Dunno if anyone is interested in this. The Passion of the Christ will be released in the theatres on Feb. 25. Hopefully I'll be waiting in line.

It covers the last 12 hours of Christs death(note: movie is not 12hrs long)

It will be the most controversal movie of the last decade, and it is said that it will revive christianity in the world...I watched the trailer for it and it gave me shivers.

Note: This movie is very real. It is rated for gory content. If you don't wanna see nails driven through someones hands like that, barbed whips tearing someones back apart...maybe you should sit this out.

http://www.thepassionofthechrist.com

I don't know what to think of this movie. My school, being a private Jewish school, is telling all of us that this movie will spread anti-semitism in the world. On the other hand, I think that this is genuinely what Mel Gibson believes and therefore he has every right to make the movie. People keep telling me to boycott the movie because it will portray the Jews as responsible for Jesus's death. I don't really want to see it anyway, as it doesn't interest me, but I still don't know what I think of it.

--------------------------------------------
In the land of the braindead
The man with one neuron is king
--------------------------------------------

People who become anti-semetists from watching the movie were likely already inclined to feel that way. More than likely they're already bigots looking for yet another reason to persecute the jews. It disgusts me and I was raised Catholic. It was 2000 years ago! People thought differently then, and lets face it, the man was claiming to be god, surely that is going to instigate a few people, right?

I want to kill Michael Jackson for saying he's Peter Pan.

I would say that anyone ELSE saying that this will spread anti-Semitism is a fear-monger. To say that all Jews were responsible for the death of Jesus is like saying that all Germans were responsible for the persecution and other atrocities inflicted on Jews and others during WWII.

Get a life. For real. [Those people, I mean] Anyone who DOES get swayed to think exactly that [like the previous poster mentioned] can't possibly be using their heads for anything other than a hat rack.

Eh, I hope that came out right.

People are stupid and take things too litterally. People(not jews...) were responsible for the death of Christ, but it had to be. It was prophecyed(i spelt it wrong i know).

As a Canadian I am guilty about Canada's action towards Canadian-Japanese internment camps...yes...just like the jew camps, but maybe less severe. These were "canadian" citizens, born in canada, for generations.

The pharasies were just pissed off that Jesus was defying them...he was upturning their selling in the church...how they twisted the word to fit their means. And the crowd...wanted it. Much like people cheer on wrestlers, or better yet, Gladiators. They were trying to destroy what seemed to be a powerful man, claiming to be "God's Son."

It's the "Greatest Story Ever Told"...how can you not be interested? I could rant on, but i think i would get yelled at

*************************************************************************************************
"I saw that this thread had a responce. I clicked on it expecting it to be from someone important. Guess I can't have everything now can I?"-Chris

"Don't ask when the next book comes out, nobody ****ing knows!"-Riley

Msn: petrov_18@hotmail.com ICQ:147142744 AIM:lockehockey

Locke, did you read what Pinchy said?  I don't see why Pinchy would find it the 'greatest story ever told.'  Remember the differences in belief systems of the various people on the board.  I'm guessing there are more than a few who aren't interested and more than a few who are.

I haven't even seen previews yet, though I have seen a few news reports and read a couple of articles.  I'm torn.  The subject matter itself shouldn't cause concern of spreading anti-semitism, but a poor portrayal could well do.  I tend to go with Narc on this, though, and say that if a movie would do it for someone, they were just looking for a reason to be bigoted.  Not having seen it, it is hard to be positive, but that is my inclination.

I'm Catholic as well, and NEVER heard the crucifixion spoken of as being the fault of the Jewish people.  I'm not sure how Gibson could portray it to make it appear so, but I guess it is possible.

It is suppposed to be very 'realistic' (read 'bloody') so there is a good chance I won't go see it on that score.  I'm afraid my imagination is quite enough.  I don't need to see it. 

 

 

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~


http://www.schnoogle.com/authorLinks/Sandy_Phoenix
http://www.fanfiction.net/read.php?storyid=1461584

I think 'the greatest story ever told' was an allusion to the movie with that title. Not that Locke was saying that it was, without doubt, the greatest story ever told. But why am I speaking for him?

Passion Plays are famous for [but not intended to] incite feelings of ill will toward Jews. It's a fact. They wanted to ban the plays. So Gibson's movie is expected to do the same. Again, showing the stupidity of man.

Gibson has admitted that some of his movie is conjecture. Even scholars do not know exactly how Christ was crucified. They disagree, anyway, on whether there was one nail in each wrist and one nail in the shin to hold both legs OR if his hands were tied. So Gibson took all of his findings and told HIS story. It's his right as an artist. Nobody has to agree or go see it.

Something I want to adress:

"As a Canadian I am guilty about Canada's action towards Canadian-Japanese internment camps...yes...just like the jew camps, but maybe less severe."

How are you guilty of that as a Canadian? Are you refering to what happened after Pearl Harbour and the Asians being put in camps? Hate to tell you this, but that was something the government did. NOT the Canadian people, not the American people. Government . We can not be held accountable for actions done by the heads of our countries - ESPECIALLY before we were even born. That is stupid! It's as annoying as the people who complain that their ancestors were slaves for so many years by white people so now they all hate white people. Generalizations such as these and dwelling on times from before our own is just continuing the circle and breeding more hatred.

If I were to feel bad about my heritage - my Grandmother's first cousin was Michael Collins. Her father allowed for Collins AND Eaton Devilera to stay with him for a long period of time. These two men were the masterminds of the 1916 IRA and were responsible for many deaths. (Devilera ironically had Collins killed and became the Irish Prime Minister) anyways, I had nothing to do with it. It is something from years ago. Am I guilty by association? I bloody well hope not because I have English relatives who are members of parliment who the IRA would still love to kill. I'd have one hell of a family reunion.

the reason people think this will invoke anti-semitism is because of the scene where the mob of Jewish people chant "Crucify him, Crucify him." And then the most controversial... "His blood be on us, and our children, and our childrens children." This is what some people fear will invoke anti-semitism among people who see this movie. Theoretically, the jewish population of today, are that mobs' childrens' childrens' childrens'...children.

This is obviously ridiculous, but some christian extremists view this as a valid reason to hate Jews.
That scene is the main concern of the whole movie.




bring back 1912

My pastor interviewed Gibson a couple weeks ago about this movie... it wasn't during service but they did have an audience of other pastors/priests around Chicago suburbs (I go to Willow Creek if any of the IL people have seen that massive place..) They have the interview online somewhere and mentioned in it was that Gibson's dad wrote a book about how the Holocaust never happened. Interesting...

-------------------

"if you let them make you; they'll make you
paper mache; at a distance you're strong; until
the wind comes; then you crumble and blow away"

Lol, I have to agree with your statement Narc...but i still "feel guilty". Even if it was our government, it is part of my "heritage". I don't feel hate for any race, just shame in what the canadian "government" did with the situation.

Back to the topic...I was raised Christian, in a somewhat extreme manner, it pissed me off. But i still hold the beliefs and values, regardless of my lack of attendance.

No one knows exactly how it happened. No one knows exactly what Jesus looked like. I look at it as an interpretation. It's the same story, told by someone else. I agree with you Sandy, my imagination can paint the picture enough, but I don't think my mind can grasp the scope of it.

I'm going to see it, I have relatives going to see it that arn't even christian...but they were raised with the beliefs and values just like me.

How can you hate a Jew, for what his ancestors did 2000 years ago...thats just plain stupid.

I have to comment on this:
----------

"the reason people think this will invoke anti-semitism is because of the scene where the mob of Jewish people chant "Crucify him, Crucify him." And then the most controversial... "His blood be on us, and our children, and our childrens children." This is what some people fear will invoke anti-semitism among people who see this movie. Theoretically, the jewish population of today, are that mobs' childrens' childrens' childrens'...children."
----------

It is up to Mel Gibson whether or not to put this in the movie. This may or may not have happened. However, the gospels say it did and he takes the gospels as...well...gospel, so I suppose he will.

Historians disagree on whether or not the Jews told Pilate that they indeed wanted Jesus's death to be on the hands of them and their descendants. And while it is true that the Jews were more than happy to see Jesus disposed of, they never would have cruxcified him. That was a Roman punishment. Jewish courts condemned people to death by cutting off their heads with a sword or stoning or burning or hanging, depending on the crime. Jesus's "crime" was that he didn't keep the Sabbath (actually punishable by death in those days, provided there were two witnesses who warned him about it), which would have resulted in a death by stoning.

If the Jews had wanted to kill him so badly I still don't see why they wouldn't have sentenced him in the Jewish Bet-Din (court) to die by stoning.

Anyway... another thing I've noticed is that lately the Jewish community has been tossing around allegations of Anti-semitism like candy. To me this is like the boy who cried wolf. To me anyway, Mel Gibson isn't setting out to be anti-semetic, but a lot of my friends, and my parents, hate him for this movie. i just think that we have to only accuse people of anti-semitism who rightly diserve it...
like Mel Gibson's FATHER who is a holocaust denier. He basically says that at the time there weren't even 6 million Jews in the world and that Hitler was just trying to "relocate them" to other part of Europe so they would be safe from persecution.

sigh




--------------------------------------------
In the land of the braindead
The man with one neuron is king
--------------------------------------------

Gibson decided to take the "His blood be on us, and our children, and our childrens children" bit out of the movie b/c it was causing so much controversy.

"How can you hate a Jew, for what his ancestors did 2000 years ago...thats just plain stupid."
And how can you hate Jews when Jesus himself was a Jew? Talk about something being unchristian!

About Gibson, I disagree, Pinchy, and here's why:

YOU'RE GOING to have to go on record. The Holocaust happened, right?" Peggy Noonan asks of Mel Gibson in the Reader's Digest for March.
Gibson: "I have friends and parents of friends who have numbers on their arms. The guy who taught me Spanish was a Holocaust survivor. He worked in a concentration camp in France. Yes, of course. Atrocities happened. War is horrible. The Second World War killed tens of millions of people. Some of them were Jews in concentration camps. Many people lost their lives. In the Ukraine, several million starved to death between 1932 and 1933. During the last century, 20 million people died in the Soviet Union."

When a guy tries to make it sound like the holocaust was no big deal and says that the Jews were merely among the many victims of WWII, even though their circumstances were completely different (systematic extermination b/c of who they were vs. victims of war or a ruthless dictator who wanted more money), I'm going to be suspicious - especially considering what he said is pretty darn close to what sophisticated holocaust deniers say.

~Queen B of Winky-P-Winksville~
Sirius R.I.P. 1960-1996
Twin to Andi

I understand about everyone being suspicious. Everyone should be. I suppose everyone has their own agenda, including Mel Gibson.

But I think people SHOULD NOT BE looking to the film industry for history lessons. Although I have always believed that the victor always dictates history [whether they record true or untrue facts] I would think that Hollywood, as your source, would make you a blockhead.

I think that this is a good thing this film is enjoying this 'popularity'. It puts it under the microscope. And people learn more. They might read more of the Bible or at least be information hungry now. Beautiful. Do we worry that people will get the wrong impression from this film? NOPE. Not with this much hype. Like I alluded to before, the individuals who DO get the wrong impression would not be remotely intelligent to begin with.

And probably should all be scheduled for frontal lobotomies. With a dull knife. What harm could that do?

Imma pass up pouncing on that one...

*************************************************************************************************
"I saw that this thread had a responce. I clicked on it expecting it to be from someone important. Guess I can't have everything now can I?"-Chris

"Don't ask when the next book comes out, nobody ****ing knows!"-Riley

Msn: petrov_18@hotmail.com ICQ:147142744 AIM:lockehockey

I'm glad to see that you have some good, level headed people on this board who can actually have a CALM discussion about this movie.

Having said that, I think that I agree with what most people are saying in here. This is Mel Gibsons interpretation of what he believes to be actual history. I don't beleive that this is meant to promote bad feelings against the Jewish population at all. Only to focus on the crucial 12 hours of Jesus's life that is all too often overlooked by many films and books. ( At least that's my experience, but, I live in Utah, so, I'm pretty shelterd)

I was raised in a Christian household, and even though I don't practice any religion now, I plan on seeing it. I would like to see what some people veiw that story.

What I have an issue with is Locke saying that the Japanese-Canadian camps were like the Jewish camps, only MAYBE not as severe. Believe me, the Canadian camps were pleasant compared to the Jewish camps, such as Auschwitz. The Canadians weren't loading people into "showers" and then gassing them, or shooting them execution style over mass graves. There is no "maybe" about the severity. To even imply that the Canadian camps rank up close to the German camps is an insult.

But as for the movie, I could care less. I was raised in such a severe Catholic household that I long ago stopped believing in any monotheistic organized religion. I don't see why people get inflamed over a movie. If your beliefs are so rigid that a movie trying to portray anything from your religion can inflame you, it's time to settle down and realize you're a fanatic.

Helen, I agree with you wholeheartedly.

Also, does anyone have any insight into why Mel Gibson's father is such an adamant holocaust denier? I mean, yeah, he's not all there, but why does he believe that it didn't happen? Is he crazy or is there a reason?

--------------------------------------------
In the land of the braindead
The man with one neuron is king
--------------------------------------------

I will probably watch this film when it comes on TV. I am christian, but I am very open minded about religion.

And anyway, Jews didn't kill Jesus. Sure, some pharisees got annoyed, but that doesn't mean the entire religion is bad.

Too be honest, I love the Jewish religion. Whenever we do Jewish related topics in religious studies, I have a lot of entheusiasm for it.

No film will make me change my mind about ANYONE.

"There are two of them? Well Ali, there is one of me... deleeeted. Deleted?! WHAT?! What happened? Undeleted! Undeleted! I didn't mean to do that! Come back Ali! Come back Ali's sister! You mean too much to me!" Strong Bad

Meh i look back now, i shouldn't have put maybe in there...but I would like to point out something now.

I highly disagree, I do believe that the camps ranked up there with the jewish camps...I don't know how you couldn't. Regardless of the severity, do you know what happened in the camps? They were shoved together like cattle...malnurited, sharing poor toilet facilities in public. Dieing, and being seperated from their families. Maybe the canadian government was slightly more humane about it, like not killing them all off outright(which honestly, I think many would have preffered). But what is the difference of stripping a person of all the hold dear and driving them down into the pitt of un-civilization...treated like barbarians, and outcasts...then released afterwards to re-enter a new world, and still mistrusted. I know it's not as severe, but i see it very black and white, like its a "sin" to kill someone. But it is also a "sin" to steal. And for me "sin" is "sin". I think it is an “insult” to just disregard it (and I’m not saying you are, its just the “even rank up close” part that makes me say it).

The fact remains that both internment camps were cruel...They may not appear in the same light - because the jews have been the most persecuted group, since they became the “chosen people” and now that society is more humanistic than ever, we sympathize for them - but we cannot forget the suffering of others.

I don’t intent to start a debate, these are just my opinions (I think I would lose against Helen:)…note: I shouldn’t have used the word “maybe”. I apologize if it offended/s anyone.

I think that the film is trying to quicken the lost “Christian Soldiers” (or Catholics) that can’t actually imagine what their savior had “done” so they could be saved from eternal hellfire. This movie, as it is called, in my opinion is “not” for “entertainment” purposes, but for the reason I stated above. Nonetheless it is an interpretation. I have seen 4-5 gospel movies(The greatest story ever told, King of Kings, Jesus of Nazareth, Jesus…ect.) I saw these in my youth, and no…I am not a fanatic…I do not have a religion, but beliefs…however I am not a “humanists” in the fullest extent. I believe the reason that this film is so controversial is the actual “realistic ness” (I know its not a word) of it. The blood, the gore…

“I don't see why people get inflamed over a movie.”

I totally agree here, I don’t see why people get passionate about the dumbest things…like Harry Potter…it was the most condemned thing in my church as a youth, and I read it in spite. But even JKR said she didn’t believe in “magic” in that sense. This rage is coming from the same type of religious fanatics that burned supposed “witches” at the pyre a few centuries ago.

Man.  I was SO not going to get into this, but this line needs some clarification.

"I think that the film is trying to quicken the lost “Christian Soldiers” (or Catholics) that can’t actually imagine what their savior had “done” so they could be saved from eternal hellfire."

So, it is for Christians AND Catholics?  Why, how nice.  And here I was, thinking that I was practicing a Christian faith all these years.  Silly me.

That isn't what you meant, is it Locke?  You don't differentiate between Christians and Catholics, do you?

 

 

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~


http://www.schnoogle.com/authorLinks/Sandy_Phoenix
http://www.fanfiction.net/read.php?storyid=1461584

Locke, the internment camps for Japanese-Canadians weren't death camps. I don't see how you can claim that it even comes close. Of course some died because of the bad conditions, but they weren't killed, and that's that. But then, considering you once compared Helen to Hitler and what she does to this board to the holocaust, I don't expect much.

~Queen B of Winky-P-Winksville~
Sirius R.I.P. 1960-1996
Twin to Andi

I myself am a Catholic, and will go see the movie. I suppose I just don't understand how one movie such as this could cause so much controversy. I mean, I love my religion and everything and believe in it wholehartedly, but that doesn't mean that I am not interested in other ways of life and religions. In fact, I am quite obsessed with the world at the moment, including its history.

I can't seem to find a reason why some Jews are so frustrated for the movie. This is not the first time that a certain people (religous group or not) have been portrayed badly, and it certainly won't be the last.

Let the people who have doubts be renewed in this movie if that is their thinking and if not, exercise your right to free speech and bash it all you want. The fact is that it's just a movie about a biblical figure, and will not be the last. I agree that this is Gibson's interpretation and he, as an accomplished actor etc., has the right to do the movie the way he thinks such-and0such happened.

I still cannot believe that some people still refuse to believe the Holocaust happened. If the pictures of all the mass graves and the survivors didn't convince you, what will it take? I just don't undertsand some peoples' logic, or for that matter their entire mindset. To say something like that is disgraceful to all the people who dies in concentration camps and those who are still alive. I also agree with whoever said that canadian/american camps couldn't be compared to Germany. North Americawere not shooting people right and left, burning them, lying about it, and giving prisoners a three week life expectancy when they arrived. Just because the people in Canada and America had bad living conditions, does not, by any means, mean they had the worst. I'd rather feel hungy than be going into a shower...

Made in USA, but Texas to be more precise. If you mention that I have an accent I will kill you. Yall have a nice day now!

Don't get me angry, I'm running out of places to hide bodies.

Sandy, I didn't mean to offend you, on the contrary, I know many people that go by the term Catholic, and some by the term christian...i wasn't trying to segregate them.

Moriah, I didn't say the Japanese camps were DEATH camps...I said they were Internment

Internment:imprisonment, confinement, captivity, custody, detention...take your choice of words.

I think you totally missed my whole point due to the fact of a grudge you still hold against me, ****ING GET OVER IT! I have apoligized to Helen several times, and the board. I have asked helen not long ago, if it bugs her...she said she didn't care...I was foolish when I said it, so get the **** over it!

I'm not gonna have this thrown up in my face whenever I post my opinion. If you don't like it fine. But keep your silence, it would be muchly appreciated. Thanks.

In my rage i missed this one point:

"Of course some died because of the bad conditions, but they weren't killed"

How is that not killing? I don't understand.

Your "rage?" LOL. Yes, you apologized and yes, you were forgiven, which is exactly why I don't see why what I said offended you so much, after all I couldn't throw it in your face even if I wanted to! I was saying it jokingly anyways, because that incident really sticks out in my mind and it's weird to have this discussion with you. Guess it didn't come off.

I know you didn't say they were death camps, that's what *I*'m saying. It's exactly my point - how can internment camps even be compared to death camps?

So you're saying that putting people in bad conditions which lead to their death is the same as intentionally and systematically murdering them? I don't even know what to say to that. The holocaust WAS an attempt at extermination, not just bad treatment - that's what makes it stand out so much and as terrible as it is. If you don't see that then does that mean you see no difference b/w what happened in Ukraine and the holocaust?!

~Queen B of Winky-P-Winksville~
Sirius R.I.P. 1960-1996
Twin to Andi

Alrighty.

The asians were put into those camps for safety in an effort to protect world interest after they bombed Pearl Harbor.

The Jews were put into camps for the purpose of extermination, after slow painful torture. There are so many differences on this I just can't believe the comparison has even been brought up.

Do you know what was done to the Jews? Anyone with a weak stomach read no further:

They were experimented on in so many ways. New gasses were tested on them to see if they would make effective weapons. They would convulse, their insides would blister, so many other things that I can't remember because I had to stop reading. The women were raped. Some were forced to be with animals to see if people can be crossed. My great uncle was a soldier for the british military and did some of the interrogations on the Nazis and he told me much of the stuff that happened in the camps were never publicized because it was too gruesome. Do you still think there's any comparison?

I'm not saying the camps with the asians was justified, but in all fairness they DID make the first strike and the camps were retaliation. The attacks against the Jews were unprovoked, pure bigotry - an act of hate.

Adding onto Narc's list... I know there was a man who would cut apart twins just to see if the other would feel it.

In English we're reading a book called "Night" which is by a survivor of the Holocaust. Yeah if you're interested in knowing some of the things that happened... good (and, of course, disturbing) read. It's pretty terrifying to read some of it. When they first entered the camp (Aushwitz... sry if I spelled it wrong) the author and his father are seperated from his mother and sisters and all he says is "I didn't know that would be the last time I'd see them." And when they're going to selection he sees a pile of dead children outside of the crematory that they'd be working in. We also saw some pictures in class of all this... and starving people... it was just horrible...

But honestly, has anyone read anything by a person who denies the Holocaust happened? I'm curious to know some of the reasons... with evidence like photographs... I don't understand how much more proof somebody needs?

-------------------

"if you let them make you; they'll make you
paper mache; at a distance you're strong; until
the wind comes; then you crumble and blow away"

First of all, Locke, don't tell Moriah to keep silent.  It's rude.  You started this and if you can't take it, it becomes your problem.  She has as much right to express herself as you do.

Second, I still don't think you understood my question.  You are referring to Catholics as something separate from Christians.  You are aware that Catholicism is a Christian religion, right?  Just as Lutherans, Baptists (Southern and American), non-denomenational, etc (forgive me if I didn't list someone's denomenation, there are so many...) are all Christian.  Yes?

As for the interment camps being anything like the Nazi death camps, the only similarity I see is that they kept people there and called them camps.  After that, I see little to compare.  The death camps were built for just that purpose.  Not to detain individuals as a part of a program of perceived national security, as was the case of the Japanese interment camps (which, by the way, I am NOT saying were a good idea), but to EXTERMINATE the Jewish people so unfortunate as to be captured and brought there.  I don't see how you can call them even a little similar.

 

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~


http://www.schnoogle.com/authorLinks/Sandy_Phoenix
http://www.fanfiction.net/read.php?storyid=1461584

Man....I am so not getting into this one!!

I give up on the "internment" camps. Either I am not putting it in proper terms or everyone is missing my point...

It's hard for me not to get "offended" when people repeatedly thro it in my face...text does not express attitude thus I can't tell that your joking.

Sandy...I know their are many religions/practices that go under the name Christian(anglican, baptist, lutheren, penticostal, non-denomination, catholic, presbeterian...) As I said before I wasn't trying to segregate...I know it they are all basically the same thing, practicing a Christian faith...what I mean is, I know people that go by the terms Christian or Catholic(most people i know don't say they are baptist...ect) I was raised in a Non-denominational Church...It was kind of "cut that way".

Locke, the problem is that your point got across loud and clear, and that's why people are taking issue with it. I first said that I disagreed with you on your characterization of Canadian camps as being nearly severe as the German camps. You said that you strongly disagreed with me there, meaning that you DID think the Canadian camps were worse. You then tried to prove your point that they were as bad, meaning that you DO think the Canadian Internment camps were as bad as the German camps. Unless you're thinking something COMPLETELY opposite to what you're writing, they're getting it right. The problem is that people are now calling you on it and you want to back-track to save face.

Actually, "Night" is a VERY tame book compared to some of the others out there. I spent years upon years studying the Holocaust and reading literature on it. The one I'd recommend people read to see the horrors of the camp is "Auschwitz" by a Jewish Doctor who was forced to live in the gas chamber barracks and worked alongside Mengele in the experiments and autopsies. But even then, you don't get close. There are books from the surviving twins out there who watched their other twin be brutally butchered in front of them in the name of "science". Here's what happened to the Jews:
They were first labeled with stars. Then they were given curfews. Then they were thrown out of schools. Then their businesses where burned and looted. Then they were prohibited from other stores and public life. Then they were legal game for Nazis to shoot for sport. Then they were told they had to live in Ghettos, where they had no money, no food, and no work. Then they were massacred and the survivors were crammed into cattle cars without room to sit, with a single bucket to go to the bathroom in for the entire car. Then they were forced out at a death camp. There were some camps, such as Triblenka, that were solely death camps- i.e- no camp, only a gas chamber. Others were sent to "working camps", where they were forced in front of a doctor (Mengele or others), who chose most people to die in a gas chamber and only a few to live in Barracks. The ones who died were told they were getting a shower, then killed with Zyklon B. The ones who lived were branded and their hair shaven. They lived 4 to a bunk that were 4 bunks high, only fed a waterly liquid with no substance and if they were lucky, an occassional piece of bread made of sawdust. They were beaten and arbitrarily executed. They could be gassed at any time. Thypus and other deadly illnesses spread through their barracks, but if they got sick, they were gassed. If they went to Barrack 12, the medical bunker, they were done for since the Nazis commonly issued a barrack-wide gassing for that barrack. They worked until late night and were forced up long before sunrise to undergo an excruciating role call, where if one person was missing, their barrack would be killed. If they faltered, they were killed.

And those were the lucky ones. The others were taken to Barrack 9 and 13, experimental barracks. They were subjected to electric torture, heat torture, cold torture, pressure chambers until they literally exploded, and much worse. These were mad doctors that finally got liency in their projects.

So tell me exactly what you meant when you disagreed with me that the Canadian camps were no where near as bad. You said that the Canadian camps came close...how the hell do you rationalize that? Believe me, I'm interested.

Well...Im not back tracking, I'm backing down...but from your post I think i miss said something. What I was simple trying to say was the following.

The canadian camps, are as far as i know, the only "internment camp" that ranks near German camps...I said i shouldn't have put "maybe"...i know what went on in both camps, i don't need explanations...I was just trying to say: Either way you look at it, both camps are bad...if you die in a camp due to "bad conditions" that is still Murder in my eyes.

I was disagreeing about the point in which the canadian camps don't rank even close to the german ones. Sure maybe the german camps are ranked #1, but the canadian ones would be up there somewhere...get my point?

sighs

So who is going to see the film tommarro? Imma wait till the weekend.

I understood what you were trying to say Locke. Sometimes text just does not translate exactly how you want it to. I fell victim to that many times. They invented smiley faces for that reason.

Anyway, as far as the picture goes. I'm going to see it as soon as possible, which means probably 2 weeks from now. I won't line up for anything. Or maybe I will download it from the net? I would not mind reading about it on here before I see it. I know it's not following everything to the letter but I'm sure it ends the same as any other Passion play. So I won't be surprised by the ending!

Yes, I get that Locke is ashamed of the camps. However, he keeps stating that those camps are nearly as bad as the German camps or at least rank up there right near those camps. That's NOT true. Even the Japanese led-camps used for P.O.W.s in the south-pacific region were far worse than the Canadian camps. The difference was overt, physical torture and external physical brutality that the Germans and the Japanese used to their prisoners. With the German camps, I didn't even get to touch upon the end of the war, where the Nazis, instead of giving up, forced the Jews and other prisoners on death marches, where they froze and were shot if they stumbled. At the end, they were locked into cars and abandoned. Many died through Nazi brutality even after the war since they were worn down and starved, yet forced on these marches for miles upon miles only to meet another fate just as brutal.

So my point is- the Canadian camps not only were not anywhere near as bad as the German camps, they ranked nowhere near as close. The Japanese led-camps were the second worse. The soviet-camps were the third worse since they locked their prisoners in the Siberian Steppe and tortured them there. If the Canadian camps even make the top 10, they are a FAR cry from those other camps...there's no comparison to it.

No question about that, Helen.

I don't really have anything to say about the camps, but I did see the movie today. It was gory, but the way they made it seem you'd think that people would be running out of the theater screaming. I didn't find the violence to be really disturbing. Realistic, but not really disturbing. As for the "anti-Jew" aspect of it, Jesus died for the sins of everyone so wouldn't Jews be semi-helping the occurance of that? I think that if someone were truly Christian, then they would say that it was God's will regardless of who "condemned" Jesus. Some bibilical scholars don't even really beleive that it was the Jews that condemned Jesus, and say that early Christians placed more of the blame on them since they were still under the rule of the Romans. They needed to make it seem like the Romans were devoid of any guilt in it.

"I love you, for sentimental reasons.
I hope you do believe me.
I give you my heart"
-Nat King Cole

Well, The Romans were the ones really behind the death of Jesus...the washing of the hands and the "may it be on your heads" was all propeganda. They were in fear of an uprising. Jewish custom demands stoning...and Jesus was killed in "roman" ways.

Basically it was as much the Jews fault as it was the Romans.

One of my friends is on his way to being a religious scholar...or whatever you call it...he tells me wild tales about the gospel and the new testiment. How jesus never died...and the stone was for a family tomb so it could be rolled away easily...and the aloe and such that mary had when she went to mourn for him, was really to speed the healing process...actually it takes more then a few hours on the cross to actually die.

I still think it's nonesence...but it put my beliefs into question for a few days.

Question...Did anyone leave the theater, or was crying? I expect to see an emotional response from this movie, and will be dissapointed if i dont(kinda like that scene in ROTK where everyone bows to the hobbits...i swear you could hear like 10 people crying in the theater)

I have to completely agree with Michelle. To blame Jesus's death on any particular group is to denounce your own faith. You're saying that a specific group is liable for your Lord's death, so you're basically saying that you hate that group for killing the man since without them, that man would still be alive. However, if you truly believe Jesus is your savior and died for your sins, then you should recognize that it was Jesus's choice to die and if he hadn't, your sins would not have been forgiven and you'd be damned despite your faith.

The Bible makes a point that Jesus could have asked God to save him at any time, regardless of the group who condemned him. Plus, Jesus KNEW this was going to happen. That suggests that everything was preordained upon the group who called for his execution. This shows that the group wasn't given free choice since God had already planned for them to do this to Jesus. They were only an instrumentality to further God's will if you believe that Jesus knew he'd die for the world and willingly chose that path.

As Michelle points out, if you are Christian, a fundamental tenant of your faith is that Jesus had to die to save the world, and he died due to the world's sins, not the sins of just one group. He died for everyone. In a very narrow sense, Jesus died from his own choice, not the Jews or the Romans. He could have saved himself by asking God to save him, but refused and chose his fate willingly. In the broader sense, the world killed Jesus since their sin drove him to the cross. In no Biblical view did the Jews or Romans kill him unless you only read one page of the Bible of Jesus's hearing and discard the rest of the Bible's message.

I'd just like to say WHOA! has to be one of the most intense threads we've had in a long while.

I'm not religious (except on days when I worship satan) and will not comment, but wow - this is the most lively I've seen this board in a few months!

"Now Now Draco... Play nicely"
Harry Potter and the Chamber of Secrets

So? I'm not even monotheistic, but found this discussion interesting enough to jump into.