← Autodidact Archive · Original Dissent · Valley Forge
Thread ID: 12000 | Posts: 24 | Started: 2004-01-23
2004-01-23 01:19 | User Profile
Well, folks, with approximately one month to go until The Passion of Christ opens on 2000 American screens, it looks like Jews are finally rolling out the heavy artillery. Abe Foxman and a so-called "interfaith expert" from the American Jewish Committe have weighed in and concluded that The Passion is an "unambiguous portrayal of Jews as being responsible for the death of Jesus." In other words, the flim tells the truth. I hope every White Gentile in the world sees this movie.
The American Jewish Committee, which sent its interfaith experts to church screenings in Florida and Illinois, said the movie contained "unnecessary and destructive imagery of Jews" and "represents a disturbing setback" to relations between Jews and Christians.
Abraham Foxman, national director of the Anti-Defamation League, who has accused Gibson of holding anti-Semitic views, saw the film for the first time Wednesday night in Florida. He said it is an "unambiguous portrayal of Jews as being responsible for the death of Jesus."
Gibson, who directed, funded and co-scripted the film, has repeatedly denied that his movie maligns Jews. His spokesman, Alan Nierob, did not immediately respond to a request for comment Thursday.
Jewish groups have been worried that Gibson's script would ignore modern teaching by the Roman Catholic Church and many other denominations that Jews were not collectively responsible for Christ's death. The notion of Jewish guilt fueled anti-Semitism for centuries.
An article about the film in The New Yorker magazine last September indicated Gibson would keep a biblical verse out that upsets Jews and has been used to justify anti-Semitism: "His blood be on us and on our children!" (Matthew 27:25). That verse was not included in a version of the film The Associated Press saw last month.
[url]http://abcnews.go.com/wire/Entertainment/ap20040122_1849.html[/url]
2004-01-23 01:32 | User Profile
Just found this on VNN (instead of a Christian forum, I'm sad to say). Apparently the filthy kikes -- as you can see I am sick and damn tired of using polite euphemisms -- lied their way into the screening by posing as Christian pastors. What are the odss this detail doesn't make it into the national press?
Orlando, Florida-AP -- Leaders of two Jewish groups are giving negative reviews after posing as pastors so they could attend an advance screening of Mel Gibson's "The Passion of the Christ." Abraham Foxman of the Anti-Defamation League and Rabbis James Rudin and David Elcott of the American Jewish Committee paid their way into the Global Pastors Network conference in Florida.
They sat unnoticed Wednesday evening among thousands of pastors, who had been addressed earlier in the day by Gibson himself.
Foxman and the rabbis told The Washington Times they registered for the conference under a fabricated church name and signed a non-disclosure agreement regarding contents of the film.
But afterwards, they called reporters to complain that the movie includes a verse from the Gospels that historically has been used to blame the Jewish people for killing Jesus. In Matthew 27:25, Jews calling for Jesus' crucifixion say, "His blood be on us and on our children."
[url]http://www.walb.com/Global/story.asp?S=1613018[/url]
2004-01-23 11:43 | User Profile
You have to wonder why none of these pastors recognized ole honest Abe. Are they living in a cave somewhere? Christians should react to Foxman and the rest of the ADL vermin the way Dracula reacts to a cross. Of course, with[URL=http://www.markdankof.com/family_values.htm] Ralph Reed shilling for them[/URL] and [URL=http://www.fpp.co.uk/docs/ADL/Ashcroft_071103.html]John Ashcroft kissing their asses[/URL] it's understandable that some Christians are confused, but they need to start paying more attention to current events.
2004-01-23 13:14 | User Profile
They sat unnoticed Wednesday evening among thousands of pastors, who had been addressed earlier in the day by Gibson himself.
Too bad that some of us weren't working security for Mel. These clowns wouldn't have gotten to the ticket window.
Foxman and the rabbis told The Washington Times they registered for the conference under a fabricated church name and signed a non-disclosure agreement regarding contents of the film.
Once again showing themselves to be the master of the lie and fraudsters. It would be funny if Gibson brought charges against them for this.
2004-01-23 13:31 | User Profile
I thought Gibson has cut that from film? I hope this is true.
So use words right from Matthew is a form of anti-Semitism?
2004-01-23 17:42 | User Profile
[url]http://www.imdb.com[/url]
[QUOTE][B]Mel Gibson Says He Fears "The Worst Is Yet To Come"[/B]
A day after a Vatican official close to Pope John Paul II denied media reports that the pontiff had endorsed Mel Gibson's The Passion of the Christ, the BBC reported that Gibson told a religious group meeting in Orlando, FL, "I anticipate the worst is yet to come. I hope I'm wrong. I hope I'm wrong." It was not clear whether Gibson's remarks were in reaction to the Vatican's statement or whether he was forecasting trouble unrelated to the Vatican's position regarding the film. The Washington Times reported that those who viewed the film had to sign confidentiality statements to enter, with the exception of pastors who wished to support it. [/QUOTE]
[I]"I anticipate the worst is yet to come. I hope I'm wrong. I hope I'm wrong." It was not clear whether Gibson's remarks were in reaction to the Vatican's statement or whether he was forecasting trouble unrelated to the Vatican's position regarding the film. [/I]
Does it get more disingenuous than this? I doubt very much that Gibson was referring to the Vatican, but to the people who only last year gave the Vatican a taste of what terrible wonders their mighty media machine could wreak upon their enemies (and that's why "Catholic" today means "boyf**ker" to 7 out of 10 people not living in caves)...and who are doubtless helping to patch in this new 'yes he did/no he didn't' mixed signal now coming from the Holy See.
I look now for Team Shmuel to bring enormous pressure onto Rome to condemn this film even if only by distancing. Failing that, subtly revive - via the usual 'who, me?' channels - the old infighting between Catholics and Protestants once again in this country: cut this movie off at the knees by reminding America's Christian Zionist faithful that the Pope in Rome is more antiChrist than holy man, and a damned foreigner either way. Stay tuned.
2004-01-23 18:05 | User Profile
You know? I am not a "church" person but now thanks to the Jews I am going to see this muvie,,,,,,,, most of the times those people make something big out of nothing and that's what gets them in trouble. One good example of this happened yesterday in London, an American was talking about something and used the words "the Jewish lobby", well,,,,, a Jew stood up and said that that was antisemitic,,,,,, so, I guess that now they want to change the english language. I just love those people, in hell.
2004-01-23 18:21 | User Profile
[QUOTE=il ragno]Failing that, subtly revive - via the usual 'who, me?' channels - the old infighting between Catholics and Protestants once again in this country: cut this movie off at the knees by reminding America's Christian Zionist faithful that the Pope in Rome is more antiChrist than holy man, and a damned foreigner either way. Stay tuned.[/QUOTE]
So far to me, it seems that recent events surrounding this movie have highlighted a growing separation between the Pope and traditional Catholics more so than between evangelicals and papists.
2004-01-23 19:17 | User Profile
[QUOTE=Texas Dissident]So far to me, it seems that recent events surrounding this movie have highlighted a growing separation between the Pope and traditional Catholics more so than between evangelicals and papists.[/QUOTE]
Agreed. See [URL=http://forums.originaldissent.com/showthread.php?t=11920]this thread[/URL] for some of the commentary on and grassroot promotion of the film by evangelicals.
It seems that evangelicals are most likely not very informed on the fundamental differences between the Vatican and Gibson's traditionalists. Most evangelicals are also probably not aware of the significance of Vatican II, especially in how it changed the relationship between the church and Judaism. What stands out to me as an evangelical (though not a dispensationalist) is the mention in the above thread of minor, extremist organizations that oppose the film. They're talking about the ADL, of course; it's a group that could hardly be called "minor" in it's influence or "extreme" in it's ideology, if extreme is defined as an attitude outside the accepted standards of discourse. With everyone from Ralph Reed to Sheriff Andy Taylor partnering up with the ADL and spouting out it's message, the ADL has become as mainstream as Mr. Rogers of late.
These dispensationalists are being very careful not to step on any toes. The task at hand is to make them aware it's long past time to break out the hobnail boots and do some dancing.
2004-01-23 23:55 | User Profile
Well, Foxman really needs to get on the horn to whoever's running the Mossad these days, since it's readily apparent that he's bitten off a little more gristle than he can comfortably chew. I honestly don't think the Heebie-Jeebies expected such a big backlash over something so minor (after all, if the goys'll accept a full-blown shooting war for Israel, then what's the big stink over a movie?) There's even "anti-Semitic" posts about it over at FreeRepublic, for cripe's sake! (there's a thread on that around here somewhere). Of course, that's always been hyman's problem, never knowing when to back off. Now, I'll bet these A-holes have singlehandedly doubled the attendance the movie's going to get, all without Gibson spending dime one! I'm sure Foxman expected that Mel was just another bought Hollyweird stooge who strayed a little too far off the reservation and would immediately cringe and grovel once the gentle-reminder fax with the ADL letterhead oozed it's way into the Icon Productions office.
But, lo and behold, Gibson turns out to be one of those rarest of creatures in showbiz today: a man of prinicple! You can see how it flummoxes the Usual Suspects to no end. They truly haven't the first idea how to deal with him. I can almost fly-on-the-wall picture how the meetings in the ADL's conference room went after the first round of veiled hints went ignored or rebuffed.
*"Okay, this guy's playing hardball. What do you think his angle is? Is he holding out for some more financial backing for Icon or what?"
"You don't think he's actually serious about this, do you?"
"I don't know, but we've got to plug this one toot-sweet. Gibson's popular and doesn't need the money, and not past his prime like Brando, so going straight at him might not work too well. Hmmm. No doper kids to work through like the Godfather. Wait! I got it! We'll smear his old man as a looney and Nazi. The guy's got pretty loose lips. Do the usual hatchet on him and have the Post put it out in time for the weekend paper. Oh, and have Rachel over at the Anonymous Phone Call Division get the staff busy keeping the bastard's private line flooded. Hey, Steve! Doesn't your cousin work at Icon? Have her send that number over ASAP."
"The usual script?"
"No. I think we better go right for the throat on this one. If this SOB wants to mess with us, start off with the 'your kids aren't safe' spiel."
"I'm on it."*
Not even any of that kinda stuff has worked apparently, so the idiots are reduced to sneaking into private screenings dressed as clergy! I'm sure Foxman's gearing up for another campaign as we read and I'm equally sure Gibson knows it, too, judging by his above comments.
I smell a real knife-edge opportunity for 'em, though. If the Mossad could false-flag up some kind of multiply-lethal "incident" at the premiere of the flick, courtesy of the usual Wild Eyed Ay-rab Fanaticsâ⢠they could score a twofer: send a message to any other would-be troublemakers, as I'm sure it would be well-known in all the right circles exactly who was behind it AND get all the Christians currently peeved at the ADL and their partners-in-crime to focus their rage on a much more kosher target at the same time.
Of course, if they get caught like they did in Mexico City...
2004-01-26 04:00 | User Profile
[url]http://www.nydailynews.com/news/local/story/158082p-138791c.html[/url]
Against unbelievable odds, "The Passion of the Christ" is now shaping up to be the hottest ticket in the history of Hollywood when it finally hits theaters on Ash Wednesday, Feb. 25.
Jewish leaders have blasted the movie as anti-Semitic and warned it could ruin interfaith relations for decades. "He didn't miss any chance to malign Jews," said Abraham Foxman of the Anti-Defamation League.
But many church groups are planning massive pilgrimages to the theaters, buying up blocks of thousands of tickets.
And plenty of other New Yorkers, from the faithful to film geeks, are scrambling for tickets too to see what the fuss is about.
Forget "Return of the King," a new Lord is coming to town.
"This is really the highest demand we have seen this far in advance for group sales," said Dick Westerling of Regal Entertainment, a major cinema chain.
Regal has booked the flick at three of its Manhattan theaters. In Brooklyn, Norman Adie hopes to open the movie in two of his three Pavilion theaters.
"I'm hearing from my staff the interest is enormous," Adie said.Filling seats, at least during the first weekend, shouldn't be a problem because this is one religious film that's getting more buzz than a plague of locusts.
**The New York-based Catholic League bought 1,200 tickets at $9.75 apiece and will make them available to members for $5.
"We could probably sell 10,000 of these tickets," said Catholic League President William Donohue. "The reason I'm subsidizing it is to make a point - it's important to see this movie. And it's to drive Mel's critics crazy."**
It's a stunning turnaround for a movie that, just six months ago, looked to be as popular as Judas at the Last Supper.
Its lead actors - James Caviezel as Jesus and Monica Bellucci as Mary Magdalene - were relative unknowns compared with their superstar director.
The movie, which chronicles the last 12 hours of Christ's life, contains some of the most brutal violence ever shot, and the dialogue is in dead languages, Aramaic and Latin.
More damning, an interfaith group of scholars condemned an early script, arguing it blamed Jews for the Crucifixion and would spur anti-Semitism.
There were rumblings that Gibson's labor of love was a $25 million vanity project, something along the lines of John Travolta's "Battlefield Earth."
"Overall, nobody cared about it. They thought it was some fool's quest," said Harry Knowles, the film fan behind the Web site aintitcoolnews.com.
"But then Mel started showing it around to various special interest groups - politicos and religious groups - and word started leaking out about people being shook to their souls. [Now] we were talking about how powerful a film it was, as opposed to how much did it cost, how stupid it was."
In December, Knowles convinced Gibson to show the film at a 24-hour marathon in Austin, Tex.
"The audience was blown away," he said. "And those were film lovers, not necessarily the most religious people."
By October, Gibson had found a distributor, New York-based Newmarket Films, which decided to open "The Passion" on 2,000 screens nationwide. English subtitles were added.
Raves from the religious kept pouring in. In November, the Rev. Billy Graham said he was moved to tears. The next month came reports that Pope John Paul had given his blessing.
"It is as it was," the pontiff was quoted as saying. Still, controversy dogged the film.
Last week, the Pope's right-hand man denied the holy father had plugged the film. And Gibson's detractors' remain vocal.
"I find, with some exceptions, basically Christians who see it like it or feel a catharsis, and Jews who see it feel troubled," said Foxman.
Foxman isn't surprised by the demand for tickets, just uneasy. "He's selling it as a religious experience," he said of Gibson. "It's not just another movie. This is now becoming a Christian obligation."
2004-01-26 07:41 | User Profile
[QUOTE=Texas Dissident]So far to me, it seems that recent events surrounding this movie have highlighted a growing separation between the Pope and traditional Catholics more so than between evangelicals and papists.[/QUOTE]
Ditto, but keep in mind that Mel Gibson is (please correct me if I'm wrong) a member of the Society of Saint Pius X of Archbishop Levebvre, which is in formal schism with Rome since circa 1988. I don't know all the details of the problem, but basically this society never accepted the Novus Ordo Mass and stuck exclusively to the Latin Tridentine Mass. When push came to shove, they wouldn't comply with the requirement for reconciliation set by the Vatican (especially Cardinal Ratzinger :alucard: ) that they say the Novus Ordo Mass at least once and keep the Latin rite for their order.
I think that history has proved SSPX right in the main, although I will refrain from asserting any solid opinion as I'm not clear on all the details. Anyway, the point is that there are "traditional Catholics" like me who haven't broken with Rome, although certainly you're right that this whole affair has clarified the lines of conflict between the official Novus Ordo Church and the few traditionalists.
Walter
2004-01-26 07:42 | User Profile
Jewish leaders have blasted the movie as anti-Semitic and warned it could ruin interfaith relations for decades. "He didn't miss any chance to malign Jews," said Abraham Foxman of the Anti-Defamation League.
Go Mel!!! :thumbsup:
Walter
2004-01-26 09:07 | User Profile
Walter:
Mel is not a member of the society, though I believe his pop is an "empty seat"er as one might say from the Latin.
2004-01-26 14:09 | User Profile
[QUOTE=Campion Moore Boru]Walter:
Mel is not a member of the society, though I believe his pop is an "empty seat"er as one might say from the Latin.[/QUOTE]
So, Mel Gibson is a Catholic in good standing with Rome?
That wasn't my understanding of it, but that said he doesn't seem to talk about it much. CAn you refer me to something on that?
Let's all say a little prayer for our brother in Christ, Mel Gibson, as he faces persecution from the Pharisees for the sake of His Holy Name.
Walter
2004-01-27 03:49 | User Profile
Foxman is now demanding that Mel append an anti-"hate" message to the end of his film.
Gibson To Defend 'Passion' on ABC imageABC on Friday began promoting an interview with Mel Gibson about his controversial movie, The Passion of the Christ, due to air as a special edition of Primetime on Feb. 16, nine days before the scheduled opening of the film on Ash Wednesday. The promo referred to the movie as "one of the most controversial movies of all time." It did not indicate whether critics of the film would also be interviewed. Meanwhile, the head of the Anti-Defamation League has said that he wrote to Gibson asking him to append a message to the film, in which he would declare: "I've said I wanted to make a Passion of love. Blaming Jews for Christ's death would make this a Passion of hate." In an interview with Saturday's New York Times, Rabbi Abraham Foxman warned that it is especially urgent that Gibson moderate the message of his film "because it's now likely that more people will see his Passion in two months than saw all the Passion plays ever staged in the previous 2,000 years." However -- also on Friday -- William Donohue, head of the Catholic League, the largest Catholic lay organization in the U.S., defended Gibson's film and said that the "relentless campaign" by its critics will be "ultimately futile."
[url]http://us.imdb.com/StudioBrief/#1[/url]
2004-01-27 06:53 | User Profile
We all know Abe Foxman snuck into the preview disguising himself as a Catholic Priest.. need there be any more example of his rotten heart ? But Jesus can save even him.. and the moment you think He cannot, if you dare, you are not a Christian. I will not se this film, my reasons are told.. and Ive heard and seen about Mel deeply, but Mel is Hollywood . Mel is full of himself. God is not a whore.
2004-01-27 07:19 | User Profile
Mel may well be full of himself, I don't know. But even if he is he's got plenty of company in that regard with many a great evangelists throughout American history from George Whitefield to Billy Sunday. I firmly believe the Lord can use anyone according to His will.
Stay strong, Mr. Gibson. Don't let the anti-Christ Foxman and his minions sway you one iota. Our prayers are with you and your 'controversial' film and may it lengthen the ledger of names on the right side of that Book of Life.
2004-01-27 08:56 | User Profile
So with the all-important "His blood be upon us and our children!" quote? Yes! Apparently God has put steel in Gibson's spine. Maybe He too is sick of the filthy Sheckies and their eternal carping & lies.
Remain steadfast, Mel! Don't change a damn thing. Thus saith the Lord.
2004-02-05 04:16 | User Profile
What Abe Foxman an d all his network is, the clique included by the sins of lust..the Lord works in mysterious ways, he is present, and he can impress upon them.... they are just as miserable as a beggar spiritualy though they are ultr-rich and have satiated and experienced the fullness of Sin. Shame
2004-02-05 04:23 | User Profile
no reproduction of Jesus is acceptable Jesus was not san emmy winner Mel Gibson and all he begs for had misunderstood Blessed are those who have NOT SEEN YET BELIEVE When your God places your suffering on your table its too late Your attempt to portray the love of my life is sacrosanct and blasphemy The sooner you admit it the sooner you accept truth Mel.
2004-02-06 12:10 | User Profile
Some things are just obvious on their own
Sounds like the Jews are ganging up on Mel Gibson as they did to Jesus
What will they say in the future, they wern't the ones try to crucify Mel?
2004-02-06 12:53 | User Profile
[QUOTE=Exelsis_Deo] Your attempt to portray the love of my life is sacrosanct and blasphemy.[/QUOTE]
Nothing can be sacrosanct AND blasphemy to Christianity. They are opposites.
Feric
2004-02-06 13:44 | User Profile
[QUOTE=Exelsis_Deo]no reproduction of Jesus is acceptable Jesus was not san emmy winner Mel Gibson and all he begs for had misunderstood Blessed are those who have NOT SEEN YET BELIEVE When your God places your suffering on your table its too late Your attempt to portray the love of my life is sacrosanct and blasphemy The sooner you admit it the sooner you accept truth Mel.[/QUOTE]
Excelsis my friend, the Church long ago allowed the artistic representations of Our Lord. Icons in the East, statues in the West. These aren't idols because they're understood to be art - but in the case of icons holy art.
You miss the theology behind icons. The Church teaches and Scripture attests that God created man in His image (icon) and likeness. In the Fall we lost both the image and likeness of God, but in Christ all things were restored. We have God's image, we know what He looked like, in Christ. In the Eucharist we have His Substance.
Anyway, the Church always celebrated art of nearly every kind. The written word and music along with the plastic arts. The east felt more uncomfortable with statues than the Latin west, but that was under the influence of Arianism and its decendant, Islam. :osama:
The Muslims and the Jews reject holy art beyond the written word, because they don't have Christ Who Is the Word Itself, the Incarnation of God Himself. In Christ, all things are made new and are restored to the godliness that infused all things before the Fall. In Christ, all things are made new.
We have seen His face, Excelsis. We have His body. Surely we can, with fear and trembling, reveal His face to the world He redeemed.
Walter