[QUOTE]
*Originally posted by Marley23 *
**[li]The film relies on sinister medieval stereotypes, portraying Jews as blood-thirsty, sadistic and money-hungry enemies of God who lack compassion and humanity. **[/li][/QUOTE]
Except, one would presume, for THE JEW WHO’S BEING CRUCIFIED.
And the Jews who followed him, yes, but one would also presume that they’re considered more Christian than Jew (since according to Jewish leaders they were heretics).
Except, historically in these passion plays, Jesus’s Jewishness is downplayed. “The Jews” are the bad guys, the instigators, the guys who say about Jesus, “May his blood be on us, and our children, and our children’s children.”
Maybe Gibson’s movie isn’t like that. I hope it isn’t, but historically, plays dealing with Jesus’s crucifixion make Jews the heavies.
Having read most of the post here and followed this story in the news to some extent I’m beginning to have a few doubts on the ability of the religious community to “bring us together.”
This is a movie for Crissake!
Bah… the film’s a load of shit…
Everyone knows Jesus was just a socialist, left-wing hippy who happened to have invented beat poetry.
He was missing all those years coz he was strung out in an opium den in India. He probably wrote the lyrics to Dark Side of the Moon while he was there too.
He might have failed the Messiah test, but he DEFINITELY would have failed a drug test - no doubts. And he woulda grinned too.
But what would I know? 25 years I’ve been in a hole in the desert, not saying a word to anyone - and then BAM! All of you lot come along and spoil my peace.
Voyager,
You ask for a cite? from stuff that is currently being discussed and published?
How about stuff from this thread, from Marley23:
Try parsing the extract for yourself. It is pure demagoguery. Full of weasel words, unsubstantiated assertions, appeals to unspecified authorities, special pleading and straw man arguments.
If the accusations are false, what does that make Mr. Foxman and Rabbi Korn?
Likewise, I can find nothing in the historical record to substantiate the strange assertion made by the ADL spokepersons that, historically, passion plays have frequently inspired pogroms and the like.
Historically, pogroms and other murderous raids conducted against Jews (or Albigenses, Hussites, assorted heretics etc.) have always been conducted under the auspices of the Civil/Military power of the particular region and usually for some sort of material gain. Bear in mind that the Civil/Military power is jealous of its power and does not want mobs running loose as they may challenge the authority of their own power. You will note that he has not actually cited an example to back up this assertion.
As for the theory that pogroms happened spontaneously as a result of Christians watching a passion play at Christmas with its familiar and mundane plot, I find that quite unconvincing and it will take much more than an unsubstanted assertion by an ADL spokesman to convince me that this was a typical reaction to a passion play.
Some people have disputed my use of the terms “hate” and “loathe” when describing the bigoted upbringing of many Jews and Christians. I agree. Perhaps the words were too strong. I was thinking more in terms of the casual use of terms such as the use of “Yid”, “Kike”, or “Goykopf” in conversations between family and community members.
Casual, rather than deadly bigotry. The problem usually arises when such habits of mind become too entrenched and over developed.
You need to look a little harder then.
I haven’t seen Gibson’s film and I don’t know if it’s anti-semitic, but to deny the violence that Passion Plays have historically incited against Jews bespeaks an ignorance on your part. Fortunately this is the board for dispelling that ignorance.
Do you believe that the holocaust happened or is that just made up too?
**
Well, well, well. First of all, you contradict yourself. A piece of demagoguery can hardly be full of weasel words. Did Stalin say Trotsky might be a traitor, or WAS a stooge of the capitalists?
Your thinking is a bit fuzzy here.
Now, let’s dissect the quote.
They’re deeply concerned. Are they not allowed to be? Perhaps not if there has been nothing in the past 2,000 years or so that would cause concern. Think there hasn’t been? You might try addressing DtheC’s post.
How evil can you get! They’re not calling Gibson names, or accusing him of anything - they’re just expressing concerns about his work. And how anti-Christian it is to make common cause with Protestants and main-line Catholics. And we all know that good inter-faith relations is the number one priority of those who hate other religions, right?
Which accusations are false? What are the accusations? That they are concerned that the movie might hurt interfaith dialog? Not much of an accusation, in my book.
Thanks to Diogenes for covering this one.
And where did they say these things? Do you deny that passion plays today are different than those of years past? Why do you think they saw fit to change the tone? Did you somehow think the accusation was that any Christian seeing the movie would turn into a raving maniac?
Well, I personally have never heard the word “goykopf” used. Goy means gentile, I have never heard it used as a slur the way the other terms you gave are. I don’t know of any Jews bigoted towards Christians. Growing up in New York, I never met nor saw any indication of Christians bigoted towards Jews. This is not to say this never happened, in the '30s my great aunt had to lie about her religion to get a job.
The statement is expressing concern that this movie might be stirring up animosities that have been reduced through the good offices of both sides. If someone proposed to do a remake of Birth of a Nation, would you think objections to this would be wrong?
Diogenes the Cynic,
You ask me:
My answer is: I think of the figure 11 Million, plus or minus 5%.
Since one gratuitous insult deserves another, I believe you have only ever thought of 6 million.
Diogenes the Cynic,
Those are most impressive links you provided. One small area in Bavaria, Circa 1382 (or whatever) supports everything that Foxman and Korn claim is evil about Christians in general?
Here’s another take, for what it’s worth:
Yes, I know, it’s only in jest.
They’re not saying Christians in general are evil. They’re just saying that passion plays have a history of promoting anti-Semitism, and they do.
[Captain Amazing,**
Maybe “Passion Plays” do (or did) cause massive pogroms as the spokepersons of the ADL would have us believe, for dubious reasons of their own.
I doubt it, and it interests me little. The examples cited on this thread are restricted to small areas and time spans in Europe of 600 years ago. I doubt that passion plays have ever ranked very highly in the thoughts of Jewish community leaders through the ages.
I find people who insist that people raised as Jews are free of bigotry to be quite absurd. I have met many religious bigots in my lifetime, Christians, Jews, Muslims and Atheists.
In the final analysis, it proves nothing except that a person’s beliefs are shaped to an enormous extent by the particular family that they happen to have been born into and, inevitably, in the particular area of land that they were born in.
No one is saying that Jews can’t be bigoted, or dislike Christians. However, opposition to this movie isn’t neccessarily a sign of anti-Christian bigotry. Mr. Foxman and Rabbi Korn are saying, after having seen the movie, that it is anti-Semitic, and it’s their job to fight anti-Semitism.
Now, they could be wrong. I haven’t seen the movie, and I don’t intend to see the movie, so I don’t know if it is anti-Semitic or not. However, even if it’s not, nothing they’ve said is anti-Christian.
You believe wrong.
Did you read all the links? The Bavarian village you speak of is only about the origin of Passion Plays and the violence that accompanied them all over medievel Europe for centuries. There is no “maybe” about it. Jewish ghettos were routinely sacked after Passion Plays which literally demonized Jews and blamed them for the crucifixion.
I feel compelled to go at this from another angle. Probably angled enough to be off topic, but what the heck.
What if Jesus had not been killed? Where would the Christian religion be? Christian dogma requires the sacrificial death of Jesus, or it doesn’t make sense. Death by heart attack wouldn’t work.
It seems that Jesus, according to the Gospels, was aware of his fate ahead of time. Did he not indicate that Judas would betray him? And was that a prophecy, or an assignment? Jesus was a deity, after all, or THE deity, not just a prophet.
It’s well known that the temple priests were puppets of the Romans at the time of Jesus. At the same time, they were trying to preserve Israel, and were aware that the future of the country was on a knife edge. So what else could they do? And would it have mattered in the end. Moreover, if there was a “mob” involved (although I doubt the Romans held much with mobs; it would have been an orderly gathering, I think), they must have shared the latter concern.
My point is that the Passion has been done to death, so to speak. It appears, from what I’ve read, that Gibson has principally added gore to the spectacle, along with some medieval commentary. Wouldn’t it be refreshing if a film dealt with something a little deeper than simply following the Gospels.
Well, if Jesus wasn’t killed, that implies he would not have been the Messiah. If that were the case, we’d all still be Jews, waiting for the Messiah. When you cut right through everything, that’s really the only different between Christians and Jews–one group believes Jesus was the Messiah, the other doesn’t and is still waiting. True, it’s a significant difference, but still…
I would say it was prophecy that Judas would betray him, not assignment.
What else could they do? Probably a number of things. When it comes down to it, everyone involved made their own decisions.
I’ll grant that the Passion has been done quite a bit. I think Mel just wanted to make what he felt was a true rendition. Whether it’s been done before…that’s fairly irrelevant, at least as far as Mel and crew are concerned. I’m always interested in seeing a new vision of it.
Well, nothing is really known outside of the gospels, right? So a filmmaker would have to delve into a lot of fiction to do so (granted, some people think the Bible is fiction–that’s another debate). If someone wants to try to do the Passion with any accuracy, they really only have the Gospels to work on.
Anyway, those are my thoughts at the moment. Good questions, though! And since I’m the OP, I don’t mind the minor hijack at all. 
As I said before until you’ve seem the movie you can’t really say if it’s antisemtic or not, but if you’ve wasted your money on it your probably a cunt.
MC Master of Ceremonies,
Unfortunately, we all had to waste our time reading that. At least your crude, brainless answer was short.
Yeah, at least that’s true:smack: