Four years late. Just watched Passions of the Christ. I have a question

by shopaholic 33 Replies latest watchtower beliefs

• 

  shopaholic

  As you know this movie was banned for JWs. Any faithful witness would not watched a non-JW bible movie (even though they do it all the time but that's a different subject.) I watched it this pass week over a couple of days. So after watching the movie, I came away with one thought, actually a question...How important is it, really, if it was a cross or a stake?

  Anyone that suffered that much, the cross or stake thing is such a minor issue or am I missing something? I bring this up because depending on where you live in the US, this is typically one of the first things that a JW will use with bible studies to assure them that JWs have the truth. I read two older posts about the movie and I agree that it did bring Christ to life. I'm still agnostic and very much doubt everything at this point but just from a "Long ago, in the plains of Jerusalem..." storytelling viewpoint the story was well told. Urggghh...the injustice and the inhumanity, I wanted to jump through the screen and stop the whole thing. I could feel his pain.

  I better understand why the Org tries to limit what their followers learn and/or watch. If I saw the movie will I was an active dub, I would boldly say that the cross vs. stake issue is a non-issue. Oh wait...then they would probably out me for apostasy.

  Other movies I recently watched that were banned as a JW: Schlinder's List and The Pianist
• 

  BizzyBee

  I've thought the same thing for quite some time - what difference does it really make? The substantive issue is that Christ died for our sins.

  Red herring. Likewise with December 25 - celebrating the birth of our Saviour isn't about the exact date, which we can't really know.
• 

  BIG D

  Hey shops!!

  Well it certainly seems less important these days with all the over the tops society dealings of late, but i remember it like you said , showing that we were the truth, with hell and the cross.

  big d
• 

  inkling

  As you know this movie was banned for JWs.

  Other movies I recently watched that were banned as a JW: Schlinder's List and The Pianist

  I think "banned" is a poor and deceptive word choice. There is no list of banned movies. Sure, watching R rated movies is discouraged, but it's a judgmental stretch to called movies such as Schlinder's List banned. I know MANY witnesses that have seen Schlinder's List for it's "educational" merits, and for its relevancy to witness suffering in the Nazi concentration camps. These witnesses I know speak openly about having seen the movie. Other witness have little problem talking about select R rated movies they have seen, and this is not a punishable offense, although it won't exactly gain you any brownie points with any conservative elders responsible for your Theocratic Advancement. [inkling]
• 

  BluesBrother

  IN NO WAY WERE THOSE FILMS BANNED

  All three of those films have been seen by me with my zealous and active J W wife, and we have them on dvd and have discussed "Passion" openly with others. BTW. Why do you think that they would object to Schindlers list or The Pianist?

  In answer to your Q, about the cross v stake issue....No it does not matter what the shape of the instrument was.

  What matters is the level of the J W scholarship and honesty when they discuss it or quote from other sources to back their assertions. It is them that make it into an issue. It is them that make dogmatic claims. ..So we are entitled to analyze their claims - that's all.
• 

  Zico

  "How important is it, really, if it was a cross or a stake?"
  
  It's not important. Not important at all. Jehovah's Witnesses make an issue about something nobody else cares about so they can use it as a way to say they are better than 'pagan' christendom.
• 

  BurnTheShips

  As you know this movie was banned for JWs.

  It was? Why? Whats the point? So it was a cross so what? The bOrg doesn't want the dubs to comprehend the sacrificial love of Christ.

  I had a bootleg off of bittorrent invited two elders over and their families to watch it!

  Not a dry eye in the place. Should we form a JC?

  Burn
• 

  shopaholic

  I think "banned" is a poor and deceptive word choice.

  Let me clarify. As a regular pioneer or MS in my area you could not watch any of the movies I mentioned or any R-rated movie and remain a regular pioneer or MS, including Schlinder's List. So although we were "discouraged" from watching such movies, in my area it translated to their being "banned" for witnesses. This is what I heard I plenty of at regular pioneer mtgs during the COs visit. Please remember that various WTBS principles translate differently depending on your CO and/or congregation. Some of you obviously attended more liberal congregations.

  I attended an assembly where the DO said from the platform that witnesses should not see "Meet the Parents". That did not surprise because at the pioneer meeting before hand it was mentioned that privileges would be taken away from pioneer, MS or Elder if it was found out that they saw the movie. I saw it about 2 years later at a friends house that lives in another state. Her and husband were like "have you seen this movie? its hilarious". I responded "I thought we were not suppose to watch this movie." As it turned out they did not get the warning at their assembly or pioneer meeting. So I guess this goes back to the thread about peoples conscience allowing them to make different decisions. I watched the movie because it was only PG-13...I thought it was so funny I went out and bought it but made sure it was never out front with the other DVDs in my home.

  Also, it didn't matter how educational a movie was if it was rated-R, it was a no-no in my area. Movies were mentioned by name from the platform in my area. What can I say, I towed the line...although after awhile I realized it was just someone's personal opinion.
• 

  Frank75

  What Jesus was killed with is not at all important as other posters have argued. If anyone wants to look at the WT position critically, you will find that much of their support dries up and blows away when you look at the sources WT uses to defend it.

  I think what you will find as you study into cults and what makes them tick, that this is how they lure members in and then trap them mentally. Unique seemingly iron clad beliefs lead the member to dismiss anything that does not fit the prejudice they have been given. When the honeymoon wears off, the convert who has cut off old friends and family finds it easier to give in because, "Where else can I go?"

  The cross vs stake argument is a classic. What other "Christian" religion doesn't embrace the cross in some way? So not only have you got him to leave his old belief system, but made all the others off limits.

  Another one the JW's like to lean on is "We're the only ones going house to house!" Therefore any religion that doesn't go house to house is again, in their mind, off limits.

  However anyone who has read their bible has seen that before sending his disciples out to preach Jesus said, " (Luke 10:7) . . .Do not be transferring from house to house."

  Likewise, the cult leadership has sought to appear super pacifists by not only preventing members from joining the military, but even carrying weapons. The JW then dismisses any religion that allows its members to join the military.

  But again Jesus told his disciples in his last hours, " (Luke 22:36) . . .Then he said to them: "But now ...let the one having no sword sell his outer garment and buy one."

  Bring that text out at your next WT study and see if they aren't nailing you to a stake!

  Frank75
• 

  RisingEagle

  You guys that brought out the wonderful point that it didn't matter the shape of the instrument used to crucify Christ, but that the sacrifice was lovingly made, did so much better than I could say.

  The argument over cross or stake reminds me of the other argument involving the comma placement when Jesus was granting pardon to one of the criminals crucified beside him, "Truly I tell you, today" and "Truly I tell you today, you.." As another poster pointed out in a thread I saw, the comma placement should not matter. What's important is that the one who had the authority to grant forgiveness did so even during the worst moment of human life. To dispute over where he may or may not have paused in speaking the pardon should never be up for argument. To me it shows, again, how the witlings will squeeze out the gnat and gulp the camel.