north with a large following who talked about a kingdom. It may have been a kingdom not of this world but Pilate was no theologian. The words of Jesus to Pilate, "you have no power over me, any power you have is from my Father" was exactly revolutionary talk that would get the person who said it crucified post haste. To imply therfe was a stroner power than Rome - that J.e.w.i.s.h peasant was dead meat to Pilate.

 

External evidence: who was responsible, accoprding to the creeds? "He was crucified under Pontius Pilate." Why not name Caiphas if the early Christians who lived through that at thought Caiphas was responsible? No, they knew who killed Jesus: imperial Rome because Jesus was considered by them to be a revolutionary who spoke of a Sovereign that was greater than Rome.

 

To add lines like Gibson does about Caiphas is to distort the story and one reason why this movie is antiSemitic because it adds and goes out of its way to say "the Jews" killed Christ. And the blood guilt was passed down from generation to generation culminating in Inquistion, pograms, Holocaust.

 

Since all of the Gospels were written after the fall of Jerusalem and were written knowing Rome was reading every word, it was expedient to make Caiphas and the Temple folk look guilty and play down Rome. Caiphas had his pomp and ceremony as Pilatge's lap dog and would hardly have concerned himself with another Jewish peasant messiah which were a dime a dozen in those days. But the intrinsic evidence is all there in the Scriptures.

 

Remember Pilate controllled the Temple. Pilate was skimming (or a surcharge or user fee or tax) off of all the transactions in the Temple for revenue. When Jesus cleansed the Temple and through the money changers over - who were placed there by Pilate, not by whoever Pilate allowed to be high priest that year - the challenge was to Rome, not to the Temple.

 

Again, check out conservative Biblle scholar Paul Maier. Yes, I know Paul Maier. Hey, this is my vocation and so to enough seminars, you meet people. Actually Paul and I once tried really fast to figure out from memory the exact words of the Aaronic blessing at a prayer breakfast we were at because at the last second they said I was to do the benedictuiona nd we had no Bible or book of liturgy at hand -- so we both tried to remember what it was and we wrote it ona napkin for my use.

 

Paul Maier is a most conservative scholar, he is Missouri Synod Lutheran which is very conservative, Paul wrote First Christmas, First Easter, etc. Paul has not weighed in yet on the Gibson movie to my knowledge but to get a fuller account of what happened in those hours, in that week, that it was Rome and not the J.e.w.s - then read his books. He writes very well, it is very readablle, I think he is way too conservative, but you won't!!!! :-) But I know you and I know Paul's work and you will realy enjoy, please trust me and do yourself a favor on this one.

 

Irony is that after Jerusalem fell, Christianity has no "center" and to fill the vacuum, the Christian community in Rome became preemminent and you know what they developed into... being the power center in the Roman capitol of Rome, it served them well to downplay Pilate's role and make the J.e.w.s responsible. Although they could not change the creeds - "he was crucified by Pontius Pilate." That is why it was so momentous when in Vatican II (and ina post Holocaust world) Rome through John XXIII and Paul VI said the old teaching was wrong, it was not the J.e.w.s,

 

And it was then that Gibson's family broke away from the Roman Catholic Church and said a false pope was on the throne. Of course, the elder Gibson has denied the Holoicaust ever existed and how I do say this nicely, who enies the Holocaust other than Nazi sympathizers and extreme antiSemites?

 

And then rememeber that Anna Catherine Emmerich's visions (which were laced with antiSemitism and the warnings that a false pope would arrive and steal the church) of the crucifixion that informs Gibson, not the Bible as prime text. Anna C Emmerich had stigmata (as they say) and thus her ecstatic revelations based on the stigmata are the authority that what her visions say haopened are indeed the reality.

 

If the movie had been billed Anna Cartherine Emmerich's Version of the Passion a lot less concern and a lot less profit. So it is that Gibson for the purpose of hype says "it is what it is" when it is not, it is not based on the Gospels, he ahs added things and showing it through his own lens which is not one that is the Gospel lens.

Makes sense to me, no?

[sox4lifeinPA]

%20-%20Paul%20Helbig%20on%20Romans%209.mp3]Romans 9 sermon

 

I'm not a big "well this guy said so it has to be true" kinda guy...but I believe there's alot of truth in what Paul Helbig has to say. please, enlighten me if I shouldn't be listening to this source. it's about an hour long mp3 of a sermon I heard last fall. quality pre-destination stuff.

 

if anyone has a hour to waste, it's good.

[BrandoFan]

some were chosen for heaven, some were chosen for hell.

 

Some are born to sweet delight

Some are born to endless night

[bjmarte]

%20-%20Paul%20Helbig%20on%20Romans%209.mp3]Romans 9 sermon

 

I'm not a big "well this guy said so it has to be true" kinda guy...but I believe there's alot of truth in what Paul Helbig has to say. please, enlighten me if I shouldn't be listening to this source. it's about an hour long mp3 of a sermon I heard last fall. quality pre-destination stuff.

 

if anyone has a hour to waste, it's good.

My only problem with predestination is that many who push it as a theology exclude free will. God gives us free will to choose what we will do, including whether or not we will accept him. I think of predestination less like God picking and choosing people and more like God just knowing ahead of time what we are going to choose. It is a small distinction but an important one IMHO.

[sox4lifeinPA]

My only problem with predestination is that many who push it as a theology exclude free will.  God gives us free will to choose what we will do, including whether or not we will accept him.  I think of predestination less like God picking and choosing people and more like God just knowing ahead of time what we are going to choose.  It is a small distinction but an important one IMHO.

bj....

 

can you show me where the words "free will" are in the bible?

 

just checking.

[Queen Prawn]

**cues Jaws theme, with an E replacing an A....as a plainfully familiar black hat is creeping up to an unsuspecting goy standing in the flea market crowd....TA-DUM, TA-DUM**

LMAO!

[Wong & Owens]

read romans 9.... those who "find salvation", were just elected to begin with. God chose them from the outset. some were chosen for heaven, some were chosen for hell.

Wait, so god creates all of mankind in his own image, then he decides that some of us are going straight to hell?

 

Well, needless to say, I wouldn't give that theory an ounce of credit. However, if it is true, god can go f*** himself.

[FlaSoxxJim]

Wait, so god creates all of mankind in his own image, then he decides that some of us are going straight to hell? 

 

Well, needless to say, I wouldn't give that theory an ounce of credit.  However, if it is true, god can go f*** himself.

That's not the God that crerated man, Wayne. That's the God that was created by man -- pettiness, capriciousness, indiscriminate cruelty and all. We have to justify those traits somehow, so let's ascribe them to the Divine Agent.

 

And BJ, your distinction is absolutely critical. The distinnction between true predestination/predamnation and the concept that an omnicient God would know our fates ahead of time even though we do possess free will is what separates a religious viewpoint I can tolerate (All have a shot at salvation), and one that is absurd beyond the point of needing to address it (only a select few are born chosen and theres nothing you can do about it).

 

The only Calvin that ever said anything I care about is the kid with the stuffed tiger.

[Wong & Owens]

That's not the God that crerated man, Wayne.  That's the God that was created by man -- pettiness, capriciousness, indiscriminate cruelty and all.  We have to justify those traits somehow, so let's ascribe them to the Divine Agent.

Well put, Jim. Kind of the point I was trying to illustrate.

[Soxy]

Oh, and props to Jim Flaxx for not using engendered terms to describe God.

[Wong & Owens]

Oh, and props to Jim Flaxx for not using engendered terms to describe God. 

Was that a shot at me?

 

My apologies, I meant no misogyny by using "himself." "Itself" probably would have been better.