Historical Realities: The God with the power to create would also have the power to communicate and preserve that communication so that we could trust it and be judged by it. Dt 32:46 "Set your hearts on all the words which I testify among you today, which you shall command your children to be careful to observe—all the words of this law. 47 "For it is not a futile thing for you, because it is your life...

Communication and Art: God communication appeals to our head and heart and will, using culturally appropriate means. However, the primacy is given to the cognitive. 1Co 9:22... I have become all things to all men, that I might by all means save some.

Why Jesus had to die:  Hebrews 9: 26  He then would have had to suffer often since the foundation of the world; but now, once at the end of the ages, He has appeared to put away sin by the sacrifice of Himself. 27  And as it is appointed for men to die once, but after this the judgment, 28  so Christ was offered once to bear the sins of many. To those who eagerly wait for Him He will appear a second time, apart from sin, for salvation.

Emphasis of Jesus and the Scriptures: Christianity and the Bible are not so much about dying as about living to glorify God.

Paul Harvey Comments on "The Passion": One scene in the film has now been forever etched in my mind. A brutalized, wounded Jesus was soon to fall again under the weight of the cross. His mother had made her way along the Via Della Rosa. As she ran to him, she flashed back to a memory of Jesus as a child, falling in the dirt road outside of their home. Just as she reached to protect him from the fall, she was now reaching to touch his wounded adult face. Jesus looked at her with intensely probing and passionately loving eyes (and at all of us through the screen) and said "Behold I make all things new." These are words taken from the last Book of the New Testament, the Book of Revelations. Suddenly, the purpose of the pain was so clear and the wounds, that earlier in the film had been so difficult to see in His face, His back, indeed all over His body, became intensely beautiful. They had been borne voluntarily for love.

A law professor whom I admire sat in front of me. He raised his hand and responded "After watching this film, I do not understand how anyone can insinuate that it even remotely presents that the Jews killed Jesus. It doesn't." He continued "It made me realize that my sins killed Jesus" I agree. There is not a scintilla of anti-Semitism to be found anywhere in this powerful film. If there were, I would be among the first to decry it. It faithfully tells the Gospel story in a dramatically beautiful, sensitive and profoundly engaging way.  Those who are alleging otherwise have either not seen the film or have another agenda behind their protestations. This is not a "Christian" film, in the sense that it will appeal only to those who identify themselves as followers of Jesus Christ. It is a deeply human, beautiful story that will deeply touch all men and women. It is a profound work of art. Yes, its producer is a Catholic Christian and thankfully has remained faithful to the Gospel text; if that is no longer acceptable behavior than we are all in trouble. History demands that we remain faithful to the story and Christians have a right to tell it. After all, we believe that it is the greatest story ever told and that its message is for all men and women. The greatest right is the right to hear the truth.

We would all be well advised to remember that the Gospel narratives to which "The Passion" is so faithful were written by Jewish men who followed a Jewish Rabbi whose life and teaching have forever changed the history of the world. The problem is not the message but those who have distorted it and used it for hate rather than love. The solution is not to censor the message, but rather to promote the kind of gift of love that is Mel Gibson's filmmaking masterpiece, "The Passion."

Gibson wants people to understand through the movie, if they don't already, the incalculable influence Christ has had on the world. And he grasps that Christ is controversial precisely because of  WHO HE IS - GOD incarnate. "And that's the point of my film really, to show all that turmoil around him politically and with religious leaders and the people, all because He is Who He is."

Nevertheless, certain groups and some in the mainstream press have been very critical of Gibson's "Passion."
The New York Post's Andrea Peyser chided him: "There is still time, Mel, to tell the truth." Boston Globe columnist James Carroll denounced Gibson's literal reading of the biblical accounts. "Even a faithful repetition of the Gospel stories of the death of Jesus can do damage exactly because those sacred texts themselves carry the virus of Jew hatred," wrote Carroll. A group of Jewish and Christian academics has issued an 18-page report slamming all aspects of the film, including its undue emphasis on Christ's passion rather than "a broader vision." The report disapproves of the movie's treatment of Christ's passion as historical fact.
The moral is that if you want the popular culture to laud your work on Christ, make sure it either depicts Him as a homosexual or as an everyday sinner with no particular redeeming value (literally). In our anti-Christian culture, the blasphemous "The Last Temptation of Christ" is celebrated and "The Passion" is condemned. But if this movie continues to affect people the way it is now, no amount of cultural opposition will suppress its force and its positive impact on lives everywhere. Mel Gibson is a model of faith and courage.

What you won’t learn from ‘The Passion’-  Pastor Ken Wimer www.donfortner.com

1. It won’t teach you the GOSPEL.  The Bible says, “it pleased God by the foolishness of PREACHING (not dramatizing) to save them that believe, I Cor. 1:21.   Is not the Bible sufficient to give us the account of Christ’s death?  Is it not the record that God has given of His Son, 1 John 5:11.  Faith does not walk by sight, 2 Cor. 5:7. The truth regarding the Lord Jesus Christ, and how God has redeemed and justified sinners by His sovereign grace, is not revealed through man-made imagery (idolatry), but through the Gospel revealed in God’s Word, I Cor. 2:1-5.

2. It can’t show you the true SUFFERINGS OF CHRIST. The movie is rated ‘R,’ because of the torture and abuse that it portrays, directed toward the actor playing the lead role.  The question is, ‘When the Bible speaks of the sufferings of Christ for sinners, was it referring to His physical sufferings?’...Isaiah the prophet declared, “Yet it pleased the LORD to bruise him; he hath put him to grief: when thou shalt make his soul an offering for sin,” Isaiah 53:10.  His sufferings were about God justly pouring out His wrath upon His Son as the Substitute and Sin-Bearer of His elect.  It is the Just One dying for the unjust, that God the Father be just in justifying (declaring righteous) every one for whom Christ died.  The Lord Jesus, by His death, satisfied God’s perfect righteousness by which God has forever justified chosen sinners, having put away their sin, once for all, Rom. 5:9,10. 

3. It doesn’t tell WHY the Lord Jesus Christ laid down His life.  If it did, there wouldn’t be a debate as to whether the Jews or Romans killed him.  Acts 2:23- “Him, being delivered by the determinate counsel and foreknowledge of God, ye have taken, and by wicked hands have crucified and slain.” God slew His Son, but the wicked hands used are representative of the sins of His people. If Christ laid down His life for me, my SINS nailed Him there.  Salvation is conditioned on His righteous life and sacrificial death alone.  I could not provide that perfect righteousness, but He did.  I was guilty of the wrath of God, but God purposed that wrath on His Son. By His death, God has redeemed, justified, and sanctified every sinner for whom Christ died, I Cor. 1:30. 

Don Fortner www.scionofzion.com/passion_of_christ.htm

We are being fed the media line that this movie is historically accurate and that it is based entirely upon the account of the crucifixion given in John's Gospel. But that simply is not the case. Gibson himself has stated, "The movie reflects my beliefs." Remember, he is a devoted Catholic. James Caviezel said, referring to his role (as the Son of God!), "I think it's very important that we have mass every day. I need that to play this guy. If I was going to play him I needed the sacrament (mass) in me."
Gibson stated, on the Eternal Word Television Network that his inspiration for the movie's script was a book written by a German nun, Anne Emmerich, called The Dolorous Passion of Christ. Gibson used the facts revealed in John's Gospel to surround the fabrications of nun to cleverly make the fabrications look like facts. That is nothing new to Rome. That is exactly what the Apocryphal books do. They add human fabrications to the Word of God to make the fabrications look like the truth.

I am sure the movie will be a real tear-jerker. Paul Harvey saw the movie and declared, "Frankly, having now experienced it (you do not 'view' this film). this was not simply a movie; it was an encounter, unlike anything I have ever experienced...I will never be the same. When the film concluded. I am not sure there was a dry eye in the place. The crowd that had been glad-handing before the film was now eerily silent. No one could speak because words were woefully inadequate."  That is precisely the desired effect. That is exactly what makes the movie appealing to men, especially to religious leaders. Both papists and Protestants equate feeling sorry for "poor, suffering Jesus" as either conversion or a sure move toward conversion. But that is not the case. Our Master said, as he was on his way to Calvary, the place of his triumph, "Weep not for me, but weep for yourselves, and for your children" (Luke 23:28).

Animated Idolatry - Why would anyone who would not think of attending a papal mass or wearing a crucifix want to see such a film as this? It is nothing more than animated idolatry. Our God forbids the making and use of religious images (Ex. 20:3-4). That prohibition certainly includes images and pictures that are supposed to be or represent Christ. If it is idolatrous to have an image of God (the Lord Jesus Christ) in your living room, it cannot be less evil to play the role of God (or watch a man play that role) in a movie or play.

Gospel preaching is the declaration of justice satisfied and redemption accomplished by Christ's sin-atoning death.

Gospel preaching is not playing on the emotions of people to trick them into religion. Gospel preaching is convincing sinners of sin, and righteousness, and judgment finished by the effectual accomplishments of the omnipotent Lamb of God.

Five Reasons Not to Go See The Passion of Christ  By Andrew J. Webb www.scionofzion.com/five_reasons.htm
1) Its Origins: Gospels AND extra-biblical visions (demonic??) of an 18^th century mystic nun

2) Its Script: The script of The Passion of Christ was specifically intended to link the crucifixion of Christ with what Roman Catholics believe is the re-sacrificing of Christ that occurs in the mass. Gibson's intent is to show us that the sacrifice of the cross and the sacrifice of the altar (the mass) are the same thing. Protestant Evangelicals have historically rejected the idea that Christ can be sacrificed again and declared it "abominable." 
3) Its Theology: central to the Christian Gospel, but missing from The Passion of Christ, is the concept of Christ's active obedience. Christ not only died for the sins of His sheep on the cross but He established their righteousness through His perfect obedience to God's Law. It is only if His passive obedience in dying on the cross and His active obedience in keeping the law are imputed to believers per 2 Cor. 5:21 that believers will be justified before almighty God.

4) Its Medium: We need to remember that the last time dramatic presentations replaced preaching as the main vehicle by which the truth of the Bible was communicated was during the middle-ages when the church refused to allow the translation of the Bible into common languages and when in place of the preaching and teaching of God's word, the common people were given visual presentations such as Passion Plays, statues, relics, and icons. These things were designed, like most visual imagery, to play upon the emotions and stimulate a response; but the ability to evoke an emotional response via imagery or drama is not the same as successfully transmitting the Gospel.
5) Its Main Character: Every visual representation of Jesus is inevitably a lie...At the time of the Reformation, Protestants overwhelmingly rejected the practice of making images of Jesus as a clear violation of the Second Commandment.

ONE REASON TO GO: . 1Co 9:22... I have become all things to all men, that I might by all means save some.

1) Its Origins: This is in marked contrast to the Jesus film, which is unabashedly Protestant and Evangelical in its production and message and which has been widely used in evangelizing Roman Catholics. It is largely for this reason that the Jesus film has not been utilized or endorsed by Roman Catholics. By contrast, The Passion of Christ has already proven its effectiveness as an evangelism tool in producing Catholic conversions and encouraging Catholic devotion

2) Its Script: Although it is widely thought that the script for the movie is based entirely on the gospel according to John, this is not the case.  The script for The Passion of Christ contains much extrabiblical material, and is based in part on a mystical Roman Catholic devotional work by an 18th century German Nun (Sister Anne Emmerich) entitled The Dolorous Passion of Christ. Gibson stated on EWTN that reading Emmerich's book was his primary inspiration for making the movie. By introducing extrabiblical elements, not only does The Passion of Christ change some of the theological emphases of the Biblical account of Christ's
crucifixion, but it will also create a false impression amongst the very "seekers" that Evangelicals are trying to reach, that things were said and done at the crucifixion that did not actually happen. For Evangelicals, who would feel very uncomfortable with a version of the Bible that put words into the mouth of Christ that He never spoke, to endorse a movie that does the very same thing seems hopelessly inconsistent. Protestants traditionally rejected the Apocrypha precisely because these books were fabricated and contained inauthentic material, despite the fact that these books might have been useful for evangelism. For modern evangelicals to embrace a vehicle that is inauthentic in order to achieve evangelistic ends indicates a serious decline in faithfulness.   The script for The Passion of Christ not only adds things that didn't occur in the Bible, it cuts out other things that did. The most widely known example of this is the important declaration, "His blood be on us and on our children." (Matthew 27:25) 

The script of The Passion of Christ  was specifically intended to link the crucifixion of Christ with what Roman Catholics believe is the re-sacrificing of Christ that occurs in the mass. Gibson's intent is to show us that the sacrifice of the cross and the sacrifice of the altar (the mass) are the same thing. Protestant Evangelicals have historically rejected the idea that Christ can be sacrificed again and declared it "abominable." 

3) Its Theology: Gibson's comment about the sacrifice of the altar and the sacrifice of the cross shows the indispensable link in this movie between the Catholic view of Christ's sacrifice and the portrayal of the Crucifixion in The Passion of Christ....Also central to the Christian Gospel, but missing from The Passion of Christ, is the concept of Christ's active obedience. Christ not only died for the sins of His sheep on the cross but He established their righteousness through His perfect obedience to God's Law. It is only if His passive obedience in dying on the cross and His active obedience in keeping the law are imputed to believers per 2 Cor. 5:21 that believers will be justified before almighty God. The Passion of Christ does not even make any pretence of teaching the active obedience of Christ, the entire notion of which is alien to Roman Catholic theology. Therefore if Evangelicals intend to use this as a Gospel teaching tool, they must understand that at best they are teaching only half a gospel, and that the half they are teaching is defectively presented. 

4) Its Medium: Many Evangelical Pastors are hailing movies like The Passion of Christ as part of a new and better way of spreading the Gospel:
It is indeed true that we live in a highly visual and increasingly anti-literate society that places a premium on sound bites and easily assimilated visual imagery, but does this mean that we should abandon preaching in favor of using movies or dramatic presentations? We need to remember that the last time dramatic presentations replaced preaching as the main vehicle by which the truth of the Bible was communicated was during the middle-ages when the church refused to allow the translation of the Bible into common languages and when in place of the preaching and teaching of God's word, the common people were given visual presentations such as Passion Plays, statues, relics, and icons. These things were designed, like most visual imagery, to play upon the emotions and stimulate a response; but the ability to evoke an emotional response via imagery or drama is not the same as successfully transmitting the Gospel. The means that God has ordained for the transmission of the Gospel, was neither drama, imagery, nor even "lectures" - it is preaching. Preaching involves the communication of the Gospel in a way that patiently convinces, rebukes, exhorts, and teaches (2 Timothy 4:2-4). The bible teaches us the awesome importance of preaching and why it cannot be replaced by another medium:

We must preach God's Word regardless of how unpopular it is because we are commanded to do so: "Preach the word! Be ready in season and out of season.  Convince, rebuke, exhort, with all longsuffering and teaching. For the time will come when they will not endure sound doctrine, but according to their own desires, because they have itching ears, they will heap up for themselves teachers; and they will turn their ears away from the truth, and be turned aside to fables." (2 Timothy 4:2-4)

We must preach God's Word because it always accomplishes the purpose for which it was sent: "For as the heavens are higher than the earth, So are My ways higher than your ways, And My thoughts than your thoughts. For as the rain comes down, and the snow from heaven, And do not return there, But water the earth, And make it bring forth and bud, That it may give seed to the sower And bread to the eater, So shall My word be that goes forth from My mouth; It shall not return to Me void, But it shall accomplish what I please, And it shall prosper in the thing for which I sent it." (Isa.55:9-11)

God does not command us to produce dramatic presentations of Gospel themes, He commands us to preach. Though this option was freely available to the Apostles as they brought the Gospel to cities with amphitheaters and a long tradition of using the dramatic arts to convey religious and moral themes to the populace they did not do so. The wisdom of the Apostolic methodology has been borne out by the fact that it was when the Gospel was being transmitted primarily by plays and symbolism that true Christianity began to sink under the weight of superstition. We are in danger of returning to precisely that state of affairs by reviving the teaching methodology of the medieval church. Even though it was produced in the 21st century, The Passion of Christ is identical in all critical aspects to the Passion Plays of the Roman Catholic Church in the Middle Ages.

5) Its Main Character:
For the first four centuries of its existence the church did not use pictures of Jesus as an aid to evangelism. This was despite the fact that they were bringing the gospel to highly visual cultures that had always used imagery to convey religious ideas. The initial movements towards making pictures of Christ were initially strongly opposed, and the practice was formally condemned by the church as late as 753 AD. Unfortunately, once they had taken hold of the public imagination, the practice of making visible representations of Christ proved difficult if not impossible to eradicate and gradually, pictures and dramatic representations of Jesus became quite commonplace in the church. At the time of the Reformation, Protestants overwhelmingly rejected the practice of making images of Jesus as a clear violation of the Second Commandment. They also rejected the notion that such images had a necessary role as "textbooks for the laity" and then proved that notion false by producing generations of other Protestants well versed in the word and familiar with their Savior although they had never once owned or seen a representation of him.

Rather than visual imagery, they relied on the preaching of the Word to save souls, and the gospel made great advances. If we return to the use of imagery and begin endorsing movies like The Passion of Christ, we will be returning to the very state of affairs the first Protestants struggled and died to reform. We must not think that merely endorsing one form of visible representation of Christ will not lead inevitably to others. For instance, it is impossible to make a coherent argument against the use of the crucifix in teaching the Gospel if we have already endorsed the use of a movie that portrays the crucifixion. Merely because one display is static and the other moving does not change their essential nature at all. The Passion of Christ is in essence, an animated Crucifix.

In closing, let me address a common objection, namely that we must use tools like The Passion of Christ in order to reach the lost and that if we don't we are "missing a great opportunity."

Are we really missing an opportunity though? If we are convinced that using a Roman Catholic movie to present the Gospel is in essence a violation of God's law, how could we possibly use it? Should we sin that grace may abound?

Also, are we really certain that this will be as effective as we think in saving souls? J. Marcellus Kik in his Pictures of Christ addressed that very question and gave us some wise advice, which I think all Christians
would do well to heed:

"But can it not help in the saving of souls, it is asked. But how? Looking at a picture of Christ hanging upon the cross tells me nothing. It does not tell me that He hung there for sin. It does not tell me that He hung there for my sin. It does not tell me that He is the Son of God. Only the Word of God does that. And it is the Word of God that has been given us to tell the story of salvation through the blood of Christ. It is not through the foolishness of pictures that sinners are converted but through the foolishness of preaching.

It is amazing how slowly unscriptural practices enter the Christian Church.  We must at all times go back to the Scriptures. The Bible is our infallible guide. And if our practices and doctrines do not conform with the teachings of the Scriptures then we must eliminate them. The Bible instructs the Church not to make any likeness of Christ. The present day pictures of Christ are false and no one would make a serious claim that they resemble Christ upon earth. They separate His humanity from His deity. They do not at all give us a glimpse of His present glory. They are not condoned by the inspired apostles.

God has ordained the foolishness of preaching to evangelize the world. He has promised to attend the preaching of the Word with the power of the Holy Spirit. The so-called pictures of Christ are a hindrance and a temptation to idolatry. Let us cleanse the Temple of God from them."14

"In the sphere of religion, as in other spheres, the things about which men are agreed are apt to be the things that are least worth holding; the really important things are the things about which men will fight."
                 - J. Gresham Machen

PROVIDENCE PCA MISSION CHURCH: http://www.providencepca.com

Agape News: Sawyer questioned the Catholic actor about whether his traditionalist belief system barred the door to heaven to Jews, Muslims, and Protestants, to which Gibson replied, "That's not the case at all -- absolutely not. It is possible for people who are not even Christian to get into the kingdom of heaven." Although most Christians cite John 14:6 -- "I am the way, the truth and the life; no man comes to the father except through me" -- as evidence to the contrary, Gibson says he believes that it is not impossible for non-Christians to enter heaven, but that it is "an easier ride" for those of his faith.