Passion Of Christ Review: Jan Markell
--> Posted to Jans_Articles for February, 2004

I'm struggling with the right words to say. Mel Gibson's "The Passion of the Christ" is a polarizing movie with outspoken critics and supporters. I'll tell you first off, it is not entertainment. Is it more violent than all the other Hollywood films today? No. But this one is about the torturing of our Savior, the Lamb of God. Seeing His blood spewed and running in pools on the ground and His endless scourging is not for the faint of heart. It bothers me that a "Christian film" is rated "R"-and that children can not and should not see it. Maybe the violence will reach some who are only moved by media today that has violent visual effects-the shock factor. This is what Mel Gibson wanted as he stated in many interviews. He stated, "I want to push people to the edge." He does, but is that necessary? This makes the suffering of our Lord very graphic and painful, but after two hours of it, I had had more than enough.

Some say Christianity is forever changed by this film. Others call it the most powerful evangelistic tool in one hundred years. (What ever happened to the Bible?) I disagree with both comments but I do believe God will use this film for Kingdom work. Seeing our Lord scourged relentlessly by blood thirsty Roman soldiers delighting in it allows the viewers to almost taste Jesus' agony and it will increase one's appreciation for what He went through. So bring an unsaved friend, but be prepared to share the gospel afterwards! The movie does NOT talk about the love of God, sin, repentance, why Jesus had to go through this for us, nor why the Father had to smite Him like this. There is a quick reference to Isaiah 53 in the opening scene-so quick one can miss it.

But I'm not going to say Hollywood and Mel Gibson have created the greatest evangelistic tool! We don't know if Mel is a believer or not. I highly question that. We know he is a devout Catholic who says at one point all religions can get into Heaven, and in another interview, that only Catholics can. I do not believe he is biblically grounded.

The film diverts from the Bible more than I am comfortable with. There's a thing called "literary license" which allows books and movies that are based on fact to digress from that a bit. However, that is NOT allowed with the Bible as stated in the Bible. I might excuse it in the film once or twice, but it happens too frequently.

I tread cautiously as I mention the Catholic issue in the film. My Catholic readers will take themselves off the e-mail list and I don't mean to be offensive. I am only reporting what I saw that will trouble many Protestants. I think in this issue more than anywhere else, the movie now becomes "The Gospel According to Mel." He seems to be making the point all through the film that Mary is suffering as much as her son. Mary is in almost every scene, when, in fact, in the Bible she is really only at the foot of the cross. When Peter denies Christ three times, he runs to "Mother" Mary and confesses the sin. At one point Mary wishes to die with Jesus. These and other Catholic theologies will someday likely lead the Vatican to declare Mary co-redeemer. This should not keep Protestants away from this movie, for the portrayal of the price Jesus paid for our sins is significant.

For centuries passion plays have stirred anti-Semitism around the world. Mel follows the Bible as it concerns the Sanhedrin and their hatred for their own Messiah. Jesus cries on the cross, "Forgive them for they know not what they do." He was referring in part to the fact that God had blinded the Jews so how could they see that He was the Messiah. We read about it in Romans 9-11. Yet the unbelieving world does not understand this theological point, and thus they have used these scenes to persecute Jews for hundreds of years. Remember that almost all historical anti-Semitism is somehow tied to "Christianity" though many of those "Christians" are in name only and not true believers. Anyone can wear a cross as the Nazis did and even the Crusaders. Thus "churchianity" has killed countless Jews, not true Christians. The Jews themselves don't fully grasp this.

But there has never been a "passion play" like this movie! I am convinced Mel is not anti-Semitic, however. He followed historical facts and he followed the Gospels. I only wish he had taken Mike Evans' suggestion to put up on the screen at the close, "The Romans crucified 250,000 Jews. Only one rose from the dead." He told Mike he would do that, but that is not the case. He did take out the scene of the Jews crying, "May His blood be upon us and our children." Remember that Hitler made his political debut in a city near the famous "passion play" of his day. If the film is shown in Europe or parts of the Arab world, anti-Semitic fall-out could be the result.

Lastly, I was bitterly disappointed that two hours were spent on the brutal execution of our Lord, complete with torn flesh and cries of excruciating pain from a blood-stained body, and no more than 30 seconds on His glorious resurrection. That is completely out of balance. The ending needed a Handel's "Messiah"-type closure. Glorious, triumphant music with Jesus resurrected body without the blood and wounds viewed for two gruesome hours. The absence of this left me let down.