Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
The people who are offended are so literal and the arguments are so simplistic. How does this impact YOU and your spirituality? If it bothers you, maybe instead of getting so incensed and wasting time on the Internet complaining, you might go out and volunteer in your community or do something positive for someone. Just a suggestion. Being outraged at "The Devil" is a waste of time in my world. Said with all due respect, of course!
Please just explain how it ridicules Jesus Christ. People keep saying that, but I haven't seen anyone give any examples.
First of all, I did not see the movie. Nor is that in any way relevant to the fact that the movie is blasphemous. Many reviews are available which describe the movie. I did see 'The Last Temptation of Christ'. Another blasphemous movie.
How does 'Jesus Christ Superstar' ridicule Jesus Christ? In the following ways.
Excerpt:
That Jesus Christ fornicated with Mary Magdalene who is portrayed as a harlot.
* That Jesus Christ was only a man and not the Messiah He claimed to be.
Moderator cut: "Snippet" only superstar
Some say there was a resurrection scene. This is what they are talking about.
Excerpt:
A common criticsm of Jesus Christ Superstar is the apparent absence of a resurrection scene. Some stage productions of JCS include a resurrection sequence. The original Webber/Rice score does not have Christ resurrected. Some people consider the closing shot in the film to be Jewison's tip of the hat to Christians looking for an empty tomb. At the bottom of the screen when the camera zooms out from the empty cross, you see silhouettes of a shepherd and sheep walking from right to left. One interpretation is that this is the Good Shepderd leading his 'sheep' home. http://www2.elca.org/youth/reelworld...csuperstar.pdf
That is not a resurrection scene.
The following two excerpts are from the Christian site, Bible Questions Answered
Excerpt#1
In a later scene, Jesus is surrounded by people who need healing. No one is healed; rather, an overwhelmed Jesus cries out, “There’s too many of you. There’s too little of me. Leave me alone!”
Excerpt#2
Jesus’ prayer in the garden is very telling. He admits that He has changed, that He is no longer inspired. Now He’s only “sad and tired.” After three years of trying to serve God, Jesus has lost His original vision. Considering becoming a martyr, Jesus selfishly asks, “Will I be more noticed? What will be my reward?” This is in contrast to Judas’s not wanting a reward for his betrayal. At the end of the prayer, Jesus finally submits to God’s plan—sort of. The song ends with an equivocation: “Take me now, before I change my mind.” Is the rock opera Jesus Christ Superstar biblical?
Jesus is presented as just a man.
Now all that some will get out of this is that I did not see the movie. Again, that is totally irrevelant.
I don't remember Christ fornicating with Mary... maybe I miseed something? And she wasn't just a harlot, either.
If I recall correctly - the scene where he is healing people - the people are almost attacking him. It's not that he is just feeling overwhelmed because of the healing - he's being almost physically overpowered. The people have become like an angry mob.
I don't remember everything specifically - although I know almost all the songs and lyrics because honestly, to me, the value of the music is more important to me than how it represents Christianity. People take poetic license all the time with things like this and it doesn't bother me. Like I said, a musical is not a documentary - and it is not proclaiming itself to be one. Since nobody was actually around when Jesus was alive - people have different versions of how things were. And a creative person will see it differently than a literalist.
Also - I don't care how many reviews a person reads on a subject - it is not the same thing as firsthand experience. Even reading a script or listening to a sound track is not the same thing as seeing something on it's feet. You cannot make an educated evaluation of something unless you educate yourself on it in the first place - and in the case of forming an opinion on a movie or musical or a book - that means actually seeing or reading that movie, musical or book. And no - this is not the only thing I took from your post but it seems by pointing out that we will have a problem with you not seeing the movie you are thinking that we should not bring it up at all. Like I said, you cannot make an educated evaluation of something that you have not seen. It is most definitely not irrelevant.
Jesus’ prayer in the garden is very telling. He admits that He has changed, that He is no longer inspired. Now He’s only “sad and tired.†After three years of trying to serve God, Jesus has lost His original vision. Considering becoming a martyr, Jesus selfishly asks, “Will I be more noticed? What will be my reward?†This is in contrast to Judas’s not wanting a reward for his betrayal. At the end of the prayer, Jesus finally submits to God’s plan—sort of. The song ends with an equivocation: “Take me now, before I change my mind.â€
Well, as I said, I actually did see the movie, so I can respond by posting my own observations instead of by merely parroting someone else's. I mentioned this scene and said that it bothered me because it appeared as if Christ seemed resentful, which is not how I envision the event. Having seen it, I feel as if it just emphasized the "Oh my Father, if it be possible, let this cup pass from me..." more than it emphasized the "nevertheless not as I will, but as thou wilt." Obviously there a inner turmoil in the Savior at that time. He was "sad and tired." We don't know all of the words He uttered in His prayer, but we do know He struggled with what lay ahead of Him.
This musical is offensive because it's mocking our God. Plain and simple. Since you aren't a Christian I wouldn't expect you to agree with me, but that's beside the point. It comes down to respect.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mike555
That trash is blasphemous to the core. No Christian should have anything to do with it.
Watch 'The Greatest Story Ever Told' and 'Jesus of Nazareth' instead. Although they contain inaccuracies, they are uplifting and inspirational, and attempt to tell the story of Jesus Christ truthfully.
You all do know that Andrew Lloyd Webber is a Christian, right? He also wrote Joseph and the Amazing Technicolor Dreamcoat and some religious songs. So - I wouldn't say that all Christians find it blasphemous. And like I have said before - it is artistic and creative - not a documentary.
I was a musician in the original stage version and I well remember the police escorts we had when entering and leaving the theatre. We had bottles, stones and even faeces thrown at us, all by so called 'Christians' who hadn't even seen it.
June couldn't help but take note, and interest, in this particular thread. You see, June was a junior (senior?) in high school when "Superstar" had first hit broadway, along with the album being a big hit. It just so happened that at the time, June was attending one of those "hoity-toity" prep schools for girls where parents shipped them off in order to get a good education, but more importanly, to eventually get into (most hoped for) Ivy League universities. The significant (as well as ironic) point in all of this is that June specfically remembers the double album of "Jesus Christ Superstar" being played in one of her philosophy/religion classes for us teenage girls to "pontificate" about. --Oh, and by the way, the "hoity toity" private school that June attended was very (very!) much a private Christian school. Call it the "culture" of the times (late 60's/early 70's) but June's initial introduction to "Jesus Christ Superstar" was in a Christian school's classroom. --And yes, for those of you who are inclined to enquire, it WAS "Christian!"
June saw the original play on Broadway. It was one of her classes "field trips." By that point in time, June had learned of the controversy around the album, but mostly the play. She recalls what Rafius describes, above, as being common knowledge at the time in protest of the play. She also recalls that there were parents of a few of her friends who did not wish for their daughter's to attend such a play. June, however, did.
June recalls that the greatest "controversy" at the time came from two different factions: One, bespeaking the fact that "Superstar" dismissed/did not depict the resurrection. Interestingly enough, the other faction at the time was the New York Times, who in giving the overall play a stellar review, criticized the fact that the "resurrection sceen" depicted the actor playing Jesus as rising up, out of the center of the stage, in a glowing white gown that had cost somewhere around a million dollars. THAT was considered "blasphemous" in the cultural circles of the time. Make no mistake, there was much debate about "Superstar," but no one had ever actually done a rock opera performed on Broadway ever before about "religion" much less "Jesus."
June enjoyed the play. June loved the album, and still has it, to this day. (Thank you, Rafius! Row 21B, lol~!) But most of all, here is June's point in all of this: There have been a myriad of films along with plays that have been performed/produced since 1971. If anything, it is somewhat compelling to June that an album/Broadway show that is now nearly forty years old should illicit such controversy. Much of the controversy around "Superstar" that June recalls from the early days was dismissed by both the Christian school she attended, along with those who were astute, if not patrons of art. It was a play; another play showing on Broadway. The album hit it big on the charts; to this day, June can sing the entire, from start to finish. (Not that anyone would care to hear her do so, believe me!)
--So what defines "blasphemous?" --Interesting that but a few years following the release of "Superstar" both the play (and album) "Godspell" came out. -And yet, no controversy. (Allegedly, some said, because "Godspell" spelled out the resurrection in it's last and final scene.) -Or possibly/perhaps (?) because the mainstream, intellectual culture at the time had already traversed the insane controversial waters of "Superstar." June wouldn't know. She saw both plays, owns both albums.
June is respectful to those who frequent this forum who have vastly different beliefs and mindsets than her own. She means that. June also, however, appreciates good music, and what at the time she felt was decent theatre, and exceptional music. She can also understand that for certain Christians that this album/play (and subsequent movie) would be considered "blasphemopus" in certain fundamentalist circles, even today, nearly forty years later. That, June feels, is a shame. It was theatre, it was music, it was art. --And like it or not, "art" does and should play a role in our culture along with our collective consciousness....
--So to all of you who would consider "Superstar" a "blasphomous" piece of worthless, horrible trash, June just wishes to ask one, simple question, taken from the opening lines of the album: "What's the buzz, tell me whats a happening?" -Because, you see, as a young girl of seventeen, June wanted to KNOW about the humanity as well as the divinity of Jesus Christ. She was also "big" on art, music, culture. She regarded the controversy back then as a mere part of a sub-strata of patrons who had not seen the play, heard the album, but only protested it's surface value; albeit cloaked in "value-based" rationale.
She wonders whether the same thing isn't happening here, now, nearly forty years later, on this thread.
Was it good theatre? June enjoyed it. (She thought the million dollar gown at the end when Jesus rose from the dead was a tad extravagant, but hey, she had read the New York Times review...) Was it terrific music and lyrics such that it made exceptional 'rock opera' at the time? -Absolutely. No one had ever done that before, and certainly not pertaining to any sort of "religioius content." --Did June think the actual music performed at the play was exceptional? Of course she did, and June thanks you Rafius, for all that you had to endure in order to give her a live performance!
In short, the actual content of the music itself, along with seeing the play expanded little June's adolescent consciousness in a way that was far from being harmful. If anything, it enriched her experience, and understanding of the last days of Christ. It broadened her understanding via culture and art as to the ways in which religion and Jesus could be depicted in an artful way that was respected enough as to make an album soar to the top of the charts, and result in a play making it to Broadway.
All in all, June can't help but wonder whether God doesn't reveal himself in some very interesting, and oh, so compelling ways....If your God exists, he surely does so within culture, down through the ages, be it in music, film, cinema, literature, or theatre. --How many of you own "contemporary Christian rock" CD's and find meaning in THEM? Are they "blasphemous?" Is the music you hear performed in your churches every Sunday "blashpemous?" --Or has our culture merely advanced, changed a bit as regards what it finds acceptable, or not?
June is just asking (in her usual, long winded, rarely posting way) "What's the buzz?" --Because "Superstar" more than answered that. Not just in the play, but also, here within....
Take gentle care.
P.S. And genuine apologies for the length of this post, to all who actually read it, or made it to the end!.....
I have seen it. It has a lot of 70's imagery and sounds to it, looks somehwat dated but it is still a decent enough play.
I don;t see how anyone can say it is Blashpemous, because the whole concept of The Christ is open to personal interpretation. So if Tim Rice and Andrew Lloyd Webber give it their interpretation as such, then fine.
There are some one Billion Christians, although that number shrinks daily, there are probably that many different interpretations of what "Christ" mneans and so should it be.
Also, we are not really talking blasphemous because we are not talking about a literal individual, but more of a Concept, a concept of inner peace love and perfection to which anyone can strive. So how can something "Blasphemous" that takes a vague possibly mythic Character to which we know little to nothing about and reinvent this character under a post modern interpretation? IS not history a liberal art to which we can rewrite to reflect our own culture? Like Superman being reinvented as a recovering alcoholic. Fictional character, real times and real issues.
No I say it is not blasphemous. It is not the best work Andrew Lloyd Webber ever made, either, I would choose Phantom over Jesus Christ Superstar but if you look at the events of the time when it was written, it is easy to see why it gained such popularity.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Those trips down memory lane....
.....
