NOTE: Order Passion evangelism materials today!

Early in this Passion Initiative, I stated that everyone would have their own agenda when it came to the film. And I think it is fitting to admit that we have our own agenda as well. But hopefully, our agenda is about His agenda.

As early as January 8th, I wrote to our Passion team and partners that different groups would try to make this film about side issues; issues like its celebrated Hollywood director, or his unique slant on Catholicism, or anti-Semitism, or artistry and violence, or biblical and historical accuracy, etc. But, I warned, we needed to make sure it was about Jesus and what He did to purchase our salvation. After all, that's what Mel Gibson wanted it to be about.

While Newsweek wrote a cover story on "Who Killed Jesus?", we were trying to prepare the Body of Christ to answer the more important question, "Who is Jesus?" And I believe that is God's agenda and therefore needs to be our agenda.

In the past month I have heard CNN's Aaron Brown and NBC's Stone Phillips tell their millions of viewers that the answer to that question is shrouded in mystery. Yet the apostle Peter's simple response of "You are the Christ, the Son of the living God," was commended by Jesus as being blessed and from the Father.

Amazing as it may seem, 2000 years after Peter got it right, so many are still getting it wrong. And when you think about it, people's reactions to the movie are more about how they answer the question "Who is Jesus?", than on whether this was a good piece of movie making.

I guess we should not be surprised. Jesus predicted that His true identity would divide people when He said "Do not think that I came to bring peace, but a sword" (Matthew 10:34). He goes on to say that family members would be divided on the question, so having whole ideological groups divided shouldn't be surprising.

What can be surprising is the apparent contradictions among those of the same persuasion. Consider these opinions.

Jewish Thoughts

Anti-Passion:

• "The concern is he has selectively taken the worst possible interpretation of the Passion narrative, which involves blaming Jews for the crime of deicide (killing God), and is transferring that blame to all Jews, including Jews alive today."
  ~ Mark Weitzman, Simon Wiesenthal Center
  
  
• "Mel Gibson’s unbiblical and a-historical account of the "crucifixion" story, The Passion of the Christ, through purposeful rewriting of the Christian Gospel mythos has, itself, become an anti-Semitic diatribe which, since it’s February 25, 2004 release resulted in hate crimes against Jews, Synagogues and Jewish Cemeteries in cities throughout the US." ~ Rabbi Tovia Singer, Israel National Radio

Pro Passion:

• "Gibson's film is an artistic vision and must be judged that way. It is an awesome artifact; an overpowering work. I can't remember being so affected by a film before. It is extremely painful to watch and yet the violence is never gratuitous. You never feel like you want to take your eyes off the screen. It is a wracking emotional journey, which never strays from its inspirational purpose. It is as close to a religious experience as art can get." ~ David Horowitz, Jewish Talk Show Host and Columnist
  
  
• "It is by a very large margin of advantage the most effective cinematic adaptation of a biblical story I have ever seen. And it's the kind of movie that's going to touch people." ~ Michael Medved, Film Critic and Synagogue President

Academic Scholarship

While the media almost exclusively points to "Christian scholars" who are critical of the film, such scholars usually come from one perspective and with a well defined agenda. There are of course the original group who read the bootleg script and demanded changes. But more recently, one media outlet actually took a scholar to the movie to get his reaction, resulting in this report.

• "With a shake of his head, Dr. Funk lets out a long, slow sigh and wearily declares, "Well. Gosh, I don't know. I'm just flabbergasted." Five minutes later, as we make our way out to the parking lot, he elaborates a bit, stating, "What in the world has Mel Gibson done in his life that he feels so guilty he has to make a God-awful film like that?" He adds, "Here's my bottom line: this movie will set Christianity back 500 years. I think it's that bad."

Dr Funk of course, is best known as the founder of the controversial Jesus Seminar. Under the guise of promoting "religious literacy", he and his associates attempt to eliminate the supernatural from the scripture.

What the media rarely tells us is that there are just as many conservative scholars in support of the film. One of these is Dr. Darrell Bock, Professor at Dallas Theological Seminary. He has praised the film since first seeing it last summer and recently said:

• "It's one of the most authentic portrayals of crucifixion we've had out of Hollywood. I think it's a very well-done movie. It's probably the best movie of its type produced by Hollywood."

Catholic Contradiction

For the height of contradiction, witness these two news items both from Monday, March 15.

• "In a joint statement, the Archbishop of Johannesburg Catholic diocese, Buti Joseph Tlhagale, and Chief Rabbi Cyril Harris, representing the Catholic and Jewish communities of South Africa, noted that the film's depiction of Jews and their alleged role in the death of Jesus was negative and could undermine the strong Jewish-Catholic working relationships in South Africa and fuel anti-Semitism."
  
  
• "Joaquín Navarro-Valls, the Director of the Holy See's Press Office, said yesterday that 'The Passion of the Christ' was 'a cinematographic transcription of the Gospels. If it were anti-Semitic, the Gospels would also be so.' He added that the Pope would have criticized the movie if it were bigoted against Jews, but, he declared, there is 'nothing anti-Semitic about it.' The Vatican spokesman made his comments in reply to Riccardo Di Segni, chief rabbi of Rome, who had asked the Vatican to formally condemn the Mel Gibson movie."

Are we, and even more significantly South African Catholics, to believe the Archbishop or the personal Press Secretary of Pope John Paul II?

A little closer to home, what about these offerings from two Canadian Roman Catholic priests.

• "Roman Catholic Biblical Scholar Father Gerald Caron, Professor of Biblical Studies at the Atlantic School of Theology in Halifax, calls Gibson's film "anti-Jewish, theologically flawed and historically dubious." In an interview with Rabbi Tovia Singer for Israel National Radio on the date of the film’s release, Dr. Caron stated "The teaching of contempt – hate of the Jews or hate of their religion – is part and parcel of Christian history. This is a Christian problem that we have to get rid of, and its not a movie like this one that will help us continue our efforts to get rid of the denigration and condemnation of our Jewish brothers and sisters."

Balance that statement with that of Fr. Thomas Rossica, National Director of World Youth Day 2002 in Toronto.

• "It is not at all anti-Semitic. The film neither exaggerates nor downplays the role of Jewish authorities and legal proceedings in the condemnation of Jesus....He incorporates elements from the four Passion narratives of Matthew, Mark, Luke and John, but remains faithful to the fundamental structure common to all four Gospel accounts."

Are we to believe the scholarly professor from Halifax or the pastoral executive from Toronto?

Protestant Disagreement

Protestants have embraced the film to a great extent. Evangelical leaders abound with endorsements for the film. Still there are some who criticize the medium, the message and the messenger. I have been forced to read objections to the film from Protestants based on its Catholic doctrine, Catholic crucifix, Catholic treatment of Mary, scriptural inaccuracies, indiscriminate and excessive violence, not enough of the resurrected Jesus, etc.

Against all this I just wonder how these critics can possibly think that Billy Graham, James Dobson, Rick Warren and thousands of others have got it all wrong in endorsing the film?

And of course there are those Protestants who condemn any depiction of Jesus as the creation of an idol. In their opinion, therefore, the film is a violation of the second commandment and a creation of the devil intended to deceive true believers and get them to worship a false Jesus. Without going into depth on this criticism, I would simply point out that this would also make the JESUS Film, accredited with helping millions of people to become Christians and probably the greatest evangelistic tool of history, a similar violation. I reject that thinking as both short-sighted and illogical.

A refreshing perspective on the film as a work of art and a work of God was offered by Phil Boatwright, movie reviewer for the Baptist Press. He wrote:

• "Since ancient times, artists have used their craft to entertain, motivate, educate and persuade. But ultimately, the purpose of art is to uplift the spirit of man. Mr. Gibson has used his art form to help those who only know the name of Jesus as an expletive to understand the nobility of Christ and the Passion of God. This Passion stirs the soul."

Time and space do not allow for other examples, but suffice to say that Eastern Orthodox officials, politicians, Hollywood insiders, movie reviewers, and main stream media types also disagree amongst themselves on various aspects of the film.

A Final Word

In summary, Jews disagree amongst themselves on whether the film is anti-Semitic. Scholars disagree on whether it is biblically and historically accurate. Most Catholics tend to like the film, but those Catholics who are in defiance of their leadership on other issues have no problem maintaining that position on the film as well.
And though respected evangelical leaders support the Passion as an outreach tool, self proclaimed Christians on either end of the spectrum bring their extreme biases with them in finding fault with Gibson's work.

What all this shows me is that a person's view of the film is in large measure affected by their personal agenda before seeing the film, and specifically their opinion of God, Jesus and the Bible.

The Passion of the Christ has helped me to see the beauty of the cross and the incredible gift of love expressed in Jesus' death for my sins. I have seen the film 15 times now. I love it. I wish everyone could appreciate it as much as I do, but I know that won't happen.

More importantly, I wish everyone could have the right answer to Jesus' question "Who do you say that I am?" The Passion Initiative was designed to help the Body of Christ provide answers to those searching for the right answer. Next week I'll share some of the stories of those finding answers. In the meantime, let's all lift up Jesus. Clearly there are many who still need to see, know and understand who He is.

Breaking News

• The film was #1 at the box office for the 3rd straight weekend with $32.1 million in gross receipts. This pushed its total to $264.5 million, surpassing My Big Fat Greek Wedding for the all time lead in Independent Films. It also became the highest grossing 'R' rated film of all time.
  
  
• It seems The Passion is having an effect on Hollywood. Michael Medved writes "Less than a week after the release of The Passion, a colorful ad covering two full pages appeared in USA TODAY and other national newspapers, announcing an ambitious film (scheduled for Christmas 2005) based on The Chronicles of Narnia: The Lion, the Witch and the Wardrobe written by the great Christian thinker, C.S. Lewis. The willingness of Walt Disney Pictures, newly partnered with Walden Media, to announce this undertaking so far in advance and in such splashy style surely relates to the astonishing ability of the Gibson film to draw wary moviegoers back to theaters."
  
  
• And others are trying to cash in on the religious-themed movie phenomenon. Yesterday I read the following: "Jesus Christ was a family man. He was married to Mary Magdalene and had several children, including a daughter named Sarah. Their descendants are alive today. This is the great secret uncovered in the course of Dan Brown's publishing phenomenon, The Da Vinci Code, a novel that has topped best-seller lists in the year since it was published and soon will be made into a movie by director Ron Howard."
  
  I recommend you don't see it.
  
  
• Finally, experts are saying Mel Gibson could personally earn between $300-700 million from the film. These same reports indicate he may give as much as $100 million to the church. It will be an awesome stewardship responsibility. I suggest you pray for him.

How will you be involved in the online ministry?
Click here for opportunities to tell others about Christ >>


Quick Links
Volunteer opportunities
Promotional material
Join the ShareTheLife.com prayer team
www.TheLife.com evangelistic website