Why do I so easily run away from that aspect of the Christ story. For me as a Protestant who seldom concentrates on the crucifix, we have an empty cross, it was the occasion for reflection and pondering and meditation. I think he, in fact, understands the cross to be a very violent act. He was not trying to put that violence on one group of people or another group of persons. That Gibson used his own hands to drive the spike into Jesus or that Gibson used his own voice to give the wail that Judas gave as he died suggests to me that Gibson was not trying to scapegoat. I thought that some of the Romans who beat Jesus up were somewhat over the top. As to the extra facts or the interpretation, I think that anyone who sees the movie will see that there are good Jews and bad Jews. It also is the fact that Jesus was beaten to death and died on a cross. I think we'll debate for a long time whether it's a little bit too much Braveheart theology, a little too gory. And that is both its strength and its weakness. This is an interpretation of those four Gospels in which they're combined and Gibson has tried to fill in the gaps. One is that if we simply went with the sparse facts of four Gospels, we wouldn't have a story, we wouldn't have a movie. Maybe there are two things that need to be said. In this version of Christs crucifixion, based on the New Testament, Judas expedites the downfall of Jesus (Jim Caviezel) by handing him over to the Roman Empires handpicked officials. The power relationships between the two are almost totally reversed from what we know historically. Now we know historically that Caiphas was effectively appointed high priest by Pilate and in fact was more fearful that the Romans would destroy the temple as it indicates in John Chapter 11 than he would have been in leading any revolt, which was not in his power to do. He tells his wife in a scene that also is not found in the Gospels, that he is afraid Caiphas will lead a revolt against Roman rule unless Pilate complies with Caiphas insistence on Jesus' execution. If not subordinate, he is certainly intimidated by him. In addition, and more historically significant is the fact that Pontius Pilate is clearly subordinate in power to Caiphas, the high priest. There is also some severe violence there that the New Testament certainly doesn't present at that juncture. First of all, there are many scenes not found in the New Testament in which Jewish characters inflict violence on Jesus for example, he is thrown off a bridge in chains as he is being brought before the high priest. Well, there are two dimensions to that as well.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. Archives
February 2023
Categories |