Roger Ebert gives "The Passion" 4 stars

[AmericanErrorist]

Pilate is seen going through his well-known doubts before finally washing his hands of the matter and turning Jesus over to the priests, but Caiaphas, who also had doubts, is not seen as sympathetically. The critic Steven D. Greydanus, in a useful analysis of the film, writes: "The film omits the canonical line from John's gospel in which Caiaphas argues that it is better for one man to die for the people that the nation be saved.

"Had Gibson retained this line, perhaps giving Caiaphas a measure of the inner conflict he gave to Pilate, it could have underscored the similarities between Caiaphas and Pilate and helped defuse the issue of anti-Semitism."

This scene and others might justifiably be cited by anyone concerned that the movie contains anti-Semitism. My own feeling is that Gibson's film is not anti-Semitic, but reflects a range of behavior on the part of its Jewish characters, on balance favorably. The Jews who seem to desire Jesus' death are in the priesthood, and have political as well as theological reasons for acting; like today's Catholic bishops who were slow to condemn abusive priests, Protestant TV preachers who confuse religion with politics, or Muslim clerics who are silent on terrorism, they have an investment in their positions and authority. The other Jews seen in the film are viewed positively; Simon helps Jesus to carry the cross, Veronica brings a cloth to wipe his face, Jews in the crowd cry out against his torture.

A reasonable person, I believe, will reflect that in this story set in a Jewish land, there are many characters with many motives, some good, some not, each one representing himself, none representing his religion. The story involves a Jew who tried no less than to replace the established religion and set himself up as the Messiah. He was understandably greeted with a jaundiced eye by the Jewish establishment while at the same time finding his support, his disciples and the founders of his church entirely among his fellow Jews. The libel that the Jews "killed Christ" involves a willful misreading of testament and teaching: Jesus was made man and came to Earth in order to suffer and die in reparation for our sins. No race, no man, no priest, no governor, no executioner killed Jesus; he died by God's will to fulfill his purpose, and with our sins we all killed him. That some Christian churches have historically been guilty of the sin of anti-Semitism is undeniable, but in committing it they violated their own beliefs.

This discussion will seem beside the point for readers who want to know about the movie, not the theology. But "The Passion of the Christ," more than any other film I can recall, depends upon theological considerations. Gibson has not made a movie that anyone would call "commercial," and if it grosses millions, that will not be because anyone was entertained. It is a personal message movie of the most radical kind, attempting to re-create events of personal urgency to Gibson. The filmmaker has put his artistry and fortune at the service of his conviction and belief, and that doesn't happen often.

http://www.suntimes.com/output/ebert1/cst-ftr-passion24.html

[rfkrocks]

1. pilate off the hook?

Everything I have read about this movie indicates that Gibson down plays Pilate responsibility or makes him suffer second doubts. I know Pilate in the gospel narrative appears not to want to kill Christ. Yet he does and does so knowing the innocence of his vicim. As a Christian, Pilate is the ultimate bad ruler and is no way sympathetic-he does what all bad exampless of rulers do-hurts the innocent for his own comfort-how barbaric. washing his hands while it is only his order that brings death. it is why from the begining of Christian theology (Nicean creed circa 320 AD) that even a Roman Emperor approves the saying crucified under Pontius Pilate. It is the Roman govenors' name that lives in history. Allowing sympathy for Pilate misses the point about the way rulers should care for the people they serve under God. The fundies try to admire strong government but true Christianity teaches service and compassion as the bench ark for the righteous ruler.

[anti-NAFTA]

2. I read the New Testament, but

it pretty much blamed the Jews and not really Pilate. I don't know how the film can be any worse.

[rfkrocks]

5. Sorry disagree

First of all the disciples were jews, mary was a jew and practically all the people Jesus delt with were jews. Including Jesus. The new testament is not a polemic about jews but about the way to walk with God-Love one another and love God. I can't help that lunatics can turn that theology into antisemitism. My only explanation is that it is easier to hate than love which explains the success of the odious political system that is in place here today. Moses in the old testament watches the Israelites punished for their lack of faith with a plague of poisonous snakes-He also breaks the commandments because of the golden calf episode-does that make Moses anti-semitic? Anyway we don't agree about religion but how about Anyone but Bush?
:-)

[Media_Lies_Daily]

7. Then, IMHO, you didn't read the New Testament very carefully...

...or if you did, you failed to grasp the basic meaning present throughout the collection of documents.

The New Testament is not about blaming anyone...it's primarily about God's love for man and his willingness to send his only Son to demonstrate that love.

[Tinoire]

11. but not all the Jews. Only the High Priest for political reasons and

the crowd of rabble they bussed in to pressure Pilate into releasing Barrabas instead of Jesus.

That crowd reminds me of the rabble Baker bussed in to Florida to prevent the votes from being counted. That crowd didn't represent you & me or all Americans anymore than that rabble represented all Jewry.

The ones who greeted Jesus with the palms... they weren't there.

It's a difficult film for all I think but I really want to see it. It's not any easier on Christians than on Jews.

What I have always been taught and this is in the New Testament, all over the place, is that we all are responsible. It's the reason Gibson insisted on being the one who held the nails as they were pounded into Jesus' hands- to remind himself that he was responsible.

Here are some thoughtful reviews on the film and the fuss if you want to read them: http://www.mastermediaintl.org/guest/index.htm

Peace

[UTUSN]

3. Even EBERT's Thoughtful Review

needs to be offset by Boloboffin's thread, "Top 10 Reasons the Passion Is Not 'As It Was' ": http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=104x1152849

[HornBuckler]

4. Naw.. That's Crap

It's A Movie... I'm Gonna See It Tomorrow.

[UTUSN]

6. &

I Am Going to See It in a Week or Ten Days When the Crowds Have Thinned Out Just So I Can Participate in Discussions Knowledgeably and Hopefully, Courteously, Except on Those Regularly Scheduled Days of the Week Well Known That My Synapses Aren't Crackling.

[HornBuckler]

8. Amen

Brother Amen

[Sterling]

9. Ask the fundies if it's just a movie.

Let us know what you find out.

[HornBuckler]

10. I Don't Care What They Think

If The FUNDIES Said Saving Private Ryan Was A Spiritual Experience I Might Take Heed. However, This Is A Religious Movie. They Are Supposed To Be All Wet About This. I'm Looking Forward To A Good Movie - Nothing MORE....