“For what shall it profit a man, if he shall gain the whole world, and lose his own soul?” Mark 8:36

Or what shall it profit a man if he shall make a fortune, yet lose his reputation in the process? Mel Gibson’s blockbuster movie The Passion of the Christ is now recognized as one of the greatest religious box-office sleepers of all time. The film not only broke box-office records, it shattered Hollywood benchmarks for success which generally exclude films having religious themes.

Skeptics doubted that a film depicting only the last 12 torturous hours of Christ’s life prior to His crucifixion would appeal to today’s generally irreligious moviegoers. Gibson proved them wrong! And he did so using his personal financial resources. Having failed to gain major studio financial backing for a film whose theme he believed in – but studio executives did not – Gibson was forced to pour his own money into the project. He also demonstrated flashes of marketing genius by gaining the interest and support of evangelicals who saw the film’s release as an opportunity for 21st Century evangelism. Gibson wisely solicited their constructive criticism and input to improve The Passion’s overall appeal to Christian audiences, changes he incorporated in the final screen version.

I’m grateful to Mel Gibson for producing a film which reminded me in vivid ways that freedom from sin is not cheap. It cost Christ His life! At the same time, as a Christian who loves Israel, I can readily understand why Jewish people protested the film’s release.

Anti-Semitic Undertones
If Gibson could claim a quasi partnership with evangelicals, the opposite was true for the Jewish community. Some Jewish leaders, already suspicious of Gibson’s background and intentions, early on took exception to the film’s prominent portrayals of the Jewish conspirators in the plot to kill Christ. Some went so far as to accuse Gibson of being an anti-Semite by pointing to the film’s not-so-subtle undertones. Gibson defended himself and his film in television interviews by arguing that his dramatic portrayals were accurately based on the biblical account. So far so good! That is, until the film’s release and Gibson’s subsequent arrest on suspicion of driving while intoxicated. According to media reports of that arrest, Gibson, it is alleged, broke into an anti-Semitic diatribe, directing his angry words at the arresting police officer who, unfortunately for Mel Gibson, was Jewish.

A History of Collective Pain
All of this to say that those of us who call ourselves evangelicals need to realize that
Jews today continue to be very sensitive where the crucifixion of Christ is concerned. They resent the broad, anti-Semitic brushstrokes that suggest that all Jews are collectively responsible, both then and now, for the killing of Jesus of Nazareth. Jewish reaction to Gibson’s movie simply shows that these wounds in the Jewish collective consciousness have not completely healed.

Any reminder of the historic killing of Christ, especially one that depicts Jewish complicity in such a vivid on-screen way is, for Jews, like adding salt to a festering wound. The film’s international success only aggravated Jewish concerns. If it is true that pictures speak louder than words, Jews wondered about the film’s impact on a worldwide audience of literally hundreds of millions of people who would see the Christ figure brutally beaten at the instigation of conniving, Jewish conspirators. Jews anxiously wondered whether these moviegoers would, consciously or unconsciously, connect Jews then with Israel and Jews today, further inflaming anti-Israel/Jewish sentiment. After all, because of media bias, Israel is usually depicted as the bully on the Middle Eastern block.

Slanted Reporting
Case in point: Christiane Amanpour’s God’s Jewish Warriors, broadcast in August ’07 by CNN as the first of three episodes in a series examining Christian, Muslim and Jewish extremists. Amanpour’s analysis of so-called Jewish warriors, the first episode in the series, was quickly accused of being an “incredibly slanted presentation” by Sondra Baras, Director of the Israel Office of Christian Friends of Israeli Communities, and an orthodox Jew who raises support among Christians for Israeli settlement communities. Baras, who was featured in God’s Jewish Warriors, penned her response to the televised screening in a letter she wrote to Jen Christensen, one of the show’s producers, and the one with whom Baras had the most contact. Baras wrote:
“…There have been exactly four Jewish terrorist incidents or attempted incidents and you devoted half the program to them, discussing each one in detail. The people who support these are a fringe minority and roundly condemned by 98% of the settlement movement…If you gave similar time to every single Arab terrorist attack, the show would go on for days, if not years. Is that fair?”

A Shameful History
Sondra Baras had much more to say than I’ve included here, but the point is that CNN’s perceived slanted reporting is simply the latest broadside aimed at the Jewish community in a continuum going back nearly 2000 years. To quote John Chrysothom (349-407AD): “Jews are abandoned by God and, for the crime of deicide (killing Christ), there is no expiation possible.” Martin Luther, a giant of the Protestant Reformation, wrote:
“’Listen, Jew, are you aware that Jerusalem and your sovereignty, together with your temple and priesthood, have been destroyed for over 1,460 years?’ This work of wrath is proof that the Jews, surely rejected by God, are no longer a people, and neither is he any longer their God.” According to Luther’s logic, the destruction of Jerusalem in 70 AD, and the subsequent Jewish expulsions from the land of Israel which followed, was proof that God had rejected the Jews. One wonders how Luther would explain Israel as she is today – one of the most progressive nations on planet earth – and this less than sixty years after her rebirth in 1948.

Curse and Consequence?
Clearly, Luther’s words simply reflected the prevailing anti-Semitic, replacement theology of his time, the idea that since Jews had rejected Christ as their Messiah, God the Father had rejected the Jews. Thus, the Church had become the new Israel. Those adhering to this position could argue that Israel’s rejection and replacement was the logical outcome of the fact that Christ was crucified at the instigation of certain Jewish leaders in Jerusalem. This was a crime many in the Church could not forget, and would not allow Jews to forget. In other words, if Romans drove in the nails, then it was Jews who provided the hammer and the nails, something they gladly admitted in a self-proclaimed indictment: “His blood be on us and on our children” (Matt. 27:25b).

But let us ask: Was this self-induced curse literally fulfilled less than a generation later when the full weight of Roman barbarism destroyed Jerusalem and decimated the population in 70 AD? Was this the price those Jewish conspirators and their descendants paid for conspiring to kill Christ? Do Jews in every generation continue to pay the price of their fathers’ sins, so to speak, as reflected in their pain-filled history of persecution? The answer to all of these questions must be a resounding no, not if the Father heard and responded to His Son’s plaintive plea:
“Father, forgive them; for they know not what they do.”(Luke 23:34a).

If Jesus could readily forgive those Jews who stood before the Cross, no Christian has the right to accuse, much less blame, those Jews who did not…

Rev. Dr. John Tweedie is the Chairman of Christians for Israel. His 8-unit DVD teaching series Why Israel? is suitable for individual, church, and/or small groups. Each unit includes on location scenes and interviews recorded in Israel. Helpful leader and individual participant study guides are also available.