Enjoyed your article.....i was agnostic too until i did the math. It is stated that as humankind, we possess MAYBE 10 percent of all knowledge in the universe. There are approximately 6 billion people on earth.....meaning I posses 1/6000000000th of 10 percent of all universal knowledge. Given the likelihood that my limited understanding of the universe was in error by questioning the existence of God, I took the rest on faith, studied the bible, talked to some friends and now, I am a minister. Who'd a thunk it?

Enjoyed reading your view Angloesque, Was just wondering if the picture did anything to change your agnostic ideas? I have to agree with you about John. I was saying the same thing on the way home. What you wrote confirmed exactly what I was thinking. I thought the actor could have put more into it. As for the crow part. There was no scripture for that. I also agree with you that this part could have been deleted. The Satan and the baby scene. Hmm... My interpretation of this was perhaps showing that this was Satan and the anti-Christ (which is the son of Satan) preparing to make the world their kingdom now that they got Jesus out of the way. Thats all I can figure it out to be. It would be interesting to hear other opinions on this. I also did not thing the movie was in the least anti- Semitic, thats exactly the way the story went in the bible. If anyone is guilty it is all of us, for we all have sinned. GCJ

Thanks for the review. i have been debating whether or not to see it, your comment help.

GCJ,

Was just wondering if the picture did anything to change your agnostic ideas?

Well, in short, no. I still wonder if the writers of the gospels glamourized Jesus and what he was doing (I believe in his historical character, but am undecided on whether or not he was the Son of God). It doesn't quite make sense to me that this was God's big plan for redemption--I have to wonder if there was a better way (and that's assuming that there is a God--I wonder if there are more gods but one uber-God). I still think that since religion is fundamental to all cultures, there has to be some sort of God or myriad gods. Who they are and what they're like is where I'm agnostic. It's a crappy position to be in, too; I miss the nice fundamentalism that was much easier to believe in. Stupid education.

Also, I was intrigued by your analysis of that baby or anti-Christ. I've always thought that just Satan was the anti-christ.

Larry,

The best thing that a religous film can accomplish is to encourage debate.

I quite agree. That's why I hate to see disparaging comments made towards creation/evolution, a pet interest of mine, because it's the debate that keeps both sides constantly checking themselves. Good perspective.

-T.

I like the book better. Mr. Gibson's interpretation is far too bloody and EASY (despite Mel's claims) to get away with in this day and age. Mel has said that if you have problems with his movie, it's not his fault...you must have issues with the Bible. Wow, what an egomaniac to say that what he portrayed on film was a story from the bible...NOT so much! The basis for his movie was in the Bible, but not the bloodfest. Which Gospel was the story of Jesus inventing the dinner table in? After reading accounts from various sources (non-biblical) I get the sense that his portrayal of the whipping and crucifixion was correct (though Mel must not buy the wrist and ankle placement of nails; demonstrated in archeological specimens). But that doesn't make his story biblical. I only felt one thing leaving that theater. Boy, am I glad that's over. What I gather from this movie and Mr. Gibson's other bloodfest specials (Braveheart, The Patriot, LW1-4) is that he believes the only way to influence beliefs is through violence...isn't that what Jesus's executioners were attempting to do? At least I can put my mind at ease knowing that Gibson can't make a sequel...or can he?

The basis for his movie was in the Bible, but not the bloodfest.

Mr. Gibson's other bloodfest specials

his portrayal of the whipping and crucifixion was correct

So the violent parts were accurate, but the movie was too violent? What do you want?

So, because you're a minister now, you must be right in your 1/60000000000th of knowledge or what is the probability that you're STILL wrong. Maybe you should try ski instructor?

If you've ever seen a movie, you're a hypocrite. Just read the script.
>>I'm talking about those pop-up books...not actual reading. I never do that. That's why my paragraphs are so silly;->
the point is to convey, vividly, Jesus's willingness to suffer (terribly) for the sins of humanity
>>I believe in the ability of one's imagination to carry that moment. If a director doesn't trust his audience to know the horrific nature of the told events...what does that say? One need not see a murder to know that it is a horrible event. There are many well done films that do much with a story without having to portray every detail- I think it is an art to do so- to witness what Mel did is spectacle. Yes, I did go see it (I also rubberneck at accidents and love WWF;-)-so that makes me a hypocrite to 'preach' that there should be a better way to tell the story, but if someone decides not to see it because I THOUGHT the movie awful, then maybe that's good.
I have no such faith to start
>>I did not mean for you to state your beliefs, nor am I making a statement of my religious beliefs.

Encourage all members of the UN to watch the film and explain that more than 2000 years ago

Right after you encourage the UN to kick all the white people out of the Americas; two thousand years ago, they belonged to the Natives.

What I was referring to is this - The theft-by-expropriation of more Palestinian land for the fence will certainly result in Palestinian families leaving or being forced out of their ancestral lands and homes.

http://www.palestinemonitor.org/Special%20Section/Closure/ethnic_cleansing_with_guns.htm

Palestinians claim that it is their ancestral land.

I did not encourage the UN to kick all the white people of the Americas. Only liberals and socialists do such a things. To conservatives, the UN is a debating society without guts, yet liberals use it to air their leftist thoughts as if they can do anything. But then, if you remove the UN, where will the leaders of those emerging countries get their "wealth".

I am a minority and I am not white. I respect the fact that without the white race, the natives as you say will still be "natives".

aconservative

For those of you who doubt that Jesus is the Son of God, who may feel they have been "educated beyond such conclusions," I would implore you to read a book called "The Case for Christ," by Lee Strobel, who was an unbelieving investigative journalist at the time he wrote it.
While our intellect will not ever get everything correct, it is refreshing and amazing to see just how completely the gospel is true, not only for our heart and spirit, but also for our intellect, if only we investigate the real facts, instead of trying to come to conclusions with the bits of incomplete information we pick up in life without much effort.

wakhonta:

I hope you are not "agnostic". Didn't "God" gave Moses the land title of those lands? If you believe this - Moses was a Jew.

aconservative

Isaiah 8:14 And he shall be for a sanctuary;
but for a stone of stumbling and for a rock of offence
to both the houses of Israel, for a gin and for
a snare to the inhabitants of Jerusalem.

Psalms 22:16 For dogs (Gentiles=The Romans) have compassed me:
the assembly of the wicked have inclosed me:
they pierced my hands and my feet.

Isaiah 53:
[4] Surely he hath borne our griefs, and carried our sorrows:
yet we did esteem him stricken, smitten of God, and afflicted.

John 11:
[49] And one of them, named Caiaphas, being the high priest that same year, said unto them, Ye know nothing at all,
[50] Nor consider that it is expedient for us, that one man should die for the people, and that the whole nation perish not.
[51] And this spake he not of himself: but being high priest that year, he prophesied that Jesus should die for that nation;
[52] And not for that nation only, but that also he should gather together in one the children of God that were scattered abroad.

Isaiah 52:
[13] Behold, my servant shall deal prudently, he shall be exalted and extolled, and be very high.
[14] As many were astonied at thee; his visage was so marred more than any man,
and his form more than the sons of men:
[15] So shall he sprinkle many nations; the kings shall shut their mouths at him:
for that which had not been told them shall they see; and that which they had
not heard shall they consider.

Isaiah 11
[10] And in that day there shall be a root of Jesse,
which shall stand for an ensign of the people;
to it shall the Gentiles seek: and his rest shall be glorious.

Isaiah 42
[1] Behold my servant, whom I uphold; mine elect,
in whom my soul delighteth; I have put my spirit upon him:
he shall bring forth judgment to the Gentiles.
[6] I the LORD have called thee in righteousness,
and will hold thine hand, and will keep thee,
and give thee for a covenant of the people, for a light of the Gentiles;

Isaiah 50:[6] I gave my back to the smiters,
and my cheeks to them that plucked off the hair:
I hid not my face from shame and spitting.

The movie is Wonderful. We are in a world-wide Spiritual
Revival right now! A woman told me she was in a "big" book
store and it was filled with teens wanting to buy
books on Jesus. This is only a tip of the iceberg
of what the Holy Spirit is going to do.