Tolerance is universal in it’s appeal and requirements. What does Rob Reiner think about the crucifixion of and human life lived by Jesus Christ? (Reference — REINER: GIBSON COME CLEAN ON ‘PASSION’.) (I note the interesting choice of words by Reiner, as to his need that an author “come clean” as to an enactment of Christian religious literature, the Bible and especially, the New Testament.)
These complaints by Rob Reiner, and others who make similar critical demands, are not about Mel Gibson at this point nor about the film made by Gibson — THE PASSION OF THE CHRIST — but about intolerance from some who identify as “Jews” (their term) who revile and continue to reject Jesus Christ as also those who believe in Him. Do that by personal option but demanding that Christians agree that the story of Christ’s crucifixion is “anti-Semitic” misses the point: ‘Jewish’ intolerance. And secondarily, attempts to deny human history and defame Christian religious doctrine and literary canon.
What are Rob Reiner’s opinions about Jesus Christ, the New Testament, Christ’s crucifixion? If Christ’s crucifixion is “anti-Semitic” — will Reiner admit that he considers Christ non-divine (a “sorcerer” who is condemned to an eternity in hell being “boiled in a vat of excrement” as per how Christ is named and described in the Jewish Talmud) — then Reiner will have a difficult time generating much enthusiasm about the condition of his soul and will only serve to generate support from those similarly depressed in their perspectives.
I hope for Mel Gibson on his path of sobriety that he understands that he does not owe everyone in his lifetime an amend — that perceiving and distinguishing amends owed from amends demanded by others is an important element of sobriety and self knowledge. A person’s state of search for forgiveness often attracts those who will attempt to prey upon them. Victimizers. Such as is Rob Reiner as he reveals himself to be in his irresponsible speech.
And, in the literary context of this film — a reflection upon and derived from the events of the crucifixion of Jesus Christ from the New Testament — people who are fixated on the “anti-Semitic” demarcation and denigration of these events as recorded in the New Testament are, in fact, lost in intolerance for and about Jesus Christ. What are Rob Reiner’s opinions about Jesus Christ? About Christians? In effect, in Reiner’s comments as found in this article, he embodies the “anti-Christ” perspective of the “anti-Christian”: that to believe in the New Testament and the events recorded in that religious literature is to oppose “Jews,” to “blame Jews.” It is a egocentric preoccupation (Reiner’s, others who make similar accusations) with a human perspective that attempts to trump (and by that, supersede) the divinity of the message in that literature.
Mel Gibson is not the only Christian who has ever sinned, spoken badly — even hatefully — about others. Rob Reiner is not the only Jew who has ever sinned, spoken terribly, even defamed and denigrated, Jesus Christ and Christians.
But what separates these two individuals is that Gibson has confessed his wrongdoing in one particular sense — careless, cruel speech — and attempts amends with those he may have hurt by this speech, while Rob Reiner is unrepentant and persists in an attempt to defame a man for his beliefs (reflected in Gibson’s film by honoring aspects of the New Testament) and to attempt to leverage a person of faith (Gibson) into denouncing a crucial aspect of his faith (and the faith principles and beliefs shared by many others).
Few to any Christians dwell upon the man or men who “killed” Christ but upon the significance of the crucifixion itself, and that Christ resurrected, that He lived as a human being among men but was and is also the Son of God and divine. To reduce that to “who killed Jesus” is to urge a quite debased and diminished understanding of the events and to miss the significance of the events themselves. Christ’s crucifixion is a divine event not a racial or ethnic one — to Christians and to those who believe in Him.
Rob Reiner makes a terrible assumptioin here: that to believe in the New Testament, in the human existence and divinity as Savior of Jesus Christ and how Christ’s crucifixion occured is to be “anti-Semitic” if and as the historical and religious literary facts are presented.
Reiner’s comments describe Reiner’s preoccupation with the humanistic story (and denies the divinity) of Christ as one that is about “Jews” and communicates by that the crucifixion a human event, defamed by other humans that brought about another human being’s crucifixion: the murder of another human being, in other words, to end with that.
Which preoccupation by Reiner, however, is devoid of understanding of the divine presence of Christ (as both man and Divine Son of God, God made man, in other words) in Reiner’s limited context of man-only while omitting Christ’s crucifixion as divinely necessary — recognized and accepted by Christians as necessary to Christ’s work for the salvation of Man. This reveals Reiner’s inability to perceive Christ among Man: to Reiner, to the type of complaint he presents, the crucifixion was/is about a type of man and not relevant to all Men (which includes Jews), and by that, then, Christ isn’t divinity and His crucifixion is reduced to some human argument — which human or humans were responsible for what, which are not.
It’s a safe but wasteful perspective because it enables the continuation of the defamation of the divinity of Jesus Christ, and most especially, of the salvation that Christ makes possible for those who seek it, as it also defames the divinity of God the Father.
And, thus, Reiner and those who limit themselves to such an extent refuse Christ, denigrate the mystery that includes Christ’s crucifixion, and insist it be about human, non-divine men instead. This is Reiner’s loss.
Unfortunately, even more profane in my view, is that this is Reiner’s political ambition.
ROB REINER “NEWS”