The passion of Christ

The scene was set , Caiaphas is not satisfied and demands that Jesus be crucified. Pilate tries one last time to avert the inevitable.

He tells the mob that they can save one condemned man from execution and tells them to choose between Jesus and Barabbas, a murderer. To his disbelief the mob choose to pardon Barabbas. Jesus is to be crucified.

Ultimately, The Passion of the Christ is not even a proselytising film. It is a film about the tragedy of mankind: about man’s bloodlust, about his inexhaustible cruelty to his fellow man, about his cowardice, conformity and hypocrisy, about the pleasure he takes in the suffering of others, and about his fatal lack of empathy and compassion.

You must think though; torture, murder and death in general were not seen as bad back then as they are now. They were everyday and usually public occurances.

The mob could care less to free a murderer; but to free someone who claims he is the son of god? Blasphemy!!! …I think Jesus pretty much pissed them off much more then any murderer in that time could have. In that context, it is more understandable that they would wish Jesus’ death… and gladly at that.

It might not have seemed such a big deal back then, but hey, if God really wanted it to happen like it seemed he did - then it appears wanted it for the new religion he’s son would bring. I mean, just look at it. Christianity is currently the biggest religion in the world - but if Jesus was not crucified, would it be so? Unlikely perhaps, though none could ever tell for sure.


I think you guys are forgetting that this is a movie. There are many weak claims made in the Passion, one of them being that Pilate was sympathetic to Jesus.

Pilate was not the “nice guy” Mel Gibson–or the Bible for that matter–tries to make him out to be. It is highly unlikely that such a brutal procurator as Pilate would even have let the crowd vote on Jesus’ fate; let alone grieve over the crowd’s choice. It would give off a sign of weakness to the population. This man was one of the most ruthless procurators in the Roman Empire. He was actually removed of his position for being so barbaric.

He ruled with an iron fist. It wouldn’t have been in his nature to allow a crowd to vote on Jesus’ fate. Jesus and his followers were a threat to the Empire. They had to be taken care of.

Personally, I think all historical evidence points to Pilate as being the sole person who decided Jesus’ fate.

Historical evidence of Jesus? Where?


History, written by people.You know, like Albert Einstein, Adolf Hitler,
Karl Marx, JFK …
Don’t know are you the right person to answer, but can you give me any
evidence of existance of that Satan of yours ??
Jesus was dude that existed as living person 2000 years ago.
Satan is just Illusion, just like Evil .

            much love !

Jesus, as fulfilment of Prophecy, couldn’t end up any other way, then the way He ended up. I have seen the movie last night, (first and last time) and I like book better :wink:
Pilate did not see any wrongdoing on Jesus, and his hands were perfectly clean of Dudes blood. Jesus told him that himself.

          much love !!

PieceFullthyme your mistaken about Satanism much like most people who have not done much research on Satanism. Satanism in the sense that Myself and Dr S. know does not believe in an actually Being known as Satan nor do we believe in any being who has any power in Heaven or Hell because to Us Heaven nor Hell exist. Please refer to one of the Several… and Yes I mean several threads on Satanism for a further insight on Satanism. You’ll see many times where Dr. S or Myself explain that Satanism does not worship, nor follow, nor believe in Satan. Thanks


My comment was relevant because the discussion hinges on historical evidence of jesus. Without it, this just a discussion about a story in a book(And concequently a really shitty movie).
In that case whatever the book(movie) says is ‘true’ because it qualifies itself…end of discussion.
If you are going to talk as if it REALLY HAPPENED, evidence of such is key, wouldn’t you think?

To the religious guy…see Laskos post. Satan as a being only exists in the minds of christians. Some around here accept immagination as qualification of reality, and to some of them I’m sure he is very real. Not me, though.

But I absolutely refuse to derail another thread talking about this, so let’s keep it on hay-zoos, ok?

In any case, a historical document is always at question… As Voltaire once said, “History is Fables agreed upon” but not neccesarily true as documentation of the Bible is rather sketchy as we /don’t/ have /any/ Original papyrus from the Bible do authenticate Todays hundreds of interpretations on the Bible.

I wasn’t refering to historical evidence of Jesus, I was refering to historical evidence of Pilate. I have no idea whether Jesus existed or not but I do believe Pilate did, and I do believe all the historical evidence of Pilate indicates Pilate would have been the sole person to make decisions concerning the fate of people who were percieved as threats to the stability of the empire.

Being the ruthless leader that Pilate was its hard to imagine him as being compassionate for Jesus, which is why I believe he wasn’t being compassionate for Jesus, he was more along the lines being a Leader who at the hands of the Jews (and there were many of them… to many of them) needed to make a decision… A) Tell them they can’t crucify him and take the risk of an uprising and possibly losing his dominion and power… or B) Let the jews have but a single man to kill… to keep the order of his Empire.

I dont really consider my interpretation one of compassion but one of Political reasoning… Allow a ruthless Mob to kill one man and save his armies the trouble of protecting this one Man, and also protecting themselves from the uprising.

I am not religious guy, religion is lie, my state of mind is based on truth.
It was only 2000 years ago, they used written word as only way to record what was going on. And, there was so many words written about
Jesus from Nazareth and His folks. Which is for you a lie.
Lie is a religion based upon His name, not the Dude himself.
If you flat out believe that everything about Jesus is a lie, why bother thinking about him ?, you feel me ? Just like Santa Claus, he is fable, but
we got to pretend, because we love our kids, and they hope Santa loves them :wink:
If you’ve said He was just a punk, running his mouth like every other lunatic of his time, i could feel that.
But to say he never existed, is just too deep for me.
Bottom line, you reserve absolute right to your opinion (belief), and you’re cool.

                   much respect !

No Lasko, I am not mistaken about Satanism, or you or Dr.S :sunglasses:
Satanism is a mega Lie, mega illusion, and you and Dr. S are two
cool dudes that believe in lies. That’s all, just like “christians”.
Dude you got to take it from me, my Wife is Jehovah’s Witness :cry:
feel me now ?
Heaven and Hell do exist as metaphores of Human state if mind.

Unlike you, I do not tell people what to Do or Believe, I am telling the truth, and you can feel it or Not, you don’t have a choice.
Can you feel that “you don’t have a choice” part ??

    much respect !

Where did you get that truth and evidence about Pilate ??
According to a bible, He was under Huge influence from his wife .

Well, they’ve actually found that a man named Jesus, in Jesus’ supposed time, voted on something along with some of his community.

What I dont understand is… a lot of history is taken off hieroglyphics or books or scrolls and such - and it is taken apart by historians into what is real and what isnt, so its really their interpretations of it.
Why should the bible be taken any differently? Because it has some unbelievable claims and events? Heh and loads of Greek, Egyptian, Aztec, etc, history doesnt? Of course it does. What do we learn from all this? In every lie there is at least some part truth.

So from his vote we can say, there was indeed a man named Jesus in Jesus’ time, who voted.

From the Bible we can say, that he had quite a few followers who seemed to write down his teachings and miracles. What if though, his miracles Gasps didnt really happen? What if it was all just symbolism for the meaning; if you believe in God and his son you will be good and well or whatnot.

From the shroud that is said to be his, we can say that perhaps he was executed and was placed in a tomb, his body covered by this shroud like the Bible says.

From these three things I believe the Bible gives the best account of what happened to a man named Jesus and Pilates role in his crucifixion.

To throw out the whole Bible because you dont believe that Jesus was a real person or whatnot is rediculous to me. Just as my belief in God may be rediculous to you. Different strokes for different folks I suppose.


Jesus is mentioned at least twice in the non-Christian historical record (that I’ve seen).

  1. Flavius Josephus, a Jewish historian mentions Jesus in passing. Josephus wrote twenty-volumes titled Jewish Antiquities around 93 or 94 C.E. He briefly mentions Jesus as the founder of the “tribe of the Christians.” Josephus’ tone is fairly neutral, although scholars I’ve read like John Crossan point out hyperbolic language added by later Christian translators.

  2. There is also a scathing account from Cornelius Tacitus, who mentions him in passing when describing the fire that swept Rome in 64 C.E. Tacitus writes: “Nero substituted as culprits, and punished with the utmost refinements of cruelty, a class of men, loathed for their vices, whom the crowed styled Christians. Christus, the founder of the name, had undergone the death penalty in the reign of Tiberius, by sentence of the procurator Pontius Pilatus, and the pernicious superstition was checked for the moment, only to break out once more, not merely in Judea, the home of the disease, but in the capital itself, where all things horrible or shameful in the world collect and find a vogue” (Annals 15.44).

I included most of Tacitus’ writing because it is rather entertaining, any way you look at it.

How about this.

The fact that the figure of christ is followed by millions worldwide means either he was an actual historical figure , and was the son of god.


That he was alive but was not the son of god, so christians are misled, as are muslims for thinking he was alive to be a prohet.

Or he simply never existed.

Everyone, John, luke, peter, timothy, all the apostles , everyone who ever had a phd and wrote extensively about christ, Bob marley , John coltrane, some of our greatest minds , all deluded schizophrenics?

That is a lot of misled ignorant people. Are we really so dumb as a creature that more than half of us believe in a figure that never existed?

I doubt that. You can say that one cant make conclusions based on figures alone all you like. But you are basically saying that the majority of the world is misled into thinking christ was alive.

If he never existed, that is a lot of confused people. But I dont believe personally they have it wrong. Even though most dont follow christ correctly, I concede that.

I believe it is yourself who is failing to accept the obviousness of it all, just for a start.

Never mind what esoteric groups have to say about christ himself that further supports the idea that he was actually here.

But again it is irrelevant really. And We each must make up our own mind. Nevertheless, I am not a christian , but I believe Christ lived, because it seems silly not to.

And I cant be put into the category of people who need christ, and so therefore must see him as real. No, It is silly because it defies logic.

Unless Im unaware of some massive global conspiracy to make people follow an invented figure. A conspiracy that started some 2500 years ago.

These are also reasons to consider with regards to christ as historical figure.

I’ve already been over this, and feel no need to re-invent the wheel. … p?t=140856