Slash Boxes
NOTE: use Perl; is on undef hiatus. You can read content, but you can't post it. More info will be forthcoming forthcomingly.

All the Perl that's Practical to Extract and Report

use Perl Log In

Log In

[ Create a new account ]

rjbs (4671)

  (email not shown publicly)
AOL IM: RicardoJBSignes (Add Buddy, Send Message)
Yahoo! ID: RicardoSignes (Add User, Send Message)

I'm a Perl coder living in Bethlehem, PA and working Philadelphia. I'm a philosopher and theologan by training, but I was shocked to learn upon my graduation that these skills don't have many associated careers. Now I write code.

Journal of rjbs (4671)

Thursday May 04, 2006
10:51 AM

the last temptation of christ

[ #29530 ]

So, I'm watching "Movies That Shook the World," and they're talking about The Last Temptation of Christ. I just don't understand why people got so riled up about that movie. It was a good movie. I doesn't say that Jesus wasn't the Messiah -- although I don't see why a movie can't be free to make that claim. It actually shows that Jesus was the Messiah, wholly man and wholly God. It shows Jesus living a real, full life. He gets married, he has children, and all that stuff... but it's fiction! I don't just mean that it's a movie, but that in the context of the movie, Jesus's life beyond the Calvary is just a fiction, presented by Satan as a temptation. Is it that they see Jesus doing things that they don't think he did (getting married, having sex)? The movie then asserts that these things didn't happen. Are the images themselves offensive for some reason? It can't just be that we're seeing Jesus tempted and conflicted. We see that already in canon. Most people who protested did not, presumably, see the movie. Someone told them about the movie and told them that it was bad. What was the stake of the people giving those instructions?

It was a good movie. What was everyone so upset about?

The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
More | Login | Reply
Loading... please wait.
  • Did you not see all the mess with the cartoons of Mohammed? You will always get a group of people that do not like something for what it represents (whether fact or fiction).

    I am a fundmentalist Christian and have no problem with that movie. I just won't watch it, even though I know it is "fiction". If it was being presented as "fact", then I would have a problem with it.

    Some people groups take themselves waaaay too seriously.

  • IIRC it crossed some theological line. The author of the book it was based on Nikos Konstantinos (no doubt horribly misspelled) was excommunicated by the Greek Orthodox Church. What was the exact offense I don't know.



  • Been a while since I watched the film or read the book, but I definitely remember having to pass a picket line of mad christians on my way into the cinema.

    As I recall, their major problem was with the sequence where Jesus imagines what his life could have been like if he had ignored his religious calling. He imagines marrying Mary and one scene shows him having sex with her.

    I never understood why this annyed the christians so much as (as far as I can recall) nowhere in the bible does it say that Jesus was e
    • ...but if we take it as read that Jesus was celibate and unmarried, it doesn't matter. The movie doesn't say he was married or uncelibate!
      • Actually since there is no mention of a wife, then we have to infer that he was unmarried and being unmarried he would have been celibate because the only "good" sex is in the context of marriage according the word of God and he would have been bound by that.

        And no, it doesn't matter a flip because IT'S A MOVIE.

        • Actually since there is no mention of a wife, then we have to infer that he was unmarried

          Actually, I don't think that we do.

          Firstly, pretty much every religious leader was married at that time. If Jesus hadn't been then that would have been unusual enough to have been mentioned in the gospels.

          Secondly, at the time women (particularly wives) we're very highly regarded so it would unsurprising if Jesus's wife wasn't mentioned.

          Thirdly, doesn't John's gospel keep mentioning "the disciple that Jesus lo

          • While women may not have been highly regarded by "man" that isn't so with "God" as there are many women mentioned in the OT and NT in pretty significant roles.

            Every Jewish Rabbi would have been married (probably) but Jesus was NOT a Rabbi (except in a teaching role). Traditions encouraging a dedicated single life also existed elsewhere in Judaism. Members of the ascetic Jewish sect of the Essenes were known for their emphasis on celibacy. All of Jesus' family is mentioned in scripture yet his "wife" would

      • Oh absolutely. The film only says that on the cross he might have considered what it would have been like to have been married and uncelibate.

        So, yes, like you I find it really hard to see what the christians find so upsetting in this film.