Mel Gibson Holocaust denier???

[Jedi Master Carr]

I pray this is load of crap or I think I might go out and burn everything Mel Gibson film I have

A New York Times Sunday magazine article due to appear on March 9 will report that The Passion, a movie about the last 12 hours in Christ's life being produced and directed by Mel Gibson, will reflect Gibson's ultra-traditional Catholicism. Christopher Noxon, who wrote the piece, interviewed the star's father, Hutton Gibson, who has called Pope John Paul II "Garrulous Karolus, the Koran kisser" and has denied that the Holocaust ever happened. The Times article says that the movie may revive the charge that the Jews killed Christ. Gary Giuffré, a friend of the actor who holds his traditionalist beliefs, told the Times that the $25-million movie, which Gibson is personally financing, will "lay the blame for the death of Christ where it belongs." In an interview with today's New York Post, Noxon said that Gibson, who recently attacked the article on Bill O'Reilly's program, "has played hardball with me the whole time, and gone ballistic."

He is denying it in other ppapers but if thtat is true than the people might turn against him.

[ReaperFett]

doesnt it say his FATHER thought it?

[Jedi Master Carr]

Well I am not sure either it does or the article is badly written I got it from IMDB.com, might have to read the article to really find for sure. If it is just his father, I pray Gibson doesn't share the same sentiment.

[Jedieb]

Gibson is a devout Catholic. I believe his favorite commandment is;
Thou shal not kill.... except on a movie screen where it can be glamorized, desensitized, and trivialized all the while enriching your bank account.
;)

[JMK]

That would sound about right.

[imported_Grev Drasen]

Even if it were true I don't see how that would affect how good of an actor he is. You'd be willing to trash all your current Gibson films and turn your back on the upcoming ones, just because of something he believes in?

Ah well, your loss I guess.

[Darth Viscera]

Originally posted by Grev Drasen
Even if it were true I don't see how that would affect how good of an actor he is. You'd be willing to trash all your current Gibson films and turn your back on the upcoming ones, just because of something he believes in?

Ah well, your loss I guess.

An immoral person can only be so entertaining. I hope he doesn't share his father's beliefs.

[JediBoricua]

Gibson goes a bit too far with his catholicism though, I mean he is against the Vatican Council of 1962 where they allowed each dioscesis to conduct mass in the native language of the country, not in latin. A bit dense, Gibson's view is, IMO.

[Hadrian Invicta]

Holocaust = real

That's a no-brainer

And what's wrong with saying that the Pharisee's and Sadducee's killed Christ. Last time I read the bible and the history books it was them who demanded his execution to the Roman Govenor Pilate, who washed his hands of the ordeal and told them he was there's for the taking, after which they Crucified him.

Now if your not Christian and you don't believe that, it's your business, but that's the way the history books and the Bible tells it, so if your Christian you prolly should follow that thinking as well.

[Loki Ahmrah]

Laying the blame for the death of Christ? As a Catholic, I don't agree with that statement, not one jot.

No-one is to blame for it. The key factor in the crucifixion of Christ was that it was a death he freely accepted. It makes me ill to see this sort of perversion of faith; using it as a tool for conflict and controversy as opposed to the path to peace.

[Diego Van Derveld]

Both the Romans and Jews were at fault, but neither totally. The Romans did the dirty work. The Jews merely demanded his death. They were expecting Christ to be their physical king, and to lead them in all these mundane affairs. That wasn't the kind of leadership He offered them, and they were angry because He wanted to lead them in the one area they did not wish to be led. Its not an anti-semitic slant...its just the way things happened. A different time, a different place.

[Admiral Lebron]

I've never heard anything about him in line to become king... Now it is thesable, as one of the requirements to be the messiah does include being from the house of solomon... but I've never heard of him in line to be a King.

[imported_Akrabbim]

BTW, the commandment is "Thou shalt not commit murder", not "thou shalt not kill." Big difference. Also, He was to be of the order of Melchizadek, the only priest-king ever recorded in the Bible, and as well he was to be of the house of David. No one said He was to be a physical king, but most of the Jews thought so because of that.

And I seriously doubt Mel Gibson believes that about the Holocaust. I'd be willing to bet it's a rumor started to try to get him to stop making "The Passion". Funny... you can talk about Christ being falliable, homosexual, unreal, anything you like, but make a movie showing Him to be the Son of God, and people come out of the woodwork trying to stop it...

[Admiral Lebron]

Not that I've heard of. From what I've read of the Rabbi's is that he was a 'radical' in a sense and thats why Jews urged the Romans to kill him.

[Diego Van Derveld]

One week prior, they paraded Him into Jerusalem on palm fronds. They wanted something from Him big-time, and He was all about something else entirely. That's why He was killed.

[Jedi Master Carr]

It could be false he has come out and denied which is good, heck if anything this could be publicity for the movie. About the death Christ, I have always felt the Romans were more at fault sure the Phariseses mentioned what Jesus was doing, my guess is the Romans saw this as treason and went and grabbed. I don't think Pilate washed his hands that his insane, Pilate was known as a brutal man, who did not give mercy. My feeling has always been that the writers of the gospels decided to change that one section to make Rome look better for good reason, they didn't want to be killed themselves.

[Diego Van Derveld]

I wholly disagree. If they didn't want to be killed, they were in the wrong profession. The disciples were all martyred, every one of them. You don't give the Jewish tribes enough credit for angry zeal. That's precisely where the word Zealot comes from...a sect of the Jews. Hell, its precisely at this point in time that Israel is practically torn apart by a massive revolt against the Romans. I can't remember if its 50 years before or after Christ, but that's the whole incident at Masada, with the incredible siege and mass suicide of the Jewish resistance. The Jews weren't all grins and kisses. They even had a sect of them whose name was derived from very small, thin daggers that they would JAM INTO THEIR ENEMIES BRAINS...even other Jews who they deemed "not as extreme" as they were.

[Jinn Fizz]

It always upsets me greatly when I hear someone attempt to justify their anti-Semitism with the excuse, "The Jews crucified Christ." It seems as if they always fail to see the flaw in their so-called "reasoning"...Jesus Himself was a Jew.

I seriously, seriously doubt that Mel Gibson is a Holocaust revisionist. The article I saw at Yahoo only mentions Holocaust revisionism in relation to Gibson's father, and suggests that they have many, many differences of opinion.

I myself am a Catholic, and I have to admire Gibson for holding such traditional views, even though I might not agree with all those views myself. It's a gutsy thing to be so conservative in liberal Hollywood.

And getting back to the idea of blame in the crucifixion of Christ...I agree with Loki, fixing blame has no place in Christianity. The only way humankind was to be saved was through the sacrifice of the Messiah, and yes, through the willing acceptance of that sacrifice by the Messiah. Jesus could have easily avoided crucifixion by fleeing Israel, but He recognized and accepted that He had to die in order to save His children.

I have to say, I'm intrigued by the idea of Gibson's movie, and will probably make an effort to see it someday.

[Diego Van Derveld]

Its not a total indictment of anyone. They were all to blame, and yes, Jesus could have avoided the punishment by leaving. He refused. Jew and Roman, Hebrew and Gentile alike have the blood of Jesus on their hands. He died for us, because of our sins. I think its quite symbolic that both sides had a hand to play in setting up the cross, but ultimately, it was Jesus's choice to die upon it.

[Darth Viscera]

Don't forget that his father is 85 years old, and quite possibly a nutball.

[Figrin D'an]

Originally posted by Jinn Fizz
And getting back to the idea of blame in the crucifixion of Christ...I agree with Loki, fixing blame has no place in Christianity. The only way humankind was to be saved was through the sacrifice of the Messiah, and yes, through the willing acceptance of that sacrifice by the Messiah. Jesus could have easily avoided crucifixion by fleeing Israel, but He recognized and accepted that He had to die in order to save His children.


That's fine, from the aspect of Christianity as a faith. But, if you want to look at the events from a purely historical point of view, its perfectly valid to study the specifics behind the death of Jesus of Nazareth, including those that may have been responsible and the motivations they carried.

[Jedi Master Carr]

Yeah but not all the Jews were Zealots, that was just one sect, if they all were Zealots the Romans would have killed them all. It was the Pharasees who wanted to comply with the Roman rule and that is why they probably turned Jesus in, they didn't want any trouble they were scared of the Romans and for good reason, the Romans troops leveled cities they were too dominant and you didn't mess with their power.
Also the Zealot Resitance happened in 60 AD the first one it is when the templed was destroyed. The second one occured I think 116 I am not certain of the exact date there, under the rule of Trajan, it may not have concluded until Hadrian's rule though, that was the final straw the Romans kicked the Jews out of Israel and they didn't really return until the 1930's. But only the Pharasees survived the other three sects perished in this rebellion , the Pharasees were the only smart ones.

As far as the gospel writers well a lot of historians have said that Luke was using his gospel to apease the Romans trying to show that the Christians were traitors to the state and were good citizens. I am sure these men waned their religion to survive they probably thought if they showed the Romans as the bad guys that it would destroy their religion. It worked for a while the Romans didn't mess with them until Domitian, and that was because he claimed he was a god and wanted everybody to bow down to him, well the Christians would do that so he started to have them executed it is then that it becomes a tradition for future Roman Emperors.

[Jinn Fizz]

Charley, you put it quite rightly, that everyone had a hand in it. Even Peter had a part of it, with his denial of Christ.

I would like to think that there is a difference between "responsibility" and "blame." I don't think the words are necessarily completely interchangeable. Just my point of view :).

And in the end, it could be said that Jesus stopped any finger-pointing before the event was even at an end, when He prayed, "Father, forgive them, for they know not what they do."

So much of it had been foretold in the Old Testament...the Son of Man was destined to appear, and also destined to make the ultimate sacrifice to save mankind. In some ways, the circumstances surrounding the sacrifice were not the vital issue; it was the sacrifice itself that was vital. And without the sacrifice, there would have been no Resurrection.

For that time period, the circumstances made sense. There was already the tension regarding the Roman occupation of Israel, plus the Pharisees saw Jesus as a threat to their power and social standing. It was almost fated to turn out the way it did.

[Dirjj Mordrai]

A gospel writer sugercoating the message it contains just does not ring well with my ears. The New Testament scriptures adamantly condemns any man to make himself a god. (A la Roman Emperors included, sound politically correct??? But initially Rome tolerated foreign religion of the conquered lands.) And consider the great Christian persecutions suffered under the reign of Nero and Diocletian. IIRC, every apostle was a martyr too right?

The christian belief encourages faith even in the face of persecution or death. Heck, Nero even dressed them up in lamb costumes while wolves and lions tore the believers into pieces during the games he hosted.

During his reign, the christian movement was largely forced underground, figuratively and literally as they lived in catacombs. Also they marked their palms with a fish symbol, so they can identify and find sanctity thus safety amongst other believers. This fish symbol is now very representive of the religion's fellowship today. A part of the modern believer's identity if you must.

[Diego Van Derveld]

Diocletian was one of Rome's Christian emperors, wasn't he? I know at least thats where the word Diocese comes from. Perhaps he simply imposed the quartering of the empire, which was later adopted by the Vatican. I can't remember at the moment.

[Dirjj Mordrai]

Nope during his reign occured the last great christian persecution under Roman rule. He proclaimed himself a god also. But he did eventually abdicate and became a christian. Anyways, I was raised loosely catholic but converted to a protestant much later in life, for a few years actually. now am just enjoying life as a 'free thinker' or something. I have no inclination towards any belief system the least bit.

[Hadrian Invicta]

Seems too many people forget the Old Testament book of Issiah. Just read it and any theories on the New Testament taking the blame off the Romans and placing it on the Jews for appeasement is immediately disproved.

This isn't a placement of blame. It's a statement of fact. It is important that the Sanhedrin killed Christ to fufill the Old Testament Prophecies. This however doesn't give anyone the right to persecute Jews. Christians shouldn't Persecute anyone, in fact any body or group that has persecuted others in the Name of Christ can not in all good faith consider themselves Christian, they are something horrible and twisted and will pay doubly for their sins in the here-after

[Diego Van Derveld]

I've never layed fault to Jews for this. 2000 years ago, despite all best intentions, I'd just as easily be one of those who demanded that He hang from the cross, or be one of the ones to put nails in his wrists. Jesus pardoned ALL, whether their role on Calvary was great or small. We, as a whole mankind, failed to find our redemption. Jesus gave us that redemption, wholly undeserved. What possible reason is there to hold against a Jew a trespass that should be held against me as well? I find that to be an insulting double standard. We're all guilty. We're all pardoned. End of story.

[Jinn Fizz]

Oh yes, extremely valid point...for people to pass judgment on those who were there from a vantage point of 2000 years later is basically an ignorant thing to do. Attempt to place yourself in their shoes, and I'd say it's a pretty good bet that a lot of use would have been there in Jerusalem that day, demanding that Pilate release Barabbas and crucify Jesus.

It's just like the idea I've always had...if Jesus came to earth today instead of 2000 years ago, do you think He'd get any nicer reception than He did back then? Heck, no. As a matter of fact, it would probably be even harsher than it was back then, thanks to the worldwide media. He would, in all likelihood, be held up to ridicule and dismissed as a crackpot by the majority of people.

[Diego Van Derveld]

It's just like the idea I've always had...if Jesus came to earth today instead of 2000 years ago

First or second time down? Cause I'm pretty sure the second time down is gonna put the issue to rest, what riding on a horse with a flaming sword, etc etc etc

[Syd]

Well said Diego.

[Wei Wu Wei]

Ok. Here it is. New Testament, the Gospels.

LUKE- This book was indeed written with a Gentile audience in mind. It was a defense of Christianity in the sense that the writer of the Gospel of Luke wanted to show the Romans that Christians were a harmless people. Christianity sprung out of Judaism. The Romans had respect for the Jewish religion becuase it was ordered, it was ancient, and it was rooted in law.

MATTHEW-This one was geared toward Jews. Most Jews didn;t believe that Jesus was the Messiah and therefore the book of Matthew was written to prove to the non-believing Jews that Jesus was the Messiah.

[Jedieb]

First or second time down? Cause I'm pretty sure the second time down is gonna put the issue to rest, what riding on a horse with a flaming sword, etc etc etc

What kind of horse? Mustang, Appaloosa, Arabian, or maybe a nice big Clydesdale? What kind of flaming sword? japanese, Samurai, or maybe something with a Medieval flavor? I just want to get the visual straight in my head so I know what to look out for.

And I really thought it was just 'thou shall not kill' or 'you shall not kill.' Oh well, if it's murder then that means only his paycheck from Payback is tainted. :rolleyes

[Jedi Master Carr]

Okay about Nero the Christians, were only persecuted in Rome during his reign and that only happened because of the great fire, which Nero had nothing to do with by the way, but people started to blame him and looked for a scapegoat and used the Christians, and they rounded them up and executed them.
After this though it wasn't until later. This is from a book on Roman history.
"Christianity only became a concern of the Roman state fifty years later, and then not because of fears of incediary vandalism but because the secrecy in which early Christians practiced their religion and their refusal to worship the emperors made them suspect in political environment seething with plots and counterplots against the government." (Ancient Rome Timothy Roberts)
It was Emperors like Domitians who declared themselves to be gods that started this. Still he was a paranoid nut who had people killed on a whim. Some emperors did not persecute them Trajan for example told one of his counceliers to ignore them. So it really went from emperor to emperor. Also I don't think Diocletian was Christian, I know under his rule was one of the largest. Its also surprising that Marcus Aurelius consider one of the greatest Roman Emperors let one of the worst persecution of Christians take place under his reign.

[Jinn Fizz]

Originally posted by Diego Van Derveld
First or second time down?

First time down. :)

Although, I gotta tell ya, with things the way they are in the world right now, I sometimes wonder if maybe that second time coming down isn't necessarily all that far off. :\

[Lilaena De'Ville]

http://www.newsmax.com/archives/articles/2003/3/9/14907.shtml

A must read!!!

I can't wait for this movie.

[Jedi Master Carr]

If they put it in subtitles I refuse to watch it, I don't know one word of Aramic, besides it is dumb to put a movie in a dead language, we have no clue how it was spoken, we can't tell how the words were accented or anything.

[Admiral Lebron]

If they put it in subtitles I refuse to watch it


Typo?

[Jedi Master Carr]

yeah whoops, I meant obviously if they didn't.

[ReaperFett]

I cant have much intrest in seeing a film where I dont know what anyone is saying.