← Autodidact Archive · Original Dissent · Centinel
Thread ID: 9290 | Posts: 12 | Started: 2003-08-26
2003-08-26 06:47 | User Profile
From The Associated Press, available online at: [url=http://www.miami.com/mld/miamiherald/entertainment/6615048.htm]http://www.miami.com/mld/miamiherald/enter...ent/6615048.htm[/url]
Posted on Mon, Aug. 25, 2003
Mel Gibson 'Passion' Film Causing Uproar
RACHEL ZOLL Associated Press
The reasons evangelicals back Israel vary - The uproar over Mel Gibson's upcoming film on Jesus' death is testing the unusual partnership between American Jews and evangelical Protestants, who have recently become among the staunchest supporters of Israel.
Many conservative Christians have called "The Passion" the most powerful depiction they've seen of Christ's final hours. But groups such as the Anti-Defamation League have argued that the portrayal of Jews in the events leading to the crucifixion will promote anti-Semitism.
The Rev. Ted Haggard, head of the National Association of Evangelicals, upset some Jewish leaders by mentioning support for Israel in a recent statement defending Gibson's movie, set for release next year.
"There is a great deal of pressure on Israel right now and Christians seem to be a major source of support for Israel," Haggard said, after a private viewing of the film for top evangelicals. "For the Jewish leaders to risk alienating 2 billion Christians over a movie seems shortsighted."
Haggard said in an interview that his comments were not meant as a threat, but as a "word of caution" that Jewish complaints "may come across to some average people as them being against a movie about Jesus."
Abraham Foxman, national director of the Anti-Defamation League, called Haggard's comments "sad and offensive."
"You don't achieve interfaith relationships by being tolerant of anti-Semitism," Foxman said. "My understanding has always been that evangelical support of Israel is out of goodwill, good faith and is not conditioned as a quid pro quo on any issue."
An ADL representative saw a screening of the film in Houston, after which the group complained that the film portrays Jewish authorities and a Jewish mob as the ones responsible for the decision to execute Jesus. Gibson has said the movie is not anti-Semitic.
Haggard insisted that disagreement over the film would not destroy the Jewish-Christian alliance on Israel. The National Association of Evangelicals says it represents 51 conservative denominations with 43,000 congregations.
However, some leaders say the dispute is forcing both sides to confront the uncomfortable theological differences between them.
ranging from a sense of shared spiritual heritage to support for a Jewish homeland after the Holocaust.
The strongest pro-Israel sentiment comes from a subset of evangelicals known as Christian Zionists, who see the existence of modern Israel as a precondition for the second coming of Christ, which is to be preceded by a period of extreme violence and the death of millions, including Jews.
Many Jewish leaders have been uneasy about accepting this support. Even so, conservative Jews and evangelicals have been working together for Israel more closely than ever. Last year, American Christians donated $20 million to help Jews resettle in Israel, said Rabbi Yehiel Eckstein, president of the International Fellowship of Christians and Jews.
Eckstein, who has sought Christian support for Israel for 25 years, agreed that Haggard's remarks "would confirm for a lot of Jews their suspicion that there is a quid pro quo." But he argued the ties between Christians and Jews over Israel are so strong, "it's not even going to register on the radar screen. It's not even going to be a blip."
Dave Blewett, president of the National Christian Leadership Conference for Israel, disagreed. He said that until the recent flap over the movie, Jews troubled by working with evangelicals had concluded they needed support for Israel so they would deal with religious disagreements later.
"Well, it's all coming up now," Blewett said.
The executive committee of his organization, which represents evangelicals, mainline Protestants and Roman Catholics, plans to discuss fallout from the movie at its meeting in October.
Foxman said he has already received calls from Jews who had opposed working with evangelicals. They are pointing to Haggard's remarks as evidence that the partnership is unworkable.
But Haggard said Jewish leaders are the ones making relations more difficult by focusing so intensely on Gibson's film.
"I don't think that Christian leaders are going to compromise on their support of Israel no matter what, certainly not over their like or dislike of a movie," he said. But, he added, "if the impression is that Jewish leaders are against the (crucifixion) story being told, then that's not helpful to us."
ON THE NET
National Association of Evangelicals: [url=http://www.nae.net/]http://www.nae.net/[/url]
Anti-Defamation League: [url=http://www.adl.org/adl.asp]http://www.adl.org/adl.asp[/url]
2003-08-26 09:57 | User Profile
**Abraham Foxman, national director of the Anti-Defamation League, called Haggard's comments "sad and offensive."
"You don't achieve interfaith relationships by being tolerant of anti-Semitism," Foxman said. [u]"My understanding has always been that evangelical support of Israel is out of goodwill, good faith and is not conditioned as a quid pro quo on any issue."[/u]
**
My understanding is different. I see these idiotic "christian"zionists as showing good will, ect. while Foxman continues to spit in their faces. One day a number of them will realize that isn't dew.
Foxman said he has already received calls from Jews who had opposed working with evangelicals. They are pointing to Haggard's remarks as evidence that the partnership is unworkable.
One can hope that this alliance from hell may be broken up before too much longer.
2003-08-26 12:44 | User Profile
THE ALLIANCE, 2012
Suddenly, a gunshot rings out. Major Ralph Reed crumples to the hangar floor, dropping the telephone as he falls.
ATTORNEY GENERAL BUSTAMENTE: Round up the usual suspects!
ABE FOXMAN: Cruz, I think this is the beginning of a beautiful friendship.
(They exit as the static of white apathy wafts over the swelling soundtrack...)
2003-08-26 16:07 | User Profile
"There is a great deal of pressure on Israel right now and Christians seem to be a major source of support for Israel," Haggard said, after a private viewing of the film for top evangelicals. "For the Jewish leaders to risk alienating 2 billion Christians over a movie seems shortsighted."
Well, bravo to Haggard! But, I suppose he can kiss the TV contracts, Gulfstream bizjet and all-expenses-paid trips to the Holy Land goodbye.
Every little step in the right direction is a net positive, and the more Haggards that come forward, the greater chance more of the flock will see the light and fall away from the Falwells and Robertsons as the hucksters and whores that they are.
This movie flap, combined with the usual suspects' whining and posturing over the 10 Commandments monument in Alabama, has the makings of tectonic shifts in the political landscape, so in that regard, go Abie! Go Morris! Keep pushing.
2003-09-01 10:00 | User Profile
Mel Gibson can't even get his pals at 20th Century Fox Studios to distribute his graphic and bloody movie about the last hours of Jesus Christ's life.ÃÂ Fox, which has a joint production deal with Icon, had the first option to distribute the controversial movie. But the studio has decided to pass**, a spokesman for News Corp said yesterday.
"Fox wouldn't be involved," said the spokesman.
New York Jewish leaders who rallied outside News Corp.'s Sixth Ave. office building yesterday cheered when Assemblyman Dov Hikind revealed that Fox was out.
Hikind warned other movie companies that "they should not distribute this film. This is unhealthy for Jews all over the world."
Several protesters holding signs that said "The Passion" was a "Lethal Weapon to Jews," worried that audiences would believe that Jews were to blame for the Crucifixion, and that misconceptions would lead to violence.
Shulamit Hawtof, a Jewish administrative assistant from Borough Park, Brooklyn, didn't even want the movie go direct to video."I would like to see it buried, frankly," she said. **
Next line of attack for Jews 'n' their shabs: "graphic and bloody movie". It's a splatter movie! Maybe they could call it EASTER SUNDAY ("the night HE came back!....")
** Michael Hoffman: *What Gibson's critics on the Right seem to have forgotten is that Auschwitz has replaced Calvary as the central ontological event of Western history precisely because there has been so much celluloid devoted to the inmates of Auschwitz, and little or nothing concerning the horrors the Son of God endured on the Cross. On this basis alone, the ADL and the rabbis will despise this film, which, contrary to the statements of those wishing to curry favor with the Money Power, does not whitewash or minimize the Judaic role in deicide; it's just not the focus of the movie.
Comments by timid Gibson-supporters suggesting that he shows the Romans in a worse light than Jews, or that the movie "pays tribute to Judaism" are spoken out of fear of The Lobby. The fact is the ADL dishonorably attacked Gibson and his octogenarian father with the usual contemptuous smear tactics, which have deeply offended Mel. As a result, he's refusing to screen his film for ADL chairman Abraham Foxman and other blind haters like him. This says far more about Gibson's mettle than statements by kosher-conservatives seeking to defend him by currying favor with the Master Race.*
William Donohue, president of the Catholic League:
Who does the Crucifixion? It's all the Romans!**
A few weeks ago, I wrote:
From the day I heard this thing was for real (ie, principal photography completed, rough cut in previews) I've never believed this film will be released theatrically...What Mel has in his favor (that would have killed this project via crib-death a decade ago) is a thriving pay-per-view and DVD market. DVD alone is sufficiently lucrative to make a theatrical engagement unnecessary to turn a profit, given a reasonably moderate below-the-line budget......religion in America has proven to be a shopping-channel phenomenon anyway, so a campaign of call-and-order-THE-PASSION-today-and-get-this-beautiful-Jew-throwing-a-rock-at-our-Lord-lithograph-absolutely-FREE! could actually work. Mel, having a built-in audience Shecky Spielberg can only dream of, could do an end-run around the major theater chains, release his final cut and turn a profit.
...and I took some heat for it! Well, now we see that THE PASSION's chances for theatrical release are slim and none. Hook-nosed harpy Shulamit Hawtof (and how'd you like to snuggle next to someone named 'Shulamit Hawtof'?) has now let the cat out of the bag that killing major video/DVD distribution is the next to-do on Team Shmuel's little checklist. Now suddenly my laughed-at prediction that Mel's movie will end up being hawked on TBN infomercials (complete with 800 number and 'call-before-midnight-tonight' premiums) is...ummm...not quite so hatefully irreverent, eh?
Sorry, Jesus fans: [u]you're not getting your movie[/u]. And if you do eventually end up with a VHS or keep-case DVD of something called THE PASSION, it will be in a cut, and re-cut, and new-scenes-added, and featuring-an-introduction-by-Generic-Prominent-Jew, version.
But look on the bright side: now there'll be no turning back. Like it or not, you'll have to start Naming the Jew. If only to defend your Saviour's good name.
2003-09-01 12:17 | User Profile
My attitude towards actors is they're all just salesman, nothing more, and all their awards are just salesmanship awards, and the product they sell is the Jewish Agenda. Mel wanted to be something more and now the pink slip is being delivered.
2003-09-02 03:38 | User Profile
Il Ragno:
Next line of attack for Jews 'n' their shabs: "graphic and bloody movie". It's a splatter movie! Maybe they could call it EASTER SUNDAY ("the night HE came back!....")
Exactly. Anything to trivialize and secularize the subject matter, while diverting the mouthfoaming dispensationalists into alternate defense modes.
**A few weeks ago, I wrote:
From the day I heard this thing was for real (ie, principal photography completed, rough cut in previews) I've never believed this film will be released theatrically...What Mel has in his favor (that would have killed this project via crib-death a decade ago) is a thriving pay-per-view and DVD market. DVD alone is sufficiently lucrative to make a theatrical engagement unnecessary to turn a profit, given a reasonably moderate below-the-line budget......religion in America has proven to be a shopping-channel phenomenon anyway, so a campaign of call-and-order-THE-PASSION-today-and-get-this-beautiful-Jew-throwing-a-rock-at-our-Lord-lithograph-absolutely-FREE! could actually work. Mel, having a built-in audience Shecky Spielberg can only dream of, could do an end-run around the major theater chains, release his final cut and turn a profit.
...and I took some heat for it! Well, now we see that THE PASSION's chances for theatrical release are slim and none.ÃÂ Hook-nosed harpy Shulamit Hawtof (and how'd you like to snuggle next to someone named 'Shulamit Hawtof'?) has now let the cat out of the bag that killing major video/DVD distribution is the next to-do on Team Shmuel's little checklist. Now suddenly my laughed-at prediction that Mel's movie will end up being hawked on TBN infomercials (complete with 800 number and 'call-before-midnight-tonight' premiums) is...ummm...not quite so hatefully irreverent, eh?**
Bull.
You were given heat for your sweeping generalizations about Christianity, and if you had taken the trouble to review the replies to your original statement- or to link to the original thread, found [url=http://forum.originaldissent.com/index.php?act=ST&f=10&t=10260&hl=&view=findpost&p=56947] here[/url]- perhaps this would have been more easily recalled.
I do not and have not disagreed that Gibson might find it difficult or impossible to use typical distribution channels for his film. My disagreements in the earlier thread and in this one are with your finding opportunity in this controversy to disparage all Christians, and with your statements that equate all of Christianity in the U.S. with dispensationalist nonsense.
I find this divisive approach to be counterproductive, lazy, and dishonest.
2003-09-02 04:24 | User Profile
You're half-right (but only half-right). The line that drew fire was:
"Religion in America has proven to be a shopping-channel phenomenon anyway, so a campaign of call-and-order-THE-PASSION-today-and-get-this-beautiful-Jew-throwing-a-rock-at-our-Lord-lithograph-absolutely-FREE! could actually work."
But if that's how it plays out, then my point will have been proven. If Team Shulamit has its way (and does anyone credibly believe it won't?) and THE PASSION becomes something direct-marketed via television ads, one may safely assume that the major network & cable channels (who are all cross-owned by the same Tribal entities who run the theatrical distributors now rejecting the film) will similarly pass on running the ad campaign. That will by default leave only the religious stations, which are largely duchies dominated by Falwell, Robertson, Jan Crouch, Rod Parsley, etc.
The bone of contention to my comments was that I was unfairly analogizing American Christians with Falwell and Robertson et al. But these are the only manifestations of American Christianity with any sort of clout in a showdown with Jewish interests. If pushed, all the other (more dignified, less clownish) representatives of the Faith will timidly give in and back down - most prominently the Catholic Church (whom certain factions here at OD would love to convince us have proprietary rights to Christ Himself!) who periodically scuttle forth to read 'apologies' whenever prompted by Tel Aviv.
How can this be a 'sweeping generalization' when it's the plain-faced truth?
2003-09-02 04:45 | User Profile
**If pushed, all the other (more dignified, less clownish) representatives of the Faith will timidly give in and back down - most prominently the Catholic Church (whom certain factions here at OD would love to convince us have proprietary rights to Christ Himself!) who periodically scuttle forth to read 'apologies' whenever prompted by Tel Aviv.
How can this be a 'sweeping generalization' when it's the plain-faced truth? **
Because many of those "more dignified, less clownish" others aren't on the major media radar screens. They have nothing to "lose" by sticking to their principles. Then again, they largely don't have much use for the movies or television, either.
American Christianity doesn't begin and end with Falwell/Robertson, the Southern Baptists and Ashcroft & the Assemblies of God, ya know. Try leaving New York and getting over to "flyover country" sometime, particularly the northern plains.
2003-09-02 05:19 | User Profile
**Try leaving New York and getting over to "flyover country" sometime, particularly the northern plains. **
Sigh. This New York bashing's getting old, boys. Besides, what does my zip code have to do with my argument?
And pleeez don't give me that okeydoke of "mebbe you city fellers see it thet way, but out here where the 20th century never took, we don't have much use fer yer movin' pictures, nor yer 31 flavors of ice cream, nor yer tight toreador pants, neither."
You obviously have computers and the Internet out there in Frostbite Falls....therefopre it's a safe guess that you have all the modern diseases of moral ambiguity and conspicuous consumption. Like the talkies, and Elvis records.
2003-09-02 15:49 | User Profile
*Originally posted by il ragno@Sep 2 2003, 00:24 * ** The line that drew fire was:
"Religion in America has proven to be a shopping-channel phenomenon anyway, so a campaign of call-and-order-THE-PASSION-today-and-get-this-beautiful-Jew-throwing-a-rock-at-our-Lord-lithograph-absolutely-FREE! could actually work."
**
It was. And my response was:
Maybe, maybe not. I would tend to think that this stereotypical characterization of "true believers"- by implication, all Christians- as shopping-channel morons buying trinkets is more a Jewish/Hollywood/Frankfurt School product than a useful or truthful paradigm.
IR:
The bone of contention to my comments was that I was unfairly analogizing American Christians with Falwell and Robertson et al.
Not from me. Fairness isn't the issue. (BTW, we never allow our kids to respond to us or argue among themselves by saying "No fair".) What is at issue is the fact that Falwell, Robinson et al are useful idiots for those who wish to bring down all of Christianity. They continue the degradation and marginalization of the faith that is set in place by its enemies. I don't think you're being "unfair"- you're just repeating the standard anti-Christian propaganda line we've all been fed via TV and government intervention.
How can this be a 'sweeping generalization' when it's the plain-faced truth?
How can this be the "truth" when this epic showdown is currently mere conjecture? And why would one participate in the gloom/doom when Gibson has given us reason to celebrate? Remember, small acts of revolution. Perhaps more will be inspired and educated, regardless of the outcome for this film.
Sigh. This New York bashing's getting old, boys.
If you say "no fair" again, you're going to your room. Besides, this universal Christian bashing is not only ancient, it's got the Circle K Ranch seal of approval.
Maybe those tight pants are making you cranky...
2003-09-05 01:45 | User Profile
You will probably end up watching Mel Gibsons' film in trendy small independant theaters as no major distributor wants to touch it.