The Passion of the Christ: January 2007 Archives

January 11, 2007

Passion of the Christ even more Satanic

It seems that Cutting Edge Ministries are not the only bunch of loony fundies to see all sorts of weird Illuminati symbolism in The Passion of the Christ, as a quick Google reveals. Barbara Aho starts off with a bit of pedantryTechnically, the last twelve hours of the life of Jesus Christ on earth were those preceding His Ascension, however Gibson’s movie covers the betrayal, trial and crucifixion of Jesus—before observing that some of the actors had dubious pasts (and here was me thinking that forgiving of past sins was a Christian thing. Oopsikins). Then it gets interesting, in the way we appreciate here at Prattle Towers (both hemispheres).

It's just a gorefest, okay?

Darn those pesky reviewers who will read deep meaning into Mel Gibson's films, when all he intended was that we be entertained by endless graphic violence! Take yesterday's Grauniad as an example. The "Society" supplement included a discussion of the piece by Giles Fraser, vicar of Putney and a lecturer in philosophy at Wadham College, Oxford. He notes criticism such as that we've already seen.

Apocalypto has been broadly condemned for its racist stereotyping, and historians have pointed out that mass human sacrifice was unknown in Mayan culture.

And he also notes its obvious evangelical intent:

The film's final scene is a shocker. As the gorefest plays itself out, a boat rows ashore bringing Spanish conquistadors and a monk holding high a simple cross. The Mayans look on dumbstruck. The old sacrificial system is about to give way to Christianity. Thus Gibson redescribes the genocide conducted by the conquistadors as a morality tale in which Christianity saves indigenous peoples from the Mayan death cult.

But his main point is that the notorious anti-semite has used the Mayans as a synonym for Jews.

But it's not really Mayans that are in view here. And perhaps that's why Gibson didn't care enough to get the cultural references right. Unfortunately this film is yet another chapter in his none too healthy obsession with Judaism. For Mayan pyramids read Jewish temple. Gibson knows that Jewish temple worship only involved animal sacrifice. None the less, his Mayan high priest draws from some of the worst caricatures of the bloodthirsty Jew as invented during the middle ages.

He's also concerned that the movie represents a sort of theological thinking that Jesus appears to have specifically opposed:

The root cause is a theology associated particularly with Anselm and Calvin. Human beings are wicked and can only make it to heaven if they are punished for their sin, thus righting the scales of justice and wiping clean the slate. The problem is, human wickedness is so deep that the required punishment would be too much for us to bear. So Christ offers to take our place, accepting our punishment in the form of an excruciating crucifixion. It's the story of salvation, as read by the religious right. All sin must be paid for with pain....

Jesus put it pretty clearly when he quoted his favourite passage of the Hebrew scriptures: I desire mercy and not sacrifice. The retributive logic that sin can be cancelled by pain is just what Christ resisted.

Now, this is one of the articles on which the Guardian has invited comments, and they are as entertaining as the one on the Intelligent Design apologia, but in a different way. LabanTall is a believer in the sort of violent Christianity that Fraser and Jesus criticise, and has spotted that our correspondent has an obviously Jewish name:

If it's true that Mr Fraser is a convert from Judaism, my theory is that the Chief Rabbi sent him undercover - as a 'sleeper' - for a joke, to see how idiotically right-on a Church of England vicar could get before he was rumbled and thrown out. He's discovered that the CoE is a broad church - any amount of liberal lunacy is acceptable.

Leftwingorthodoxjew breaks rank with the Conspiracy to assure him that he is right on the mark with his suspicions:

sure you have Fraser rumbled - I can reveal his real name is Emmanuel Goldstein, he is also related to Lazer Wolf the butcher

It is a well known fact that the Chief Rabbi sends sleepers to all the major faiths (we draw the line of course at Scientology) and we are all having a big laugh about it at the expense of the gullible Christians...

just off to bed to grow my horns a bit longer now - good night

A Christian snuff movie that links blood with salvationThe Guardian, 10th January 2007.

January 7, 2007

Mel Gibson in racism shocker!

So, what happens when you get an authority on Mayan culture to review Mel Gibson's latest violent pornfest, Apocalypto? Traci Arden, writing in Archaeology magazine, was disturbed, and not only by the inaccuracies:

The thrill of hearing melodic Yucatec Maya spoken by familiar faces ... during the first ten minutes of the movie is swiftly and brutally replaced with stomach churning panic at the graphic Maya-on-Maya violence depicted in a village raid scene of nearly 15 minutes. From then on the entire movie never ceases to utilize every possible excuse to depict more violence. It is unrelenting.

Not surprisingly, the film is not historically accurate in any way, although considerable effort was made to keep it visually so, but this seems to be to support an evangelical and racist message:

And who really cares that the Maya were not living in cities when the Spanish arrived? Yes, Gibson includes the arrival of clearly Christian missionaries (these guys are too clean to be conquistadors) in the last five minutes of the story (in the real world the Spanish arrived 300 years after the last Maya city was abandoned). It is one of the few calm moments in an otherwise aggressively paced film. The message? The end is near and the savior has come. Gibson's efforts at authenticity of location and language might, for some viewers, mask his blatantly colonial message that the Maya needed saving because they were rotten at the core. Using the decline of Classic urbanism as his backdrop, Gibson communicates that there was absolutely nothing redeemable about Maya culture, especially elite culture which is depicted as a disgusting feast of blood and excess...

I know the Maya practiced brutal violence upon one another, and I have studied child sacrifice during the Classic period. But in "Apocalypto," no mention is made of the achievements in science and art, the profound spirituality and connection to agricultural cycles, or the engineering feats of Maya cities. Instead, Gibson replays, in glorious big-budget technicolor, an offensive and racist notion that Maya people were brutal to one another long before the arrival of Europeans and thus they deserve, in fact they needed, rescue.

The same excuses used to subjugate them for the last 500 years, it seems. Up until 10 years ago, the Guatemalen army was systematically killing off the Maya, simply because they were Mayan.

Is "Apocalypto" Pornography?Archaeology, 5th December 2006.

January 1, 2007

Passion of the Christ satanic!

It was inevitable, I suppose, but while researching the forthcoming end of the world, I encounted a series of articles about the occult nature of The Passion of the Christ at Cutting Edge Ministries. Of particular interest to us is WHY IS ANTICHRIST SYMBOLISM PREVALENTLY SHOWN IN "THE PASSION" where, we are promised, we will discover the symbolism of "Jesus"' naked buttocks in the last scene, among other things. But the first thing we learn is that antichrist and Roman Catholic are one and the same.

Once our journalistic investigations prior to the opening of "The Passion" had revealed strong occult Roman Catholic influences in the creation and the direction of the movie, I felt that we should see a significant Illuminati signature depicted somewhere in the movie.

It starts early. Apparently the virgin birth is nothing but a Satanic deception planted by Auld Nick himself. But it's the eyes of the Christ character that are the most obvious Satanic symbols in the film.

In the Garden of Gethsemane, Jesus is repeatedly punched in the face by Caiaphas' guards. After this savage fist beating, Jesus' face is swollen and very puffy. In fact, His right eye is completely closed. For the rest of the movie, Jesus is shown as being able to see only out of His right eye, as this picture clearly demonstrates. Right up until the time of His death on the cross, Jesus is able to see out with only one eye. In other words, Jesus is a one-eyed Messiah for the vast majority of this movie.

Does this mean Jesus is really Odin then? I mean, there's the one-eye thing, and the hanging on a tree thing...

Was that an All-Seeing Eye of Illuminized Freemasonry, the One-Eyed Wisdom and Benevolence of Providence.?

This is also where Jesus' bum comes into it, as He is seen leaving His tomb in his bare scuddies (and bare everything else, too).

Carefully consider this fact: that depiction was totally unnecessary to this film! The Gospels do not record that Jesus left the tomb naked; Sister Anne Emmeric did not see in her "visions" that Jesus was naked as He left the tomb. Therefore, why would Gibson and his Jesuit script writer concoct such an ending? Since Gibson reportedly spent $50 million of his own money to make this film and get it distributed, and since he is a proven professional screen director, you know that he paid attention to every detail, no matter how minute. You know that he knew this film was going to end on Jesus' bare bottom, so that must have been the plan.

But why, and does this mean Jesus isn't Odin after all? Apparently the C.F.R. (Council on Foreign Relations) portrays Antichrist as a one-eyed, left-eyed naked Messiah riding a white horse. It only seems to have four legs though. As you can imagine, Cutting Edge Ministries have a rather unusual view of the CFR. But back to the point, after observing that The Moslems believe that an Antichrist is to appear who will have 'one eye' and that it's only ever the left eye that is shown, they come to a stunning conclusion.

Therefore, you can only now conclude that the reason Gibson showed "Jesus" bare buttocks was that he was providing the second part of the Antichrist symbol - A one-eyed Messiah who is naked!

Right. Now,if only they could work in the Odin bit, to match their Mary-as-Pagan-Goddess bit...

About this Archive

This page is an archive of entries in the The Passion of the Christ category from January 2007.

The Passion of the Christ: September 2006 is the previous archive.

Find recent content on the main index or look in the archives to find all content.

Resources

About this site
Contact the Prattle
Ego Corner

The Pagan Prattle
c/o P.O. Box 666
Edinburgh EH7 5YW
Scotland

Syndication

Licence

Creative Commons License
The original material in this weblog is licensed under a Creative Commons License.