Jump to content

passion of the christ


Sukhi
 Share

Recommended Posts

saw it wit ma closest friends, muslim homies, they didn't like it so much, and I agreed wit em.

I think the whole movie was about showing how much jesus suffered. That's it. They just show a guy being tortured for like 2 hours and it brings about emotions in people. Like Christians will be like: man look what he went through for us. I feel it was overly gratuitous, and was just meant to get people emotional over it, so they might become better Christians. I think they spent too little time actually teaching the message of Jesus, and more on his death. I know his death is important to Christians, but shouldn't what he lived for also be important. Personally I didn’t come out of there feeling, wow Jesus was a great man who spread the word of god; instead I felt: wow, that guy took a hell of a beating….

I think the Last Temptation of the Christ was much better.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Good movie.

Infernal Monk: "The Passion" is a very specific period segment of time, the few days leading up to Jesus' crucifixion. It is a point central to Christianity that Jesus suffered and died.

Not everyone understands all of the religions in the world. A Christian may wonder why Sikhs make a big deal out of the fact that 5 guys emerged from Guru Gobind Singh ji's tent on Baisakhi day...that does not make the day any less important.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

it made cry a lot too.

i think the movie made the jewish priests appear in a particularly negative light.

but having said that, a couple of things really hit home with me.

one of the things that i noticed was that intolerance and ignorance were leading factors that led to the events that ultimately helped end christ's life (similar to what happened to some of our own gurus). and today, we've got a similar environment religiously speaking where in the sikh community here in canada at least, people are VERY intolerant of other people's views. all you need to do is take a look at a couple of forums to see just how much we all feel the need to be right and subjugate anything and everything that moves to our "infallible" logic. we're all guilty of it. i'm guilty of it too when making these statements because i think i'm right in accusing people of being intolerant.

another thing i noticed was how christians seem to believe in free will and how that affects their perception of Judas. under the assumption that Judas acted out of free will, we come to the notion that Judas was a sinner and rightfully suffered.

but if we look at it from a slightly different perspective, one of Hukam, i think Judas was probably one of Christ's most beloved disciples because he was "destined" per se to betray Jesus. he had the heavy "responsibility" in a sense to deliver Jesus into the hands of the Jewish priests.

who in their right minds would want to give up their beloved saviour or Guru to his/her enemy?... nobody.

*sighs*

ok, i'm not making sense anymore. i'm a jumbalaya of thoughts today. exams. stresss... (i'm prolly gonna come back, read this and be like "what the hell...?!")

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest Javanmard

1. The movie is a Catholic Passion play, very well established tradition of the Catholic Church where, duringh the Holy week, the suffering of Christ is played by actors or local people.

2. It has the structure of the rosary, a meditative prayer in Catholicism focussing on the relation between Christ and the Holy Virgin, her joys and her pains.

3. All of the dialogues are based on the Gospels and if the Jewish priest look bad in the movie it's because that's the case in the Gospel as well.

4. I love the movie precisely it has stopped this whole sanitised and Protestant tendency within Catholic devotion: Jesus was tortured brutally and yes that means there was a lots of blood!!! Previous Jeus movies kind of showed Christ with one or two wounds and that's it. The Gospels clearly say that he was flogged 40 times with those hooked wipps and treated brutally by Roman soldiers.

5. The other reason why I like it is because of the language. Jesus was not European: he came from the Middle East and this should be a reminder to Christians that their roots are in the East. Also by keeping the languages to Aramaic, Hebrew and Latin, Mel Gibson clearly sent out this message: it is not God who should adapt to us but us who should submit to God. A message that applies to us as well: It is us who have to adapt to Sikhi NOT the opposite.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think the most beautifull part was when they first take jesus and mary comes to see him as they are taking him away. He is then tied down below in the dungen and mary walk around and feels the presense of her master/son below the ground and she kneels down lays her head on the ground and jesus looks up and feels her presence.....It was most beautifull....I think the relation between mary and Jesus was most Sacred, Precious and inspiring. It was just beautifull the love between those 2 was immense thru out the movie. Her inability to do anything, the helpless feeling was her shown in her pain, her tears.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

yeaaah... that was really nice too. in a very sad way i mean.

i think what totally killed me was the part when jesus is carryin the cross and mary's like "take me closer to him" and he's comin by, but he falls or whatever, and they sorta flashback to a time when jesus was a kid and he fell and mary ran and picked him up.

*sighs*

that bit made my mum shed a whole ton of tears too.

hey shaka laka baby, nice to see you around. did you notice that some of the aramaic words seemed eerily similar to hindi words? funkadelic. "maut" was one that i heard, methinks. of course i'm prolly wrong.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

well to put it in a nutshell, the theory says that the 3 wise men were buddhists from india/tibet who came to pay their respects... they also took away jesus when he was around 14/15 years old to india & taught him about buddhism. he stayed there for around 15 years before returning & spreading the word. later when he was crucified, he actually survived & then fled to kashmir where spent his remaining days preaching.

not sure what evidence the guy had to back up his claims though... other than a tomb in kashmir with the footprints of the buried saint having markings that may have been caused by a nail through them.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...