|
Post by Mr. Atari on Mar 3, 2004 22:37:00 GMT -5
Whoa, he's a LITTLE bit freaky if you know what I mean. :-/ Well, in Christian theology, Jesus died to pay for the sins of humanity. So in that sense, it wasn't the Romans or the Jews that killed him, but sin. If Mel considers himself a sinner who needed the sacrifice of Jesus to pay for his sins, it makes sense that he'd want his hand in the shot. It may be freaky, but it's highly significant.
|
|
|
Post by ArtCrow on Mar 4, 2004 14:57:54 GMT -5
Ok I'll jump in here.
I saw the Passion 2 days ago and it's a film I won't soon forget. It's powerful and draining. I've seen a lot of blood and gore in the movies over the years but nothing compares to that scourging scene, wow.
I'm someone who likes historical dramas and I've seen pretty well all the Bible movies, including most of the Jesus films that have come along. I thought Last Temptation of Christ was powerful, even though it didn't really follow the gospels. But the Passion is something else. I don't know if I want to see it again but I'm glad I saw it once. It's an experience.
One more thing, I loved that it was done in original languages. I've always wanted that in historical films. I want to see vikings speaking Old Norse, Anglo-Saxons speaking Old English, etc etc. I hope this film starts a trend.
|
|
|
Post by Mr. Atari on Mar 4, 2004 16:15:54 GMT -5
Yeah- I haven't heard anyone complain about the original languages or the subtitles. Maybe it'll convince people to see other foreign language movies. The whole "I don't like subtitles" defense for avoiding filmmakers like Kurosawa has always bothered me. It's amazing how quickly you forget you're reading.
|
|
|
Post by Buddhist Kitten on Mar 4, 2004 21:09:56 GMT -5
I wish for me and my approx. 10 months older than me friend to go see this. If I am not posting reguarly in about a week or so, it is because I am throughly traumatized. And my friend wants to go see it too, so I suspect that we shall be praying together.
P.S. Does the Bible say anything about lesbianism?
|
|
|
Post by ArtCrow on Mar 4, 2004 21:21:59 GMT -5
P.S. Does the Bible say anything about lesbianism? Yes, the Bible does say something about both male and female homosexuality, as well as incest and beastiality. According to the Bible it's all not good.
|
|
|
Post by nightfalcawk on Mar 5, 2004 18:24:40 GMT -5
I accept homosexuals and think the laws regarding marrage should be overturned due to the fact that they are unconstitutional, regardless of out Catholic and Protestant beliefs.
|
|
|
Post by Buddhist Kitten on Mar 5, 2004 18:29:10 GMT -5
Yes, the Bible does say something about both male and female homosexuality, as well as incest and beastiality. According to the Bible it's all not good. They used to do stuff like that before Christianity in Rome. And, when Lewis and Clark explored America, the female Native Americans were not as strict about sex as we are (or were). Proves how different we are, does it not?
|
|
|
Post by Mr. Atari on Mar 5, 2004 18:51:40 GMT -5
Well, I finally saw the movie this afternoon.
The violence really didn't shock me. I guess it has to do with your expectations. If you think that a Roman scourging was like a light whipping, or a crucifixion was humane and/or clean, then I imagine the violence would be shocking.
What really struck me was the high quality of the filmmaking. Even if you take away the plot or the religious background, and Gibson did a phenomenal job directing an epic movie.
More than anything, I hope that as a result of this movie people can begin thinking of this event with a sense of realism. Instead of just in a sterile way commemorated by a shiny piece of jewelry.
|
|
|
Post by nightfalcawk on Mar 5, 2004 19:11:16 GMT -5
I dont have anything against gays either. However, marriage was created for a man and a woman to get married and have children. To start a new family, to go on for generations. If gays want to get married, why cant they just live together? Thats what they do anyway. Why must they actually get married? (I think it's just an equal rights issue. I mean, if straight people jumped off bridges, and gays weren't allowed to, I'm sure there'd be protest of gays wanting to jump off bridges) Overall, I really dont care. I have no offense to gay people, it's their lives, let them do what they want with it. True dat. I just think if you give them the rights of married couples, just go the whole 9 yards and give them permission to be married. Like you said, either way, I don't care.
|
|
|
Post by Mr. Atari on Mar 5, 2004 19:18:32 GMT -5
Guess who said the following:
"Marriage was a custom long before the state commenced to issue licenses for that purpose. In all cases, marriage has always been considered as the union of a man and a woman, and we have been presented with no authority to the contrary."
Jerry Falwell? Pat Robertson? George W. Bush?
Nope. Nope. and Nope.
This quote is taken from the U.S. Supreme Court decision of Jones v. Hallahan.
Whether or not gay marriage should be allowed, the way in which it's happening seems problematic to me. Instead of letting the checks and balances come to a determination, maverick judges in certain states just take it upon themselves to go against a Supreme Court ruling.
I don't think a constitutional amendment is appropriate, because I don't think has anything to do with the constitution. But the legislative flip-off these judges are giving is out of line.
Topic? Let me just reiterate, I liked the movie.#nosmileys
|
|
|
Post by Mr. Atari on Mar 5, 2004 20:01:17 GMT -5
Normal Roman scourgings were 39 lashes, front and back. The whip-like weapon with the multiple ends, consisting of bone, spikes and shards of glass was a common implement of punishment throughout the Roman empire. A few years ago, the Journal of the American Medical Association ran an article called "On the Physical Death Of Jesus Christ". It detailed, from a medical perspective, what happened to him physically in the scourging and crucifixion. For the full text, check out: www.geocities.com/alokonsen/death2.htmFor just the part on scourging, see: www.geocities.com/alokonsen/death3.htm
|
|
|
Post by Ator on Mar 5, 2004 21:52:45 GMT -5
As amazingly painful as crucifixion is, impaling is the worst. Though sometimes just through the chest, this was not the ordinanry impaling. They'd stick a spiky pole up your butt and it comes out of your mouth. Now that's sick. Yeah, it's amazing what sinful people can think up, huh?
|
|
|
Post by Mr. Atari on Mar 5, 2004 21:59:34 GMT -5
Well, it is tough to run a worldwide empire of terror by letting people off with community service.
Those Romans weren't about to let their colonies revolt.
The impaling thing was popular in Nero's and Domitian's regimes. They would coat captured Christians in tar, then impale them on 10 foot high spikes. Then set them on fire. That's how they lit their garden parties. It's also where the term "Roman Candles" comes from.
I didn't make that last paragraph up.
|
|
|
Post by Ator on Mar 5, 2004 22:06:43 GMT -5
The damn Romans simply got too big. They didn't know when to let their empire stop growing. Everyone is like that in some way or another. The more sex/money/power you have, the more you want.
|
|
|
Post by nightfalcawk on Mar 5, 2004 22:06:44 GMT -5
Well, it is tough to run a worldwide empire of terror by letting people off with community service. Those Romans weren't about to let their colonies revolt. The impaling thing was popular in Nero's and Domitian's regimes. They would coat captured Christians in tar, then impale them on 10 foot high spikes. Then set them on fire. That's how they lit their garden parties. It's also where the term "Roman Candles" comes from. I didn't make that last paragraph up. Wrong, Pontius Pilot was a psychopath. The Roman goverment told him to stop killing people and he was exiled after the Jesus murder.
|
|