'Faith' inspired Gibson's movie

February 4, 2004

Gibson says film is about "obsessional love" Mel Gibson says a renewed interest in faith inspired his controversial film about Christ.

Gibson told Readers' Digest magazine: "I think the germ of it came at a time when I was really searching, asking all those Hamlet questions."

The Passion of the Christ, released in the US this month, has been attacked by Jewish and Christian groups, who fear the film is anti-Semitic.

Gibson said was shocked by criticism of the film, which he also wrote.

The actor and director said the film had been "incubating for 12 years".

He said he had researched the film thoroughly.

It was a surprise, to have shots being fired while I was still filming

Mel Gibson

"Part of my investigation was the reawakening of the faith I was raised in.

"So I began to explore in books, sermons and theologies. It's interesting that many of the critics think I just came out of a vacuum with this.

"I have talked to literally thousands of learned and biblical scholars. I didn't make it up, you know."

Gibson said the film was about "obsessional love" and was based on text of the gospel.

But some critics have complained the film is anti-Jewish because it suggests Jews were responsible for Christ's death.

The film has dialogue in Latin and Aramaic

In the US, the Anti-Defamation League and American Jewish Committee have launched a campaign against the film, saying it is anti-Semitic.

"I expected some level of turbulence because whenever one delves into religion and politics - people's deeply held beliefs - you're going to stir things up.

"But it was a surprise, to have shots being fired while I was still filming, and then to have various loud voices in the press - people who hadn't seen it - slinging mud."

He added: "They don't really have a problem with me if they have a problem with this film. They have a problem with the gospel, because it adheres pretty well to the gospel."

Despite denials from the Vatican, Gibson said the Pope had seen the film and given his approval.

"Yes, Pope John Paul II saw it.

"His assistant related a comment that he made during the latter part of the film.

He said, 'It is as it was'. It sounds pretty Zen, doesn't it?"

The Passion of the Christ is released in the UK on 26 March.

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

How about a film about The Transcendence of Krishna ?

February 6, 2004

Open letter on 'The Passion of the Christ'

--

Posted: February 6, 2004

1:00 a.m. Eastern

By Dr. James Dobson

Dear Friends:

It isn't often that I find myself speaking favorably about a modern movie, but there is a film being released this month that I believe is among the most powerful and important ever made. I'm talking about ""The Passion of the Christ"," a dramatic recounting of our Savior's final hours on earth, including His crucifixion and resurrection.

You've probably already heard something about this movie, as it has received a great deal of press (much of it negative) in recent months. I'll address the controversy surrounding "The Passion of the Christ" in a moment, but first some general information. The film has been directed by one of the most prominent and well-known movie stars of our time, Mel Gibson (in addition to appearing in countless Hollywood blockbusters, Mr. Gibson directed and starred in the Oscar-winning Scottish epic "Braveheart"). According to NewMarket Films, the company releasing "The Passion of the Christ" here in the U.S., the script was "adapted from a composite account of the Passion assembled from the four biblical Gospels of Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John."

The movie is designed to provide an authentic representation of the events surrounding Christ's death. All of the characters in the film speak the original languages heard at the time, including Aramaic and Latin. (In the early stages of production, Mr. Gibson intended to release the film without subtitles. However, at the urging of many who saw early screenings of "The Passion of the Christ," English subtitles have been added.) In the U.S. and Canada, the movie is being released on Ash Wednesday, Feb. 25, which signifies the beginning of Lent.

I had the privilege of viewing a "rough cut" of the movie last summer during a writing trip to California, and again in September. I can say that, in addition to being faithful to the essentials of the biblical account, it is easily the most heart-wrenching, powerful portrayal of Christ's suffering that I have ever seen. Shirley and I were deeply moved by the stark depiction of the brutality and humiliation that Jesus endured on our behalf. Other preview screenings have had a similar effect, leaving audience members either weeping openly or hushed in reverent silence.

Mel Gibson also traveled to Focus on the Family headquarters last year to show an early version of "The Passion of the Christ" to several members of our executive staff. After seeing the film, our ministry president, Don Hodel, and executive vice president, Del Tackett, (Shirley and I were out of town at the time) issued statements praising the movie for its historical accuracy and its powerful portrayal of Christ's sacrifice. Gibson himself has said that, in making the movie, "I wanted to bring you there and I wanted to be true to the Gospels."

Mr. Gibson's earnest desire to accurately portray Christ's suffering for humankind – and to share that pivotal moment in history with a mass audience – is tremendously refreshing to me. He has gone to great lengths to ensure that the movie will encourage, rather than offend, the millions of Christians around the world for whom the death and resurrection of Jesus hold such profound meaning. Indeed, over the past year, he has shown footage to numerous Christian and Jewish leaders around the country, not for the purpose of promotion, but to solicit their feedback.

When Mr. Gibson brought his movie to Focus headquarters last year, it was clear that he was genuinely interested in our opinions and respectful of our views. He could easily have sent one of his representatives here to show the film and request our endorsement. Rather, he appeared personally, without any fanfare, in order to address any questions and concerns we might have had.

A devout Catholic, Mel Gibson has repeatedly emphasized the fact that he felt called by God to bring "The Passion of the Christ" to the big screen. During one interview, he said, "I'm not a preacher, and I'm not a pastor. But I really feel my career was leading me to make this . The Holy Ghost was working through me on this film, and I was just directing traffic. I hope the film has the power to evangelize ... Everyone who worked on this movie was changed. There were agnostics and Muslims on set converting to Christianity." When was the last time you heard a major Hollywood star make a statement of such magnitude?

Apparently, however, the idea of a movie that accurately portrays the death and resurrection of Christ and that "has the power to evangelize" is more than certain members of the liberal media establishment can stomach. As a result, "The Passion of the Christ," throughout its production, has been the source of great controversy. More specifically, the movie – and Mel Gibson himself – have been mercilessly dogged by liberal commentators hurling unfair criticism and baseless allegations of anti-Semitism.

The reasoning proffered by many of these cultural elitists is that the movie's characterization of the Jewish leaders of Jesus' day and its depiction of the angry mob calling for His crucifixion could lead viewers to the conclusion that the Jews were exclusively responsible for killing Christ. "The Passion of the Christ," they somberly intone, could therefore be a catalyst for renewed outbreaks of anti-Jewish sentiment around the world.

Despite repeated assurances from Mr. Gibson that his film does not seek to malign Jews – or any other group – the attacks have come fast and furious. That "The Passion of the Christ" endeavors to remain true to the Gospel accounts is no excuse in the minds of those who wish Mel Gibson and his movie would just go away.

Columnist James Carroll of the Boston Globe, a subsidiary of the New York Times, went so far as to suggest that "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." Does Mr. Carroll really expect readers to believe that the Gospels – written by Jews about a Jewish Messiah and His Jewish disciples – are anti-Semitic? His assertion is so ridiculous and foolish as to be laughable.

Among Mel Gibson's liberal critics, New York Times columnist Frank Rich has been one of the most vocal and vitriolic. In one particularly nasty diatribe, Rich characterized Gibson as a "Jew-baiter" and endeavored to malign the actor's elderly father, who has absolutely no connection to the movie whatsoever. Mr. Rich suggested that Gibson was "sowing religious conflict" by not inviting a sufficient number of Jews to attend preview screenings of the movie. (As you may know, Mr. Rich has a long and illustrious record of disdain for everyone and everything that fails to live up to his "enlightened" liberal ideals. In recent years, he has referred to yours truly as "The Godzilla of the Right" and compared me to Ku Klux Klan member David Duke, endeavored to link conservative Christians with the Oklahoma City bombing and Promise Keepers with the militia movement, and blamed the Family Research Council for the death of Wyoming college student Matthew Shepard.) Rich is rabidly anti-Christian in almost every context.

In my estimation, the liberal backlash against "The Passion of the Christ" is incredibly significant. Shaky charges of "anti-Semitism" are really just a smokescreen. I believe the real problem the liberal establishment has with this movie is that it has the audacity to portray Christ as He really was – not only as a historical figure, but as the Savior of mankind. That is an offense to the postmodern sensibilities of our morally relativistic culture. The fact that Mel Gibson actually hopes to use his movie as a vehicle for evangelism only adds fuel to the fire.

Columnist David Limbaugh put it best when he said:

How ironic that when a movie producer takes artistic license with historical events, he is lionized as artistic, creative and brilliant, but when another takes special care to be true to the real-life story, he is vilified ... 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 post-Christian culture, criticism of the blasphemous "The Last Temptation of Christ" is celebrated, and "The Passion [of the Christ]" is condemned.

Stated another way, criticism of "The Last Temptation of Christ" brought angry protests of "censorship" from Hollywood and the media, whereas objections to "The Passion of the Christ" are considered entirely valid. This is yet another example of a powerful double standard.

In one sense, I suppose we should not be surprised when the true story of Christ – whether depicted on film or declared from the pulpit – creates controversy. The Apostle Paul reminds us that "the message of the cross is foolishness to those who are perishing, but to us who are being saved it is the power of God" (I Corinthians 1:18). There is no denying that there is a spiritual element to the uproar surrounding "The Passion of the Christ," as well.

Mel Gibson seemed to recognize this himself when, in a recent interview, he described the controversy over his movie as evidence of "big realms that are warring and battling."

In another interview, he noted that one of his primary motivations in making the movie was precisely "to show that turmoil around [Jesus] politically and with religious leaders and the people, all because He is Who He is ... This is not a Christian vs. Jewish thing. '[Jesus] came into the world, and it knew him not.' Looking at Christ's crucifixion, I look first at my own culpability in that."

Indeed, many Jewish viewers who have seen the movie paint a picture that stands in stark contrast to the alarmist posturing of Frank Rich and his cronies. David Horowitz has noted that "there is no finger pointing at Jews in the film, and it is unsustainable to suggest that this will provoke Christians into violence against Jews." Alan Sereboff, a Jewish screenwriter who has previously worked with Gibson's company, said, "As a Jew I left the movie feeling a greater sense of friendship and closeness to my Christian brothers and sisters than I ever thought imaginable." And noted movie critic and radio host Michael Medved has called "The Passion of the Christby far the most moving, substantive, and artistically successful adaptation of biblical material ever attempted by Hollywood."

Praise from Christian viewers has been equally effusive. Wall Street Journal columnist Peggy Noonan said of the movie: "I came away reassured. It is a moving film, and what it moves you to is tears, and thought ... It leaves you indicting yourself: It leaves you wondering about what your part in that agonizing drama would have been back then, and what your part is today." Billy Graham, who described himself as having been "moved to tears" by the film, said: "After watching "The Passion of the Christ," I feel as if I have actually been there ... The film is faithful to the Bible's teaching that we are all responsible for Jesus' death, because we have all sinned."

WorldNetDaily columnist Joseph Farah echoed those sentiments and explained why the liberal media's charges of "anti-Semitism" are without merit: "Followers of Jesus believe we are all responsible – all human beings, alive, dead or yet to be born – for crucifying Jesus ... He bore our sins and they were nailed to that tree the day He died. We don't blame anyone but ourselves. To do so would miss out on the grace He offered with His shed blood."

Having shared a few of the details concerning "The Passion of the Christ," may I now encourage you to take the time to go see the movie when it is released on the 25th of this month? As Christians, we often decry the immoral films that Hollywood routinely releases, and rightly so. However, in addition to avoiding movies that are immoral or otherwise disparaging of Christianity, we must do everything we can to support those rare films that, like "The Passion of the Christ," are both edifying and uplifting.

For years, Hollywood executives have justified their constant barrage of sex-and-debauchery-soaked movies by saying, "We're only releasing what the public wants to see!" Many movie industry executives refuse to admit that there is a viable audience for stories and characters that extol biblical virtues. "The Passion of the Christ" presents us with a powerful opportunity to prove them wrong.

In the competitive entertainment market, a movie's opening weekend is widely considered to be the measure of success or failure. If a film fails to draw strong numbers during its first few days of release, it is generally considered a "flop." Therefore, I want to encourage you to consider seeing "The Passion of the Christ" either on its opening day, or soon thereafter. (For information on advance ticket sales and group tickets, you can visit the official movie website at www.thepassionofthechrist.com.)

Don't wait for the film to run its course in theaters or to be released on DVD. You have a couple of extra days to choose from, as "The Passion of the Christ" is being released on a Wednesday, whereas most films open on Fridays. If you can't see the movie on opening day, I hope you'll consider seeing it sometime between Thursday (the 26th) and Sunday (the 29th). If "The Passion of the Christ" does big business during this period, the entertainment industry might finally begin to get the message that audiences are hungry for movies that offer more than the typical Hollywood diet of blasphemy and obscenity.

On a related note, I need to mention two other movies released within the past year that were noteworthy for their positive portrayals of Christian characters and themes. The first, "The Gospel of John," received acclaim from both Christian and secular critics for its excellent acting and production values. As the title suggests, it is a word-for-word recounting of John's Gospel. It is still playing in select theaters as of this writing, but if you can't find it in your area, you can order it on VHS or DVD from www.gospelofjohnthefilm.com.

The second film, "Luther," starred Joseph Fiennes in a surprisingly fair and accurate portrayal of Martin Luther, the father of the Protestant Reformation. You can visit www.lutherthemovie.com for additional information about the film. (Details concerning the future DVD release have not yet been announced.)

While both of these movies represent encouraging signs that all hope is not lost in Hollywood, and while they were both marginally successful in their own right, neither of them were the type of "blockbusters" that would make the decision-makers in Tinsel Town really sit up and take notice. Again, I'm convinced that if more Christians were willing to support films that respect their values, rather than simply vilifying the ones that don't, we would see more movies like these produced.

Before closing, I want to offer a few words of clarification on two matters related to Mel Gibson's film. First, although accurate to the biblical account, you need to know that "The Passion of the Christ" is excruciatingly violent in its depiction of our Savior's scourging and crucifixion. As such, it is wholly inappropriate for young children.

In any other context, I could not in good conscience recommend a movie containing this degree of violent content. However, in this case, the violence is intended not to titillate or entertain, but to emphasize the reality of the unspeakable suffering that our Savior endured on our behalf. Christian recording artist Christy Nockels of Watermark, put the violent nature of the film in perspective by saying, "It is extremely graphic, but through each scene my heart kept taking me back to Isaiah 53:5: 'By His stripes we are healed.'" Speaking personally, I was deeply affected by a single thought while watching the movie: I did this to Jesus.

Second, I'm aware that many of my readers may have some questions about Mel Gibson himself. On the one hand, he has appeared in a number of films containing content that many Christians would find offensive. On the other, his staunch adherence to Catholic beliefs and doctrines might be upsetting to those who come from a more evangelical and Protestant persuasion. Please know that, in discussing this project, I am not offering a blanket endorsement of either Mr. Gibson's personal beliefs or his past work. I can only say that, when it comes to "The Passion of the Christ," I believe it has the potential to dramatically impact Christian viewers and, even more importantly, change the lives of the many unsaved audience members who could potentially be drawn to it.

There are no specific references to unique Catholic doctrine in the film – it is a straightforward depiction of what both Protestants and Catholics agree is the single most important event in human history. The movie simply endeavors to show audiences, in the words of the Apostle Paul, "nothing ... except Jesus Christ and Him crucified" (I Corinthians 2:2).

Whether you decide to see "The Passion of the Christ" or not, with Easter on the horizon, I hope that you will take some time in the coming weeks to reflect on Christ's death and resurrection and to consider the inestimable significance that those events hold in the lives of those of us who claim Him as King. He paid the penalty for our sins so that we might be reconciled with our Father in Heaven. The prophet Isaiah captured the magnitude of that moment most eloquently:

He was despised and rejected by men, a man of sorrows, and familiar with suffering. Like one from whom men hide their faces He was despised, and we esteemed Him not. Surely He took up our infirmities and carried our sorrows, yet we considered Him stricken by God, smitten by Him, and afflicted. But He was pierced for our transgressions, He was crushed for our iniquities; the punishment that brought us peace was upon Him, and by His wounds we are healed.

– Isaiah 53:3-5

And now, 2,000 years after His earthly life – in the age of movies and satellites and the Internet – the Suffering Servant beckons to us still. To those who hear and respond to His call, He offers the promise of grace, forgiveness, restoration and a glorious eternity. That is Good News, indeed!

Sincerely,

James C. Dobson, Ph.D.

Founder and Chairman

Focus On The Family

P.S. Since I have been talking about the subject of movies this month, I thought it would be appropriate to mention Focus on the Family's Plugged In magazine. This monthly publication discusses the content of a wide range of movies, TV shows, video games, secular and Christian music CDs, and other media related to youth culture. Its companion website, www.pluggedinonline.com, focuses primarily on current movies and also contains an archive of reviews for past movie and music releases. If you're a parent, I believe you will find Plugged In to be an indispensable resource.

krsna · February 6, 2004

Nothing's bigger than Jesus

Pop culture looks to Jesus Christ for inspiration

Babiak

The Edmonton Journal

Friday, February 06, 2004

Henry Ian Cusick stars as Jesus Christ in The Gospel of John, just one of several upcoming Christ-related cultural confections.

CREDIT: Brooke Palmer

EDMONTON - Jesus is a dangerous man. He is a gentle god. He is a blasphemer and a saviour and the spiritual boss of the most powerful social and political force in the western world.

Saint Paul, the converted Jew who created a religion out of Jesus, was one of the greatest storytellers in human history. If we can call Jesus a literary character, he sits in the top five, up there with Moses and Satan and Hamlet. The historical Jesus, living in the fearful shadows of Christianity, remains a mystery.

So we shouldn't be surprised that Jesus is omnipresent in art and entertainment. But why this winter? Felicity? Divine judgment? A lack of any better ideas? Either way, according to our religious orientation, we will be offended, fascinated or inspired this winter.

We will be anything but bored.

"When you work on this sort of project, you are dealing with one of the most interesting figures in the history of the world," said Canadian producer Garth Drabinsky.

Drabinsky produced the other film about Jesus in theatres this month, The Gospel of John, opening in Edmonton next Friday. "What we're releasing is a faithful, word-by-word adaptation of the most well-read, well-quoted, most beloved book of the New Testament."

Drabinsky is Jewish, and insisted on a rather obvious yet essential preface before the beginning of the film: Jesus and all his followers were Jewish. The gospels were written a couple of generations after the death of Jesus, at a time of great dispute between Judaism and early Christianity; forces within Christianity were battling for supremacy. To fortify its forceful break with Jewish law and competing versions of the new religion, The New Testament is polemical. In The Gospel of John, the Jewish religious authorities are cast as the bad guys.

"The only way to combat anti-Semitism is to have a greater understanding of the issues," said Drabinsky. "There are anti-Judaic aspects in the gospel and in the film. Of course there are. There were splinter groups everywhere at the time. Jesus had radical ideas about Judaism."

The Gospel of John will be in theatres for a week and a half before Mel Gibson's steamroller of controversy hits theatres on Ash Wednesday, February 25. The Passion of the Christ isn't the word-for-word rendering of an 1,800-year-old document. It is a fictional account of the last 12 hours in the life of Jesus. But don't expect to hear the word "fictional" in the publicity materials.

Gibson, who produced and directed the film, has called Passion authentic and biblically accurate. In an underground publicity campaign, it is being promoted and presented as fact. Linked evangelical churches across the continent are directing their parishioners to see the film. Passion promoters giddily claimed that Pope John Paul II said, "it is as it was," after a screening of the film, though Vatican officials have denied these reports.

Over the last few months, preview screenings of Passion have rolled out across North America. Invited guests saw the film in Edmonton in January, but media were not invited. As in most major cities, Jewish leaders weren't invited to the film either.

Since a leaked copy of the screenplay surfaced in April of last year, there has been speculation that Passion could stir anti-Semitic sentiments. Concentrating on the bloody and humiliating final 12 hours in the life of Jesus is the most dramatic choice for Gibson, but not necessarily the most revealing. It makes Hollywood sense, as the bad guys are most clearly bad in the last 12 hours and the good guy is at his most vulnerable and mysterious.

If Jesus hadn't died, the religion would be completely different or not a religion at all. However, after watching their Lord and Saviour pummelled and poked and insulted, evangelical Christians might not be in the mood to hug a Jew after they leave the theatre.

The Anti-Defamation League, worried about the centuries-old charge of deicide against the Jewish people, has asked Gibson to add a postscript to the film, and Gibson has apparently edited out a potentially inflammatory scene in which the high priest Caiaphas curses the Jewish people.

Drabinsky, who has seen Passion, won't comment on it. "All I'm saying is that in our movie, the exquisite writing of the Bible comes forth. It's not being played with by a Hollywood screenwriter. We're not proselytizing or theorizing."

Theorizing about the historical Jesus is almost as popular and almost as controversial as presenting the gospels in whole or in part. Dan Brown's mega-bestselling novel The Da Vinci Code has been a bestseller in the U.S. and Canada for almost a year. Playing off conjectures in the quasi-historical non-fiction book The Holy Blood and the Holy Grail by Michael Baigent, Henry Lincoln and Richard Leigh, released in the early 1980s, the novel supposes that Jesus wasn't the Son of God but rather a genius who married and had children with Mary Magdalene.

This secret, according to these books and plenty of others, has been protected by a devoted society of artists and leaders, including Leonardo Da Vinci.

For those who enjoy imagining that Christianity, as we know it, is based on a series of falsehoods, there are more books to come. Thanks to the riotous success of The Da Vinci Code, the upcoming publishing seasons will cast Jesus as a pagan god, as a gnostic Jewish philosopher and as the originator of a completely different religion, led by his brother James the Just.

Not that Jesus can't also be the king of fun. The play Bigger than Jesus, which toured through Edmonton last weekend, considered the iconography of the Last Supper as a production number using Star Wars action figures. And next week, the power of song will compete with the elusive power of truth at the Jubilee Auditorium's staging of Andrew Lloyd Webber's Jesus Christ Superstar.

As Judas sings in the first act: If you strip away the myth from the man You will see where we all soon will be.

Jesus!

Kulapavana · February 13, 2004

By Rabbi Daniel Lapin

Two weeks before Mel Gibson's "The Passion of the Christ" flashes onto two thousand screens, online ticket merchants are reporting that up to half their total sales are for advance purchases for the film. One Dallas multiplex has reserved all 20 of its screens for "The Passion." I am neither a prophet nor a movie critic. I am merely an Orthodox rabbi using ancient Jewish wisdom to make three predictions about "The Passion."

One, Mel Gibson and Icon Productions will make a great deal of money. Those distributors who surrendered to pressure from Jewish organizations and passed on the movie will be kicking themselves, while Newmarket Films will laugh all the way to the bank. Theater owners are going to love this film.

Two, "The Passion" will become famous as the most serious and substantive biblical movie ever made. It will be one of the most talked-about entertainment events in history. It is currently on the cover of Newsweek and Vanity Fair.

My third prediction is that the faith of millions of Christians will become more fervent as "The Passion" uplifts and inspires them. It will propel vast numbers of unreligious Americans to embrace Christianity. The movie will one day be seen as a harbinger of America's third great religious reawakening.

Those Jewish organizations that have squandered both time and money futilely protesting "The Passion," ostensibly in order to prevent pogroms in Pittsburgh, can hardly be proud of their performance. They failed at everything they attempted. They were hoping to ruin Gibson rather than enrich him. They were hoping to suppress "The Passion" rather than promote it. Finally, they were hoping to help Jews rather than harm them.

Here I digress slightly to exercise the Jewish value of "giving the benefit of the doubt" by discounting cynical suggestions growing in popularity that the very public nature of their attack on Gibson exposed their real purpose-fund-raising. Apparently, frightening wealthy widows in Florida about anti-Semitic thugs prowling the streets of America causes them to open their pocketbooks and refill the coffers of groups with little other raison d'être. But let's assume the groups were hoping to help Jews.

However, instead of helping the Jewish community, they have inflicted lasting harm. By selectively unleashing their fury only on wholesome entertainment that depicts Christianity in a positive light, they have triggered anger, hurt and resentment. Hosting the Toward Tradition radio show and speaking before many audiences nationwide, I enjoy extensive communication with Christian America, and what I hear is troubling. Fearful of attracting the ire of Jewish groups that are so quick to hurl the "anti-Semite" epithet, some Christians are reluctant to speak out. Although one can bludgeon resentful people into silence, behind closed doors emotions continue to simmer.

I consider it crucially important for Christians to know that not all Jews are in agreement with their self-appointed spokesmen. Most American Jews, experiencing warm and gracious interactions each day with their Christian fellow citizens, would feel awkward trying to explain why so many Jewish organizations seem focused on an agenda hostile to Judeo-Christian values. Many individual Jews have shared with me their embarrassment that groups, ostensibly representing them, attack "The Passion" but are silent about depraved entertainment that encourages killing cops and brutalizing women.

Citing artistic freedom, Jewish groups helped protect sacrilegious exhibits such as the anti-Christian feces extravaganza presented by the Brooklyn Museum four years ago. One can hardly blame Christians for assuming that Jews feel artistic freedom is important only when exercised by those hostile toward Christianity. However, this is not how all Jews feel.

From audiences around America, I am encountering bitterness at Jewish organizations insisting that belief in the New Testament is de facto evidence of anti-Semitism. Christians heard Jewish leaders denouncing Gibson for making a movie that follows Gospel accounts of the crucifixion long before any of them had even seen the movie.

Furthermore, Christians are hurt that Jewish groups are presuming to teach them what Christian Scripture "really means." Listen to a rabbi whom I debated on the Fox television show hosted by Bill O'Reilly last September. This is what he said, "We have a responsibility as Jews, as thinking Jews, as people of theology, to respond to our Christian brothers and to engage them, be it Protestants, be it Catholics, and say, 'Look, this is not your history, this is not your theology, this does not represent what you believe in.'"

He happens to be a respected rabbi and a good one, but he too has bought into the preposterous proposition that Jews will re-educate Christians about Christian theology and history. Is it any wonder that this breathtaking arrogance spurs bitterness?

Many Christians who, with good reason, have considered themselves to be Jews' best (and perhaps, only) friends also feel bitter at Jews believing that "The Passion" is revealing startling new information about the crucifixion. They are incredulous at Jews thinking that exposure to the Gospels in visual form will instantly transform the most philo-Semitic gentiles of history into snarling, Jew-hating predators.

Christians are baffled by Jews who don't understand that President George Washington, who knew and revered every word of the Gospels, was still able to write that oft-quoted beautiful letter to the Touro Synagogue in Newport, offering friendship and full participation in America to the Jewish community.

One of the directors of the AJC recently warned that "The Passioncould undermine the sense of community between Christians and Jews that's going on in this country. We're not allowing the film to do that." No sir, it isn't the film that threatens the sense of community; it is the arrogant and intemperate response of Jewish organizations that does so.

Jewish organizations, hoping to help but failing so spectacularly, refute all myths of Jewish intelligence. How could their plans have been so misguided and the execution so inept?

Ancient Jewish wisdom teaches that nothing confuses one's thinking more than being in the grip of the two powerful emotions, love and hate. The actions of these Jewish organizations sadly suggest that they are in the grip of a hatred for Christianity that is only harming Jews.

Today, peril threatens all Americans, both Jews and Christians. Many of the men and women in the front lines find great support in their Christian faith. It is strange that Jewish organizations, purporting to protect Jews, think that insulting allies is the preferred way to carry out that mandate.

A ferocious Rottweiler dog in your suburban home will quickly estrange your family from the neighborhood. For those of us in the Jewish community who cherish friendship with our neighbors, some Jewish organizations have become our Rottweilers. God help us.