# Passion was a piece of art **URL:** \ **Category:** Cafe Society\ **Created:** [March 1, 2004, 5:17pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/passion-was-a-piece-of-art/231938 "2004-03-01T17:17:39Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 10\ **Page:** 3
**Author:** ![Munch](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/munch/32/5281_2.png) [@Munch](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Munch)\ **Post date:** [March 3, 2004, 9:11pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/passion-was-a-piece-of-art/231938/41 "2004-03-03T21:11:46Z")
> [@mswas](#): > > The movie is called The “Passion” of Christ because it is about PASSION not intellectualization. No, it’s called “The Passion…” because the story of Christ’s suffering and death has been called “the Passion story” for centuries. ---
**Author:** ![mswas](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/e99b99/32.png) [@mswas](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/mswas)\ **Post date:** [March 3, 2004, 9:40pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/passion-was-a-piece-of-art/231938/42 "2004-03-03T21:40:01Z")
> [@Miller](#): > > What’s not to understand? Christian theology isn’t terribly difficult to figure out. I daresay that if it were, it would never have caught on and spread the way it did. I think if most of it’s proponents actually understood it, they wouldn’t say that Pagans, Hindus etc… are devil worshippers. Hell I think if they understood it they’d realize that Satan wasn’t a seperate entity from Christ, and just his own temptation for the alternative to the route he took. ---
**Author:** ![mswas](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/e99b99/32.png) [@mswas](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/mswas)\ **Post date:** [March 3, 2004, 9:41pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/passion-was-a-piece-of-art/231938/43 "2004-03-03T21:41:12Z")
> [@Munch](#): > > No, it’s called “The Passion…” because the story of Christ’s suffering and death has been called “the Passion story” for centuries. And I’m sure there was no reason to call it that for all those centuries. Erek ---
**Author:** ![Miller](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/miller/32/481_2.png) [@Miller](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Miller)\ **Post date:** [March 3, 2004, 9:52pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/passion-was-a-piece-of-art/231938/44 "2004-03-03T21:52:41Z")
> [@mswas](#): > > And I’m sure there was no reason to call it that for all those centuries. There was, but not the reason you think. Passion used to just mean “suffering.” It was only after it got conflated with Jesus’s suffering out of love for humanity (sometime around the Norman invasion) that it can to have the emotional conotations it does today. [Cite.](http://slate.msn.com/id/2096041/) > [@mswas](#): > > I think if most of it’s proponents actually understood it, they wouldn’t say that Pagans, Hindus etc… are devil worshippers. Hell I think if they understood it they’d realize that Satan wasn’t a seperate entity from Christ, and just his own temptation for the alternative to the route he took. Just as you say: belief and understanding are two different things. If one can believe without understanding, then one can surely understand without believing, no? ---
**Author:** ![beajerry](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/7bcc69/32.png) [@beajerry](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/beajerry)\ **Post date:** [March 4, 2004, 4:46pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/passion-was-a-piece-of-art/231938/45 "2004-03-04T16:46:30Z")
mswas, you are right that it is inappropriate to comment on others’ experiences of their belief as being ‘wrong’. But can one say there is a _correct_ way to apply religious symbols? Yes. How does one know the _correct_ way? By comparing several religions and their use of symbols. (Stepping outside of one’s belief to _re-valuate_ it.) That is a vital duty of every religious believer. And if they do not do this, then they will be guilty of what Miller points out: believing without understanding. And that is ‘wrong’. So, perhaps it wasn’t inappropriate of me? ---
**Author:** ![mswas](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/e99b99/32.png) [@mswas](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/mswas)\ **Post date:** [March 16, 2004, 6:17am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/passion-was-a-piece-of-art/231938/46 "2004-03-16T06:17:58Z")
beajerry: I don’t believe in objectivity. I don’t believe one can step outside of what they believe. I don’t think there is a “correct” way or not. Maybe it’s correct for you however. Sure I like to shift my viewpoint, but when I understand another viewpoint I understand it as filtered through my own. ---
**Author:** ![mswas](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/e99b99/32.png) [@mswas](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/mswas)\ **Post date:** [March 16, 2004, 6:20am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/passion-was-a-piece-of-art/231938/47 "2004-03-16T06:20:47Z")
> [@Miller](#): > > There was, but not the reason you think. Passion used to just mean “suffering.” It was only after it got conflated with Jesus’s suffering out of love for humanity (sometime around the Norman invasion) that it can to have the emotional conotations it does today. [Cite.](http://slate.msn.com/id/2096041/) > > Just as you say: belief and understanding are two different things. If one can believe without understanding, then one can surely understand without believing, no? This assumes some universal axiom of truth. Which I do believe in, but I don’t believe the details are it, and I don’t believe it can be described and I don’t believe there is any viewpoint that is not privy to it, only viewpoints that have convinced themselves that are not. In otherwords, I have no real way to verify anything, so I just accept what I see. The rest are just intellectual mindgames. Erek ---
**Author:** ![Miller](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/miller/32/481_2.png) [@Miller](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Miller)\ **Post date:** [March 16, 2004, 6:22am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/passion-was-a-piece-of-art/231938/48 "2004-03-16T06:22:53Z")
What? ---
**Author:** ![gigi](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/a587f6/32.png) [@gigi](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/gigi)\ **Post date:** [March 16, 2004, 3:22pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/passion-was-a-piece-of-art/231938/49 "2004-03-16T15:22:33Z")
> [@mswas](#): > > What was this line from Matthew that was taken from the subtitles? I have heard about it, but haven’t heard what the actual line was. The bolded section below, where the Jews could be said to take responsibility for Jesus’ death: Matthew 27:24: When Pilate saw that he could prevail nothing, but that rather a tumult was made, he took water, and washed his hands before the multitude, saying, I am innocent of the blood of this just person: see ye to it. 25: Then answered all the people, and said, \*\*His blood be on us, and on our children. \*\* ---
**Author:** ![Dogface](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/9d8465/32.png) [@Dogface](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Dogface)\ **Post date:** [March 16, 2004, 3:54pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/passion-was-a-piece-of-art/231938/50 "2004-03-16T15:54:46Z")
> [@mswas](#): > > When Judas is laying down, the little children come up to try and help him, they were being very compassionate until he started acting crazy to them at which point he had hallucinations about them and they became demon children. Could somebody please point out the specific verses of Scripture in which this scene is mentioned? After all, Mellieboy’s propaganda has, over and over, stressed how UTTERLY FAITHFUL to Scripture his little movie is. Therefore, since it is so VERY FAITHFUL to Scripture, this scene must be therein. Where is it? [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/passion-was-a-piece-of-art/231938.md?page=2)