How far did the Gibson apple fall from the tree?

[Ben Kenobi]

I'm on Berz's side of this.

It is for our sins, that Christ suffered, and that our sins put him upon the cross.

That seems a fairly core teaching about the atonement, so rather than chastise Berz for unfairly castigating Christians, we should acknowledge that this is what they believe.

Secondly, if you don't like the guilt, Berz, then TFB. It is not there for you to like, but rather to encourage repentence.

[Imran Siddiqui]

It is for our sins, that Christ suffered, and that our sins put him upon the cross.

That seems a fairly core teaching about the atonement, so rather than chastise Berz for unfairly castigating Christians, we should acknowledge that this is what they believe.

What about the Arian heresy (some who still exist, IIRC)? What about other Christian sects which aren't convinced on the Jesus died for all mankind stuff?

[Ben Kenobi]

Arians deny the divinity of Christ, and hence, they cannot be Christians.

What about other Christian sects which aren't convinced on the Jesus died for all mankind stuff?

Well, find them please. The atonement is something shared between all the denominations that I am aware of.

[The Mad Monk]

They are not Christian.

There is room for disagreement on many things, but not on the Arian Heresy.

[Imran Siddiqui]

Arians deny the divinity of Christ, and hence, they cannot be Christians.

Why not? They considered themselves Christian.

[Ben Kenobi]

Standard definition of christian, is the body of churches that affirm the ecumenical councils of the church, ending with the council in Chalcedon.

Arians do not, hence they fall outside the boundaries of Christianity.

All the ecumenical councils occured before the split of the East and Western churches, and therefore, remain affirmed by both today.

[Imran Siddiqui]

I don't use to ecumenical councils to determine what is Christianity. If you say you believe Jesus was a prophet and consider yourself a Christian, I don't see why what the main Chruch who stamped out that heresy deciding different matters.

[Berzerker]

Imran -

But you did mention all Christians. You said "people who belong to THIS RELIGION". So no, it isn't a strawman.. you said it.

That's why Doc said what he did.

Doc is clueless, and I didn't say ALL CHRISTIANS (that's your strawman). I said people who belong to this religion - Gibson's religion - that blames us all for Jesus death, i.e., collective guilt. Are you now claiming that ALL CHRISTIANS believe we killed Jesus?

What about the Arian heresy (some who still exist, IIRC)? What about other Christian sects which aren't convinced on the Jesus died for all mankind stuff?

Well now, explain why you think I'm claiming ALL CHRISTIANS believe "we" killed Jesus when some Christians don't even believe he was crucified for our sins. Hell, there were (and may still be) some Christians who don't even believe he was crucified...

Ben -

I'm on Berz's side of this.

It is for our sins, that Christ suffered, and that our sins put him upon the cross.

That seems a fairly core teaching about the atonement, so rather than chastise Berz for unfairly castigating Christians, we should acknowledge that this is what they believe.

That is a different belief from what we're discussing. In his movie, Gibson's hand is shown placing the spike about to enter Jesus' hand and Gibson says something to the effect that "we" - meaning us all - are responsible for the crucifixion. This commentary may have been added because of the controversy over the original film cut portraying the Jews as guilty (collectively) of Jesus' death. It is this notion that I reject. A group of people killed him, not everyone.

Secondly, if you don't like the guilt, Berz, then TFB. It is not there for you to like, but rather to encourage repentence.

I didn't kill him, if you did, you repent.

[Berzerker]

Imran -

Like you said:

And Gibson is a practitioner of "collective guilt" as well. Spare me the BS, Mel, you didn't kill Jesus, I didn't kill Jesus, no one alive today or the past ~1900 years had a hand in his death.
And people who belong to this religion expect us to show respect for such bogus beliefs? No thanks...

What religion shares Gibson's belief in collective guilt over Jesus' death? I didn't even mention Christianity and you accuse me of ascribing this belief to ALL CHRISTIANS?

[Ben Kenobi]

Berzerker:

And my point is precisely what Gibson is trying to get out. Christ died, to redeem us from our sins, hence our sins have put him up on the cross. We may not have driven the nail, but we have done everything but. Christ, if we did not sin, would not have had to die on the cross.

Remember, Christ is the Son of God. He could call upon a chorus of Angels, should he desire, at any point of time during his time on Earth. Yet, he declined, because he wanted to serve as the sacrifice for many, and in doing so could redeem each one of us.

So it matters little who actually drove the nail into Christ's palm, because Christ would not have been there, had we not sinned.

[Ben Kenobi]

If you say you believe Jesus was a prophet

Muslims affirm Christ is a prophet, yet they are not Christians.

One of the essential teachings of Christianity, is in the trinity, in the divinity of Christ. You reject the divinity, you cannot be a Christian, you do not believe that Christ is the son of God.

Every Christian, without exception, has to profess faith in Christ, not as a man, or a teacher, or a prophet, but as God himself, equal, and enternally, the Son of God the father.

[Seeker]

why is no one using the examples of Jewish scripture with mentions of jesus(Talmud and tradition) and relying so much on Christian scripture?

BTW, it's interesting that 2000 years later the J-man still causes storms of controversy wherever he goes.

[Dauphin]

Originally posted by Ben Kenobi
Every Christian, without exception, has to profess faith in Christ, not as a man, or a teacher, or a prophet, but as God himself, equal, and enternally, the Son of God the father.

I think that your opinion. I have discussed this topic with priests, and they say you can be a Christian without even hearing of Jesus, if you live your life in a way that is in accordance with his teachings. He cited Gandhi (a non-christian) as being like any other Christian in the eyes of God.

Who is right, you or he, comes down to doctrine or personal opinion, neither of which is authorative IMO.

[GePap]

Interestingly enough, the Daily News had an interesting piece about the movie yesterday writen by a theologian bringing up an obvious point that it seemed I had missed- I forget which Italian director it was, but one of them made a movie which was basically filming the Gospel of either Mark or Luke, but filming it straight-no script, only the gospel.

Now, Gibson is NOT using any one gospel, and the fact is that the four gospels differ significantly in what events they mention and in the events of his life- Gibson picked and chose the words from each gospel he wanted, so when he says "this is what the Bible says", well, in a way, yes, but he wrote the script, mixed up the four gospels, and thus he does have a choice of what gets included and what is not.

[Berzerker]

Ben -

And my point is precisely what Gibson is trying to get out. Christ died, to redeem us from our sins, hence our sins have put him up on the cross. We may not have driven the nail, but we have done everything but. Christ, if we did not sin, would not have had to die on the cross.

Remember, Christ is the Son of God. He could call upon a chorus of Angels, should he desire, at any point of time during his time on Earth. Yet, he declined, because he wanted to serve as the sacrifice for many, and in doing so could redeem each one of us.

So it matters little who actually drove the nail into Christ's palm, because Christ would not have been there, had we not sinned.

If Jesus wanted to serve as a sacrifice, then he's responsible. If "God" wanted him to serve as a sacrifice, then God is responsible. Sorry, but this is where I part company with those who believe he died for our sins and that we are somehow responsible... If that was what God and Jesus wanted, they can't blame us... And the Jews and the Romans should be praised for playing the role desired by both Jesus and God, but they aren't. Why is that? Notice a paradox there?