Mel Gibson's Jesus movie

[BeardofPants]

Hunh. I wonder where I got greek from. Nevermind, I'll just go and do the obligatory bog-wash now. Latin it is (like duh, romans = latin.)


Ah, this is why:
http://www.keyway.ca/htm2003/20031108.htm

[Radagast The Brown]

Originally posted by GrayMouser
Just found out that the Aramaic for "God" is "Alaha".

Is it.. Aramaic is close to Hebrew, you know. In Hebrew it's Elohim. (in Arabic Alla. Sounds also close to me)

Originally posted by mithrand1r
I do not think that the film is anti-semetic.

I didn't see the movie, it didn't get here yet (if it gets here at all), but from what I heard, the movie, as I said, emphasizes the jews' part in the crucifixion, which (from what I heard again. Never read myself the New Testament) is not written in the New Testament, and might be a lie, that would probably lead for more anti-semitism in people who doesn't know the true story of Jesus murder.

[Finrod Felagund]

Well actually, Mary was played by a jewish woman, and Gibson went to her oftento see if he was doing everything right, he said he wanted the most Semitic Mary and Jesus they've ever seen!

[Finrod Felagund]

Biblically, the Jews were the ones who wanted Jesus killed, in fact, Pontius Pilate, the Roman Governor, did not really want to kill Jesus. However, both biblically and in the movie, the Romans wre much more brutal with Jesus, though the temple guards and Herod's men beat Jesus as well.

[Radagast The Brown]

Originally posted by Finrod Felagund
Well actually, Mary was played by a jewish woman, and Gibson went to her oftento see if he was doing everything right, he said he wanted the most Semitic Mary and Jesus they've ever seen!

Well, I don't know who Mary is (and like to know if someone wants to tell me) but Jesus was Jewish, so I guess he really shuold be Semitic.

Biblically, the Jews were the ones who wanted Jesus killed, in fact, Pontius Pilate, the Roman Governor, did not really want to kill Jesus. However, both biblically and in the movie, the Romans wre much more brutal with Jesus, though the temple guards and Herod's men beat Jesus as well.

As I said, I didn't read the New Testament, and therefore I don't know what was exactly the story, but I can tell, from other people who read the book and saw parts of the movie, that Gibson didn't make the movie exactly as the crucifixion of Jesus really happened by the New Testament.

(Since I didn't watch the movie, I'll bring it from a newspaper. I think these are facts.)

"If you are one of the Jews that resisted Jesus at the time you look terrible in the movie... they are portrayed as covertous, bloodthirsty and revengeful, and not saying anything intelligent during the movie except repeating religious sayings. They look clearly as people who wanted Jesus dead. The only 'good' jews are the believers of Jesus that follow him..."

"The Jews are described in the as a bloodthirsty mob, and the Romans are described as enlightened, merciful rulers, that were diverted to crucify (sp.) Jesus without really wanting it."

[Finrod Felagund]

I meant Mary as in Jesus' mother Mary, who played a big part in the film.

[GrayMouser]

Originally posted by BeardofPants
Hunh. I wonder where I got greek from. Nevermind, I'll just go and do the obligatory bog-wash now. Latin it is (like duh, romans = latin.)


Ah, this is why:
http://www.keyway.ca/htm2003/20031108.htm

I did read somewhere that there should have been a lot more Greek than Latin; Greek being the lingua franca of the eastern part of the Empire.

As well, upper-class Romans were usually very fluent in Greek- Pontius Pilate, for example, would almost certainly have been using Greek rather than Latin to communicate with the locals- the educated Jews would also be proficient.

[Rían]

Originally posted by Finrod Felagund
Biblically, the Jews were the ones who wanted Jesus killed ...

But I think it's important to know that it's independant of the Jews, in the sense that if God had chosen that Jesus was born among the Celts, it would have been the Celts that wanted him killed, not the Jews. Do you see what I mean? Anyone agree/disagree? IOW, Jesus HAD to have been born among SOME people (but of course the same people that God would have worked thru in the Old Testament - IOW, it's important that God established a line of people thru one person - Abraham, in the case of the Jews), and whatever people it had been, they would have called for His death, because to come and die and then be raised from the dead was the purpose of His life.

Rather rambling - does that make sense?

[Rían]

Originally posted by BeardofPants
Hunh. I wonder where I got greek from.

I heard about greek, too, that it would have been a more common tongue to have been used. But I'm no historian. But perhaps you heard the same thing. Looks like GrayMouser did, too.

[Radagast The Brown]

Originally posted by RÃ*an
But I think it's important to know that it's independant of the Jews, in the sense that if God had chosen that Jesus was born among the Celts, it would have been the Celts that wanted him killed, not the Jews. Do you see what I mean? Anyone agree/disagree? IOW, Jesus HAD to have been born among SOME people (but of course the same people that God would have worked thru in the Old Testament - IOW, it's important that God established a line of people thru one person - Abraham, in the case of the Jews), and whatever people it had been, they would have called for His death, because to come and die was the purpose of His life.

Rather rambling - does that make sense?

But do you think the Celts would've understood what he means, by being a god? I mean - they didn't believe in the Messiah, I really do think they would've tried to kill, too.(probably just to prove he's not a god.) (so I agree. And as a Jew, I would say that Jesus wouldn't think he's a god in the first place if he wasn't Jewish when he born, but that's just because I'm a jew and not a christian. (therefore don't suppose to believe Jesus was/is/will be a god.) Do you understand? It seemed confusing ot me)

But, if I was Christian, and therefore believing the Old + New Testamnet, I would've thought Jesus 'meant' to be from the Jewish people.

And it makes sense I guess.

[azalea]

I think Rian has put it very well, as usual. I haven't seen it, but it is my understanding that what actually happened was that the Jewish LEADERS wanted Him out of the way -- they wanted it proved to the people that He wasn't divine, because His teachings went against their practices, or at least made them look bad in the eyes of the Jewish people. The Jewish PEOPLE would naturally have been divided. Some were or became believers and were the first Christians (along with a few Gentiles, but it was mainly Isrealites [and Romans, of course] living in occupied Isreal, right?). Some would have been skeptical, and still others would believe Him to be heretical (is that a word that could be used for the Jewish faith?). So it is stupid to say THE JEWS killed Him. But because of the fact that those were "His people," it would make sense that the crowd would be made up mostly of Jews. I think the Romans didn't mind him being out of the way (so they thought ), either, because they feared He wanted to cause a rebellion, which is what the Jews believe the Messiah will do (free the people from oppression, which is why many Jews did NOT accept Him as the Messiah, because He didn't do that, in terms of political freedom, anyway. IOW, their version of freedom was not His version).
As I said, I haven't seen the movie, so I don't know how it looks, but although it only makes sense that Jews would make up the bulk of the condemning crowd, it shouldn't be portrayed as a blanket of blame layed upon all Jews. ALL the people there, Jew, Gentile, believers and non-believers alike, turned their backs on Him. He was alone on the cross, and every person bears some of the blame.

[BeardofPants]

Originally posted by RÃ*an
I heard about greek, too, that it would have been a more common tongue to have been used. But I'm no historian. But perhaps you heard the same thing. Looks like GrayMouser did, too.

Yes, I knew that Jesus (and people in the region) spoke hebrew, aramaic and greek. That's why I assumed Greek rather than latin (because Latin is Rome, but Rome doesn't necessarily equal latin, if you get my drift. )

[Radagast The Brown]

Originally posted by azalea
I think Rian has put it very well, as usual. I haven't seen it, but it is my understanding that what actually happened was that the Jewish LEADERS wanted Him out of the way -- they wanted it proved to the people that He wasn't divine, because His teachings went against their practices, or at least made them look bad in the eyes of the Jewish people. The Jewish PEOPLE would naturally have been divided. Some were or became believers and were the first Christians (along with a few Gentiles, but it was mainly Isrealites [and Romans, of course] living in occupied Isreal, right?). Some would have been skeptical, and still others would believe Him to be heretical (is that a word that could be used for the Jewish faith?). So it is stupid to say THE JEWS killed Him. But because of the fact that those were "His people," it would make sense that the crowd would be made up mostly of Jews. I think the Romans didn't mind him being out of the way (so they thought ), either, because they feared He wanted to cause a rebellion, which is what the Jews believe the Messiah will do (free the people from oppression, which is why many Jews did NOT accept Him as the Messiah, because He didn't do that, in terms of political freedom, anyway. IOW, their version of freedom was not His version).
As I said, I haven't seen the movie, so I don't know how it looks, but although it only makes sense that Jews would make up the bulk of the condemning crowd, it shouldn't be portrayed as a blanket of blame layed upon all Jews. ALL the people there, Jew, Gentile, believers and non-believers alike, turned their backs on Him. He was alone on the cross, and every person bears some of the blame.

I think you're right, only one comment - it's Israel. Many make this mistake. I can't see why.

[Aewionen]

I'm going to see the movie tommorow. It looks really good and I think Mel Gibson did a good job of making it. I know I am going to cry the entire movie, not only because how brutaly(sp?) Jesus was killed, but also because it really happened.

I agree with what Rian said, it wasnt just the Jews that killed Him. It was all of us really.

[Captain Stern]

Originally posted by Aewionen
I'm going to see the movie tommorow. It looks really good and I think Mel Gibson did a good job of making it. I know I am going to cry the entire movie, not only because how brutaly(sp?) Jesus was killed, but also because it really happened.

I agree with what Rian said, it wasnt just the Jews that killed Him. It was all of us really.

Speak for yourself.

[dawningoftime]

You know if this is all anyone is getting out of the movie, than the entire point of the movie is being missed. The point is not about who killed Jesus. The point is what Christ endured for us. In the words of the hymn writer Charles Wesley:

And can it be that I should gain
An interest in the Savior’s blood?
Died He for me, who caused His pain—
For me, who Him to death pursued?
Amazing love! How can it be,
That Thou, my God, shouldst die for me?
Amazing love! How can it be,
That Thou, my God, shouldst die for me?

When Jesus hung on the cross he had the sins of the entire world on his shoulders, past, present, and future. The point of the movie is "What are you going to do with Jesus?"

[GrayMouser]

Originally posted by azalea
I think Rian has put it very well, as usual. I haven't seen it, but it is my understanding that what actually happened was that the Jewish LEADERS wanted Him out of the way -- they wanted it proved to the people that He wasn't divine, because His teachings went against their practices, or at least made them look bad in the eyes of the Jewish people. The Jewish PEOPLE would naturally have been divided. Some were or became believers and were the first Christians (along with a few Gentiles, but it was mainly Isrealites [and Romans, of course] living in occupied Isreal, right?). Some would have been skeptical, and still others would believe Him to be heretical (is that a word that could be used for the Jewish faith?). So it is stupid to say THE JEWS killed Him. But because of the fact that those were "His people," it would make sense that the crowd would be made up mostly of Jews. I think the Romans didn't mind him being out of the way (so they thought ), either, because they feared He wanted to cause a rebellion, which is what the Jews believe the Messiah will do (free the people from oppression, which is why many Jews did NOT accept Him as the Messiah, because He didn't do that, in terms of political freedom, anyway. IOW, their version of freedom was not His version).
As I said, I haven't seen the movie, so I don't know how it looks, but although it only makes sense that Jews would make up the bulk of the condemning crowd, it shouldn't be portrayed as a blanket of blame layed upon all Jews. ALL the people there, Jew, Gentile, believers and non-believers alike, turned their backs on Him. He was alone on the cross, and every person bears some of the blame.

While I normally can't stand people who quote an entire long post just to add their own tiny comment at the end...

Great Post!

[azalea]

Originally posted by Radagast The Brown
I think you're right, only one comment - it's Israel. Many make this mistake. I can't see why.

Stupid mistake on my part, because I know better! (I think it's common because here people generally pronounce it IZ-reel or IZ-ree-ul).

GrayMouser -- Thanks!

[Rían]

Originally posted by Radagast The Brown
But do you think the Celts would've understood what he means, by being a god? I mean - they didn't believe in the Messiah, I really do think they would've tried to kill, too.(probably just to prove he's not a god.) (so I agree. And as a Jew, I would say that Jesus wouldn't think he's a god in the first place if he wasn't Jewish when he born, but that's just because I'm a jew and not a christian. (therefore don't suppose to believe Jesus was/is/will be a god.) Do you understand? It seemed confusing ot me)

But, if I was Christian, and therefore believing the Old + New Testamnet, I would've thought Jesus 'meant' to be from the Jewish people.

And it makes sense I guess.

What I meant was that if Jesus was Celtic, then the Celts would have had the same beliefs as the Jews did, if that makes sense, because God would have started with a Celtic "Abraham", and brought him out of his own country, and had him have a "son of the flesh" (Ishmael) and a "son of faith" (Isaac), and had the line come through the son of the faith, and would have given them the 10 commandments, and instituted the temple practices that are a picture of forgiveness of sins by sacrifice that Jesus would perfectly fulfill at a later time, and let them go into captivity, and brought them out of captivity, etc. etc.

It would NOT have worked to have the Old Testament events happen to Jews, then have Jesus born among the Celts. The OT and NT work together really beautifully, and the people must be the same people.

Does that make more sense? I could be wrong, but I don't think the idea is wrong. All I'm trying to say is that WHOEVER God chose to be His special people, THOSE PEOPLE (not all of them, tho) would have been wanting to put him to death.

But I think God made a good choice for what people Jesus came from - the Jews are a pretty feisty, passionate people.

[brownjenkins]

Originally posted by dawningoftime
You know if this is all anyone is getting out of the movie, than the entire point of the movie is being missed. The point is not about who killed Jesus. The point is what Christ endured for us. In the words of the hymn writer Charles Wesley:

And can it be that I should gain
An interest in the Savior’s blood?
Died He for me, who caused His pain—
For me, who Him to death pursued?
Amazing love! How can it be,
That Thou, my God, shouldst die for me?
Amazing love! How can it be,
That Thou, my God, shouldst die for me?

When Jesus hung on the cross he had the sins of the entire world on his shoulders, past, present, and future. The point of the movie is "What are you going to do with Jesus?"

i notice this myself from comments i've read... i haven't seen the movie and probably won't till i catch it latenite a few years from now... i kind of wonder if leaving out the resurrection had a lot to do with it... even most non-christians are somewhat familiar with the whole cross-thing, what happened after is less well-known and much more important... at least that's how i've always seen it