If Mark’s previous differentiation between the Jewish elite and the Jewish people suggests that only the elite were to blame for Jesus’ death, this passage contradicts such a conclusion. (12) And Pilate again said to them, “Then what shall I do with the man whom you call the King of the Jews?” (13) And they cried out again, “Crucify him.” (14) And Pilate said to them, “Why, what evil has he done?” But they shouted all the more, “Crucify him.” (11) But the chief priests stirred up the crowd to have him release for them Barabbas instead. But the Jewish authorities thwart his intention by inciting the Jewish people to demand Jesus’ crucifixion. Unfortunately for them, Pilate wants to let Jesus go because he “perceived that it was out of envy that the chief priests had delivered him up” (Mark 15:10). In view of this, it is hardly surprising that in the Gospel of Mark the high priests, elders, and scribes join in condemning Jesus to death (14:64) and hand him over to Pilate (15:1). Mark also formulated a parallel passage in 3:6, according to which, after a healing performed on the Sabbath, “the Pharisees went out and immediately conspired with the Herodians to destroy him.” This motif runs through the Gospel like a scarlet thread (note Mark 12:12: “They tried to arrest him, but feared the multitude, for they perceived that he told the parable against them”) and finds its fulfillment in the passion narrative. Their content is this: Jesus is going to Jerusalem to be put to death by the Jewish authorities. Either the author received the first from tradition and he himself formulated the last two, or he created all three. This cannot be understood without previously considering Jesus’ three prophecies about his suffering (and his resurrection) that punctuate Mark’s story. THE PASSION NARRATIVE OF MARK (MARK 14-15)Īnti-Judaism permeates the Gospel of Mark and also its passion narrative. Here is what the historical study of the four Gospel narratives of the Four Gospels reveals about the historical worth of the various narratives. It has long been known that the early Christians wrongly put the blame for the death of Jesus on the “unbelieving Jews.” By translating this theological interpretation into powerful images on film, Gibson is encouraging anti-Semitism, whether he intended to or not. Mel Gibson simply translates the content of the biblical reports into action.
#The life of christ movie trial
Everything that the Gospels say about the circumstances of the trial of Jesus – from the hatred of Jesus by the Jewish leaders and people to the declaration of his innocence by Pilate – is skillfully staged in the film. The primary narrative basis for the film is the collective account found in the four New Testament Gospels – the story that Christians call Jesus’ passion.
#The life of christ movie movie
Indeed, Gibson’s movie offers a useful corrective to the romanticized and mollycoddling treatments of the crucifixion, old and new, that lead us to forget the cruelty of his execution and the fact that the “Lord” of what is perhaps the world’s most widely influential religion died a criminal’s death on the cross two thousand years ago. This staged orgy of deliberate maltreatment accorded political rebels and slaves was a bloody reality repeated tens of thousands of times in the Roman Empire. In his portrayal of the violence inflicted on Jesus, Gibson, who is a practicing Roman Catholic, presents a historically accurate account of the torments to which those condemned to crucifixion by the Romans were commonly subjected. Its depiction of the extreme brutality of his execution has great visual impact. This movie portrays the last hours of the life of Jesus of Nazareth – from his arrest in the Garden of Gethsemane to the removal of his body from the cross. Georg-August-University Göttingen, Germany