I’m not converted by “the enormity of the sacrifice” - Tilted Forum Project Discussion Community

ARTelevision · 02-19-2004, 06:50 AM

The current media feast over Mel Gibson’s new movie about the founder of Christianity certainly seems to be focused on the large dose of violence served up to its audience. Having been a Catholic school student, I was often instructed to gaze up at the figure on the cross and dwell on how badly the man/god was treated. That was supposed to somehow get a reaction from me besides the one of utter incomprehension I actually experienced.

Now, in interview after interview and article after article, I see this same “argument” dredged up by Gibson himself and the film’s supporters. There were a quarter of a million other Jews who received the same treatment at the hands of the Romans. There have been literally millions of humans who have been tortured as heinously. What special significance is it supposed to have to me that Jesus was horribly treated?

Using the old saw that - well as god’s son, he didn’t “have” to go through it is a post-hoc argument. You have to believe that to have it make any sense.

I guess it just disturbs me to have this old piece of “theology” – the appeal to the pummeled senses – used again in this big-buck mass-media context. IMO, it’s too bad folks seem to be falling for it – the old “hit the mule over the head to get him motivated” ploy...

Lebell · 02-19-2004, 10:07 AM

Well, color me "falling for it".

I guess I really don't understand what you are trying to say, Art.

Because, if you don't believe Jesus was the Son of God, that is, Jesus was really God, then no, he was just another man from history who was tortured to death.

The meaning of the second only comes from a belief in the first.

The fact that it is old doesn't detract from the fact that it is true.

ARTelevision · 02-19-2004, 10:45 AM

Oh, OK. So then that is the point then?

He was god and didn't have to allow that to happen and so allowing it - that's the big factor?

I guess I still don't see why that makes what he went through any different from what all the other humans who have been similarly treated went through. Or why it should mean any more to me.

And I really don't see how treating one person that way is equal to all the sins of the world.

I guess it's not supposed to be a logical argument?

I keep trying to make sense of it - sort of like balancing one thing with another and then looking at it and trying to understand what the point is...

I guess it's a matter of faith or something.
But don't you want to try to explain this stuff to people who have no faith?

I guess the main point though, is that he's god - and the rest of it sort of flows from there...

teflonian · 02-19-2004, 11:02 AM

I commend you Art for attempting to make sense of it... I too do not agree with the arguments used in favor of this movie nor do I understand the logic behind Jesus as suffering for our sins. However, I have more or less given up on trying to create any rational arguments against any belief that boils down to believing something based upon “faith” and the oogly-boogly feeling you get when something weird happens in your life. It is a loosing battle as the belief based on faith isn’t rational or logical. I am sure I offended some one by that statement, and I am sorry if I have, but that doesn’t change my opinion. In any case, I do appreciate the Gibson movie for creating controversy and generating discussion (even if it is more or less the hitting your head on the brick kind). I do not appreciate the Gibson movie as from most accounts it propagates anti-Semitist feelings and that must be obvious to Gibson and the creators of the film.

Lebell · 02-19-2004, 11:14 AM

Well, if we can leave the whole question of "suffering for our sins" aside for just a moment, consider this line of thought.

Would any of us choose to go through a life of trying to help people where we knew at the end of it, the people we had been trying to help end up brutaling killing us by nailing us to a couple of 4x4s when we didn't have to?

Christians believe that is exactly what God did for us. He allowed us to kill him, not for any benefit to Himself, but for our benefit. That is why Jesus is called the "lamb who was slain". He offered himself to us and we killed him.

But instead of that being an end to His life and any hope we had of moving beyond this brutish earthly existance, it paradoxically was the ultimate hope He gave us: that there is HOPE for us in trying to live a good life, even if we end up being murdered for it.

There is HOPE that at the end of our lives, if we have lived them not for ourselves, but for each other, that we will realize that we have been serving GOD.

Xell101 · 02-19-2004, 11:15 AM

I put faith in nothing, I too am confused by it. Nearest I can figure is that the ultimate product of humans, society, that little self-perpetuating collective of humans we hold so dear, is inherently flawed and he played captain hero of civilization by staring it right in the error and took the brunt of it and forgave us for it, demonstrating attributes that were we to accept in our hearts would work like a patch for society, thereby fixing it.
So out of respect and to create a nice neat little civilization we should accept him into our hearts and follow his lessons on life and all that jazz. Course that theory is born of the confusion of a godless bastard who is without faith, so I'm geussing I've got it wrong.

Lebell · 02-19-2004, 11:22 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by Xell101
I put faith in nothing, I too am confused by it. Nearest I can figure is that the ultimate product of humans, society, that little self-perpetuating collective of humans we hold so dear, is inherently flawed and he played captain hero of civilization by staring it right in the error and took the brunt of it and forgave us for it, demonstrating attributes that were we to accept in our hearts would work like a patch for society, thereby fixing it.
So out of respect and to create a nice neat little civilization we should accept him into our hearts and follow his lessons on life and all that jazz. Course that theory is born of the confusion of a godless bastard who is without faith, so I'm geussing I've got it wrong.

No, for a godless bastard, I think you summed it up pretty well

ARTelevision · 02-19-2004, 11:26 AM

Well yes, all that does make me respect him a whole lot for being an amazing person. I think it's cool to try to live like him, too - almost no one does that, though.

I just think it's a pretty poor way to promote your religion - I mean with a real gory torture being the whole crux of the thing.

I mean why isn't the way he lived what it's all about? The way he died is really irrelevant to me - except demonstrating he was very committed to his beliefs. That's impressive in itself, granted.

I think what I'm trying to say is that it's too bad Mel Gibson decided to focus on this part of Jesus' life. And the reasons he gives for doing it are bad reasons for doing it, IMO.

tecoyah · 02-19-2004, 11:36 AM

I choose to ignore the whole movie....and watch the fanatics instead, should be far more entertaining.

raeanna74 · 02-19-2004, 11:49 AM

I do know what you are saying and seeing the interviews has gotten me to thinking about a lot of things related to it. It seems a lot of the effect of the movie may be in the play on emotions.

The reason we are supposed to be moved by it is that IF you believe what the Bible says. IF you have faith that Christ was the Messiah and God's son - THEN Christ 1. Did not have to die. 2. He did die for the purpose of rescuing believers from an eternity in separation from God and payed for their sins by his death. So if you believe he's real, understand why he did what he did, then you should feel moved to action by it. That's stated purpose of the movie. Evangelisation.

ARTelevision · 02-19-2004, 12:18 PM

Yes, raeanna, I have a problem with what I see as manipulative emotionalism. But you summed up the thinking process behind the believer's position very well.

Now on to Lebell's statements.

I'll tell ya, man, it does strike me as a wildly irrational way to create conviction.

It's sort of like posing an outrageous situation and then brutally acting it out - as in a perverse self-fulfilling prophecy. Then using that in some sort of reverse way to demonstrate that since it didn't have to happen - it must be miraculous that it did.

These are the sorts of impressions I had as a child - I remember them well. I mean, people would go through this sort of convoluted reasoning - which just seemed convoluted for perverse reasons. And then they would say things like, "now you see why it is such a miracle and why it offers us salvation rather than despair, etc..."

Well honestly, not only does it make me feel sad that torture is a relatively common human behavior - it makes me feel even worse that some folks would use an instance of it to weave an "inspirational" tale that they would indoctrinate future generations with.

I'm not kidding here: to me, telling that sort of story to a child and then blowing it up to cosmic proportions is psychological abuse, pure and simple.

rsl12 · 02-19-2004, 01:17 PM

I think this is Art's point (and if it's not, consider it mine):

When you consider what Christ went through (imprisonment, crown of thorns, nailed to the cross), it isn't a whole lot of suffering compared to many many other people. Consider what some Christian saints went through--being st. catherine attached to a burning wheel, st. matthew being grilled to death (first on his back, after which he told his torturers "I think i'm done on this side" so they flipped him over), etc etc, for even smaller causes than Jesus'. Whose suffering should we feel more? Whose story is more moving, the one who dies horribly to save billions of souls, or the one who is tortured even worse because he tried to save a few dozen?

so when people say "jesus died for your sins", how can you help but feel that other people have suffered even more for so much less?

Mantus · 02-19-2004, 05:05 PM

where is chavos when you need him...

rsl12 beat me to it *shakes fist*. There were allot of people who suffered allot more then Christ for much smaller causes.

Lebell · 02-19-2004, 09:04 PM

Quote:

Well yes, all that does make me respect him a whole lot for being an amazing person. I think it's cool to try to live like him, too - almost no one does that, though.

That’s why the way is narrow.

In otherwords, anyone can talk the talk. The actual walk is a bit harder.

Quote:

I just think it's a pretty poor way to promote your religion - I mean with a real gory torture being the whole crux of the thing.

The crux?

No.

It is however an integral part.

And I would say that as a former Catholic, you have been trained to focus strongly on Jesus’ passion, while not focusing at all on his resurrection.

Quote:

I mean why isn't the way he lived what it's all about? The way he died is really irrelevant to me - except demonstrating he was very committed to his beliefs. That's impressive in itself, granted.

How he lived is important. And what you said isn’t any small thing: that he was true to his life even unto death.

I repeat: this is NO SMALL LESSON.

Quote:

I think what I'm trying to say is that it's too bad Mel Gibson decided to focus on this part of Jesus' life. And the reasons he gives for doing it are bad reasons for doing it, IMO.

The Passion of Jesus has it’s place, as does the rest of the Jesus story.

Quote:

Yes, raeanna, I have a problem with what I see as manipulative emotionalism. But you summed up the thinking process behind the believer's position very well.

Now on to Lebell's statements.

I'll tell ya, man, it does strike me as a wildly irrational way to create conviction.

It's sort of like posing an outrageous situation and then brutally acting it out - as in a perverse self-fulfilling prophecy. Then using that in some sort of reverse way to demonstrate that since it didn't have to happen - it must be miraculous that it did.

These are the sorts of impressions I had as a child - I remember them well. I mean, people would go through this sort of convoluted reasoning - which just seemed convoluted for perverse reasons. And then they would say things like, "now you see why it is such a miracle and why it offers us salvation rather than despair, etc..."

Well, I am honestly having a difficult time figuring out what you mean here, Art.

I see nothing of the “manipulative emotion” you speak of, just the world as it was/is and what we try to understand.

In short that a man, Yeshua ben Joseph appeared in ancient Palestine and began to preach and touch people in a way that was unique. Things happened that caused people to speculate who and what he was in relationship to what they knew about God. These things continued to happen even after the Romans (at the behest of the Jewish authorities) brutally murdered him.

So is it manipulation when Christians believe these things? Or is that your interpretation?

Oh, I have no doubt that you suffered much manipulation while in the Catholic Church. But in the end, nothing is different for you than it was for people two thousand years ago. God leaves you free to believe or not to believe as you wish.

Quote:

Well honestly, not only does it make me feel sad that torture is a relatively common human behavior - it makes me feel even worse that some folks would use an instance of it to weave an "inspirational" tale that they would indoctrinate future generations with.

I'm not kidding here: to me, telling that sort of story to a child and then blowing it up to cosmic proportions is psychological abuse, pure and simple.

I think this may be one of the saddest things I have read in a while. That you feel that the story of Jesus boils down to child abuse, when the message is one of eternal hope, even when things seem darkest.

Peace to you, my friend.

ARTelevision · 02-20-2004, 01:27 AM

Lebell, I know it's probably tough for both of us to accept that we may have such divergent perspectives on this.

I respect your views. Obviously I don't understand them the way you do. I suppose I felt the need to say something regarding the current clamor over Gibson's film.

The other issue that seems to be inflaming folks - the question of who might be responsible for Christ's death - doesn't really grab me the way the issue of how the spiritual lesson is conveyed. That's the one I chose to comment on.

It's really a personal statement. I do see the type of religious education my classmates and I received as children as psychologically abusive. As you know, it was executed in the context of actual and repeated physical abuse as well.

I can temper my views regarding the subject in general. However, I can't pretend my experience was other than it was.

mr sticky · 02-20-2004, 01:59 PM

Lebell, your doing great for the team, I'll try to give you a few moments of relief!!

Guys, the most poignant fact of the crucifixion of Christ is that HE could have stopped it. At any time, at any juncture in the process, he could have merely wished it to cease (angels from Heaven, etc.).

THIS is why it was momentous. He allowed this to occur FOR us! It's not just the acts, but it's his forbearance that gives this act the deep meaning that we lay upon it!

The torture is the choice.

rsl12 · 02-20-2004, 02:26 PM

mr sticky -- I'm not sure I understand. any of the saints i mentioned above would have done the same thing in Jesus' position, allowed themselves to be crucified for the salvation of the world, right? even if they had the power to stop the torture? Heck, i would have done the same thing, if I knew for sure that would be the result--billions of souls ascending to heaven.

plenty of saints make the choice to undergo death--st. stephen, the 1st christian martyr, was going around town preaching in full awareness that the government wasn't happy about his doings. it's not like he kept running away--he kept at it till they arrested him, tried him, and stoned him to death. now, if I were in Jesus' shoes, I would allow myself to be tortured for the sake of so many people, but if I were in st. stephen's shoes, I don't think I would be so calm about preaching so publically, not being sure about how many people my words would affect, at the chance of dying. In other words, I would have a much easier time making Jesus' choice than St. Stephens'.

again, this is not an argument against jesus, it's an argument against being moved when people tell you "jesus died for your sins."

wilbjammin · 02-20-2004, 03:21 PM

Quote:

The torture is the choice.

Which is why I fail to see what makes this positive... It seems almost passive-aggressive. It seems to me as though this act supports passivity in the face of injustice, and perhaps even to put one's self into positions of being hurt by injustice. If we judge the meaning of the event by how it affects those who believe in it, then I would have to say that I have seen too many examples of people embracing situations of being put down by others for it to be good. To be Christ-like in this circumstance requires an evil, oppressive force to stand over you.

TheKak · 02-21-2004, 03:50 AM

I have to be honest when I say the Bible and the story of Jesus is one of the most rediculous things I have ever read. The church has decided to pick and choose the parts of the bible it wants to believe while continuing to ignore the brutal truth of it. If Jesus even lived (which is really doubt, historical proof tends to point of the non-existance of Jesus), then I don't even think he was that great of a guy. To sum up what I think about Jesus' message, just read my sig.

TheKak · 02-21-2004, 04:13 AM

As a side note, I don't want to offend anyone, but I can't be anything other than completely honest here. I read the Bible as a kid and I wondered why people would believe anything in it as anything other than a piece of fiction written by some obviously twisted people. I would never let my child read the Bible, its full of things like war, *detailed* animal sacrificing, eating shit, and many other horrible things. And I would ask questions about the things I had read in the Bible (like when I read Leviticus, I asked why it says that God hates certain people when I was told he loves everyone (yes, it had the words "God hates that" written many many times in it). I was told to believe what I was told and to not question things. To call this believe without understanding faith and that it was good to have faith. Well I got tired of them trying to indoctrinate me, so now what can I say, I'm a little bitter. I did some research, and to me it appears that there is absolutly zero proof for the fact that there ever even was a real Jesus. The first gospel (Mark) is dated at the earliest 70 C.E., 40 years after the death of the alleged Jesus. There is no way that whoever wrote that gospel was even alive to meet Jesus, let alone travel with him and learn things from him. There is no reference to a Jesus from any of the historians of that time, and no record of a Jesus being killed by the Roman courts. Not just that, but the Bible was assembled by men. Irenaeus of Lyon chose the 4 gospels to be in the Bible, burning many many others. So if there even was someone who had written what Jesus actually said, it was probably burned by the early church. Anyway I'm sorry to hijack this thread, maybe I should have just made a new one.

(If I have made an incorrect historical statement of some kind, please feel free to correct me, I am not infailable)

mr sticky · 02-21-2004, 07:01 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by wilbjammin
Which is why I fail to see what makes this positive... It seems almost passive-aggressive. It seems to me as though this act supports passivity in the face of injustice, and perhaps even to put one's self into positions of being hurt by injustice. If we judge the meaning of the event by how it affects those who believe in it, then I would have to say that I have seen too many examples of people embracing situations of being put down by others for it to be good. To be Christ-like in this circumstance requires an evil, oppressive force to stand over you.

In this instance, Christ was the sacrifice in lieu of the types of sacrifices from the old testament. This was not a political stance. It wasn't a mixed message.

I see it as this:

Christ's activity was to be sacrificed. The crucifixion was the route to become the sacrifice. There was nothing passive/aggressive in this stance. It had preordained purpose, known to Jesus. To strike out was to ultimately lose the endgame. It wasn't inaction. It was very predetermined action. He must allow himself to be killed in order to save the world.

raeanna74 · 02-21-2004, 07:24 AM

Whether you believe the Bible or not it seems like the promo stunts are just that and it's a drive to get as many religious persons a possible to view the film and boost ratings. I can understand from a religious point of view how the Sacrifice that was made would be poignant when viewed so grafically. I find it a bit much to expect people to truely be converted by the shock factor in demostrating the sacrifice. I don't see how many of the "conversions" will really last either as it will be an emotional response and not a logical choice. (I'm not interested in a debate here as to whether you can "Logically" choose Christianity.) Just saying that I don't think it should be emotionally based.

Ustwo · 02-21-2004, 08:21 AM

What is suffering if you KNOW its only temporary?

If you KNOW you are God and you know you are immortal, then pain is just sensory information. You might not like it, but its nothing special.

A Christian Martyr would do the same, but in the Martyr's case only faith would support them, and I can respect that, but if you were God you wouldn't need faith.

Lebell · 02-21-2004, 09:30 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by mr sticky
Lebell, your doing great for the team, I'll try to give you a few moments of relief!!

There is no competition.

The seeds fall where they will.

I would only add at this point that Jesus stood where the weakest among us stands: in the concentration camps, in the gulags, in the killing fields.

Is that a "stunt" or being "passive-agressive"?

Jay Francis · 02-22-2004, 07:38 AM

Me neither. Look how many people the Spanish and Italian inquisition burned at the stake. What could be more horrible than being burned alive? Catholic church inquisition assholes.

Jay Francis · 02-22-2004, 07:40 AM

And another point. If it really happened. Lets not forget how many mythologies detailing the same type of events were circulating at this time. Think Apollonius of Tyana as documented in Flavius Philostratus's Life of Apollonius.

hannukah harry · 02-22-2004, 11:50 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by Lebell
I would only add at this point that Jesus stood where the weakest among us stands: in the concentration camps, in the gulags, in the killing fields.

he did? i don't remember my grandfather saying anything about meeting jesus there... maybe i'm just not understanding this statement.

ARTelevision · 02-22-2004, 04:37 PM

I think that's a poetic statement. Not a completely rational one. And therefore, it's not susceptible to rational discourse. Statements of faith are always like that.

rsl12 · 02-22-2004, 08:58 PM

i think hannukah harry's point is that his grandfather is jewish...

Lebell · 02-22-2004, 10:37 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by ARTelevision
I think that's a poetic statement. Not a completely rational one. And therefore, it's not susceptible to rational discourse. Statements of faith are always like that.

I only object to the use of the term "rational", simply because it implies an "irrational".

I will concede that it is not provable logically. But it is certainly possible to rationally discuss one's faith.

Lebell · 02-22-2004, 10:38 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by rsl12
i think hannukah harry's point is that his grandfather is jewish...

So was Jesus.

Ustwo · 02-23-2004, 06:54 AM

I still contend that knowing there is God (or that you are one) and knowing that any suffering IS truely temporary makes the suffering unimportant.

Only if Jesus did not KNOW who he was did it have any meaning.

ARTelevision · 02-23-2004, 08:37 AM

Ustwo, I know. Even if one accepts the irrationality of faith-based thinking - it still doesn't make sense - like you said. Oh well. I think a lot of us just will never get this sort of stuff.

02-19-2004, 06:50 AM	#1 (permalink)
ARTelevision I change Location: USA	I’m not converted by “the enormity of the sacrifice” The current media feast over Mel Gibson’s new movie about the founder of Christianity certainly seems to be focused on the large dose of violence served up to its audience. Having been a Catholic school student, I was often instructed to gaze up at the figure on the cross and dwell on how badly the man/god was treated. That was supposed to somehow get a reaction from me besides the one of utter incomprehension I actually experienced. Now, in interview after interview and article after article, I see this same “argument” dredged up by Gibson himself and the film’s supporters. There were a quarter of a million other Jews who received the same treatment at the hands of the Romans. There have been literally millions of humans who have been tortured as heinously. What special significance is it supposed to have to me that Jesus was horribly treated? Using the old saw that - well as god’s son, he didn’t “have” to go through it is a post-hoc argument. You have to believe that to have it make any sense. I guess it just disturbs me to have this old piece of “theology” – the appeal to the pummeled senses – used again in this big-buck mass-media context. IMO, it’s too bad folks seem to be falling for it – the old “hit the mule over the head to get him motivated” ploy... __________________ create evolution

02-19-2004, 10:07 AM	#2 (permalink)
Lebell Cracking the Whip Location: Sexymama's arms...	Well, color me "falling for it". I guess I really don't understand what you are trying to say, Art. Because, if you don't believe Jesus was the Son of God, that is, Jesus was really God, then no, he was just another man from history who was tortured to death. The meaning of the second only comes from a belief in the first. The fact that it is old doesn't detract from the fact that it is true. __________________ "Of all tyrannies, a tyranny exercised for the good of its victims may be the most oppressive. It may be better to live under robber barons than under omnipotent moral busybodies. The robber baron's cruelty may sometimes sleep, his cupidity may at some point be satiated; but those who torment us for our own good will torment us without end, for they do so with the approval of their own conscience." – C. S. Lewis The ONLY sponsors we have are YOU! Please Donate!

02-19-2004, 10:45 AM	#3 (permalink)
ARTelevision I change Location: USA	Oh, OK. So then that is the point then? He was god and didn't have to allow that to happen and so allowing it - that's the big factor? I guess I still don't see why that makes what he went through any different from what all the other humans who have been similarly treated went through. Or why it should mean any more to me. And I really don't see how treating one person that way is equal to all the sins of the world. I guess it's not supposed to be a logical argument? I keep trying to make sense of it - sort of like balancing one thing with another and then looking at it and trying to understand what the point is... I guess it's a matter of faith or something. But don't you want to try to explain this stuff to people who have no faith? I guess the main point though, is that he's god - and the rest of it sort of flows from there... __________________ create evolution

02-19-2004, 11:14 AM	#5 (permalink)
Lebell Cracking the Whip Location: Sexymama's arms...	Well, if we can leave the whole question of "suffering for our sins" aside for just a moment, consider this line of thought. Would any of us choose to go through a life of trying to help people where we knew at the end of it, the people we had been trying to help end up brutaling killing us by nailing us to a couple of 4x4s when we didn't have to? Christians believe that is exactly what God did for us. He allowed us to kill him, not for any benefit to Himself, but for our benefit. That is why Jesus is called the "lamb who was slain". He offered himself to us and we killed him. But instead of that being an end to His life and any hope we had of moving beyond this brutish earthly existance, it paradoxically was the ultimate hope He gave us: that there is HOPE for us in trying to live a good life, even if we end up being murdered for it. There is HOPE that at the end of our lives, if we have lived them not for ourselves, but for each other, that we will realize that we have been serving GOD. __________________ "Of all tyrannies, a tyranny exercised for the good of its victims may be the most oppressive. It may be better to live under robber barons than under omnipotent moral busybodies. The robber baron's cruelty may sometimes sleep, his cupidity may at some point be satiated; but those who torment us for our own good will torment us without end, for they do so with the approval of their own conscience." – C. S. Lewis The ONLY sponsors we have are YOU! Please Donate!

02-19-2004, 11:26 AM	#8 (permalink)
ARTelevision I change Location: USA	Well yes, all that does make me respect him a whole lot for being an amazing person. I think it's cool to try to live like him, too - almost no one does that, though. I just think it's a pretty poor way to promote your religion - I mean with a real gory torture being the whole crux of the thing. I mean why isn't the way he lived what it's all about? The way he died is really irrelevant to me - except demonstrating he was very committed to his beliefs. That's impressive in itself, granted. I think what I'm trying to say is that it's too bad Mel Gibson decided to focus on this part of Jesus' life. And the reasons he gives for doing it are bad reasons for doing it, IMO. __________________ create evolution

02-19-2004, 11:02 AM	#4 (permalink)
teflonian Appreciative Location: Paradise	I commend you Art for attempting to make sense of it... I too do not agree with the arguments used in favor of this movie nor do I understand the logic behind Jesus as suffering for our sins. However, I have more or less given up on trying to create any rational arguments against any belief that boils down to believing something based upon “faith” and the oogly-boogly feeling you get when something weird happens in your life. It is a loosing battle as the belief based on faith isn’t rational or logical. I am sure I offended some one by that statement, and I am sorry if I have, but that doesn’t change my opinion. In any case, I do appreciate the Gibson movie for creating controversy and generating discussion (even if it is more or less the hitting your head on the brick kind). I do not appreciate the Gibson movie as from most accounts it propagates anti-Semitist feelings and that must be obvious to Gibson and the creators of the film.

02-19-2004, 11:15 AM	#6 (permalink)
Xell101 Junkie	I put faith in nothing, I too am confused by it. Nearest I can figure is that the ultimate product of humans, society, that little self-perpetuating collective of humans we hold so dear, is inherently flawed and he played captain hero of civilization by staring it right in the error and took the brunt of it and forgave us for it, demonstrating attributes that were we to accept in our hearts would work like a patch for society, thereby fixing it. So out of respect and to create a nice neat little civilization we should accept him into our hearts and follow his lessons on life and all that jazz. Course that theory is born of the confusion of a godless bastard who is without faith, so I'm geussing I've got it wrong.

02-19-2004, 11:36 AM	#9 (permalink)
tecoyah Illusionary	I choose to ignore the whole movie....and watch the fanatics instead, should be far more entertaining. __________________ Holding onto anger is like grasping a hot coal with the intent of throwing it at someone else; you are the one who gets burned. - Buddha

02-19-2004, 11:49 AM	#10 (permalink)
raeanna74 I'm not a blonde! I'm knot! I'm knot! I'm knot! Location: Upper Michigan	I do know what you are saying and seeing the interviews has gotten me to thinking about a lot of things related to it. It seems a lot of the effect of the movie may be in the play on emotions. The reason we are supposed to be moved by it is that IF you believe what the Bible says. IF you have faith that Christ was the Messiah and God's son - THEN Christ 1. Did not have to die. 2. He did die for the purpose of rescuing believers from an eternity in separation from God and payed for their sins by his death. So if you believe he's real, understand why he did what he did, then you should feel moved to action by it. That's stated purpose of the movie. Evangelisation. __________________ "Always learn the rules so that you can break them properly." Dalai Lama My Karma just ran over your Dogma. Last edited by raeanna74; 02-19-2004 at 11:58 AM..

02-19-2004, 12:18 PM	#11 (permalink)
ARTelevision I change Location: USA	Yes, raeanna, I have a problem with what I see as manipulative emotionalism. But you summed up the thinking process behind the believer's position very well. Now on to Lebell's statements. I'll tell ya, man, it does strike me as a wildly irrational way to create conviction. It's sort of like posing an outrageous situation and then brutally acting it out - as in a perverse self-fulfilling prophecy. Then using that in some sort of reverse way to demonstrate that since it didn't have to happen - it must be miraculous that it did. These are the sorts of impressions I had as a child - I remember them well. I mean, people would go through this sort of convoluted reasoning - which just seemed convoluted for perverse reasons. And then they would say things like, "now you see why it is such a miracle and why it offers us salvation rather than despair, etc..." Well honestly, not only does it make me feel sad that torture is a relatively common human behavior - it makes me feel even worse that some folks would use an instance of it to weave an "inspirational" tale that they would indoctrinate future generations with. I'm not kidding here: to me, telling that sort of story to a child and then blowing it up to cosmic proportions is psychological abuse, pure and simple. __________________ create evolution

02-19-2004, 01:17 PM	#12 (permalink)
rsl12 On the lam Location: northern va	I think this is Art's point (and if it's not, consider it mine): When you consider what Christ went through (imprisonment, crown of thorns, nailed to the cross), it isn't a whole lot of suffering compared to many many other people. Consider what some Christian saints went through--being st. catherine attached to a burning wheel, st. matthew being grilled to death (first on his back, after which he told his torturers "I think i'm done on this side" so they flipped him over), etc etc, for even smaller causes than Jesus'. Whose suffering should we feel more? Whose story is more moving, the one who dies horribly to save billions of souls, or the one who is tortured even worse because he tried to save a few dozen? so when people say "jesus died for your sins", how can you help but feel that other people have suffered even more for so much less? __________________ oh baby oh baby, i like gravy. Last edited by rsl12; 02-19-2004 at 01:23 PM..

02-19-2004, 05:05 PM	#13 (permalink)
Mantus lascivious	where is chavos when you need him... rsl12 beat me to it shakes fist. There were allot of people who suffered allot more then Christ for much smaller causes.

02-20-2004, 01:27 AM	#15 (permalink)
ARTelevision I change Location: USA	Lebell, I know it's probably tough for both of us to accept that we may have such divergent perspectives on this. I respect your views. Obviously I don't understand them the way you do. I suppose I felt the need to say something regarding the current clamor over Gibson's film. The other issue that seems to be inflaming folks - the question of who might be responsible for Christ's death - doesn't really grab me the way the issue of how the spiritual lesson is conveyed. That's the one I chose to comment on. It's really a personal statement. I do see the type of religious education my classmates and I received as children as psychologically abusive. As you know, it was executed in the context of actual and repeated physical abuse as well. I can temper my views regarding the subject in general. However, I can't pretend my experience was other than it was. __________________ create evolution

02-20-2004, 01:59 PM	#16 (permalink)
mr sticky Psycho Location: NC	Lebell, your doing great for the team, I'll try to give you a few moments of relief!! Guys, the most poignant fact of the crucifixion of Christ is that HE could have stopped it. At any time, at any juncture in the process, he could have merely wished it to cease (angels from Heaven, etc.). THIS is why it was momentous. He allowed this to occur FOR us! It's not just the acts, but it's his forbearance that gives this act the deep meaning that we lay upon it! The torture is the choice. __________________ The sad thing is... as you get older you come to realize that you don't so much pilot your life, as you just try to hold on, in a screaming, defiant ball of white-knuckle anxious fury

02-20-2004, 02:26 PM	#17 (permalink)
rsl12 On the lam Location: northern va	mr sticky -- I'm not sure I understand. any of the saints i mentioned above would have done the same thing in Jesus' position, allowed themselves to be crucified for the salvation of the world, right? even if they had the power to stop the torture? Heck, i would have done the same thing, if I knew for sure that would be the result--billions of souls ascending to heaven. plenty of saints make the choice to undergo death--st. stephen, the 1st christian martyr, was going around town preaching in full awareness that the government wasn't happy about his doings. it's not like he kept running away--he kept at it till they arrested him, tried him, and stoned him to death. now, if I were in Jesus' shoes, I would allow myself to be tortured for the sake of so many people, but if I were in st. stephen's shoes, I don't think I would be so calm about preaching so publically, not being sure about how many people my words would affect, at the chance of dying. In other words, I would have a much easier time making Jesus' choice than St. Stephens'. again, this is not an argument against jesus, it's an argument against being moved when people tell you "jesus died for your sins." __________________ oh baby oh baby, i like gravy.

02-21-2004, 03:50 AM	#19 (permalink)
TheKak Insane Location: Virginia	I have to be honest when I say the Bible and the story of Jesus is one of the most rediculous things I have ever read. The church has decided to pick and choose the parts of the bible it wants to believe while continuing to ignore the brutal truth of it. If Jesus even lived (which is really doubt, historical proof tends to point of the non-existance of Jesus), then I don't even think he was that great of a guy. To sum up what I think about Jesus' message, just read my sig. __________________ Roses are red, violets are blue, I'm a schizophrenic and so am I.

02-21-2004, 04:13 AM	#20 (permalink)
TheKak Insane Location: Virginia	As a side note, I don't want to offend anyone, but I can't be anything other than completely honest here. I read the Bible as a kid and I wondered why people would believe anything in it as anything other than a piece of fiction written by some obviously twisted people. I would never let my child read the Bible, its full of things like war, detailed animal sacrificing, eating shit, and many other horrible things. And I would ask questions about the things I had read in the Bible (like when I read Leviticus, I asked why it says that God hates certain people when I was told he loves everyone (yes, it had the words "God hates that" written many many times in it). I was told to believe what I was told and to not question things. To call this believe without understanding faith and that it was good to have faith. Well I got tired of them trying to indoctrinate me, so now what can I say, I'm a little bitter. I did some research, and to me it appears that there is absolutly zero proof for the fact that there ever even was a real Jesus. The first gospel (Mark) is dated at the earliest 70 C.E., 40 years after the death of the alleged Jesus. There is no way that whoever wrote that gospel was even alive to meet Jesus, let alone travel with him and learn things from him. There is no reference to a Jesus from any of the historians of that time, and no record of a Jesus being killed by the Roman courts. Not just that, but the Bible was assembled by men. Irenaeus of Lyon chose the 4 gospels to be in the Bible, burning many many others. So if there even was someone who had written what Jesus actually said, it was probably burned by the early church. Anyway I'm sorry to hijack this thread, maybe I should have just made a new one. (If I have made an incorrect historical statement of some kind, please feel free to correct me, I am not infailable) __________________ Roses are red, violets are blue, I'm a schizophrenic and so am I.

02-21-2004, 07:24 AM	#22 (permalink)
raeanna74 I'm not a blonde! I'm knot! I'm knot! I'm knot! Location: Upper Michigan	Whether you believe the Bible or not it seems like the promo stunts are just that and it's a drive to get as many religious persons a possible to view the film and boost ratings. I can understand from a religious point of view how the Sacrifice that was made would be poignant when viewed so grafically. I find it a bit much to expect people to truely be converted by the shock factor in demostrating the sacrifice. I don't see how many of the "conversions" will really last either as it will be an emotional response and not a logical choice. (I'm not interested in a debate here as to whether you can "Logically" choose Christianity.) Just saying that I don't think it should be emotionally based. __________________ "Always learn the rules so that you can break them properly." Dalai Lama My Karma just ran over your Dogma.

02-21-2004, 08:21 AM	#23 (permalink)
Ustwo Pissing in the cornflakes	What is suffering if you KNOW its only temporary? If you KNOW you are God and you know you are immortal, then pain is just sensory information. You might not like it, but its nothing special. A Christian Martyr would do the same, but in the Martyr's case only faith would support them, and I can respect that, but if you were God you wouldn't need faith. __________________ Agents of the enemies who hold office in our own government, who attempt to eliminate our "freedoms" and our "right to know" are posting among us, I fear.....on this very forum. - host Obama - Know a Man by the friends he keeps.

02-22-2004, 07:38 AM	#25 (permalink)
Jay Francis Psycho Location: Houston, Texas	Me neither. Look how many people the Spanish and Italian inquisition burned at the stake. What could be more horrible than being burned alive? Catholic church inquisition assholes.

02-22-2004, 07:40 AM	#26 (permalink)
Jay Francis Psycho Location: Houston, Texas	And another point. If it really happened. Lets not forget how many mythologies detailing the same type of events were circulating at this time. Think Apollonius of Tyana as documented in Flavius Philostratus's Life of Apollonius.

02-22-2004, 04:37 PM	#28 (permalink)
ARTelevision I change Location: USA	I think that's a poetic statement. Not a completely rational one. And therefore, it's not susceptible to rational discourse. Statements of faith are always like that. __________________ create evolution

02-22-2004, 08:58 PM	#29 (permalink)
rsl12 On the lam Location: northern va	i think hannukah harry's point is that his grandfather is jewish... __________________ oh baby oh baby, i like gravy.

02-23-2004, 06:54 AM	#32 (permalink)
Ustwo Pissing in the cornflakes	I still contend that knowing there is God (or that you are one) and knowing that any suffering IS truely temporary makes the suffering unimportant. Only if Jesus did not KNOW who he was did it have any meaning. __________________ Agents of the enemies who hold office in our own government, who attempt to eliminate our "freedoms" and our "right to know" are posting among us, I fear.....on this very forum. - host Obama - Know a Man by the friends he keeps.

02-23-2004, 08:37 AM	#33 (permalink)
ARTelevision I change Location: USA	Ustwo, I know. Even if one accepts the irrationality of faith-based thinking - it still doesn't make sense - like you said. Oh well. I think a lot of us just will never get this sort of stuff. __________________ create evolution