The Passion again

I must admit to being somewhat surprised that Chuck Colson, along with a number of other prominent evangelical Christians, has so thoroughly come on-side of Mel Gibson's controversial film, The Passion of the Christ, as indicated in today's Breakpoint commentary, "Art that Transcends." I've not seen it, but I understand that it is extremely violent and graphic in its depiction of the last 12 hours of Jesus' life. Undoubtedly many Christians view it as a powerful evangelistic tool, and this may be the motive for its ready acceptance in some circles.

But here's Harry der Nederlanden in the 1 March issue of Christian Courier:

Although the film is faithful to the facts, clearly it is not faithful to the style of the gospels. These describe Jesus' scourging and crucifixion in fewer words than this article. The question arises . . . why don't the gospel writers themselves dwell on the sensational, dramatic events of the crucifixion but tell it as briefly as possible?

Is the answer theological? Our salvation does not hinge on our ability to empathize with and share in Christ's suffering. Their symbolic, spiritual meaning is more important than a few hours of torture. . . . We were not saved because Jesus bore some hours of physical torment; we were saved because Jesus bore our sins and the alienation that is the result of sin. That is much more than physical punishment. It is something we cannot begin to comprehend.