Bible Scholars on the Passion of the Christ (Theology vs. History)

http://www.beliefnet.com/Faiths/Christianity/2004/03/Scholarly-Smackdown-The-...
I have raised the question of Pilate's positive portrayal in the gospels (heightened, but certainly not created, in the film). Since I do not consider that scenario to be historical, I ask why it was created by Mark and thereafter more and more emphasized through Matthew and Luke into John. In Mark, Pilate "realized that it was out of jealousy that the chief priests had handed him over" (15:10) and asked, "Why, what evil has he done?" (15:14). In Matthew, those two verses are repeated (27:18.23). But Matthew adds that Pilate's wife calls Jesus "innocent" (27:19), and has Pilate declare his own innocence: "he took some water and washed his hands before the crowd, saying, `I am innocent of this man's blood; see to it yourselves" (27:24). In Luke, Pilate asserts three times that Jesus is innocent (23:4,14-15,22). In John, Pilate again declares Jesus innocent three times (18:38; 19:4,6).

Why insist, not just on the complicity of the top high-priestly aristocracy, but on the reluctant acquiescence of Pilate?

The usual answer is that the evangelists are playing to the Romans. They know full well that Pilate condemned Jesus to the Roman penalty of crucifixion. But they feared Roman authority more than Jewish authority

"The Dolorous Passion" depicts a very clear theology of displaced punishment, expiatory satisfaction, or vicarious atonement--and Gibson's insistent brutality simply films Emmerich's ghastly vision.

So this is what I ask of Gibson and the film's fans: What is the character of the God imagined in that theology? Mel Gibson has said his film is about "love and forgiveness." But vicarious atonement is not the same as loving forgiveness. Reading "The Dolorous Passion" or watching Gibson, we should certainly be moved to love or at least pity their Jesus, but why would we worship--let alone love--their God?

I do not believe in a God who could forgive gratuitously but actually does so only after Jesus has been beaten to a bloody pulp in our place. If I accepted--as I emphatically do not--Gibson's vision of this savage God, I hope I would have the courage to follow Mrs. Job's advice: "Curse God, and die" (2:9).
John Dominic Crossan

Category:

Education

Tags:

• the
• passion
• of
• christ
• theology
• history
• bart
• ehrman
• seminary
• teaching
• bible
• yt:stretch=16:9
• scholars
• jesus
• cross
• crucified
• last
• days
• gospel

[andrjsh]

Your family disowned you if you were crucified--as if you would be around to be around to collect the inheritance. More seriously, a pressing problem concerns our culture's necessity of something being factually, empirically true in all parts vs. true in its main points. I suspect that many people ditch the whole issue of religion because something is not factually accurate--but then end up believing in UFOs, astrology, crystals, etc.

[66thPsalm]

Interesting~ thank you

[mleonsmith]

I think both commentators are quite intelligent and quite deluded