Updated March 31, 2005 (first published March 7, 2004) (David Cloud, Fundamental Baptist Information Service, P.O. Box 610368, Port Huron, MI 48061, 866-295-4143, fbns@wayoflife.org; for instructions about subscribing and unsubscribing or changing addresses, see the information paragraph at the end of the article) -

The Baptist Press for March 4, 2004, ran an article “'The Passion': Assessing its accuracy” by James R. Wicker, associate professor of New Testament at Southwestern Baptist Theological Seminary. This is one of the six seminaries funded by the Southern Baptist Convention. Professor Wicker admits that Mel Gibson’s movie The Passion of the Christ contains many inaccuracies, many things added that have no scriptural support and many other things that are openly contrary to the biblical account. He admits that Mary is exalted in the movie in a fashion that conforms to Roman Catholic doctrine and that Gibson inserts several scenes from the visions of Catholic mystics.

Even so, he says, “We ought to give Mel Gibson some leeway for ARTISTIC LICENSE in The Passion of The Christ.”

He says further, “Do not let the inaccuracies or artistic license scenes overshadow the fine ways in which the movie portrays the beatings and crucifixion of Jesus in a vivid and mostly accurate manner. [Note from Brother Cloud: We do not agree on the “mostly accurate” part of that statement.] Both evangelical Christians and Roman Catholics alike can embrace this film as a powerful tool for getting the message of Jesus' suffering, death and resurrection to the masses.”

Artistic license? Inaccuracies should not overshadow the “good.” Where does the Bible tells us that God accepts “artistic license” on the part of those who write or otherwise portray Biblical scenes and truths?

If a pastor stood up on Sunday morning and Sunday evening and preached two one-hour sermons that contained as many inaccuracies and heresies in his sermons as Mel Gibson has in his movie, (we would hope that) the professor would not take such a flippant attitude. But when it comes to movies, we suddenly have lots of license.

Show me that in the Bible. I am curious to see the authority for such a philosophy. Of course, the Bible can be made to support anything if texts are lifted from their context, but I have been studying the Bible for these past 30 years and what I have found there directly contradicts what this professor is saying.

What about the following verse: “Your glorying is not good. Know ye not that A LITTLE leaven leaveneth the whole lump” (1 Cor. 5:6; Gal. 5:9). Why did Paul warn the Corinthians and the Galatians that even a small amount of error is dangerous, that the little, in fact, leavens the whole? Why didn’t he tell them, rather, to weigh the good against the bad and if the good is preponderant, they should not worry so much about the little leaven?

And why did the Psalmist say, “Therefore I esteem all thy precepts concerning all things to be right; and I hate EVERY false way” (Psalm 119:128)? Why did he not say, rather, that he hated false ways only when there isn’t enough good to outweigh them? Why was he so narrow in his testimony and strict in his judgments? Why didn’t the Psalmist recognize the need for “artistic license”?

And why did Paul instruct Timothy in the following manner? “That thou keep this commandment WITHOUT SPOT, unrebukeable, until the appearing of our Lord Jesus Christ” (1 Tim. 6:14). Why did he not rather instruct Timothy to keep the truth of God in a more general and less strict manner, granting “artistic license” as the case may require?

And why did Paul instruct the believers at Thessalonica as follows? “Prove ALL things; hold fast that which is good. Abstain from ALL appearance of evil” (1 Thess. 5:21-22). Why didn’t he tell them to prove only some things and to abstain only from some evil while making certain that they granted plenty of “artistic license” for the rest?

Why did Paul instruct the believers at Ephesus in this fashion? “And have NO fellowship with the unfruitful works of darkness, but rather reprove them” (Eph. 5:11). Why did he say, rather, that they should avoid most or many works of darkness but that they should, at the same time, not be overly strict and always be ready to grant artistic license?

As you can see, I am having a difficult time finding this “artistic license” doctrine in the Bible.

By the way, we have dealt with this in other articles, but the very fact that this movie is being used by evangelicals and Roman Catholics alike as “a tool” for anything is a loud warning to those who have ears to hear.

(I have another question for Professor Wicker. You say, “Both evangelical Christians and Roman Catholics alike can embrace this film as a powerful tool for getting the message of Jesus’ suffering, death and resurrection to the masses.” Do you believe that Roman Catholics preach a message that will provide help for the masses?)

The enthusiastic and almost entirely uncritical support of this Roman Catholicized Hollywood movie and this uncritical statement about Roman Catholics using it by a professor at a Southern Baptist seminary demonstrates that all is not well in that convention, that, in fact, the spiritual compromise is exceedingly deep.

The following list of inaccuracies and extra-biblical things in The Passion of Christ are gathered from published reviews on the web as well as from e-mails I have received from people who have seen the movie.

SOME THINGS IN MEL GIBSON’S MOVIE THAT ARE ADDED TO THE BIBLE ACCOUNT

[Many of the quotes from Anne-Catherine Emmerich’s visions are from The Dolorous Passion of Our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ, as collected by Tim Challies.]

* In the garden of Gethsemane, while the female devil is tempting Jesus, he prays to the Father things such as, “Father defend me; save me from my attackers; shelter me from Satan.”
* The soldiers begin beating Jesus even in the garden of Gethsemane.
* As they are escorting Jesus after his arrest, the soldiers throw Jesus off of a bridge by massive chains; he falls onto the rocky ground below and is then brutally yanked back up again. (Gibson got this from the visions of Catholic mystic Anne-Catherine Emmerich. “I saw our Lord fall twice before he reached the bridge, and these falls were caused entirely by the barbarous manner in which the soldiers dragged him; but when they were half over the bridge they gave full vent to their brutal inclinations, and struck Jesus with such violence that they threw him off the bridge into the water.”)
* Jesus confronts Judas after his arrest when he is hung off of the bridge. (Gibson got this from the visions of Catholic mystic Anne-Catherine Emmerich.)
* Jesus is imprisoned in a room under the temple.
* Herod calls Jesus a fool and demands that he be given the homage of a fool. (Gibson got this from the visions of Catholic mystic Anne-Catherine Emmerich. “But he spoke in the most contemptuous manner to Jesus, and turning to the guards and servants who surrounded him, and who were about two hundred in number, said: ‘Take away this fool, and pay him that homage which is his due; he is mad, rather than guilty of any crime.’”)
* The Roman soldiers call Jesus “King of worms” and “wormy king.”
* The soldiers hammer the crown down on Jesus’ head, but the Bible says nothing about this.
* A young woman tries to give Jesus a drink of water or wine on the way to the cross, but a Roman soldier stops her. Before she tries to give him a drink, she wipes his face with her cloth and the image of his bloody face is imprinted on the cloth. She is shown cherishing the cloth close to her body as she watches Jesus continue his way toward the cross. This is based on the Catholic legend about Veronica, which claims that Jesus rewarded Veronica’s charity in wiping the sweat from his brow by imprinting his image into the cloth. There is no evidence of this myth prior to the 4th or 5th century. The alleged Veronica image of Jesus’ face, which began to appear perhaps in the 8th century, shows the typical longhaired Catholic Jesus. Reproductions of the image have long been used as “healing relics.” The legend became one of the Roman Catholic Church’s 14 Stations of the Cross. (The account about Veronica is also in Anne-Catherine Emmerich’s visions.)
* Simon, who carries Jesus’ cross, at first is reluctant, expressing great disdain toward Jesus, but afterwards he has a change of heart and confronts the Romans in Jesus’ defense. (Gibson got this from the visions of Catholic mystic Anne-Catherine Emmerich.)
* After Jesus’ first hand is nailed to the cross, his other arm is stretched out violently to reach the hole that had been drilled for the second nail. (Gibson got this from the visions of Catholic mystic Anne-Catherine Emmerich. “When the executioners had nailed the right hand of our Lord, they perceived that his left hand did not reach the hole they had bored to receive the nail, therefore they tied ropes to his left arm, and having steadied their feet against the cross, pulled the left hand violently until it reached the place prepared for it. This dreadful process caused our Lord indescribable agony, his breast heaved, and his legs were quite contracted.”)
* After Jesus is nailed to the cross, it is raised, turned over and dropped face down. One person who saw the movie observed: “They lift the cross up, turn it over and drop in on him! That would have killed him. Then they turn it over and drop it back down again. This would have likely broken the back of a healthy man, let alone one who had his back flailed with that cat.”
* A crow pokes out the eye of the unrepentant thief on the cross. (Gibson got this from the visions of Catholic mystic Anne-Catherine Emmerich.)
* Blood gushes out of Jesus’ side like a waterfall after the soldier thrusts in his spear. (Gibson got this from the visions of Catholic mystic Anne-Catherine Emmerich. “When Cassius drew his lance out of the wound a quantity of blood and water rushed from it, and flowed over his face and body.”)
* The names of the thieves on the cross are said to be Gesmes and Dismas.

Many argue, “While these things are not in the Bible, they also are not contrary to the Bible.” Who is to say, though, that these things do not somehow change the message of Scripture? The scene of the crow picking out the eye of the unrepentant thief, for example -- who can say that this extra-scriptural scene might not leave in the heart of a viewer some type of lasting but wrong impression about God and the Bible? The same is true for every type of addition that is made to the Bible narrative. We simply have no authority for such additions.

SOME THINGS IN MEL GIBSON’S MOVIE THAT ARE CONTRARY TO THE BIBLE ACCOUNT

* In Gibson’s movie the characters speak Aramaic and Latin. The descriptions of these things in the New Testament, on the other hand, are written in Greek.
* Jesus is depicted as a tall, handsome Caucasian man, whereas the Bible says that he did not have any beauty and he was a Jewish man (Isaiah 53:2). (Following is the depiction given in the visions of Catholic mystic Anne-Catherine Emmerich, which almost exactly describes actor Jim Caviezel: “The complexion of our Lord was fair, like that of Mary, and slightly tinted with red; but his exposure to the weather during the last three years had tanned him considerably. His chest was wide, but not hairy like that of St. John Baptist; his shoulders broad, and his arms and thighs sinewy; his knees were strong and hardened, as is usually the case with those who have either walked or knelt much, and his legs long, with very strong muscles; his feet were well formed, and his hands beautiful, the fingers being long and tapering, and although not delicate like those of a woman, still not resembling those of a man who had laboured hard. His neck was rather long, with a well-set and finely proportioned head; his forehead large and high; his face oval; his hair, which was far from thick, was of a golden brown colour, parted in the middle and falling over his shoulders; his beard was not any great length, but pointed and divided under the chin.”)
* Jesus is depicted as wearing long hair, which is contrary to His own standards for men in 1 Corinthians 11. The only men of God in the Bible who wore long hair were the Nazarites, such as Samson. The Lord Jesus was not a Nazarite; He was a Nazarene, meaning that He grew up in the town of Nazareth. In The Passion of the Christ most of the men, such as the disciples of Christ, the soldiers, and Pilate, have short hair, which is historically accurate. Yet there is “Jesus” with the long, stringy, hippyish hair!
* Mary Magdalene is depicted as the woman caught in adultery in Jn. 7:53 - 8:11, whereas there is no biblical evidence for that.
* Satan is depicted as a woman with a man’s voice.
* Satan tempts Jesus in Gethsemane. The devil offers many temptations. In one of those the devil asks Jesus, “Do you really believe one man can carry this burden? ...saving their souls is too costly?” (Gibson got this from the visions of Catholic mystic Anne-Catherine Emmerich.) According to the Bible, the only time that Jesus was tempted by the devil was at the beginning of his ministry.
* In the garden Jesus prays, “Father, if it be possible let this chalice pass from me.” The chalice is the cup used for the Catholic mass. The Bible uses the word “cup.”
* In the garden, when Peter asks Jesus to “get the others,” Jesus replies to the effect, “No, I don’t want them to see me like this.” One man who saw the movie commented, “This portrays a weak character, somewhat of a fake facade that they were applying to Jesus.”
* Satan also appears to Jesus at various times during His suffering.
* Jesus and the disciples are seated at the Last Supper instead of reclining. (Actually John leaned on Jesus’ breast -- Jn. 13:23)
* Peter is depicted as seated beside Jesus at the Last Supper, but actually he had to motion to John to have him ask Jesus a question (see Jn. 13:24-25).
* After Judas betrays Jesus, he goes out into the streets of Jerusalem. As he is sitting alone, two children come to ask him if he is okay. He tells them to go away. They start mocking him, and their faces turn into hideous demon-like faces. They start tormenting and biting him. One of them tears flesh from Judas’ hand with his teeth! They chase him out into the desert when he eventually hangs himself. Thus Judas is pursued to his death by demonic children! (This is from the visions of Catholic mystic Anne-Catherine Emmerich. “I beheld the traitor, Judas Iscariot, wandering about, alone, and a prey to the tortures of his guilty conscience; he feared even his own shadow, and was followed by many devils, who endeavored to turn his feelings of remorse into black despair.”)
* When Jesus is arrested, the movie depicts several disciples fighting, but the Bible mentions only Peter.
* At one point, as the female Satan is watching Jesus suffer, she is holding a baby, which is supposed to be an evil parody of the Madonna and Child. The baby turns its head and reveals a demonic face.
* The whipping depicted in the movie is contrary to the Bible. In the movie Jesus is beaten two separate times with 39 lashes each, first on the back, and then on the front, and the soldiers continue to beat him as they walk to the cross. The Bible says only that he was scourged one time. (The visions of Catholic mystic Anne-Catherine Emmerich contain lengthy detailed descriptions of Jesus’ whippings; i.e., “Two fresh executioners took the places of the last mentioned, who were beginning to flag; their scourges were composed of small chains, or straps covered with iron hooks, which penetrated to the bone, and tore off large pieces of flesh at every blow. What word, alas! could describe this terrible--this heartrending scene! The cruelty of these barbarians was nevertheless not yet satiated; they untied Jesus, and again fastened him up with his back turned towards the pillar. ... The body of our Lord was perfectly torn to shreds.”) One person who saw the movie observed: “The flogging scene is over exaggerated. The cat-o'-nine-tails with the stones/bones would do much more damage than they showed for all the flogging they showed; I doubt if anyone could have survived it. The whole thing [the punishment that Jesus endured prior to the cross] was just too unbelievable for anyone not biased. This creates a loss of credibility for the story and I see it as very harmful for trying to get unbelievers to accept it.”
* Roman soldiers are depicted as being extremely vindictive toward Christ and sadistic to the extreme; they refuse even to stop whipping him until forced to do so by their commander, and they continue to beat him along the way to the cross. One reviewer rightly observes: “The Roman government had no qualms with Christ. Pilate said so. The soldiers thought it was a big joke, and they mocked him and put the crown of thorns upon His head. They dressed Him in a purple robe and mocked Him, but there is no indication that they had any vindictive spirit toward Him that would lead to beating Him along the way.” Further, the Bible tells us about many Roman soldiers, including centurions, who were merciful and just. One asked Jesus to heal his servant (Matt. 8:5-8). Another one testified that Jesus was the Son of God (Matt. 27:54). Some Roman centurions protected Paul at various points in his ministry and treated him kindly (Acts 21:32; 23:10; 23:27; 27:43; 28:16). In fact, of the 24 times that Roman centurions are mentioned in Scripture, there is not one instance of sadistic brutality or injustice. This is not to say that the Roman soldiers were never brutal, but the Bible depicts them in a much more positive light than what we find in Gibson’s movie. He has demonized both the Jews and the Romans.
* In the movie both Jesus and Simon carry the cross, but the Bible says Simon carried it all of the way. “And as they led him away, they laid hold upon one Simon, a Cyrenian, coming out of the country, and on him they laid the cross, that he might bear it after Jesus” (Lk. 23:26). Matthew 27:31-32 tells us that Simon began carrying the cross right from the first when Jesus was led away to be crucified. If Jesus did carry the cross at all it was only the first few feet.
* A frenzied riot breaks out around Jesus as he is proceeding to the cross, with Romans and Jews fighting wildly. This is contrary to the description given in the Bible: “And there followed him a great company of people, and of women, which also bewailed and lamented him. But Jesus turning unto them said, Daughters of Jerusalem, weep not for me, but weep for yourselves, and for your children” (Lk. 23:27-28). There was no riot and Jesus was able to speak easily to the people who were around him.
* During an earthquake the floor of the temple’s Holy of Holies is cracked and the temple otherwise damaged and “a flimsy veil-like thing falls down in front of the altar.” (This is from Anne-Catherine Emmerich’s visions, where she says the temple’s “arch was broken. The ground was heaved up, and many other columns were thrown down in other parts of the Temple.”) The Bible and history tell us that the temple was not damaged in the earthquake; rather the heavy veil between the holy place and the holy of holies was rent in two, thus showing that Christ has opened the way to God through His death and blood. This happened when Jesus cried, “It is finished” (Matt. 27:50-51; Jn. 19:30).
* Jesus says, “Father forgive them for they know not what they do” before the cross is lifted up.
* Jesus is taken down off of the cross by soldiers and by the two Marys and John, whereas the Bible says his body was taken down by Joseph of Arimathaea and Nicodemus, with no mention of soldiers or of the Marys and John (John 19:38-40).
* In the resurrection scene the angel rolled away the stone before Jesus comes out. Contrariwise, in Scripture the stone was rolled away so that the disciples could see that Christ was not there; He had arisen and left the tomb before that (Matt. 28:1-6).
* In the resurrection scene, when Jesus starts to walk out, there is a shot of actor Jim Caviezel’s naked buttocks! One reviewer said, “Thus the last impression you get of the movie is this thought of a naked 'Jesus' walking around.”

SOME THINGS IN MEL GIBSON’S MOVIE THAT ARE HERETICAL

* In the garden of Gethsemane when Jesus said, “I am he,” nobody falls over backward (contrast John 18:6).
* In the Garden of Gethsemane, after Jesus is tempted by the devil, a snake slithers from underneath the female “devil’s” robe. And Jesus crushes its head beneath his foot. This is a reference to the prophecy of Genesis 3:15, but the Bible does not say that any of these things actually occurred. In fact, the Bible says that Jesus destroyed the devil by His death, not in the Garden (Heb. 2:14).
* Jesus falls six times on the way to the cross, whereas the Bible mentions no falls. Further, Simeon had to repeatedly help Jesus up when he fell, saying things like, “You are almost there,” helping Jesus to the cross. I believe this shows a weakness in Christ during His suffering that is not only contrary to what the Scriptures teach but is heretical in regard to His person.
* On the way to the cross, Jesus tells Mary, “Behold, I make all things new.” Actually, that is not spoken until about 50 years later when John wrote the book of Revelation.
* The movie portrays Jesus as somewhat bewildered at times as he is being beaten and as he hangs on the cross.
* At the end of the movie Lucifer appears in “a desolate wasteland reminiscent of Hell,” but the Bible is clear that Satan will not be banished anywhere until after the return of Christ and will not be cast into the lake of fire until after the final rebellion at the end of the Millennium.
* There is also heresy in what is left out of the movie. The Passion of the Christ focuses on Christ’s physical suffering, but the Bible focuses on His spiritual suffering. The greatest suffering that Jesus endured that day was being made sin, was being abandoned by the Father because of sin. The darkness covered the earth for three hours and in that impenetrable darkness the mysteries of redemption were acted out between God the Father and God the Son. This is the focus of the prophecies such as Isaiah 53, but a movie that focuses on Jesus’ physical sufferings misses the main point of the whole affair.

MORE HERESY: THE MARIOLATRY OF GIBSON’S MOVIE

Mel Gibson believes that Mary is “a tremendous co-redemptrix and mediatrix” (David Neff, “Mel, Mary, and Mothers,” Christianity Today online, Feb. 20, 2004). This means that Mary suffered with Christ and became the Mother of all believers, the Queen of Heaven, an intercessor for the saints.

Gibson has testified that this movie represents his faith, and there is no doubt of that for those who view the film without prejudice.

Consider the following examples of how The Passion of the Christ depicts Mary as co-redemptrix:

* Peter and John call Mary “Mother” and the word “Mother” is capitalized in the subtitles.
* As Jesus is tormented by the devil in the Garden of Gethsemane, Mary wakes up and senses Jesus’ agony. (Gibson got this from the visions of Catholic mystic Anne-Catherine Emmerich. “During this agony of Jesus, I saw the Blessed Virgin also overwhelmed with sorrow and anguish of soul, in the house of Mary, the mother of Mark. She was with Magdalen and Mary in the garden belonging to the house, and almost prostrate from grief, with her whole body bowed down as she knelt. She fainted several times, for she beheld in spirit different portions of the agony of Jesus.”)
* Jesus prays to God, “I am your servant and the son of your handmaid.” The Bible never tells us that Jesus prayed in this manner. It is another unscriptural Catholic exaltation of Mary.
* After Peter denies Jesus, he is leaving the courtyard and sees Mary, Mary Magdalene, and John. He gets on his knees before Mary, calls her “Mother,” and confesses his denial to her. She holds out her hand to him (as if she is going to forgive him), and he runs away saying that he isn't worthy. Peter twice tells Mary not to touch him after he denied Jesus. (Gibson got this from the visions of Catholic mystic Anne-Catherine Emmerich.) This is rank heresy. It was Jesus against whom Peter sinned that night, not Mary!
* Mary is near Jesus all during His suffering, co-mingling her sorrow with his pain.
* Mary is the only person other than Jesus who can see Satan. This gives her supernatural abilities akin to those of Christ.
* As the soldiers bring Jesus before Caiaphas, Jesus looks at Mary, who is across the courtyard, and Mary says, “It has begun, Lord ... so be it.” Thus, in this Catholic version of the Gospel Mary adds her “so be it” to Christ’s sufferings just as she did to the angel’s announcement of the virgin birth.
* Mary goes to a specific place in the temple and lays down on the floor with her head on the stones because she sensed the presence of Jesus chained underneath the floor. She knew where he was. The camera pans through the floor and shows Jesus hanging from shackles and looking up into the stone ceiling toward Mary. (This is from the visions of Anne-Catherine Emmerich. “Mary was with Jesus in spirit, and Jesus was with her; but this loving Mother wished to hear with her own ears the voice of her Divine Son.”)
* Mary interacts with Pilate’s wife and appeals to her to protect Jesus from the angry crowd. There is not a hint of this in Scripture. (Gibson got this from the visions of Catholic mystic Anne-Catherine Emmerich.)
* Pontius Pilate’s wife gives some cloths to Mary. (Gibson got this from the visions of Catholic mystic Anne-Catherine Emmerich. “ “I saw Claudia Procles, the wife of Pilate, send some large pieces of linen to the Mother of God.”)
* Mary and Mary Magdalene wipe up Jesus’ blood after He is whipped. (This is from Anne-Catherine Emmerich’s visions. “Then it was that the Mother of Jesus, accompanied by the holy women, approached the pillar and wiped up the blood with which it and the ground around were saturated.”)
* Once when Jesus falls down, he is depicted as not having the strength to rise until he looks at Mary and gains strength from her. He is depicted as receiving strength from her at other times as well.
* Once Mary runs up to Jesus when he falls and there is a flashback showing the child Jesus falling and hurting himself and being comforted by Mary, thus directly associating Mary’s aid with Jesus’ sufferings.
* While Jesus is on the cross, Mary comes up and kisses his foot. The blood runs down into her mouth, and she backs away “almost licking her lips with blood all over her face.”
* As she is looking up at the cross, Mary asks Jesus if she can die with him. She says, “Flesh of my flesh and heart of my heart, let me die with you.” (This is from the visions of Catholic mystic Anne-Catherine Emmerich. “The Blessed Virgin, filled with intense feelings of motherly love, entreated her Son to permit her to die with him.”) One reviewer admits, “There is that identity of Mary with the death of Christ as well; not just in mourning His death but in wanting to participate in it.” The Bible says that Jesus Christ BY HIMSELF bore our sins (Heb. 1:3), and the reason why the Bible has none of these depictions is because Mary had nothing to do with Christ’s suffering for our sins. The way that Mary is placed everywhere with Jesus in His suffering is blasphemous.
* Mary is depicted as holding the dead Jesus at the foot of the Cross, which is a reenactment of the unscriptural Roman Catholic Pieta. This depicts Mary as the suffering Mother who assisted her son in our redemption. Roman Catholic priest Thomas Rosica, who oversaw World Youth Day 2002 in Canada, observed: “The interplay of Mary and Jesus in this film is moving, and reaches its apex in the scene of the Pietà. The Mother of the Lord is inviting each of us to share her grief and behold her Son.”

CONCLUSION

It is obvious that this movie is full of errors and outright demonic lies (see 1 Timothy 4:1-4, where God’s Word warns us that devils teach doctrines).

Even if the movie did not contain all of these errors and heresies, where does God give us permission to add our human imaginations to the Gospel story? The Bible warns, “The secret things belong unto the LORD our God: but those things which are revealed belong unto us and to our children for ever, that we may do all the words of this law” (Deut. 29:29).

It is not our business to try to delve beyond the pages of Scripture with our uninspired, easily-deceived imaginations. We have no divine authority to do such a thing.

While it is true that the Bible does not tell us everything that happened that day, IT DOES TELL US EVERYTHING GOD WANTS US TO KNOW THAT HAPPENED THAT DAY!

The Bible is the infallible and complete Revelation of God, and it is able to make the man of God “perfect, throughly furnished unto all good works” (2 Tim. 3:17).

Everything about the Bible is an important part of God’s message, not only what it says but also what it does not say, the smallest details, even the repetition.

Unsaved men are not afraid of adding to and modifying the Bible. They think that they can make it better. While it is obvious that God did not want to focus on the details of Christ’s suffering, the makers of this movie imagined that they could better amplify the message by doing exactly what God did not do. This is the sin of presumption.

This movie takes the Roman Catholic approach to the Bible and Christianity by allowing the addition of uninspired, man-made tradition. The concept of “artistic license” in regard to biblical things is a Roman Catholic concept.

The Bible-believing Christian has no need for any of these things. He has the infallible Truth in ALL of its pure loveliness and glory in the Scriptures. Why should he be satisfied in any sense with some incredibly shallow, vague, distorted Hollywood shadow of the truth?

Considering the powerful role that movies play in modern society (most people are far more influenced by movies than by the Bible), there is no doubt that multitudes of people will walk away from this film with a wrong impression of Jesus Christ and the gospel. Will this heretical movie not become the “Bible” for a large percentage of those who view it?

Wake up, my dear friends in Christ.

"Little children, keep yourselves from idols" (1 John 5:21).

I cannot be emphatic enough about the danger of this Hollywood movie. It is causing a great stir and a lot of conversation, and that can surely be used as an evangelistic opportunity, but there are many serious warnings that church leaders need to be giving their people about this issue.

There are many other articles warning about “The Passion of the Christ” at the Way of Life web site. See the End Times Apostasy Database.