The Official Star Trek Movie Forum

The Official Star Trek Movie Forum > Star Trek > Star Trek XI: The Movie > "Star Trek" Sequel
Register FAQ Members List Calendar Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #41  
Old 01-29-2011, 11:16 AM
horatio's Avatar
horatio horatio is offline
Fleet Admiral
 
Join Date: May 2008
Posts: 9,257
Default

You have a point, just exchanging insults doesn't lead us anywhere. So let's get out of the personal fighting. We have already expressed mutual disrespect clearly enough.

I already explained to you what I mean with Catholic atheist or Christian materialist. It means that I grew up with those stories, was influenced by them, cherish them very much but don't believe literally in God. Golda Meir was once asked whether she believes in God. She answered that she believes in the Jewish people and the Jewish people believes in God.
That's also what God is to me, a powerful idea which has always had a very real impact in our world and in this "power of ideology" sense God is real to me. Among all ideas I know, the pagan, the deist, the theist, the Eastern spiritual or the Christian only the last one convinces me. God is the holy ghost, God is us, Christianity as some kind of atheistic religion ... although to be honest you can already find the first ideas in Jewish texts like e.g. the story of Job where God basically says that the world is a mess and out of his control. This is so very unlike contemporary Evangelical fundamentalists who immediately had somebody to blame for in the case of 9/11 or the Haitian earthquake.
So what I don't like is everything post Council of Nicaea, orthodox Christianity and its literal reading whereas what I like is "for where two or three come together in my name, there am I with them", Jesus' idea that God is the community of believers and not some white-bearded dude in the sky.

Back to the Gibson crap, the antisemitism in it is so obvious in the texture of the movie which emphasizes the guilt of the high priests and so on as well as the hyper-gory visual side that I fail to understand why I have to even point it out.
There are wonderful Jesus movies out there. Scorseses' Last Temptation of Christ is great (so much about my supposed anti Catholicism) and Pasolini's The Gospel According to St. Matthew (very moving without being sentimental or going down Gibson's gory road) is also fine.

I am hardly an expert about the religion in which I grew up with and I am sure that as a Catholic theist you are better versed in theological questions but one thing about the Jesus story is pretty clear to me. The core of it are the words and deeds of Jesus whereas the passion and resurrection is the pagan side in Christianity. Everything that's new and innovative in Christianity comes before Jesus dies.
That's why I don't give a sh*t about some antisemitic Gibson crap which has absolutely nothing to do with these 'Jesus essentials'. But he ain't the first and he won't be the last one in the long line of Christian antisemites. If you are orthodox and overemphasize the Christ part in Jesus Christ you automatically ignore the Jesus of Nazareth, Jesus the Jew part. Or to approach the relationship between Judaism and Christianity from a psychoanalytical angle, it is pretty natural that the son seperates from his father and wants to see him perhaps even die.

Now how to get rid of of Christian antisemitism? I don't believe that a more liberal, multicultural version of Christianity does the trick. I grew up in a fairly liberal Catholic environment but I am not too fond of reducing something like the story of the Good Samaritan to a stupid Sunday school moral lesson. And as we saw during the last decades liberalism spawns fundamentalism in all religions.
I'd very much like a truthful and hardcore version of Christianity but one which focuses on the core message and gets rid of all the orthodox, literal reading nonsense. Or in other words, a drier, factual, more down-to-Earth instead of high-in-the-sky version of Christianity. You just have to hammer into the heads that Jesus is a Jew to destroy Christian antisemitism, you just have to hammer into the heads that Peter made two mistakes during the Passion to destroy Papal infallibility and you just have to hammer into the heads that Jesus and his disciples walked around ancient Palestine in a group which shared everything to destroy Protestant, right-wing Christianity.

Last edited by horatio : 01-29-2011 at 11:48 AM.
Reply With Quote
  #42  
Old 01-29-2011, 12:35 PM
thestartrekker's Avatar
thestartrekker thestartrekker is offline
Lieutenant
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Ireland
Posts: 293
Default

Horatio, I take it all back. You have had a lot to say they, but you were holding it back. I really don't disrepect you, but fell into the trap of tit for tat name calling.

On the point of of the 'guilt' of the high priest, the guilt lies equally with Pilate, despite his protestations to the contrary.
The words of the high priest are recited by the congregation at Easter as an acknowledgment that the guilt lies with them.(the Catholics. They believe Jesus died for all mankind. Other denominations do the same too I believe) That people have used that in the past, deicide, and associated guilt, was wrong. And your right, people may still do, but Catholicism as a set of beliefs doesn't teach that, and neither does mainstream Protestantism. Gibson underscored the point, its his hands hammering in the nails if I recall.

Your right, the gospels skip over the gory details, probably becuase it was taken for granted that people knew at the time what was involved in crucifixion. But, you have to admit, it was a gory business. Did he need to make a gory movie, no, but he did.
But that, the goriness, in and of itself I don't think is anti-semitic. It shows the Romans were ruthless in the running of the empire.

You are also right, Christians do need to have it hammered in that Jesus was a Jew, and I think this movie clearly demonstrates Jesus was Jewish, his Jewish heritage, and the Jewish roots of Christianity. I doubt many would appreciate the Jewish roots of Catholic liturgical tradtion. But maybe I digress too far.

Perhaps the weakest point of Gibsons movie is that it only touches on brief moments of Jesus' ministry, the beatitudes etc. But it does what it says on the tin, 'The Passion' account.

I've got to go, but as for papal infallibity, there is only a few occasions, under a strict set of conditions, where a pope is considered infallible. He can't say black is white and expect people to accept it. But it does show the weakness of Peter, and potentially, all christians.
__________________
You may find that having is not so pleasing a thing as wanting. This is not logical, but it is often true." Spock (Amok Time)

Reply With Quote
Reply


Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT -8. The time now is 06:51 AM.


Forum theme courtesy of Mark Lambert
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.8
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright © 2009 by Paramount Pictures. STAR TREK and all related
marks and logos are trademarks of CBS Studios Inc. All Rights Reserved.