Dear Brother Phillip,
I posted here my fundamental reason(s) for opposing this film.
Why I am opposed to the Passion of Christ
I will respond as fully as I am able to your post later.
Until then, I will say here as I said in the very first post I placed in this topic that I have not seen this film.
When I first heard of its making I thought this was a great idea. The first flag I received in the reveiws of this film was noting evangelical leaders state (as you seem to agree) this movie is the best evangelical tool in the last 100 years. From this statement to Mel's own disbelief expressed that the reception among protestants when this movie contains so much Marian doctrine.
This movie operates to deny scripture as being complete in and of itself because it draws any portion of its imagery from the vision of any person, let alone of three different such visions. In investigating just one of these and reading the 'vision' of Emmerich alone I was and remain sickened that such a work supposed to 'fill' in the blanks of scripture is so readily (or according to Mel received "hands down") by protestants.
This movie operates to deny the sufficiency of the sacrifice of Christ in so much as it uses any portion of the vision of Emmerich because her writing is seen throughout to exalt the mother of Jesus to a place that God nor scripture places her in. This movie is based upon the writings of this woman who states in that writing that the prayer of Christ during his suffering that God would "permit" what he was enduring to be a help to those who would endure the same.
Because of the attempt to mingle scripture with these falsehoods I believe this movie is from satan himself who proves in the third chapter of scripture that his methods are not to display deception and lies without a semblance of truth found therein.
In order to give a complete rundown of the movie scene by scene I would have to see it. I readily admit I have not seen it and I count it a blessing of God to have been saved of this unscriptural imagery witnessed by this 'artistic license.'
Were you and I to work alongside each other in a factory and you were to ask me regarding this film and I 'thought' you were 'lost' I would not speak as my posts speak here on the BB. Here we are among brothers and sisters who ought to be able to see the motive of this film instead of proclaiming it as something it is or cannot be, an evangelical tool.
That person who would ask such questions would not be turned from Christ because of my disagreement with the film, or else their interest I would think (even as though I would have any authority to think they are "LOST") is an evidence of a drawing that is based on their interest in the imagery portrayed. In order to be brought to Christ, any person must be drawn by the Holy Spirit. There is no other way. Most certainly not a hollywood film with little truth mixed in with 'visions' and false doctrine.
it is the attitude that this film can finally do what the Spirit has not done that I am in disagreement with, it is the attitude that this film can somehow enlighten all of us to the 'blanks' of scripture that I am in disagreement with, it is the attitude that this film will do what the word of God has not done that I am in disagreement with, it is these attitudes exhibited among the people of God that I am just as surprised at as Mel himself.
The preaching of the cross, the preaching of the gospel is offensive, let's add imagery and falsehood (visions and doctrine) and we will attract all the world to Christ.
Proverbs 14.25 disagrees also.
May God Bless you Dear Brother. Forgive me if I have offended you in these things. Pray for me that were I to be found in error by the word of God that His Mercy would be upon me when I am judged.
Bro. Dallas Eaton
I posted here my fundamental reason(s) for opposing this film.
Why I am opposed to the Passion of Christ
I will respond as fully as I am able to your post later.
Until then, I will say here as I said in the very first post I placed in this topic that I have not seen this film.
When I first heard of its making I thought this was a great idea. The first flag I received in the reveiws of this film was noting evangelical leaders state (as you seem to agree) this movie is the best evangelical tool in the last 100 years. From this statement to Mel's own disbelief expressed that the reception among protestants when this movie contains so much Marian doctrine.
This movie operates to deny scripture as being complete in and of itself because it draws any portion of its imagery from the vision of any person, let alone of three different such visions. In investigating just one of these and reading the 'vision' of Emmerich alone I was and remain sickened that such a work supposed to 'fill' in the blanks of scripture is so readily (or according to Mel received "hands down") by protestants.
This movie operates to deny the sufficiency of the sacrifice of Christ in so much as it uses any portion of the vision of Emmerich because her writing is seen throughout to exalt the mother of Jesus to a place that God nor scripture places her in. This movie is based upon the writings of this woman who states in that writing that the prayer of Christ during his suffering that God would "permit" what he was enduring to be a help to those who would endure the same.
Because of the attempt to mingle scripture with these falsehoods I believe this movie is from satan himself who proves in the third chapter of scripture that his methods are not to display deception and lies without a semblance of truth found therein.
In order to give a complete rundown of the movie scene by scene I would have to see it. I readily admit I have not seen it and I count it a blessing of God to have been saved of this unscriptural imagery witnessed by this 'artistic license.'
Were you and I to work alongside each other in a factory and you were to ask me regarding this film and I 'thought' you were 'lost' I would not speak as my posts speak here on the BB. Here we are among brothers and sisters who ought to be able to see the motive of this film instead of proclaiming it as something it is or cannot be, an evangelical tool.
That person who would ask such questions would not be turned from Christ because of my disagreement with the film, or else their interest I would think (even as though I would have any authority to think they are "LOST") is an evidence of a drawing that is based on their interest in the imagery portrayed. In order to be brought to Christ, any person must be drawn by the Holy Spirit. There is no other way. Most certainly not a hollywood film with little truth mixed in with 'visions' and false doctrine.
it is the attitude that this film can finally do what the Spirit has not done that I am in disagreement with, it is the attitude that this film can somehow enlighten all of us to the 'blanks' of scripture that I am in disagreement with, it is the attitude that this film will do what the word of God has not done that I am in disagreement with, it is these attitudes exhibited among the people of God that I am just as surprised at as Mel himself.
The preaching of the cross, the preaching of the gospel is offensive, let's add imagery and falsehood (visions and doctrine) and we will attract all the world to Christ.
Proverbs 14.25 disagrees also.
May God Bless you Dear Brother. Forgive me if I have offended you in these things. Pray for me that were I to be found in error by the word of God that His Mercy would be upon me when I am judged.
Bro. Dallas Eaton
