My reply to beanieboy

[Granite]

Look who's talking...I mean, pants on fire? :devil:

 

[beanieboy]

You neg rep me for this? You ARE a liar. Every Christian I know reflected on the life and teachings of Jesus, on his example to the world, on the meaning of his resurrection. Every one of them. That make you a LIAR.

I neg repped you because I quoted someone else. and you called me a liar.

Calling me a liar
A) doesn't add to the conversation
B) it is a quote from someone else, not me
C) it doesn't support it's claim
D) is being disruptive.

 

[beanieboy]

You neg rep me for this? You ARE a liar. Every Christian I know reflected on the life and teachings of Jesus, on his example to the world, on the meaning of his resurrection. Every one of them. That make you a LIAR.

By the way, we are talking about The Passion of the Christ.
Please READ THE THREAD before off shooting off your mouth.

Nowhere does the movie encourage reflection on the life and teachings of Jesus, on his example to the world, on the meaning of his resurrection.

Does it talk about hope?
Forgiveness?
The love of God?
Caring for those in need?
Loving your neighbor as yourself?

That's what the writer suggested - that it missed what Jesus preached, and the meaning of his resurrection, and gave only 2 minutes to it.

 

[On Fire]

You post crap from other people because you can't think for yourself. You post it. You agree with it. Makes you a liar.

 

[Granite]

You post crap from other people because you can't think for yourself. You post it. You agree with it. Makes you a liar.

OF: I really, really think you need to take a deep breath, admit you screwed up, and then leave this discussion.

 

[On Fire]

OF: I really, really think you need to take a deep breath, admit you screwed up, and then leave this discussion.

Please. I know his posts were coped and pasted. I can seee the link. But when he posts crap without comment I can only assume he agrees with it. If he chooses to post lies then he is a liar. Not too complicated.

 

[Granite]

Bean isn't lying to anybody. We all saw the same movie (at least I presume you did) and he's offering his opinion and the opinion of a Quaker on the subject. If he was trying to mislead someone who hadn't seen the movie it'd be one thing, but we are all on the same page here.

And you were just acting juvenile shouting "LIAR!" like a spoiled kid on a playground. Come on, man. Grow up.

 

[On Fire]

To say that "The Passion of the Christ" does not encourage reflection on the life and teachings of Jesus, on his example to the world, on the meaning of his resurrection is a lie.

 

[On Fire]

The fact that we're talking about it 676 days after its release is proof of that.

 

[Granite]

To say that "The Passion of the Christ" does not encourage reflection on the life and teachings of Jesus, on his example to the world, on the meaning of his resurrection is a lie.

The emphasis is on Jesus' suffering, torture, slow death, and degradation. And it's bean's opinion, okay? Frankly, I agree with him, more or less. Passion forces us to watch a good man die a horrible death, and its intensity and brutality don't give us time to do anything but catch our breath at the end. The resurrection (which Gibson almost didn't include) is a blink and miss it afterthought.

 

[On Fire]

The emphasis is on Jesus' suffering, torture, slow death, and degradation. And it's bean's opinion, okay? Frankly, I agree with him, more or less. Passion forces us to watch a good man die a horrible death, and its intensity and brutality don't give us time to do anything but catch our breath at the end. The resurrection (which Gibson almost didn't include) is a blink and miss it afterthought.

You both need to admit that you missed the point of the film.

 

[On Fire]

And no one is surprised.

 

[Aimiel]

You missed what I asked.
He forgave sins prior to his death.
So, why was his crucifiction neccessary?

Forgiving sins and cleansing one of un-righteousness are not the same thing. To get into Heaven perfection is required. Only by The Blood of The Lamb is perfect cleansing possible. Only Jesus death pays the price required of sin, for anyone who enters Heaven. Without that sacrifice, no one would get to Heaven. God Purposed that from before the foundation of the earth.

 

[erinmarie]

I didn't think the violence was that bad. I thought the movie was okay, as a movie. I'm not sure where all the emotions come from that were brought on by the movie. Maybe I'm just not affected the way some people are. :yawn:

I liked the weird satan 'character' the best. He/She creeped me out.
I think Gibson wanted to bring attention to the way he envisioned the life, crucification and resurrection. It's not like there hasn't been movies 'like this' before. Defoe played Christ, and there's always Monty Python's Life of Brian ( )

I think you're all wrong, stupid and silly! haha.

 

[Granite]

You both need to admit that you missed the point of the film.

The "point," mission accomplished, was depicting the suffering and death of Jesus. This wasn't the life and times of Christ; this was his dying, very plain and simple.

 

[On Fire]

The "point," mission accomplished, was depicting the suffering and death of Jesus. This wasn't the life and times of Christ; this was his dying, very plain and simple.

So why are you arguing that Gibson should have had a different "point"? It's his movie, right?

 

[Granite]

Ummmmm...I'm not. I do think the emphasis was very extreme and it would have been more effective had the story been given more context. But frankly it's not like we don't know what happened before. Gibson treated the subject as though he assumed everyone knew the basic plot, which is probably close to the mark, but in choosing to embellish Jesus' death and show it in as sickening a fashion as possible was just a little much.

 

[beanieboy]

Forgiving sins and cleansing one of un-righteousness are not the same thing. To get into Heaven perfection is required. Only by The Blood of The Lamb is perfect cleansing possible. Only Jesus death pays the price required of sin, for anyone who enters Heaven. Without that sacrifice, no one would get to Heaven. God Purposed that from before the foundation of the earth.

That's a very good explanation.
Thanks.

 

[On Fire]

Ummmmm...I'm not...but in choosing to embellish Jesus' death and show it in as sickening a fashion as possible was just a little much.

You may not be but beanie is and you're agreeing with him.

"Sickening" and "a little much" are subjective.

 

[beanieboy]

http://www.beliefnet.com/story/140/story_14099_1.html

So this is what I ask of Gibson and the film's fans: What is the character of the God imagined in that theology? Mel Gibson has said his film is about "love and forgiveness." But vicarious atonement is not the same as loving forgiveness. Reading "The Dolorous Passion" or watching Gibson, we should certainly be moved to love or at least pity their Jesus, but why would we worship--let alone love--their God?

I do not believe in a God who could forgive gratuitously but actually does so only after Jesus has been beaten to a bloody pulp in our place. If I accepted--as I emphatically do not--Gibson's vision of this savage God, I hope I would have the courage to follow Mrs. Job's advice: "Curse God, and die"

Another person pointing out that
a) it wasn't about forgiveness as much as it was about atonement (and savage at that)
b) the suggestion that Christ's death would mean nothing unless he was beaten severely is unbiblical, and paints God as a beast.