All the atrocities committed by the Christians in this movie have me wondering about this. I know that in the Middle East atrocities are committed by all religions involved, including Christians, but in this film, the focus seemed to be on the latter. Am I being too sensitive?
shareI think you are being too sensitive. I am a Maronite married to a Shia woman. I don't think the movie was anti Christian but it was anti sectarian. People who put the name of their religion in front of the teaching of love and peace are the problem this is true of all faiths. The message of the movie was we need to "be together" in peace.
The whole point of the film - including the surprise ending - was a condemnation of religious persecution in general. It pretty much served as a metaphor for how in the end the only thing all that violence accomplished between those two sides was violence against their own people.
shareToo bad it happened to not show any Muslim violence...
shareMaybe because world is always about Muslim violence? While Christianity is usually pictured aa realigion of peace?
Also there are also talks about violence going back and forth from Muslims to Christians.
I wonder would you also look for Christian violance in All-Muslim violence movie? No? Didn't think so.
There were many Christian militias in Lebanon at the time doing nasty things. Likewise there were also many Muslim militias doing nasty things to each other. Look today at what's going on in Syria. Pro-Assad and anti-Assad militias running rampant.
shareIt is not reality. Yes, in reality the Christians committing such violence is extremely uncharacteristic and rare. I just take it as religious fanatics which in reality almost exclusively is Muslim, but a film can use metaphor.
shareI don't remember feeling like any religious groups were singled out. That would probably distract from the overall point of the story. Now that I think about it, that's well done in the writer & director's part to walk that fine line.
shareActually, the christian fanatics are the truest christians, because they're the only ones who're actually doing what the bible tells them to do. The bible says to kill anyone who doesn't follow Christ, including your own family members. The bible says adulterers are to be put to death. The bible also says that a woman should be put to death if she has premarital sex while still living in her father's house. The bible also says that if a virgin is raped, then she has to marry her rapist. The bible even says we're supposed to kill our children if they disobey/dishonor us.
Religious extremism isn't exclusive to Islam, and true believers of any faith will do some crazy sh*t, just because their religious scriptures tell them it's what they're supposed to do. That is one of the reasons I'm an atheist, because if you let a fictional book that was written thousands of years ago dictate your morality, then your morality will never be your own and you will just be another brainwashed bigot, committing atrocities just so you can be rewarded in the afterlife.
Crash course on the Bible and it's relation to Christianity, since you're obviously clueless -
1. The Bible never says to kill anyone who doesn't follow Christ. Christ taught the opposite - turn the other cheek when your enemy smites you. Jesus actually commanded his disciples to lay down their arms when they attempted to defend him before his crucifixion.
2. The other passages that you mentioned are from a part of the Old Testament known as the "Torah", which is the basis for Judaic law. As Jesus taught, those laws are not meant to be followed by you or anyone who is not aroused by the idea of attempting to gain eternal life by living a life of perfection (completely free of all anti-ideals or imperfections). Read the sermon on the Mount (Matthew 5) or watch Pasolini's "The Gospel According to St. Matthew" for further insight on this.
3. The Torah was a group of cruel laws Jehovah gave to his people when they asked for them in lieu of his presence and fellowship. They were a punishment and were meant to teach the people that they could never achieve perfection under a cruel God, and could only achieve true fulfillment and happiness through freedom from such harsh judgments by embracing a kind, loving and forgiving God.
4. Christians don't follow the Torah, so using adherance to the Torah to show the flaws of Christianity is ludicrous.
Is that so? Then explain Luke 19:27, which says "But as for these enemies of mine, who did not want me to reign over them, bring them here and slaughter them before me.”
If christians aren't supposed to follow the old testament, then why did Jesus say in Matthew 5:17 "Don't misunderstand why I have come. I did not come to abolish the law of Moses or the writings of the prophets. No, I came to accomplish their purpose." ALL laws in the bible, whether it be the old testament or the new testament, are supposed to be followed by christians.
Also, Matthew 15:4 says "For God said, Honor your father and mother and Anyone who curses their father or mother is to be put to death."
The new testament also condones sexism. 1 Timothy 2:11-12 says "A woman should learn in quietness and full submission. I do not permit a woman to teach or to assume authority over a man; she must be quiet." Also, 1 Corinthians 14:34-35 says "let the women keep silence in the churches: for it is not permitted unto them to speak; but let them be in subjection, as also saith the law. And if they would learn anything, let them ask their own husbands at home: for it is shameful for a woman to speak in the church." Why would I worship a god who thinks women are inferior? I love women.
The new testament also condones slavery and says slaves are supposed to obey their earthly masters with respect and fear.
These are just a few examples of some violent/unfair sh*t that is condoned by the christian god in the new testament.
Christians forget about these things though, because they only interpret the bible to suit their personal opinions and beliefs, which is why there are so many different denominations of christianity. They follow the parts of the bible they agree with, and completely ignore the rest of it, which is what they're doing with the "old testament vs. new testament" argument.
Christians believe in their god with all their hearts, without even realizing that there have been thousands upon thousands of gods that have been worshipped throughout human history, and the people who believed in those other gods believed just as strongly as christians believe in their god. Christians believe exactly what they've been taught to believe since they were old enough to understand words, and they never even attempt to think for themselves. If they had been born in a different part of the world, or during a different era, then they would've been taught something completely different. If they lived 10,000 years ago, they never even would've heard of the christian god. A few hundred years from now, or maybe a few thousand, christianity will be viewed in the same way we currently view greek mythology. It's all bullsh!t.
Is that so? Then explain Luke 19:27, which says "But as for these enemies of mine, who did not want me to reign over them, bring them here and slaughter them before me.”
If christians aren't supposed to follow the old testament, then why did Jesus say in Matthew 5:17 "Don't misunderstand why I have come. I did not come to abolish the law of Moses or the writings of the prophets. No, I came to accomplish their purpose." ALL laws in the bible, whether it be the old testament or the new testament, are supposed to be followed by christians.
That's one way to interpret it, but Matthew 5:18 CLEARLY says "not the smallest letter, not the least stroke of a pen, will by any means disappear from the Law until everything is accomplished." No matter how much you would like this to mean something else, it means that every law of every biblical prophet is to be upheld, down to the smallest detail. That includes all of the laws calling for the mistreatment/murder of women, children, homosexuals, nonbelievers, etc..
Matthew 5:18 CLEARLY says "not the smallest letter, not the least stroke of a pen, will by any means disappear from the Law until everything is accomplished." No matter how much you would like this to mean something else, it means that every law of every biblical prophet is to be upheld, down to the smallest detail.
I honestly don't see why people would find their god 'loving an dcaring' while all he does is burning innocent people by the billions..
shareChristians believe exactly what they've been taught to believe since they were old enough to understand words, and they never even attempt to think for themselves.
Not to mention, Jesus said in Matthew 10:34-36 “Do not think that I came to bring peace on earth. I did not come to bring peace but a sword. For I have come to set a man against his father, a daughter against her mother, and a daughter-in-law against her mother-in-law; and a man’s enemies will be those of his own household."
Jesus wants to set a man against his father? A daugher against her mother? A dughter-in-law against her mother-in-law? Doesn't sound very loving to me.
If you read the paragraph completely, you will realize that Jesus is saying that His teachings will upset many people who will not easily accept them. THESE are the ones expected to use the sword and turn against their parents. History showed him absolutely right.
shareCrash course on the Abrahamic Religions since like most of the religious, you seem to think of your own beliefs as exclusive and better than everyone else's:
Christians, Jews, and Muslims SHARE THE ENTIRE OLD TESTAMENT. Jesus was a Jew. Never forget that. And the Bible isn't restricted to the New Testament for a reason. Muslims themselves consider Jesus a prophet (an apostle) and the Messiah. Though they do not believe that he is God. He is still important enough in Islam that as the Messiah he is the one who will return in the end days and defeat the Antichrist. Also, because of this, Muslims consider Jews and Christians to be fellow ahl al-kitāb ("people of the Book"), which means no, they are not considered "unbelievers".
The mandate to kill the unbelievers is in the Old Testament. The mandate to stone adulterers, those who engage in premarital sex, and homosexuals and all of that is in the Old Testament. The Old Testament, is in fact, the basis of Shariah and Fundamentalist Christianity and Judaism. And the fact that the Old Testament was extremely sectarian (in the "us against evil" kind of sense) is the reason why it's the one major source of extremists for centuries.
And you still do follow it. Spend a weekend listening to a televangelist marathon on TV for example. Fire and brimstone preaching is directly from the Old Testament. Homophobia, sexism, and even slavery is in the Old Testament. Ironic really, given that it's the same teachings that drive Jihadi terrorists in the first place. And those things are peculiar in that they're the favorite topics of American conservative Christians. Judging from people like Michelle Bachman, Ann Coulter, or Pat Robertson, it seems like most American Christians value those bloodthirsty passages more than what anything Jesus has to say.
Certainly, many people quotes the "an eye for an eye" verse while misteriously forgetting the one about "the other cheek".
Oh, wait, I think that's not suprising at all, after all.
The clear differences between Old and New Testament should be easily understandable for anyone who is, obviously interested in the Bible. They're not anything that has remained unnoticed or unexplained in the last 20 centuries or so. Not even in the first 33 years.
Gal 3:23-25 (NKJV) "But before faith came, we were kept under guard by the law, kept for the faith which would afterward be revealed. 24 Therefore the law was our tutor to bring us to Christ, that we might be justified by faith. 25 But after faith has come, we are no longer under a tutor".
Thank you very much for your comments in this discussion. It has helped me understand my faith and how to become more mature in Christ.
Crash course on the Bible and it's relation to Christianity, since you're obviously clueless -
1. The Bible never says to kill anyone who doesn't follow Christ. Christ taught the opposite - turn the other cheek when your enemy smites you. Jesus actually commanded his disciples to lay down their arms when they attempted to defend him before his crucifixion.
2. The other passages that you mentioned are from a part of the Old Testament known as the "Torah", which is the basis for Judaic law. As Jesus taught, those laws are not meant to be followed by you or anyone who is not aroused by the idea of attempting to gain eternal life by living a life of perfection (completely free of all anti-ideals or imperfections). Read the sermon on the Mount (Matthew 5) or watch Pasolini's "The Gospel According to St. Matthew" for further insight on this.
3. The Torah was a group of cruel laws Jehovah gave to his people when they asked for them in lieu of his presence and fellowship. They were a punishment and were meant to teach the people that they could never achieve perfection under a cruel God, and could only achieve true fulfillment and happiness through freedom from such harsh judgments by embracing a kind, loving and forgiving God.
4. Christians don't follow the Torah, so using adherance to the Torah to show the flaws of Christianity is ludicrous.
Crash courtse on the bible and christianity - christ said the old testament applies and you must follow it.
shareVery good justifications for a non believer of religion. Does it come by happenstance that people trained in mathematics and sciences tend to approach the topic of religion more rationally? Humans were always meant to be weak spiritually, if people thought a particular religious affiliation was their saving grace, that made them all the more weaker and their weakness at heart becomes even more incontrovertible.
shareIt's based on reality. In reality, the PLO killed some Christians, and the Christians retaliated by shooting 27 people to death in a bus.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lebanese_civil_war
There were no "good guys" in Lebanon.
i was in the lebanon at the time in the US military.
those christian savages did a lot more than kill those people on that bus.
they are true blood thirsty savages.
they went into refugee camps and slaughtered all children, babies, women.
they raped, burned, tortured, everything. till this day, i can still hear, smell, feel it.
It is not reality. Yes, in reality the Christians committing such violence is extremely uncharacteristic and rare. I just take it as religious fanatics which in reality almost exclusively is Muslim, but a film can use metaphor.
200000 Muslim killed in Bosnia.
You can read that the movie it's based on Lebanese war, so it's not that fictional.
No, it certainly isn't. What it's about is how the violence is corrupting and destroying the people. There is no depiction of innocense on anyone's part. The whole point of the film is that this sort of blame cycle has to stop.
"I'll book you. I'll book you on something. I'll find something in the book to book you on."
like one of the replys said. anti secretarianism.
Movie is not overtly political. It tries to stay true to the story.
It is a realistic movie that simply shows once more how religions are one of the many cancers of humanity.
Christianity's GREATEST ally and BEST friend throughout history is Satan
Both sides are amply demonstrated as being vicious and dangerous. Note that Nahim du May was either Christian or Muslim at different times in his life. I wondered if the fact that it didn't matter what religion you were, if you were violent anyway regardless of religion, is this a racist film? I don't think it is, but I can't yet defend why it wouldn't be. Help! And, the best remake of Oedipus Rex EVER.
sharei dont think its racist or anti christian/muslim...
it shows what can happen in the fog of war, where people lose their identities, only to find out they have betrayed themselves...
nihad himself was a victim as much as one of the instigators...he was born during the war, orphaned (or so it seemed), captured by muslims who pressed him into service before he could understand what it was all about, and then once again used by the christians to commit brutalities on his own mother, which the twins were the product of...so...its more about the horror of that secret, hidden by the confusion of people brutalizing each other, than it is about anti anything...its about losing ones identity, and humanity when one becomes accustomed to becoming a monster, about losing yourself in hate and in the end hurting yourself...
but it is also about the mother coming to terms with it all, even though it was a tragedy, she still found hope nad beauty in it and her troubled sould could rest becasue all her children had found each other, and her twins had found their father...twisted as it may seem, that was the gift she hoped to give to them, of forgiveness and love...
its a hard pill to swallow...