How accurate is The Passion of the Christ?

[Josh]

Hmmmm... a somewhat troubling report on the film appears in today's installment of Christianity Today's "Film Forum" column. Here's an exerpt:

Christian film critic Peter T. Chattaway (Canadian Christianity) says that the "realistic" details of the film are, in several cases, significantly inaccurate.

"Everything you know about The Passion of the Christ is wrong," he writes. "For over a year, the film's most vocal critics have said Mel Gibson's movie about the death of Jesus is anti-Semitic, while its most vocal supporters have said no, it's only an accurate representation of scripture and history. In truth, the film is neither."

He quickly disposes of the charges of anti-Semitism, saying that the film goes "too soft on Pontius Pilate" which unfortunately makes the Jews seem more responsible for Christ's death. But he adds that Jesus and his followers are clearly portrayed as Jewish, which is not a negative portrayal.

But he reprimands the religious leaders rushing to call it accurate: "It is quite telling that the only way many Christians know how to defend a work of art is to assert that it is an 'accurate' adaptation of Scripture, as if to minimize its artistry or creativity. It is even more telling that many Christians make this assertion even when the work of art in question contains several elements that are quite definitely not accurate."

Chattaway goes on to explain that the film's portrayal of the crucifixion "rejects modern historical scholarship" and that it "erroneously identifies Mary Magdalene with the woman caught in adultery." He goes on to remind us that in the Gospel of Luke, it is an angel who visits Christ in Gethsemane, not Satan, as portrayed in the film.

"There isn't necessarily anything wrong with these sorts of artistic decisions," he says, "but they are not exactly 'accurate.'"

Chattaway also says the film exaggerates the violence done to Jesus in much the same way that other movies involving Gibson have brought down sadistic gratuitous suffering on their heroes.
 

[dgp11776]

Chattaway also says the film exaggerates the violence done to Jesus in much the same way that other movies involving Gibson have brought down sadistic gratuitous suffering on their heroes.

While I haven't seen the movie yet, I would be hesitant to agree with that statement.

1.  The scourging was not limited to "Forty save one," as Jesus was not a Roman citizen.
2.  The end of Isaiah 52 says that He was "marred more than any man, and His form more than the sons of men."  
3.  Ever notice why Pilate scourged Jesus?  To content the people.  I think if you look at the crucifixion passages, you'll see that Pilate honestly didn't want to put Jesus to death.  Even his wife didn't.  Therefore, in all likelihood, the episode of scourging was devastatingly brutal.  I think Pilate wanted to create sympathy in the heart of Christ's accusers in the hope of avoiding the cross.
4.  If you read the works of Josephus and other historical figures, they shed some light on the events leading up to the cross.  Being struck on the head with a reed is one such thing.  This was a long, wooden staff that was beaten into the head of the victim.  The soldiers did this in an effort to top each other in brutality.  Christ was unique, though, as this was done in addition to a crown of thorns.
5.  A passage in Isaiah states that they "ripped the beard from His face."
6.  In all of this, keep something in mind.  From at least some time preceeding the Garden of Gethsemane through the crucifixion, Christ didn't sleep.
7.  We can never totally convey the violence endured by His soul, nor can we comprehend it.  Think about this:  Revelation 20:14 tells of "the second death," which is the death of the soul.  Jesus actually tasted of that.  Before His episode in Gethsemane, He told the disciples that "My soul is exceeding sorrowful, even unto death."  Why?  Because He was simply thinking about the events of the cross (particularly, the three hours of darkness).  If just thinking about it caused such suffering, who can tell how awful it was to actually experience it?

I could go on, but you get the point.  I feel there is no way we can capture in its fullness the magnitude of the sufferings of Christ.