Woodworking (rec.woodworking) Discussion forum covering all aspects of working with wood. All levels of expertise are encouraged to particiapte.

Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
  #1   Report Post  
Old March 13th 04, 01:21 PM
mel
 
Posts: n/a
Default this ought to get everybody fired up....

Based on the reaction to some of the Christmas postings I'm sure this
question will wind up being a discussion on Christianity and religion. Here
it goes......

What did you think of the table they showed Christ having built in the movie
"The Passion of the Christ"? Any idea who built it and was it constructed
using techniques available of the time? Did you get the symbolism of the
table?

Before you respond to this please note, I'm on topic since I'm discussing a
table built using neander techniques built by an early carpenter or at the
very least, a depiction of one.



  #2   Report Post  
Old March 13th 04, 03:12 PM
Dr. Deb
 
Posts: n/a
Default this ought to get everybody fired up....

mel wrote:

Based on the reaction to some of the Christmas postings I'm sure this
question will wind up being a discussion on Christianity and religion.
Here it goes......

What did you think of the table they showed Christ having built in the
movie "The Passion of the Christ"? Any idea who built it and was it
constructed using techniques available of the time? Did you get the
symbolism of the table?

Before you respond to this please note, I'm on topic since I'm discussing
a
table built using neander techniques built by an early carpenter or at
the very least, a depiction of one.


A nice table of rustic style

No idea of who built it.

If you have not been the Third World you have no idea what they can do with
"primitive" tools.

Yes - and nicely understated too.

Deb
  #3   Report Post  
Old March 14th 04, 12:09 PM
Glen
 
Posts: n/a
Default this ought to get everybody fired up....


"mel" wrote in message
m...

Did you get the symbolism of the
table?


I'm not sure that I did. I would like yo hear.

Glen


  #4   Report Post  
Old March 14th 04, 01:33 PM
mel
 
Posts: n/a
Default this ought to get everybody fired up....

One part of the movie that I really enjoyed was the flashback Jesus had when
they were preparing the cross. It showed him in the backyard working on a
table. He was after all a carpenter. Mary came out of the house and saw
the table and did what mothers do best. She complimented him on the table
even though it wasn't the sort of table she was accustomed to. I gathered
from the dialog that tables back then were low to the ground yet this table
was a tall table. Jesus tells her it's a table built for a rich man. He
hasn't built the chairs yet. He takes his position at the table as if he
was sitting in a tall chair with no problem and Mary attempts to mimic him.
She pantomimes reaching for a glass and loses her balance, straightens up
and tells Jesus it will never catch on. Jesus laughs and they start to walk
into the house. Right before entering Mary tells Jesus to remove his dirty
apron before coming into the house. She holds a bowl of water for Jesus to
wash his hands which he does. Then he splashes the water on Mary with much
delight.

Mel Gibson told the entire story in this one little piece of artistic
license.

the table = a place prepared for us
the rich man = the saved in Christ
the chairs not yet made = the crucifixion not yet completed at this point of
the movie
the new style table = Christianity
the dirty apron and the washing of Jesus' hands = Jesus' baptism
Jesus splashing Mary with water with delight = Jesus' willingness to provide
for our salvation with delight

With delight..... We read where Jesus struggled in the garden with fear
and with what he was about to face he was justified in feeling so. The
total absence of God while being in the hands of Satan. We do not know what
transpired between Jesus and The Father when they were reunited but I
believe quite possibly with all the reverence I can muster........ they
giggled.


  #5   Report Post  
Old March 14th 04, 06:04 PM
Fred the Red Shirt
 
Posts: n/a
Default this ought to get everybody fired up....

"mel" wrote in message .com...
One part of the movie that I really enjoyed was the flashback Jesus had when
they were preparing the cross. It showed him in the backyard working on a
table. He was after all a carpenter.


Joseph was a carpenter. One supposes that a son would follow
in his father's profession, but is there any Biblical reference
to Jesus being a carpenter?

--

FF


  #6   Report Post  
Old March 14th 04, 06:21 PM
Nova
 
Posts: n/a
Default this ought to get everybody fired up....

Fred the Red Shirt wrote:

Joseph was a carpenter. One supposes that a son would follow
in his father's profession, but is there any Biblical reference
to Jesus being a carpenter?


Mark 6:3 "Is not this the carpenter, the son of Mary, the brother of James, and Joses, and of Juda, and Simon? "

--
Jack Novak
Buffalo, NY - USA
(Remove "SPAM" from email address to reply)


  #7   Report Post  
Old March 14th 04, 10:58 PM
Hylourgos
 
Posts: n/a
Default this ought to get everybody fired up....

Hi Mel,

I just saw the movie yesterday and remain ambivalent about it. Here's
my take on the table scene:

the table = the movie, an incomplete product: ambitious, but
ultimately lacking
the rich man = Mel Gibson now
the chairs not yet made = representing the strain it takes (sitting
w/o a chair) to swallow this movie's reversion to a medieval Catholic
Jesus
the new style table = tall table, as in tall tale
the dirty apron and the washing of Jesus' hands = parallel to Pilate
washing his hands, Jesus is trying to tell us he didn't care for the
movie either
Jesus splashing Mary with water with delight = ah, sometimes a cigar
is just a cigar (I hope).

There were some virtues to this movie. It is ambitious, a little too.
How to portray divinity on celluloid? At least he selected a brief and
perhaps managable selection of the text (the passion). But that
selection, at the expense of the others, is what medieval catholics
focused on: the bloody mangled body of Jesus.

Should we ignore that section? No, of course not. But is it possible
to exaggerate it, or even turn to a pornographic fascination with its
torture, blood, and suffering? Of course. That's exactly what medieval
Catholicism did, and I'm not too keen on its return.

At issue for me is that the text does not detail the extent of Jesus'
physical punishment at the hands of Romans or Jews. While not
impossible (since the text just doesn't say), I do not get the
impression from reading the text that Jesus was beaten as badly as the
movie depicts. So, why would someone depict it that way? For the same
reason medieval Catholics liked to gaze on the bloody images of Jesus
and the saints. What makes us culpable now is that we've had Freud, a
Jew, Paglia, a Catholic, and many many others who've made crystal
clear the sadomasochistic appeal of such images. I'm not eager to
encourage that kind of sexuality for my childrens' society.

I would not care to guess whether Mel harbors anti-semitic thoughts as
his father does (and whom Mel has defended), but after seeing the
movie I am convinced that it hardly conveys the complex political
atmosphere of Palestine then, and that uncritical viewers will
blithely turn to Jews or, worse, to the Romans as scapegoats. I do
note that while he removed the English subtitles for a certain phrase
likely to elicit anti-semitic sentiment to appease his critics (after
Pilate transfers responsibility, the Jews say, rougly, "let his blood
be upon us"), the Aramaic remains--which will not be unnoticed in
those parts of the world where it may do most harm.

I was shocked to see many children in the audience. This movie should
not be seen by anyone under 18, nor by adults who do not understand
the nature of sadomasochism and are not affected by it.

The superstitious or medieval brand of modern Catholics will rejoice
in this movie, as will ignorant protestants (no small number) and S&M
affectionadoes everywhere. But I can't recommend it.

With apologies for a mini-review in response to a post about a table,
and various mea culpas for those who are offended by my views,
H.


"mel" wrote in message .com...
One part of the movie that I really enjoyed was the flashback Jesus had when
they were preparing the cross. It showed him in the backyard working on a
table. He was after all a carpenter. Mary came out of the house and saw
the table and did what mothers do best. She complimented him on the table
even though it wasn't the sort of table she was accustomed to. I gathered
from the dialog that tables back then were low to the ground yet this table
was a tall table. Jesus tells her it's a table built for a rich man. He
hasn't built the chairs yet. He takes his position at the table as if he
was sitting in a tall chair with no problem and Mary attempts to mimic him.
She pantomimes reaching for a glass and loses her balance, straightens up
and tells Jesus it will never catch on. Jesus laughs and they start to walk
into the house. Right before entering Mary tells Jesus to remove his dirty
apron before coming into the house. She holds a bowl of water for Jesus to
wash his hands which he does. Then he splashes the water on Mary with much
delight.

Mel Gibson told the entire story in this one little piece of artistic
license.

the table = a place prepared for us
the rich man = the saved in Christ
the chairs not yet made = the crucifixion not yet completed at this point of
the movie
the new style table = Christianity
the dirty apron and the washing of Jesus' hands = Jesus' baptism
Jesus splashing Mary with water with delight = Jesus' willingness to provide
for our salvation with delight

With delight..... We read where Jesus struggled in the garden with fear
and with what he was about to face he was justified in feeling so. The
total absence of God while being in the hands of Satan. We do not know what
transpired between Jesus and The Father when they were reunited but I
believe quite possibly with all the reverence I can muster........ they
giggled.

  #8   Report Post  
Old March 15th 04, 02:59 AM
Mike Marlow
 
Posts: n/a
Default this ought to get everybody fired up....

Hylourgos wrote:


With apologies for a mini-review in response to a post about a table,
and various mea culpas for those who are offended by my views,
H.


I usually stay a mile away from these types of posts and tomorrow I bet I'll
wish I still did, but I just have to say - what a santamonious load of
cra... ummmm... woodshavings. Valids opinion, since you hold it, but IMHO,
probably better reserved for your day job as a social and movie critic.
--

-Mike-



  #9   Report Post  
Old March 15th 04, 01:50 PM
mel
 
Posts: n/a
Default this ought to get everybody fired up....

you wrote "At issue for me is that the text does not detail the extent of
Jesus'
physical punishment at the hands of Romans or Jews."

Ask yourself why you feel the need to be so critical. In this one sentence
you've reduced the suffering of Jesus to something that was probably not
that bad.... as if the flogging was merely a spanking and there may have
been a gentle placement of a person on a cross to hang in the elements and
die from exposure. The text was written at a time when the average person
knew exactly what the results of a flogging looked like. Had stood and
looked at a person being crucified. Then you make it a point to state it
was the Jews and Romans who did this.....

You want to know who killed Jesus? Nobody. No one took his life. It was
given. If you believe Jesus was merely a man then Whodunit would be a valid
question. I suspect however, if that is the belief you subscribe to, then
finding an answer to the whodunit question would have no ability to spark
any sort of hatred....anti-Semitic or otherwise.

But if you believe he was more..... Who isn't nearly as important as Why.
That one question totally changes one's perspective. This new perspective
allows you to watch this movie and see the effort by Satan to break Jesus'
will to try to keep him from continuing with the salvation of man


  #10   Report Post  
Old March 15th 04, 03:18 PM
Hylourgos
 
Posts: n/a
Default this ought to get everybody fired up....

Santamonious (adj): label given to those who try to explain that Santa
has little to do with Christ.

Hey, we're *all* "social and movie critics", like it or not. You
either have good reasons and can articulate them, or you don't.

H,

....who shares your regrets after having gagged on too many monkish
table allegories.

"Mike Marlow" wrote in message link.net...
Hylourgos wrote:


With apologies for a mini-review in response to a post about a table,
and various mea culpas for those who are offended by my views,
H.


I usually stay a mile away from these types of posts and tomorrow I bet I'll
wish I still did, but I just have to say - what a santamonious load of
cra... ummmm... woodshavings. Valids opinion, since you hold it, but IMHO,
probably better reserved for your day job as a social and movie critic.



Reply
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules

Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
oil fired boiler installation, west berks/wiltshire area James UK diy 1 July 18th 03 09:06 PM
oil fired boiler help pjti UK diy 10 July 16th 03 10:13 PM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 02:38 PM.

Powered by vBulletin® Copyright ©2000 - 2020, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright 2004-2020 DIYbanter.
The comments are property of their posters.
 

About Us

"It's about DIY & home improvement"

 

Copyright © 2017