The theological nuances of what it means to say God laid aside his Goodhood (?) and became human is beyond the pale of my intellect. I think one of the "mysteries" of the gospel is what this means in a practical sense. In John, Christ's prayer is that he and God are one, and that true believers should also be one. But then, in the Garden, he prays, "Not my will, but thine, be done" (paraphrasing, from memory). If they are one, how can they have two different wills (as in NOT MY WILL, BY THINE...). Much of our acceptance of the message of Christ iwll be based on faith. But I agree with Popes John Paul II and Benedict XVI that reason is a necessary part of our religion. Both reason and faith are gifts of God that we use together to come to know God.

By the way, I like "The Passion" and I like the two Popes' analysis of the relationship between faith and reason, but I am not a Catholic.

quote:

Originally posted by Braling II:
Maybe Anti-Roman...

You're right - the Romans wanted to do everything they could to get the Jews to give up the notion of requiring blood from Jesus. Pilate really worked at that, to no avail. Then he gave in - the coward.

The film truly showed that the Jews killed Jesus, but it was only one faction of them. Remember, Jesus was an Essene.

Doug Spaulding:

Okay. Now I have to begin to take off the gloves.

No where does it say in scripture that the Jews killed Jesus.

But it does say You did... and I did!

I did see the Gibson film about Christ and there were good and bad things to be said about it.

quote:

Originally posted by dandelion:
...and bad things to be said about it.

Quite - like it was nearly unwatchable!

quote:

Originally posted by Nard Kordell:
No where does it say in scripture that the Jews killed Jesus.

John 19:

Then Pilate took Jesus and had him flogged. The soldiers twisted together a crown of thorns and put it on his head. They clothed him in a purple robe and went up to him again and again, saying, "Hail, king of the Jews!" And they struck him in the face.

Once more Pilate came out and said to the Jews, "Look, I am bringing him out to you to let you know that I find no basis for a charge against him." When Jesus came out wearing the crown of thorns and the purple robe, Pilate said to them, "Here is the man!"

As soon as the chief priests and their officials saw him, they shouted, "Crucify! Crucify!" But Pilate answered, "You take him and crucify him. As for me, I find no basis for a charge against him."

The Jews insisted, "We have a law, and according to that law he must die, because he claimed to be the Son of God."

When Pilate heard this, he was even more afraid, and he went back inside the palace. "Where do you come from?" he asked Jesus, but Jesus gave him no answer.

"Do you refuse to speak to me?" Pilate said. "Don't you realize I have power either to free you or to crucify you?"

Jesus answered, "You would have no power over me if it were not given to you from above. Therefore the one who handed me over to you is guilty of a greater sin."

From then on, Pilate tried to set Jesus free, but the Jews kept shouting, "If you let this man go, you are no friend of Caesar. Anyone who claims to be a king opposes Caesar."

When Pilate heard this, he brought Jesus out and sat down on the judge's seat at a place known as the Stone Pavement.

It was the day of Preparation of Passover Week, about the sixth hour. "Here is your king," Pilate said to the Jews.

But they shouted, "Take him away! Take him away! Crucify him!" "Shall I crucify your king?" Pilate asked. "We have no king but Caesar," the chief priests answered.

Finally Pilate handed him over to them to be crucified.

DOUG SPAULDING:
Nice try!

Again, that is like saying...

A poor Lithuanian is brought before the judge. And all the Lithuanians in the city cry out, Send him to jail.
And the judge relented, and handed him over to the wishes of the Lithuanians.

What you are trying to do is make it sound like the Jews were some outside peoples sending this "alien""non-Jew" to his death. THAT is the point I'm making.

Okay, you didn't answer the last part.

That was:
Were YOU, Doug Spaulding, in fact, two thousand years later, in any way whatsoever, responsible for the death of Jesus Christ?

[...for the atheists, the non-religious, the semi-religious, and those of other faiths, this may seem odd. Trust me. We WILL (eventually) get back to Bradbury topics right after these announcements!)

MR. DARK:
Jesus Christ is referred to in scripture as the second Adam, or the Last Adam. That means he had to do all the things the first Adam did, but had to do them all without failure. By doing so, he was the Last Adam. Also, he had to do everything as a human, relying on his Father. THIS was what we were suppose to do. Christ had to do exactly what was required from us, but, because of our fallen nature, were not able.

DANDELION:
What was the worse parts of Gibson's 'The Passion'?

This all pretty much goes along with the topic Forum heading, End of the World.

quote:

Originally posted by Nard Kordell:
Were YOU, Doug Spaulding, in fact, two thousand years later, in any way whatsoever, responsible for the death of Jesus Christ?

No - I have a problem believing in a God who requires a blood sacrifice of his innocent son. That's so Old Testament. Something is entirely wrong here. Today's Christianity is a thousand years behind the times, and it must change or die! Mind you, God doesn't change, but humankind's perception of God must.

Doug, I don't know what sort of religions belief you adhere to, but it ain't Christianity in no shape or form. You've done a very bad thing here. You've gone off and started a concept of God based on your own ideas. You can be brave now. But lookout! Bad Boy! Bad Boy! Whatcha going to do? Whatcha going to do when they come for you?

Anyone see “Charlotte’s Web”? Oh, sorry, that’s off topic. Anyone see a heavenly object or was that a Russian woman?--well, I guess they’re both heavenly objects. Are we still recovering from the last ice age or are we still messing up the environment? Is “The Passion of The Christ” a sublime portrayal or is it religious pornography? The Word according to Brady or the Word according to Gibson? Oh, the puzzles that come before us!

Bad dog! No biscuit!

Nard, if somebody don't get it, all the preaching and talking won't make a dent. God has to breathe the knowledge of scripture into their brains. It's not manufactured by the thought processes or by the will to figure it all out.

Chapter 31, Pornography? Reminds me of that Bible verse that goes something like this: Christ came into His own creation, and His own creation did not recognize Him. (Yeah, they killed him instead.)

By the way, the latest environmental hazard, said to be more dangerous than car exhausts,(you may have read it in the newspapers during the last month) is cow poop. Man, there must be a lot of cows in the world.

quote:

Originally posted by Nard Kordell:
You've done a very bad thing here. You've gone off and started a concept of God based on your own ideas.

Everyone's concept of God had better be based on their own ideas, or they're not thinking for themselves, just following the herd!

Jesus said that he would reveal the truth to those who truly seek him - for those with ears to hear. I'm a seeker, and I've got ears.

If you're not doing things according to your conscience (the Holy Spirit), then you're being very bad indeed!

What did the "heretic" Luther say against the Church of Rome with regards to his "heresies? "I cannot and I will not recant anything, for to go against conscience is neither right nor safe." It is legend that Luther said the words "Here I stand. I cannot do otherwise."

Here I stand.

quote:

Originally posted by Phil Knox:
Nard, if somebody don't get it, all the preaching and talking won't make a dent. God has to breathe the knowledge of scripture into their brains.

Brother Phil, you got that right!

quote:

Originally posted by Chapter 31:
Anyone see “Charlotte’s Web”? Oh, sorry, that’s off topic. Anyone see a heavenly object or was that a Russian woman?--well, I guess they’re both heavenly objects.

Russian women are most definately heavenly objects!

I saw Charlotte's Web! I thought it was wonderful - much better than the '73 version (which is also very good), one of the best pictures I've seen this year (right after Casino Royale, perhaps the best Bond film ever!)