Comments on: Do we ignore what Jesus got killed for?

By: nigel

nigel — Thu, 01 Jan 1970 10:00:00 +0000

This was one of my biggest reactions to the film “The Passion”.

I know there were issues for the narative structure not easily overcome - once you chose to depict the last day of his life, of course his death is going to loom larger - as it should. But Gibson could have done more to make more meaningful links to his life.

EG The film doens’t put Herods trial of Jesus in the cotext of his and John the Baptiser’s feared critiqued of the herodian monarchy (a prphetic tradtion stretching back to Elijah). Instead it seemed to take its cues form Jesus Christ Superstar.

On the plus side, I thought the film did do a good job of showing emphasising JEsus’ love for his enemies, but even this could be seen as his accepting of the death and not the reason the others wanted to kill him.

By: Homer Paxton

Homer Paxton — Thu, 01 Jan 1970 10:00:00 +0000

there are two plans going on here.
God’s plan was for Jesus to die for our sins so we could be justified and be resurrected.

Speculation on the Jewish religious elite motives are problematic. They are held responsible however.

By: phil

phil — Thu, 01 Jan 1970 10:00:00 +0000

How can you hold the Jewish religious responsible when your own statement says that God is responsible solely?

By: felix

felix — Thu, 01 Jan 1970 10:00:00 +0000

In answer to your question, Phil, I’d have to give a resounding, “Yes, absolutely!”

Homer, what part did the *life* of Jesus play in your god’s plan?

By: Homer Paxton

Homer Paxton — Thu, 01 Jan 1970 10:00:00 +0000

Ah phil, its is like Job where is is said that Satan is rsponsible but that gos is also.
however we know god is incapable of sin.
If that sounds like a non-answer it is. There are frankly things in the bible I don’t understand.

however a curosty reading of the early cchapters of Acts shows who is responsible for Jesus’s death. something we must be all thankful for.
Felix we know Jesus only did what his father wanted to do despite being his equal.

By: bryan

bryan — Thu, 01 Jan 1970 10:00:00 +0000

We focus on the death, resurrection, second coming, maybe a miracle or two but the teaching that got Jesus killed isn�t talked about.

Actually, we don’t really spend that much time on the resurrection in the u.s. mostly on the death and the second coming.

there are many teachings of jesus that don’t get talked about a lot, that would tweak the noses of liberal anti-war types and conservative (nee fundamentalist) pro-war types.

I suspect we all preach on the verses we like more than the verses that challenge our own viewpoint (myself included).

By: phil

phil — Thu, 01 Jan 1970 10:00:00 +0000

Yep, agreed Bryan. It is a challenge to us all.

I am interested about the ressurection not being preached about most. True here, too I think. Why do you think that is?

By: bryan

bryan — Thu, 01 Jan 1970 10:00:00 +0000

I think it has to do somewhat with lack of drama, really. The crucifixion has a definite climax. The resurrection (empty tomb) is really anticlimactic in some ways. But more, I think it is easier for people to identify with the crucified christ than the risen lord. Look at the iconography of the catholic church.

I’d be interested in any other possible explanations you might have. I’ll mull it over while I’m driving today.

By: Homer Paxton

Homer Paxton — Thu, 01 Jan 1970 10:00:00 +0000

That’s interesting As I would argue it is the ressurection which is important than the cross.

It shows that Jesus was without sin thus fulfilling the prophets and had conquered sin.

no ressurection no heaven.

Having said that the cross and ressurrection are part of the same tale, neither can be viewed without the other.

By: felix

felix — Thu, 01 Jan 1970 10:00:00 +0000

I’d put the life before either!
But at the end of the day, I think it’s pointless trying to distinguish between things. I’d rather simply focus upon Jesus - the whole package!