The Passion of the Christ

[PX] Nebuchadnezzar · Post by **[PX] Nebuchadnezzar** » Tue Mar 02, 2004 1:10 am

[PX]IronFist wrote:
THE JEW (RaVeN) wrote:Yeah, but the resurrection's the most important part.
Regardless of that fact, they set out to make a movie about the last 12 hours of his life - and they did that.
If Mel had wanted it to be about the resurection it would have been.

My point exactly

THE JEW (RaVeN) · Post by **THE JEW (RaVeN)** » Tue Mar 02, 2004 1:19 am

Then I'm gonna have to agree with Homey V--cr@ppy movie. It's been heralded, also by Mel, as a way to reach out to non-believers. Granted, he said the main purpose was to show the pain that Christ went through in an effort to help us better realize his sacrifice, but he also acknowledges its messages to those outside the Catholic faith. As a devout Catholic Mel would have easily known the significance of Christ rise from the grave. Without the resurrection, the story's incomplete. It's like having the best blowjob ever and then the chick stops right before you blow your load and you're left with the worst case of blue balls............ever. Everything is leading up to the greatest moment in history (for Christians) and then you leave out the climax.

I made a pun.

[PX]IronFist · Post by **[PX]IronFist** » Tue Mar 02, 2004 1:24 am

Wait a minuite...did you just say that you want Mel Gibson to cum on your face?

Ghost [PX] · Post by **Ghost [PX]** » Tue Mar 02, 2004 1:25 am

I would disagree and say that the biggest moment ever for christianity was not the ressurection (which was added to the bible later, but I dont have the research for that yet, and I dont have the time right now, so just ignore that in any further counter-arguments for now), but the visitation to the tomb which showed that belief in ideas was more important that belief in religious shrines and artifacts... Of course the catholics destroyed that milestone in the christian religion, but thats another discussion.

[PX] Nebuchadnezzar · Post by **[PX] Nebuchadnezzar** » Tue Mar 02, 2004 1:26 am

so you're comparing the death and resurection of Christ to a blowjob? I think you're goin to hell for that one.

Ghost [PX] · Post by **Ghost [PX]** » Tue Mar 02, 2004 1:26 am

Why?

If I were christ, I would be flattered to be compared to something as enjoyable as a blowjob

[PX] Nebuchadnezzar · Post by **[PX] Nebuchadnezzar** » Tue Mar 02, 2004 1:27 am

well you're not Christ, thankfully...

Ghost [PX] · Post by **Ghost [PX]** » Tue Mar 02, 2004 1:29 am

Frankly, I dont see the Taboo of it really.
The idea of sex acts being a sin was introduced by augustinian, a Catholic pope in the early middle ages if I remember correctly. Before that, everything was fine in the eyes of the church. And really, Christ was all about spreading the message around to everyone, and Im pretty sure everyone understands a blowjob. Thus the analogy is good.

THE JEW (RaVeN) · Post by **THE JEW (RaVeN)** » Tue Mar 02, 2004 1:30 am

I'd be going to hell for a lot worse things than that.

You relate your flow of ideas to the audience your addressing. I could of used a bending-moment bridge illustration, but the blowjob one would have been understood much better.

I'm intrigued by your theory. I think it's wrong, but I'm interested nonetheless.

THE JEW (RaVeN) · Post by **THE JEW (RaVeN)** » Tue Mar 02, 2004 1:32 am

Deviant sex acts were considered a sin by Christ, Paul, and all the way back to the Torah. Regular sex, however, has been puritanized. I think that's what Homey V is referring to. I'm down with quite a few manners of sex within the marriage limits.

Ghost [PX] · Post by **Ghost [PX]** » Tue Mar 02, 2004 1:33 am

THE JEW (RaVeN) wrote:I'm intrigued by your theory. I think it's wrong, but I'm interested nonetheless.

Are you referring to mine? If so, which one?

[PX] Nebuchadnezzar · Post by **[PX] Nebuchadnezzar** » Tue Mar 02, 2004 1:34 am

I'm just down with them period.

[PX]IronFist · Post by **[PX]IronFist** » Tue Mar 02, 2004 1:35 am

Ghost [PX] wrote:
THE JEW (RaVeN) wrote:I'm intrigued by your theory. I think it's wrong, but I'm interested nonetheless.
Are you referring to mine? If so, which one?

I think he was talking to you about this theory:

I would disagree and say that the biggest moment ever for christianity was not the ressurection but the visitation to the tomb which showed that belief in ideas was more important that belief in religious shrines and artifacts

Ghost [PX] · Post by **Ghost [PX]** » Tue Mar 02, 2004 1:39 am

Thats what I figured, but I thought I'd find out before I started explaining my feldling theories. Besides, I want to hear his take on it first.

THE JEW (RaVeN) · Post by **THE JEW (RaVeN)** » Tue Mar 02, 2004 1:40 am

the biggest moment ever for christianity was not the ressurection

I think the resurrection cemented all of Christ's work. Without it, his teachings would have just been an interesting read and I'd prolly be an atheist/agnostic (I can't recall which one you are at the moment) along with you (well, I prolly would be Jewish.........not for reasons you think, but that's a whole 'nother topic). I agree with you that Christianity doesn't hold statues, etc dear (though, you're also correct about the whole Middle Ages thing), but that other religions had that, also. Buddhism comes to mind (though, it too started to emphasize idols what with all the Buddha dolls).