Two More Passion Reviews

• From MCJ's Christopher Johnson:

  But if you know that you are a sinner and that what Christ did for you on the Cross is the only chance you have for life, then if you can see it(and I judge no one's faith based on whether they can watch The Passion or not), this will be the most terrible and most beautiful movie you will ever see. The Passion is the single greatest piece of Christian visual art anybody has ever made. Or is ever likely to make.

• From Mark Shea:
  

  First: Thanks, Mel, for having the great courage to make this film. It was a profoundly *manly* thing to do and has given us a portrayal of Jesus that is, in the very best sense of the word, the most masculine Jesus ever committed to celluloid. Interestingly, several men I have talked to have spoken of the film in that way as well. The sense of sheer *warfare* that permeates the film is overwhelming. And it is deeply and profoundly warfare with powers and principalities, not with flesh and blood. Jesus has no enmity to his human adversaries. He prays for them repeatedly. But his hostility to the devil is implacable, utter, and steely. Indeed, if I were the devil, I would quail in terror at what is, for Lucifer, the single most frightening moment in the film: the look of Resolve on the face of the Risen Christ in the final moments of the film. Satan has done his worst. Now it's Time to wrest the entire cosmos away from him.

Passion - A Review of Sorts

After seeing this film on Ash Wednesday, I'm finally getting to a point where I can write some sort of review. So here are some hopefully cohesive thoughts on this film. (If you're interested, here are some initial thoughts I had right after I saw it.)

Some have looked at this film as a potential evangelization tool. It seems to me that some want to judge the success of this film by whether it can fulfill some utilitarian purpose. I think this is a mistake. As Jared pointed out in his review, this film will mean the most to Christians. It is mostly for us.

I don't know how non-Christians will react to this film. Some may hate it and some may be moved. Some Christians even hate the film, but I think it may have to do with the fact they don't want to see a Christ who suffered and died for their sins. They don't want all that icky stuff about sin and Hell to even be brought up. They want a happy-go-lucky, hippie Jesus who did nothing more than go around telling people to "love each other" and "judge not".

Some reviewers have complained about a lack of "context" in this film - they say that it should have gone into more detail about Christ's ministry and teachings. I have always understood that the word "Passion" in this context refers exclusively to Christ's arrest, torture and crucifixion. So I didn't have a problem with the events covered in the movie.

I don't think it was Mel Gibson's job to spoon-feed, propagandize or evangelize the audience. He was making a work of art about something that has made a profound impact on his life. Some may agree with the way he expressed it, others may not. I don't think you are a "bad" Christian if you don't want to see this film. That's a decision everyone must make for himself.

In this film, Christ is fully God and fully man. And as a man, He suffers greatly. His suffering is shown unflinchingly. It's very hard to watch certain parts. You will weep. At one point in the film, Jesus says to His mother Mary, "See mother, I make all things new." (Where have I heard that before? Revelation 21:5.) The Resurrection scene makes it clear that He meant what He said, that it was not just some pathetic statement from a dying man. He is shown with wounds healed and all the blood and sweat gone. Only the nail marks are left. Because of the Resurrection, this film has a hopeful and - dare I say it - happy ending despite all the suffering portrayed.

As people were leaving, everyone was so quiet. Nobody knew quite what to say. Everyone was contemplative and reflective. There was no anger or hatred (except maybe at their own sin). If this film gets people to take their faith more seriously, and I believe it will, then it has done a good thing.

A few more thoughts (I don't think there's anything too spoilerish here):

• Aramaic is a really beautiful language. And I actually recognized some of the Latin from all that those high school Latin classes.


• I was really impressed with the portrayal of Simon of Cyrene, the man picked from the crowd to carry Christ's cross.


• I loved the little flashback of the carpenter Jesus making a table and playfully bantering with His mother.


• Another brief moment of comic relief: Barabbas' strutting around after being set free.

**sigh**

Completely depressing.

I'm sure those who object to a graphic depiction of Christ's crucifixion also strongly objected to war movies with graphic violence, like Saving Private Ryan*. Right? Right?

Movies that are gory and utterly sickening and empty, like Pulp Fiction**, have gotten all kinds of raves. But the portrayal of Christ's suffering is a scandal. Strange, isn't it?

*I have never seen this movie because of what I was told about the graphic violence. I didn't think I could handle it.

**I have seen this movie, much to my regret.

Update: Andrea Harris has some interesting things to say about this whole subject.

Update 2: More movie violence hypocrisy. (Via soundfury.)

Update 3: I'll let Dean Esmay have the last word on this subject.

Passion - Others' Thoughts

I'm still trying to think of what I want to say about The Passion of the Christ. I find myself completely inept at expressing my thoughts on this film. There are so many things swimming through my head, that every time I try to write it, it just comes out wrong. So I'm going to link to some other folks who are much better at this sort of thing.

• Jared at Thinklings has an excellent review with some additional thoughts on his solo blog. From his review:

  One question that may get lost in the Church's frenzy to virtually canonize this work is whether it is a good movie or not. Will we be swayed so much so by a reverent and faithful re-enactment of our Lord's sacrifice that we will ignore any of the film's artistic deficiencies? We probably would, but there's no need to worry -- there are few deficiencies of any kind in this film (although I will posit a few in a moment). Sacred story aside, this is an astounding artistic achievement, and Mel Gibson ought to honored as a true visionary and masterful director. (Not to mention that Jim Caviezel's somewhat necessarily understated performance is incredible in itself. It is as if he knows The Story needs no help from his trained actor's eloquence. He plays Jesus with a subtlety that proclaims loudly the humility and holiness of the Suffering Servant.)

• Ben Domenech reflects on how this film brings us back to Pilate's question: "What is truth?"

  In the end, the viewer is left in a position much like that of Pontius Pilate. Do we recognize the truth in what we've seen, or do we ignore it, wash our hands of it, move on? Pilate's question is asked legitimately and honestly in the film, without pride or intellectual sarcasm. "What is truth?" he asks - but he does not pause to see Christ's implicit answer - "I am."

• Joshua Claybourn contemplates Jesus' loneliness on the cross:

  Jesus could take the beatings, and as a viewer of The Passion, I could stand to watch it. Sure, I cringed and winced each time he was hit and spat on. But I was prepared for it all. Indeed, it was just as I had imagined. And although the wail, "My God!" was also as I had imagined, I still couldn't stand to watch it. At that moment Jesus was once again alone, just as He was in the garden, but this time the weight of all of humanity's sin was on his shoulders....alone. He was separated from God spiritually and physically. I hesitate to even type that out; it doesn't really do the notion justice. Out of this silent loneliness - an unfathomable loneliness - He cries, "Why? Why did you foresake me?"

• Peppermint Patty on wanting to turn away:

  I stayed, even when I felt I couldn't breathe, even when I felt sick, when I just closed my eyes and wept at the brutality. I stayed because Mary stayed. Through her eyes, through her love, through her strength, I could bear to stay and watch.

Update: I've been remiss in linking another Thinkling's thoughts on this movie. (Sorry about that!) Eric says the film is "A Somber Masterpiece":

The film was, admittedly, violent. I’d certainly say that it’s the most person-on-person violence I’ve ever seen in a film. I did, however, get the feeling that the violence was a bit overplayed in the media. I went in to the film expecting the absolute worst, and I was pleasantly surprised that I was able to move beyond the brutality, and concentrate on the divine sacrifice being played out before my watery eyes. One Thinkling I talked to -- who had seen the film before me -- said he thought the movie was like a two-hour episode of the opening scene in Saving Private Ryan. After viewing the film for myself, I’d say that comment was hyperbolic. Indeed, the movie is about The Passion of Jesus, and, as Roger Ebert said, it was rightfully named. Nevertheless, I thought the extra-biblical dialogue, flashbacks, and developments offered a refreshing break from the visual of Jesus’ suffering, while simultaneously offering fundamental background information.

A Passion Song

I think this song is appropriate today. I've put it in the blog radio on the sidebar.

You can hear this song in the blog radio, or by going here.

The Passion of the Christ - Some Quick Thoughts

I went to see the film, today. I'm still overwhelmed, and I have other things going on, so I will share some brief thoughts. I'm not very good at writing reviews, but I'll try to write some more on it later.

I'm putting these thoughts in the extended entry, so if you don't want to read "spoilers", you don't have to.

• There were news cameras and photographers at the theater. I tried to avoid them as much as possible.
• Weird event at the showing: as the movie was starting, with the shot of the moon, it suddenly stopped. Technical difficulties, apparently. After about 30 seconds to a minute, it started again.
• I didn't see any children in the theater - thank goodness, because it would not be appropriate. The youngest I saw was maybe early teens.
• The movie begins with Jesus' agonized prayer in Gethsemane. It ends with the stone rolled away, the empty wrappings, and the Resurrected Christ -- wounds healed, but with the nail mark on His hand.
• The film is not anti-Semitic. It is neither anti-Semitic nor anti-Roman. There are evil and good actions by both.
• Pilate's wife acts as his conscience. He doesn't listen. He is a cynical man, a politician who is trying to save his skin.
• The Roman soldiers have a mindless, giggling, thug-like brutality.
• Herod and his court are bizarre and decadent.
• The priests' brutality comes from desperation - they are desperate men trying to protect the status quo.
• Judas' inner torment and guilt were demonstrated very well, with the demonic children chasing him, with Satan lurking.
• Satan, represented as an androgynous woman, is a presence throughout. She haunts and tempts Christ at Gethsemane. She watches Christ as He goes through His agony. She screams in outrage after He dies on the cross.
• The significance of the foot stomping the snake becomes apparent at Gethsemane. I believe that scene with Satan was showing Christ's inner turmoil, His dread and fear. Christ's stomping of the snake, Satan's snake, was a resolution, as if He is saying, "Yes, I will go through with this."
• Yes, the movie is bloody, but this is not gratuitous. It is necessary...absolutely necessary. It's harrowing, but it should be. This is the unsanitized telling of Christ's crucifixion.
• Another presence throughout the film is Mary, Jesus' mother. Along with Christ's unimaginable agony, we see the unimaginable torment of a mother seeing her child die. After Jesus is taken down from the cross, He is laid across her. She has the saddest look in her eyes. Others have said that this look is saying, "Look what you've done." That is exactly what her haunting look said to me.
• Most of the events in this film are taken from the Gospels. Those that aren't are dramatizations that flesh out the story, or demonstrate an inner struggle. As pointed out by others, this is a work of art, not a documentary or propaganda.
• The film is well made and well acted.

That's all for now. I'll post some more on this later. It may even be tomorrow or this weekend before I can write more. I think I may have to keep from reading other people's thoughts on the film until I've had a chance to let everything sink in. Also, I don't think I can be patient with people nitpicking this film now that I've seen it. The nitpicking drove me crazy before, it'll really drive me crazy now.

Cruelty Isn't Funny

Via Mark Shea comes this:

Comedian Thinks Roadside Memorials Are Funny - Victim's Mother Doesn't Get Joke

Sheila Dyer didn't find Curless' site funny. She found a picture of her dead son's roadside memorial on the site, with the comedian smiling and waving next to it. She said it "took the wind" out of her.

Dozens of similar pictures are posted on Curless' site. The standup comic travels across the area, posing at the shrines and posting the pictures online. Curless apparently considers them to be tasteless tributes, often writing mock obituaries that lambast the way in which the victims died.

Pardon my language, but what an ass! Does he also entertain himself by going to cemeteries and chortling at grave markers? Does he also heckle funerals and flip off people in funeral processions?

Once, I was on my way to work after getting my car serviced earlier in the morning. I passed an accident on the way. One of the cars was covered with a blue tarp. Although I tried to think of other explanations, I knew the reason for the tarp...somebody was dead in that car.

I later found out that the woman killed in the accident was a young wife and mother on her way to her waitressing job. Apparently, she was killed when someone turned in front of her and she couldn't stop in time. This is something that could happen to any one of us. If I remember correctly, this happened just a couple of weeks before Christmas that year.

I think of the car with the blue tarp, and that young mother, every time I pass by that section of the highway. And yes, the last time I noticed, there was one of those memorials, or at least there was a bouquet of artificial flowers. When I pass by, I think of children growing up without their mother. I think of a husband who lost his wife.

There is also a memorial close to where I live. I know the man's name from seeing it on the memorial. It's a pretty dangerous place to try and make a left turn. There's a curve and the cars are usually coming pretty fast. I always go around another way, rather than try to make a left there. I always wonder if the man who died there was trying to make a left turn. Or if someone made a left turn in front of him.

Apparently, this "comedian" doesn't look at the people these memorials represent and think, "there but for the grace of God go I". His thought is to make fun of not only the memorials but the people who died.

Like Mark Shea, I'm not going to bother looking at the guy's site. (In fact, if anyone posts a link to it here, I will remove it, so don't even bother.) I'm not surprised that such casual cruelty exists, but it never fails to appall me.

Good book!

I need to buy a copy and read it again sometime...

You're Fahrenheit 451!
by Ray Bradbury
Having wanted to be a firefighter much of your life, you've recently discovered the job wasn't exactly what you were looking for. While ignorance seems like the result of oppression, it all began with people just wanting to be ignorant. As you realize more about the sordid world around you, you decide to watch less TV and work on your memorization skills. Though your memory will save you in the end, don't forget to practice running from dogs as well.
Take the Book Quiz at the Blue Pyramid.

(Via Right We Are.)

No more Passion posts...

...until I see the film on Ash Wednesday. So here's one last link and then a few more thoughts of my own.

Barbara Nicolosi - Preparing for The Passion (Via Open Book.)

Face it. We are a People who have grown lukewarm and distracted. We are the pathetic People of the Gospel warning who, ignoring the Signs of the Times - or maybe crestfallen, they both result in the same pastoral paralysis - are "busy about many things; eating and drinking, marrying and giving in marriage..." In the end, we should be defined by the conviction that "only One Thing is necessary." The Passion of the Christ reconnects us to that essential thread of our identity: We are a People of suffering, who follow the Man of Sorrows through this current 'Valley of Tears.' The Church is supposed to be "The Fellowship" that gets us through this sojourn, but our Sign is inescapably the Cross. The Cross is foolishness to the Diane Sawyers of human history and fury to the Dominic Crossan's. And so are we who claim it as our standard. [...]

So, sidestepping the debate of whether kids should see this film (probably not any real young ones - it's case by case with teenagers...), and whether it will cause a rash of pogroms (give me a frickin' break), and whether it is historically accurate (It ain't. It's ART. ART is the selection and distortion of details....Give me another frickin' break already!), I want to suggest a few ways, that the adult members of the People of God, can approach this film so as to receive the maximum spiritual benefit.

Barbara then goes on to make some good suggestions. And not all of them are just "Catholic stuff" either.

When I see the film, I'll post my take, if I can pull my thoughts together and be coherent. Now, I think we all need to remember that this film is (as Barbara pointed out) a work of art. It isn't supposed to be a replacement for Scripture. It isn't supposed to be propaganda. I admit that I've taken things to heart lately and have had trouble keeping things in perspective. I'm going to work on that before seeing this film, because I want to be in the proper state of mind and heart when I see it.

Message Boards

From another email: a message board for "heated debate" called Volconvo. I have to admit that I don't hang around message boards that much anymore...I just don't seem to have the time. Volconvo looks like a well-maintained board, although, true to its name, it does appear to get heated.

While I'm on this subject, let me also mention the Annoyed Army board. I have a lot of internet friends over there, and it's been far too long since I've dropped by. Their motto is "Conversation without Confrontation," and I think they do an excellent job at keeping things that way. It's always good to feel you can post your opinions without being flamed.

Political Satire

Received via email: The Satirical Political Beliefs Assessment Test. My favorite:

What is your vision for America?

CONS: Two Maine lobsters in every pot, and a BMW in every three-car garage.

LIBL: Clean air, clean water, clean energy, clean food, clean underwear, and dirty movies.

LBRT: Make America a place where government institutions don't micromanage people's lives.

COMM: Implement a fresh, new and revolutionary redesign of corporate hierarchies in America's businesses.

Southerner!

My results from this Yankee or Dixie Quiz:

83% (Dixie). Did you have any Confederate ancestors?

None that I know of, although it's possible on my Mom's side.

(Via Jen Speaks.)

Intemperate Rant Removed

Last night, my insomnia-addled brain produced an angry rant about perceived Christian-bashing in the blogosphere. I saved it as a draft and got a meager amount of sleep. I decided to spike it -- I removed it from this space and put this in its place.

Earlier, I also almost posted a rather sarcastic, angry rant in another blogger's comments, but was unable to because his comments box wasn't working.

Perhaps God is trying to tell me something.

Update: The post in question was this post at Arguing with Signposts. I posted a toned down comment to his post and he has responded to me here. I think I overreacted. My apologies to you, Bryan.

That does it!

I'm blocking search bots from spidering my archives directory. That means the only thing the search bots will be allowed to spider is my main page and my skins directory. The latest "gr4nny s3x" search from an obscene URL did it. I know this sounds draconian, but I feel I have no other choice.

In case you're interested, you can disallow search bots from spidering certain directories using a "robots.txt" file. You can even allow or disallow specific search bots. Here is a site that explains all about robots.txt. Here is another good site on the basics of configuring robots.txt. And here is a robots.txt validator.

It seems that it takes a while for the changes to take effect. Some time ago, I blocked search bots from my cgi-bin directory to prevent searches from serving up my trackback boxes (I know some people are annoyed by that aspect of MT). It took a couple of months for me to quit getting referrals from my trackback boxes.

I also blocked spidering of all my image directories. And I fixed my .htaccess so that people can't hotlink to my images. You can also fix your .htaccess file to forward people coming from certain URLs to other sites. For example, the perv searchers who are coming here from perv URLs I've found in my referrals get sent here instead. Here's a guide to configuring .htaccess.

Mel Gibson and His Father

Two completely different views:

• From Dale Price (via Mark Shea).
• From Steve H. at Little Tiny Lies.

My opinion: I have to go with Dale on this one. As I said earlier, you can't judge what someone thinks about things by what his parents think.

Radio Blog!

This post on Thinklings about favorite cover songs prodded me into finally getting this Radio.Blog thing going.

One cover song I really like is the band Self's cover of the Doobie Brothers' "What a Fool Believes". The song is from their CD Gizmodgery, an album in which the songs are performed entirely with toy instruments.

Anyway, I'm using this song and this blast from the past* to kick off my Radio.Blog!

*"Every Hour Here" from the CD Umbrella by The Innocence Mission.

Trailer Trash

This is funny, but don't laugh too much. The way things are going, most of America will probably look like that in about thirty years.

(Via Queen of Pith.)

Attack of the Dummies

Pardon me while I rant about dumb people who make life just a little crappier for everyone else...

• I'm tired of seeing knuckleheads and trolls run loose in comments boxes, dragging the discourse down until it's just a bunch of pointless, tar baby arguments. I wish the owners of those blogs would give these dorks a well-deserved foot in the backside, but I guess some bloggers are more "tolerant" than I am. Or maybe the amount of comments they get makes it too time-consuming.
• I see that BoycottMTV has had to get rid of their comments because of knuckleheaded trolls like those described above. What is it with these dummies? Does watching MTV cause you to lose IQ points or something? They seem to think that BoycottMTV is out to rob them of their precious MTV. From what I see, all that site is doing is encouraging people to stop watching and to block the channel from coming into their homes if they have children. I don't see any call for the government to ban MTV.
• Why is it that the spammers and scammers keep flooding our inboxes with their crap? Because stupid people keep responding to it, that's why. There are people falling for Nigerian email scams. There are people buying the stuff that spammers are selling. Apparently, there are enough dummies responding to the spam to make it worthwhile for the spammer. If you're dumb enough to fall for this junk, you deserve to get ripped off. However, the rest of us have to pay for your stupidity by putting up with spam.

There...I feel much better now...

Gibson Interviewed

Joshua Claybourn, Jen and Jared at Thinklings comment on it. I think Gibson did really well. I thought Diane Sawyer had a snotty attitude. Gibson came out looking very good and she came off as being sour and nasty.

As for trying to slime Mel Gibson because of his father's kooky beliefs...let me ask you something. My Mom likes to watch TBN and thinks Benny Hinn is just great. Does this mean I like TBN and Benny Hinn?*

*Here's a clue...I intensely dislike both.

Update: Ben Domenech has more and blogs4God has a nice roundup.

PC and Rooster Update

Well, my PC is about set up again. One thing that I've found out is this -- CD-Rs can be pretty darned unreliable. I'm glad I had certain things also backed up on zip disks.

The rooster is gone for now. Animal control was closed yesterday (of course). (I was off work yesterday, too.) I called this morning and they said that they couldn't send anyone out with a trap until next week because of the holiday this week (uh, guys, the holiday is over...whatever). They said I could pick a trap up from the animal shelter if I wanted. I asked them if they would come get the rooster if I could trap him myself in a pet carrier, and they said yes.

Well, to make a long story short, he was scared of the pet carrier and would not get in it, not even with oats leading up to it and inside it. So then I tried to catch him with a blanket. He got very upset and stalked off across my neighbor's yard and then out of sight. He was cursing me the whole way in chicken-talk. So, it's not my problem any more. If he comes back, I'll just wait until animal control can bring me a trap. I took a long lunch today to try and deal with this problem and I'm not taking any more time off because of that rooster.

BTW, my neighbors knew he was there and had put seed out for him. (I had put stuff out for him as well -- he really liked oats). They were as clueless as I was about what to do.

Freaks!

I'm seriously considering blocking all search engines from this site. I'm sick of seeing referrals for people coming here looking for "gr4nny s3x"*. I've also gotten people coming here looking for "n4ked f4t w0men eating"* and "fr33 1ncest sight archive"*. The past two days, I've gotten referrals from some "adult" search sites (one with a very disgusting URL). I'm going to make sure anyone coming here from those sites ends up here instead.

So, to anyone who has gotten here via those kinds of searches...please go away. There is nothing for you here.

*I'm obfuscating the search terms so as not to make things worse.

Please Stand By

I'm still busy setting my computer up again. Yes, I decided format the disk clean and reinstall everything...a whole new beginning for my PC. I started this project Friday evening. Things went much more smoothly than the last time I did this. I got the internet connection up and running with no problem. Now I'm just busy reinstalling programs and backed up files.

In other news, a rooster has taken up residence in my and a neighbor's front yards (on the sides of our houses; I don't think my neighbor is even aware of it). He has roosted on where our fences meet for two nights. I feel sorry for him because it's been cold, windy and rainy. He won't let anyone come near him...he runs under my neighbor's bushes. I put up a couple of signs saying, "FOUND ROOSTER", but no takers so far. I guess I'll have to call animal control Monday (or Tuesday if they are closed tomorrow, which is highly likely).

Blasts from the Past

Remember this and this? Well, go forth and check it out...

This looks like fun...

Via Dizzy Girl I found this: RADIO.BLOG.CLUB. When I get some time, I'm going to look into setting up my own little blog radio.

I tried this little experiment last week, and it didn't seem to generate much interest. (But I do appreciate the folks who did check it out.) I'm kind of skittish about this stuff because I don't want to get in trouble with my host. (This is why the experiment was not on this site.) I might be offering some more "surprises" in the near future, so stay tuned.

Empty V

Scott Ott of Scrappleface fame has a new site: BoycottMTV. Actually, I've been doing that for years.

I mean, what on earth does the "M" stand for now, anyway? When I channel surf and flip past MTV, I never see music videos. All I see is what looks like some crap "reality" show.

(Via MCJ.)

This is what you get...

...when you separate God from sexuality. Not only do you get degradation and promiscuity. You also get the kind of rationalizations that Camille Paglia puts forth here: the position that rape is not that big of a deal, no worse than getting beat up. Here is what I posted in Dean's comments in response to this:

• I generally like Camille Paglia, although I don't agree with her very much. The problem with her whole view is that she, being an atheist, completely leaves God out of the equation.
• It is stated in the Bible that when a man and woman have sex, they become "one flesh". This is true whether it's husband/wife, john/prostitute or rapist/victim. C.S. Lewis has pointed out that, "wherever a man lies with a woman, there, whether they like it or not, a transcendental relation is set up between them which must be eternally enjoyed or eternally endured." That's why rape is such a destructive thing. That's why it's preposterous and offensive to say it's no worse than "getting beat up".
• Humans are more that just rutting animals. We have souls. Again, Paglia's view completely ignores this.
• The whole conversation here seems to revolve around that whole "date rape" thing. And I agree that some women foolishly get themselves in bad situations. However, I have to ask, does all this "boys will be boys" stuff also apply to strangers attacking in a parking lot or breaking in a window? Should the victim in those situations comfort herself with knowing that sex is just a "dark force" and that she's really no worse off than if she were just beaten up?

Dean then posts again on the subject. He says this:

We need to stop treating rape like a religious matter, like a sacrosant event, like the most unimaginable possible violation.

Oh, but it is...for the very reasons I stated above. Yes, some people heal and end up okay. Others' lives are ruined forever. I think it depends on the person and the circumstances.

Advertising The Passion

Amy Welborn posted about a company's plan to replace its usual advertisement on the hood of a NASCAR car with an advertisement for The Passion of the Christ. Amy thought it was inappropriate. I said in the comments that I thought it sounded cheesy.

However, some in the comments section thought that those of us who objected were being snobs. I clarified that I have nothing against NASCAR or NASCAR fans, although it doesn't interest me personally. I just thought such an advertisement seemed undignified for this kind of movie.

Well, I don't think I'm a snob. Maybe I'm overly sensitive to things like this because the media loves to portray Christians as a bunch of tacky yokels*. This advertisement looks like something that snooty elitist types would seize upon to do just that, whether it's fair or not.

Maybe I worry too much about what other people think.

I still think it sounds cheesy, though.

*Not that Christians don't give them plenty of ammunition, unfortunately.

Update: Apparently, Mel Gibson approves. Well, it's his movie... **shrug**

Update 2: Okay...I'm having second thoughts about all this. Perhaps this ad is a way to be salt, the very kind of thing that I brought up in this earlier post. A commenter named Jack on Amy's blog made a good point when he said this:

I'm sick of hearing Christians complain about the culture but then get offended when someone works within the culture (and ours is most definitely heavily influenced by advertsing) to promote something that I think most of us would conclude is good. I mean, if the race car was advertising a crisis pregnancy center would we complain that that takes away from the virture of a crisis pregnancy center?

I can't really argue with that.

Update 3: Sorry about the first linked post being a dead link...the post was taken down.

I've got mixed feelings about this...

New York Times: Gibson to Delete a Scene in 'Passion'

A scene in the film, in which the Jewish high priest Caiaphas calls down a kind of curse on the Jewish people by declaring of the Crucifixion, "His blood be on us and on our children," will not be in the movie's final version, said the Gibson associate, who spoke on condition of anonymity.

The passage had been included in some versions of the film that were shown before select groups, mostly of priests and ministers.

"It didn't work in the focus screenings," the associate said. "Maybe it was thought to be too hurtful, or taken not in the way it was intended. It has been used terribly over the years."

Jewish leaders had warned that the passage from Matthew 27:25 was the historic source for many of the charges of deicide and Jews' collective guilt in the death of Jesus.

I can understand this, but it seems almost like expurgation of the Scripture. It seems like Gibson caved in to pressure a little bit. However, I doubt that this cut will ruin the movie or anything, if it really is as powerful as people are saying it is.

The way I see it, "His blood be on us and on our children" applies to all sinners, which of course is everyone who has ever lived.

(Via Thunderstruck.)

CSPI - The Food Police

Dodd links to this item that makes fun of those infamous food nannies, the Center for Science in the Public Interest. I'm sure you've heard of them. They're the group that occasionally puts out "shocking" reports about how certain foods are bad, bad, bad and should never, ever, ever be eaten by anyone. If they had their way, you wouldn't be allowed to eat anything but watercress and wheatgrass juice.

One time, I saw a guy from CSPI on some news show. I think he was talking about the evils of Chinese food...or maybe it was Italian food. He looked every bit as cranky and joyless as I would expect someone from this organization to be. I guess eating nothing but watercress and wheatgrass juice will do that to you.

Update: Check it out -- an anti-CSPI site: CSPIscam.

"Quick to anger and quick to speak..."

I really like this song...I find it somehow appropriate lately:

From the album Woven Hand. Interested in this song? Follow me...

On Being Salt

I'm currently reading this book: Roaring Lambs by Bob Briner (d. 1999). I thought I would bring this up because there is a pretty good discussion going on in this Thinklings post regarding what Jesus meant when He said, "You are the salt of the earth..."

Here's an excerpt from the second chapter of the book:

When Jesus said, "You are the salt of the earth," He was speaking to anyone then or now who accepts Him as Savior. It is one of the clearest declarations in Scripture from Jesus to His followers. Notice, He did not say for us to become salt. He said we are salt. Once we accept Him into our lives we automatically are the salt of the earth.

The second part of the verse gives us insight into what being salt should mean: "But if the salt loses its saltiness, how can it be made salty again? It is no longer good for anything, except to be thrown out and trampled by men." So, just being salt is not enough. In fact, if we are salt and are not being salty, isn't it fair to say that we are good-for-nothing Christians? That's what the Scripture says to me.

But the question is what do we do? How do we act as salt in our world? The answer lies in the way salt is used. Salt is both a seasoning and a preservative. It seasons by adding taste and enhancing flavor. It preserves by cleansing and retarding spoilage. In both cases, the salt must be brought in contact with is [sic] object for its power to be realized. Sitting in the shaker, it does no good. It might as well be thrown out.

Any thoughts on this?

I don't get out much...

As you can see from this visited state map:

create your own visited states map
or write about it on the open travel guide

Most of those state are from when my family moved from Florida to California and back again when I was a toddler. I was only in Georgia and Tennessee to change planes (when I traveled to and from Chicago, IL and Boston, MA, respectively), but I'm including them anyway so my map will look a little less pathetic.

A Question...

What is this "Super Bowl" that everyone keeps talking about?

Update: Oh, okay...it's yet another venue for pop stars to make shameless spectacles of themselves. Looks like a must-miss...

Update 2: Oh dear...it looks like a lot of folks are coming over from Dean's and expecting a discussion about boobs. Sorry to disappoint...maybe later I'll start a post about Michael Moore, Al Franken or one of the Dem candidates for President. Then we can have a boob discussion. Until then, here's a boob picture to keep you entertained.

More on Contraception

Remember this post from last week? (More input in the comments from my fellow Protestants would be appreciated -- hint, hint.) Well, here are a few more items on this subject to think about:

• Havdala at Doves and Pomegranates challenges the belief that contraception reduces respect for life and actually causes more abortions.
• Found via blogs4God: Weight of Glory posts about a pharmacist who has run into some legal hassles because he refused to fill a prescription for a contraceptive. It seems that, rather than just take her business elsewhere, the customer decided to be a real troublemaker about this. Here's an update on the pharmacist's situation.
• Also spotted on Weight of Glory: are hormonal contraceptives harming the environment?

Like I've said, I'm still on the fence on this subject.

On Supporting President Bush

Many have been complaining, and rightfully so, about Bush's spending increases. However, Dean Esmay makes a good point when he says:

In 2000, political conservatives backed George W. Bush, knowing perfectly well--if they were paying attention at all--that he was a moderate centrist, with a few positions to the right, a few to the left, and most of them right down the middle.

Now they're mad at him for governing exactly like that. [...]

Bush is a moderate centrist who is actually to the left of his own party on several major issues, guys. He ran his entire 2000 campaign that way, and now you're baffled and angered by it? Did you, you know, even bother to listen to what the man said when he was running for President, or look at any of his campaign literature?

Also, I agree with Neal Boortz when he says this:

BUT I'M MORE AFRAID OF THE ISLAMIC GOONS THAN I AM OF BUSH'S SPENDING

After all, it is conceivable that some future congress can actually do something to turn back the obscene spending increases we've seen out of George Bush. Not likely, but conceivable. It is far more likely, however, that if we see an appeasement-oriented Democrat take the reigns next year we'll see not only the same level of spending (if not worse) but a weakened posture against Islamic terrorism that will end up costing us lives .... thousands of lives, perhaps tens of thousands.

The bottom line here is that no matter how disgusting Bush's spending might be, no matter how offensive it might be to his core conservative base, there is no Democrat running in this race who would spend any less. Every single Democrat running for congress has a new-spending agenda that ranges from a low of $169 billion a year for Joseph Lieberman, to a high of $1.3 trillion a year for Al "The Liar" Sharpton. Now it's true that every single one of these candidates promises to raise taxes on the evil, ugly, nasty, putrid rich by overturning Bush's tax cuts, but that would only put about $135 billion back in the budget (and that's not counting any reduction in tax revenue caused by the resulting economic slowdown). So each and every Democratic candidate would increase the budget deficit. The frontrunner, John Kerry, would increase the deficit by about $130 billion a year.

So ... a classic damned if you do, damned if you don't situation here. Vote for Bush and you get runaway government spending, but you also get a strong defense and an aggressive war against the Islamic terrorists who want to kill as many Americans as they can, on our own soil if possible, and to destroy the American way of life. Vote for a Democrat and you get the same runaway government spending, but as an added bonus you get the appeasement of our enemy, instead of its destruction. Vote for Bush and you get some appeals court judges who actually have an appreciation of our Constitution .. plus runaway spending. Vote for a Democrat and you get activists judges who will use judicial fiat to enact the leftist agenda ... plus runaway spending.

I understand the strong impulse to punish Bush for his free spending ways by withholding your support in November. The price for sitting on hands could be huge. It could be another terrorist attack on American soil, this time with tens of thousands dead. It could be higher spending, a bigger deficit, and a slowed economy brought on by higher taxes. It could be the end of a dream of Social Security reform ... and the list goes on.

And then ... there's always the hope that in a second Bush term he could actually start dancing with who brung him.

Yep, that pretty much sums it up for me.

Gibson's Changes to The Passion

From the Christianity Today Weblog:

WND: Mel Gibson agrees to change 'Passion' film to combat anti-Semitism

Mr. Gibson listened intently, hung his head, and was deeply moved. "What can I do," he asked? I responded, "When the last scene ends go to black, scroll these words across the screen: "During the Roman occupation, 250,000 Jews were crucified by the Romans, but only One rose from the dead."

"By doing this," I said, "instead of feeding Jew-hatred, you will be fighting it. You will be communicating the suffering of all Jews under Roman occupation. By simply inserting this statement, those who desire to use the film to incite hatred toward Jews will be deterred.

"Those who might use the movie to incite Jew-hatred would know that they would be doing just the opposite – challenging the evil myths (that Jews are cursed for crucifying Christ and are Christ-killers) taught throughout history, and still today. In addition, 'The Passion of the Christ' would be the first Jesus film produced to fight anti-Semitism by telling the true story of Jewish suffering during the time of Christ."

Mel Gibson became very excited, and said, "Perfect! I will do it. Yes, I will do it. I needed something for that spot anyway. This is it. I will do it. Thank you."

I think that is an excellent change to make.