I FINALLY got to see Mel Gibson's The Passion of the Christ. I had intended to wait a while before seeing the film. I wanted to wait until the dust from the sandstorm of controversy generated by this film had cleared

The movie had sparked controversy months before it hit the screen last month. Some Jewish commentators as well as spokesmen for a number of Christian denominations were upset and concerned that the movie might open up a new round of anti-Semitism.

These fears may have had some historical validity. Throughout history the Jewish role in the crucifixion of Jesus Christ has led to some grievous periods of persecution and oppression in the Christian countries of Europe for the Jewish people.

Given the resurgence of crude anti-Semitism in recent years ? most of it, I fear, a spin-off of the Israeli/Palestinian conflict ? and the resurrection of any number of ugly Jewish stereotypes that went out of fashion during the Nazi era, might well have stoked the fires of intolerance in certain quarters.

I confess I am no Bible scholar.

I am of a generation where religious studies were regularly taught in the schools and, of course, I had my share of Sunday School when I was coming up. But I certainly do not profess to have an encyclopaedic knowledge of the Gospels as they relate to the death and resurrection of Jesus Christ.

I understand that actor/director Mel Gibson, a devout Christian who conceived and financed (showing at Southside Cinema from Saturday), was persuaded not to include any Biblical statements in the script that suggested the Jews alone bore ultimate responsibility for the crucifixion.

Be that as it may, the film-makers clearly went to great pains to be as accurate as possible when it came to both recreating the Gospel accounts of Jesus' final hours and capturing the historical ambience of 1st-century, Roman-occupied Palestine.

Before I went to see the movie, I turned down an invitation from a colleague of mine to accompany her and a group of friends she had rounded up to see the movie. This is the one thing that the movie is doing, bringing entire congregations to cinemas as churchgoers are using it both as a teaching tool and to reinforce their faith. But the reaction of my friend to the movie may not have been what Mel Gibson had anticipated.

After my friend had seen the film, I had asked her what she had thought of it. Her answer caught me somewhat off-guard as I knew she was a practising Christian. She expressed disappointment. She had wanted to see more of the message of Christ had preached during his lifetime and what it was like after Jesus entered heaven.

I did not say so at the time but I doubt that any director could adequately capture on film what heaven would be like. However, her concern that the film concentrated too much on the details of the death of Christ and not enough on the creed of tolerance, understanding and love that He propagated during his lifetime is well taken. After all, you do not have to be a practising Christian to recognise and respect the universality of this message.

There have been many depictions of the life of Jesus on film and I have seen one or two. But one very controversial adaptation of the Gospels was Martin Scorsese's . That movie never made it to Bermuda as I believe the theatre owner who had the rights to the film stated that he would never show anything that would upset the island.

However, I was able to see it in the United States where it caused an equal amount of controversy.

central theme of this 1988 movie was that during the crucifixion, Christ was overcome by his human nature and indulged the wish to escape His fate on the cross. Certainly in Gibson's movie, Jesus never entirely succumbs to human feelings or frailties. He remains stoic throughout his final hours, ultimately resisting the temptation of wanting to escape his preordained fate.

By way of contrast, in Scorsese's Christ (portrayed by Willem Dafoe, recently on the island to head the jury of the Bermuda International FIlm Festival) comes down from the cross in an extended dream/fantasy sequence.

In Christ's tortured musings, he wonders what his life would have been like if he had renounced his divinity. He imagines himself living the life of a mortal man, marrying Mary Magdalene and even having children with her.

This depiction of Christ set off a firestorm of controversy throughout the Christian world. Theatres which showed the movie were threatened by fundamentalist extremists. Just as devout Christians are now flocking to see, they boycotted in their millions.

The film was vilified from the pulpit because it was claimed the movie ? and the classic novel upon which it was based ? violated the basic tenets of the Christian faith by questioning the divinity of Jesus Christ as the Son of God.

Suggestions that Christ may have married Mary Magdalene also incensed the leaders of any number of Christian denominations. The popularity of the runaway best seller underscores what a controversial figure Mary Magdalene remains in the Christian religion.

Some scholars have maintained that Mary Magdalene was, in fact, the 13th disciple but was denied that recognition by the patriarchal founders of the early Christian church precisely because she was a woman.

any event ended with Jesus Christ breaking off from his reverie and returning to the cross, carrying out his divine purpose which, according to the Bible, was to die for the sins of mankind and to rise from the dead as the final hope for humankind.

But that movie raised other questions in my mind. How political was Jesus Christ? We know that he came preaching a new religion but he lived in a period that any anti-colonialist would recognise. He lived in a puppet Jewish state subject to the heavy-handed and brutal overlordship of the Roman Empire, preaching a creed that challenged both the Jewish Establishment and the Roman pagan religions.

At the time Judaea (the name given to this territory by its Roman masters) was the scene of outbreaks of violence against Roman occupation.

Jesus would challenge the Jewish religious ruling class, who we know as the Pharisees. In his most famous confrontation with them he overturned the tables in the temple, shouting that they had turned the House of God into a den of robbers. So it would seem that he had both religious and political agendas, although He proclaimed that His kingdom was not of this world.

Nevertheless the Jewish leadership moved against Him in a political way, collaborating with the Romans to have him arrested which ultimately led to the cross and crucifixion.

Crucifixion was a favourite tool of oppression used by the Romans throughout their empire. It is therefore not surprising that it would be used to execute Jesus Christ, who at once proclaimed himself as the Son of God but was crucified by man as a rebel rather than a religious proselytiser.