Post
by PetfanInCt » Wed Sep 08, 2004 9:45 pm
You may be aware that Hollywood has produced a blockbuster movie centered on the things of God. You may also know that it was directed and produced by a Roman Catholic. While the film was based on Scripture, it contained a number of scenes that cannot be corroborated by the Bible. The movie I am referring to is the ever-popular Cecil B. DeMille's "The Ten Commandments," staring Charlton Heston. Mr. DeMille was a Roman Catholic, and he took artistic license by portraying Moses as having a romance while he was in Egypt, and actually disguising himself as a Hebrew slave to tread out bricks. I am sure that when the film was released, most Christians rejoiced that from the pit of an immoral industry, godless minds were suddenly reminded that there was a God and that He had a holy Law.
>>>>> However; unbelievers then have a skewed view of God and what His Word stands for and is about. Jesus said you cannot mix truth and error, for the error will always contaminate the truth, not the other way around.
Matt 7:18 A good tree cannot produce evil fruits, nor a corrupt tree produce good fruits.
1Cr 5:6 Your glorying [is] not good. Know ye not that a little leaven leaveneth the whole lump?
# Nowadays, most Christians are rejoicing that amidst the filth of Hollywood, suddenly another movie has been produced that flies in the face of everything for which Hollywood stands. That movie is "The Passion of the Christ." But some are deeply concerned that it was also directed and produced by a Roman Catholic. It also contains artistic license. It has scenes that are from Catholic mysticism rather than from Scripture (the appearance of a raven at the cross, Judas being tormented by children, etc.). These are legitimate concerns. Our forefathers in the gospel shed their blood so that we could be free from the chains of Catholicism. But we must remember why their blood was shed. It was because they stood for the truth. So while it is legitimate to expose the error of Catholicism, it is even more important to stand up for the truth of the Gospel.
>>>>> You cannot stand up for the truth of the Gospel if it is encased in mysticism and Catholicism. It changes the Gospel message into another gospel.
2Cr 11:4 For if he that cometh preacheth another Jesus, whom we have not preached, or [if] ye receive another spirit, which ye have not received, or another gospel, which ye have not accepted, ye might well bear with [him].
# Another concern that some people have is that an onscreen depiction of Jesus is a form of "graven image," and therefore a transgression of the Second Commandment. Those who think that making an image of Jesus on film is breaking the Commandment should read it in full. We are not to make graven images of "any likeness of any thing that is in heaven above, or that is in the earth beneath, or that is in the water under the earth." That means that we shouldn't make film images (movie or still photos) of any person, animal, fish, flower, bird, mountain, etc. That doesn't make any sense...until we read the whole Commandment: "You shall not bow down yourself to them, nor serve them" (Exodus 20:4-5). The Commandment forbids the creation of any image for the purpose of worship.
>>>>> Unfortunately, people do "bow" before images of Jesus - particularly Catholics. It has been reported that many people are throwing themselves at the feet of James Caveizel, who played Jesus in the Passion movie.
# While we could argue about these issues, I would rather ask you an important question. If someone says, "I'm not a Christian, but I did see the film. Wow! What was all that brutality about?" are you going to reply, "I didn't go to the movie because it was directed and produced by a Roman Catholic. It's idolatrous and it contains things that cannot be corroborated by Scripture, and I therefore think it was evil"? I hope not. I should hope that you instead use the movie as a springboard to explain the way of salvation.
>>>>> If one is knowledgeable about the gospel message, the error of the movie can be pointed out in a tactful and loving way. The gospel of the movie is not the Gospel of salvation in Jesus Christ. The movie portrays a fearful man who cowers at the feet of satan, is beaten beyond recognition, falls repeatedly on the way to the cross, receives strength from His mother, and leaves the tomb naked. This is not Jesus Christ, who is the Son of God and Savior of mankind.
# Think of Paul's attitude in Philippians chapter one. Some folks weren't just adding their own mystical thoughts to the message of the cross. They were downright vicious. They were hypocrites who preached Christ out of pretence, envy, strife and "contention." They were devious people who were so full of venom that they wanted to see Paul further suffer--hoping to "add affliction the [his] bonds." Yet what was Paul's attitude to such wickedness? He rejoiced that they preached Christ, despite the horrible baggage that came with the message. He said, "What then? notwithstanding, every way, whether in pretence, or in truth, Christ is preached; and I therein do rejoice, yes, and will rejoice"
>>>>> The point is that the Christ that was preached, was Jesus in Paul's day. It was a fresh message right from the cross in resurrection power. Today we have varying concepts of just who Jesus was. Religious systems have changed and belittled His Divinity, turning Him into a convenience or a "good man", not the King of kings and Lord of lords.
# Do you remember what happened in Mark 9:39-40, when the disciples told Jesus that they had found a man who was casting out demons in His name. This man had a "ministry," but he wasn't with their group, so they took it upon themselves to rebuke him. But Jesus told them to leave him alone. This is because God doesn't need bouncers to help Him carry out His purposes.
>>>>> Jesus also said,
Mat 12:30 He that is not with me is against me; and he that gathereth not with me scattereth abroad.
In other words, that man was imitating what He had seen. Today, Jesus has become a swear word, anathama to many world religions. He has been rejected and scorned by those who have chosen to disregard and trample the Gospel to nothing.
# If I had had a hand in the making of "The Passion of the Christ," I would have dropped all mysticism, and based it purely on Scripture. Also, (as in the epic movie "Ben Hur"--a wonderful movie) I wouldn't have shown the face of the Savior. But I didn't write, produce or direct it. So I tell myself that this isn't a movie about Jesus being a homosexual. It isn't about him having sexual relations with Mary Magdalene. It doesn't depict Him as merely a man--as did "Jesus Christ Superstar." Instead "The Passion of the Christ" is based on Scripture, with some artistic license. It begins with a powerful Scripture. The whole movie is full of Scripture...and it even ends with the resurrection. Christ is preached, and we should therefore rejoice and be thankful that millions have been graphically reminded of the cross of Calvary in a way they will never forget. That means we can either take advantage of an unprecedented opportunity to use it to speak further with them about their salvation, or we can whine. I choose the former, and I hope you do also.
>>>>> I think if you compare the "scripture" of the movie, you will find that it totally misquotes the Bible. Many words are added and changed to what Jesus supposedly said as well as in other scenes. The scenes of the movie are neither Scripturally or historically accurate. The Bible does not give us much in the line of "graphic details", therefore: why is there the need? His Word stands as full and complete Truth.
The resurrection of Jesus in the Bible depicts the power of God bringing life to Jesus, complete with angels, the stone being rolled away, the soldiers falling to the ground as dead men during an earthquake. The "resurrection" of the movie lasts all of 45 seconds showing a naked "Jesus" walking out of the tomb.
-By Ray Comfort
0 x
Thinking if I could see I would believe, then somebody said Believe and you will see.
- is located: None of the historical movies Hollywood puts out are completely accurate. Historical accuracy is not their main priority; getting the movie released and bringing in the green stuff is their main priority, and they have to squeeze a lot of information into two or two and a half hours. There are also a whole mess of people working on the movie and a lot of diverse opinions. That means information-sometimes information that may be important to make the story accurate-may get left out. It's a jungle out there amigo. 
its getting deep in here...