Dear Mel,

I'm going to bow out of this,...

If only we could trust you Mel, if only....

snip... I'm even going to let it appear that you're
well on your way to becoming the victor.

Why, that's very Christian of you Mel. Tell me: is that the "true"
Christian, or just the regular kind who can afford to be patronizing?

In keeping with the metaphor of a "school yard brawl" it's time for you,
with your superior intellect and insight, to deliver the winning blow to a
defiant opponent.

How does one secure their salvation?

You just couldn't resist throwing one more underhanded punch on the
way out, could you? No matter....

I'll be happy to tell you how *you* can secure salvation, Mel. But
first you'll have to take an oath that you genuinely want me to lead
you to salvation, that your request is sincere and that you'll listen
to what I say. To be sure you're honest about it, since you have not
been very honest in this thread, that oath must be upon the lives of
your wife and children, if any.

One thing I *can* tell you in advance about this topic is that context
is everything. Not everyone is ready at any time or place. Even Jesus
was silent about some things. Appropriateness is paramount. And, sad
though you may be to hear it, the rec.ww is not an appropriate forum.
It would be sacrilege Mel.

I'll await your decision....

Now, since you feel free to ignore my post and ask another question,
I'll return the favor, numbered duodecimately. Most of these are just
repetitions, questions you've ignored. But they've piled up and are
becoming an embarrassment because you've left them unanswered. See
what you can do to help your cause:

1) Do you think that in Mel Gibson's theology you will be saved? What
about Mel Gibson: will he be saved according to the soteriology of
your beliefs?

2) Is it possible to exaggerate Jesus' suffering, or to turn it into a
pornographic fascination with sadomasochistic torture, blood, and
punishment? If yes, where do you draw the line? By what criteria do
you distinguish a portrayal of suffering from a sadomasochistic
titillation?

3) The Gospels, in the section known as the Passion, spend about 2% of
the text on the physical abuse Jesus endured; Gibson's The Passion is
anywhere from 25% to 75%. Is Gibson's choice to amplify that suffering
(not only in quantity, but in quality also) a better choice?

4) In addition to the paucity of material in MML&J on Jesus' beating,
there are at least three texts that contradict the brutality of
Gibson's vision: Jesus' speech to the women at Lk. 23.28-31; the
soldiers coveting Jesus' clothing at Jn. 19.23-24; and the resurrected
Jesus' spear wound easily distinguished at Jn. 20.24-27, all discussed
above. Are there any texts that argue FOR Gibson's amplification?

5) Do you encourage children to see a film where the camera's focus is
on a man being flogged until the gashes cover most of his body?

6) Is an accurate portrayal of Satan an important issue? What do we
know of Satan from the texts? Does that information accord with the
film's portrayal?

7) Hutton Gibson has denied that the holocaust was anywhere near as
bad as is generally acknowledged. Do you think Mel Gibson should
disavow his father's sentiments?

8) Who killed Jesus, exactly?

9) In what way is Gibson's The Passion different from a passion play?
Are there similarities that would make a responsible person hesitate?

10) Are "true" Christians expected to make good use of their brains
and learn basic principles of reasoning? Does that include
establishing criteria for what makes a "true" Christian before the
fact, before you call others not-"true" Christians?

11) Are "true" Christians expected to be honest? Is it honest to
pretend interest in one topic only as an excuse to proselytize? Is it
honest to ignore another's questions but expect yours to be
considered? Is it honest to assume you have something to teach others
whom you do not know? How about that passive-aggressive tendency, is
that honest? Is pretending to understand Greek honest?

12) The balance between salvation by works and/or grace is encumbered
by many texts that appear at odds, and these have been the source of
major divisions within Christian theology, with brilliant thinkers
weighing in on both sides. Is it honest to choose one side and only
quote the texts ("prooftexting") that support your position, ignoring
all those that do not?

Reason may not lead us all the way to the truth, but as Robert Graves
noted, "facts are not truths, they merely say to untruths, you are not
in accordance with the facts." Thank god we are able to distinguish
the truth from your more egregious fallacies, which have become
scandalous.

In all humility,
H