Without the undoubted advantage of any great Hollywood names taking part, the Mel Gibson directed film The Passion of the Christ has taken the American cinema by storm. Released for public showing on Ash Wednesday (25th February 2004) this $30 million production has already recouped its costs, mainly because many US evangelical churches have been making block bookings and using it as an evangelistic tool.

I have not seen this film and I have no intention of going to see it if and when it reaches the screen of my local cinema. This will, in some eyes, greatly weaken what I have got to say. Perhaps not. There are still those who believe in the old observation that you don't have to drink poison to comment on its affects upon the human body.

You might not agree with this analysis of this film, but I believe you will benefit from reading it, especially if it leads you to the word of God.
Why then am I not passionate about this film?

1) THE WHOLE CONCEPT OF DEPICTING CHRIST'S LIFE IN FILM IS HIGHLY QUESTIONABLE:
This thought, of course, applies to all films of this nature and not only this latest effort. The question needs to be asked: Who would put himself forward as worthy to play the leading part i.e. that of the Incarnate Son of God? These films are not mere bioptics of a great man, but of Him to Whom one day every knee shall bow and every tongue confess that He is Lord (Philippians 2:10-11) It cannot be right that an actor who can in other films play an immoral character should be given the role of playing Him who knew no sin. The uniqueness of Christ's person and ministry seems to be sacrificed on the altar of Hollywood's expediency of producing a block buster movie on His life.

2) THE USE OF ANY VISUAL AID TO DEPICT CHRIST VIOLATES THE SECOND COMMANDMENT:
Thou shalt not make unto thee any graven image, or any likeness of any thing that is in heaven above, or that is in the earth beneath, or that is in the water under the earth: (Exodus 20:4)

It is worth noting that although art had been established long before Christ appeared in Israel over 2,000 years ago, God did not inspire any artist to give us a visible representation. No extant sketch or picture survives to tell us what the Lord Jesus looked like. The danger now is that when people think of Christ, they will see the face of the actor who took upon himself to play the Son of God. This is practical idolatry. God gave us words and these inspired revelations appear in the pages of our Bibles in the Old and New Testaments. This leads us to consider:

3) THE SUFFICIENCY OF THE BIBLE:
Those who wish to learn more about the sufferings of Christ ought to prayerfully peruse the various account as they appear in their Bibles. Psalm 22, Isaiah 53 or the Gospel accounts are pretty specific. Let a man be determined to learn the truth from these forenamed passages and who can argue that the film experts of Hollywood with all their expertise in camera work and music etc., can outdo the effect of the Spirit of God working upon the heart?

4) PASSION PLAYS VERSUS PREACHING:
Medieval Europe was a hotbed of passion plays where fact mingled with fiction were presented as gospel truth. This period of time has not been unfairly known as the Dark Ages. The Reformation marked a return to solid, sound Bible preaching. The latter alone has the approval of God upon it as a method of communication. For after that in the wisdom of God the world by wisdom knew not God, it pleased God by the foolishness of preaching to save them that believe. (1 Corinthians 1:21) Gibson's film is just a high tech, state of the art passion play. It is amazing that some evangelical churches have block booked cinemas to endorse not only the message of this film, but its method of communication. Can we be wiser than God?

5) THE PASSION FILM IS BASED ON THE BIBLE AND ALSO THE VISIONS OF AN 18th CENTURY ROMAN CATHOLIC MYSTIC:
Mel Gibson is a traditionalist Roman Catholic. He has produced this film with an image of "Christ" that is based on the apparitions of the Catholic mystic, Anne Catherine Emmerich, who claimed to have seen visions of the passion, death and resurrection of "Christ" which were recorded in her book, The Dolorous Passion of Our Lord Jesus Christ. She narrated in incredible detail her understanding of the horrendous sufferings undergone in His heroic act of Redemption. Such supports our contention that this is just another Roman passion play which has moved out of a Church building into a local cinema. By intertwining truth and falsehood into one account, we have an adding to the word of God as forbidden in Proverbs 30:6 Add thou not unto his words, lest he reprove thee, and thou be found a liar.

6) THE PASSION FILM GIVES AN INORDINATE PLACE TO THE VIRGIN MARY IN THE LAST TWELVE HOURS OF CHRIST:
An evangelical pastor present at a preview of this film, reported that the film should be renamed as the Passion of Christ and Mary. Without doubt, Mary suffered greatly as she watched her son die on the Cross. What mother wouldn't? However, despite the persistent claims of the Roman Catholic Church, Mary's sufferings were not atoning in value. Claims that she is a co- Redemptorist in the work of salvation are totally opposed to the teaching of the Bible. Speaking of Christ, Peter said: Neither is there salvation in any other: for there is none other name under heaven given among men, whereby we must be saved. (Acts 4:12) Unlike the film where Mary features prominently, the true, unadulterated account of Christ's passion mentions Mary only once (John 19:25-26) Some interpret the constant looking of Christ to his mother in this film as Him drawing strength from her presence. This is pure Roman Catholic teaching and without any Biblical authority.

7) THE PASSION OF CHRIST IS A VERY VIOLENT FILM:
Gibson comments that those who do not want to see any violence should stay away. This is a very difficult matter to tackle because how do you portray the brutality of Christ's sufferings without being overtly violent? But this brings us back to our third point above i.e. God forbear to give us such graphic representations. True, the Bible accounts make for violent reading, but we are shielded by God from graphic images. The absence of any detailed reasons in this film for the suffering leaves it but an ongoing catalogue of violence. This is in keeping with other films which where Mel Gibson's name crops up.

8) WHY THEN WAS CHRIST CRUCIFIED?
To say that Christ was crucified because [i] Judas betrayed him to the Jewish authorities who in turn [ii] delivered him up to the ruling Gentiles who in turn [iii] spiked His hands and feet to a cross is true, but falls woefully short of the whole answer. The verses quoted above from Acts 4:27-28 tells us that both Jews and Gentiles came across to do whatsoever [God's] hand and [God's] counsel determined before to be done. Ultimately it was God Himself who crucified His own Son. The Bible tells us: He that spared not his own Son, but delivered him up for us all, how shall he not with him also freely give us all things? (Romans 8:32)

This is the "How?" but in itself, it does not answer the "Why?" Since violence is the dominant theme in Gibson's theme and since it is heavily influenced by the visions (or delusions) of an ancient mystic, we must look elsewhere for an authoritative answer to this one. Turning to the Bible, we learn the tremendous truth of the Substitutionary Atonement of Jesus Christ. Peter sums it all up for us in those mighty words:
For Christ also hath once suffered for sins, the just for the unjust, that he might bring us to God, being put to death in the flesh, but quickened by the Spirit: (1 Peter 3:18)

Calvary is God's way of enabling me the guilty sinner to go free while still maintaining every last joy and tittle of His holiness. Calvary enables God to be just and the justifier of him who believes in Jesus (Romans 3:26) The message of Calvary is one of free and sovereign grace on God's part. He could have left us all in our sins and therefore candidates for hell…but instead He chose to provide a perfect salvation to the "whosoever will" (Revelation 22:17) The film is ultimately irrelevant. In my view it seriously detracts from the whole story (hence this leaflet) but its great theme will prove to be the rock either on which men successfully rest for eternity or the rock on which they ultimately perish.
***
Any comments on the contents of this leaflet are welcome: colin.maxwell@fpcmission.org
www.corkfpc.com

View one detailed criticism of this critique here which we answer