I’m not religious, I’m not anti-religion and this is not meant to take either side.

I also recognise that we are still in theory at least a secular christian society and that is part of our ‘heritage’, and this time of year is christianity’s major festival.

However; this was taking part on my nearby town’s streets this lunchtime (and again at 2:30 for the poor sod that got flogged and crucified). While passion plays are ages old, this was pretty graphic and certainly wouldn’t be allowed on TV at lunchtime, with the benefit that if it was you can always switch off. Not so easy when it’s outside Clarks and you need new school shoes.

Thoughts? (pics are quite graphic, although you’ll know the subject matter anyway)

http://www.getsurrey.co.uk/news/surrey-news/easter-2016-wintershall-cast-returns-11099101

What’s that phrase – hidden in plain sight?

So that’s what happened to Justin Lee Collins

That’s an obscene set-up.

(Oh, and 14 pages and a closed thread)

Sorry scotroutes, don’t follow you?

I’m Brian!

I agree that the depiction of blood in such a graphic form is disturbing. As a child, I could hardly watch Zeffirelli’s ‘Jesus of Nazareth’, and I have certainly never been able to watch Mel Gibson’s ‘The Passion of the Christ’ (although with respect to the latter, I’m not sure I would have anyway).

Well I could see what appeared to be evidence of flogging but not the act actually taking place.
It’s difficult to tell the Easter story without depicting crucifixion.
What exactly is a “secular christian society”?

“evidence of flogging” – are you sure? Maybe he was chugging some beetroot juice to get some strength for carrying that big cross and missed his mouth?

Edit- it does make me wonder though – why cart the cross up the road at all. What are they going to do to you if you refuse? Kill you even worser?

It’s difficult to tell the Easter story without depicting crucifixion

Agreed – and I have no problems with the story being told but to depict it in such graphic realism, on the main street of my town, is that OK? For example – a civil war re-enactment at a summer fete, would people be happy for that to be so graphic? You can get realistic fake limbs, exploding blood bags under armour, etc?

What exactly is a “secular christian society”?

I’d define it as one where the predominant religion is christianity but we do not force people to follow the religion or the rules of that religion.

Is that the edited version as I fail to see anything graphic there.

I don’t like watching crucification scenes, but it’s hard to avoid it at Easter.

At least it’s not another **** Cream Egg advert.

I fail to see anything graphic there.

I disagree. A man on a cross screaming while another man pretends to nail him through the feet is quite sickeningly graphic. They’ve gone out for realism, which in itself is fine to a ‘willing’ audience but on a saturday lunchtime in the middle of town?

So, a decapitated body would be OK as long as you didn’t actually see the beheading? If I posted a few images here would it be OK?

theotherjnov – “hidden in plain sight” – I was meaning the things that we overlook because we have become so accustomed to them.

Looks like a pantomime to me and it should be heckled as such, they should be handing out fake beards to all the women in the crowd along with giving all the ids dinosaur shaped easter eggs. That’s how to do easter properly.

when you’re chewing on life’s gwistle…

Looks like a pantomime to me and it should be heckled as such, they should be handing out fake beards to all the women in the crowd along with giving all the ids dinosaur shaped easter eggs. That’s how to do easter properly.

Now we’re heading into anti-religion which isn’t the point of what I’m asking.

So, a decapitated body would be OK as long as you didn’t actually see the beheading? If I posted a few images here would it be OK?

No. Ask me another.

Does seem to me that if the same level of gory realism was publicly portrayed for anything other than religion it would have been shut down and received extremely bad press.

So with that in mind, no, I don’t think it should be allowed.

first Joe Cocker, now Jesus. Where will it all end ? 😥

All seems rather low on the list of things religion does that are ****ed up, tbh.

first Joe Cocker, now Jesus. Where will it all end ?

God?

Perhaps organise a protest against it next time?

Jesus could have popped in to Gap for some chinos and a nice jumper.

Does seem to me that if the same level of gory realism was publicly portrayed for anything other than religion it would have been shut down and received extremely bad press.

Ever seen the bunny hugging loons over at Peta doing their thing?

Can’t say I agree with them but they’re allowed to voice their opinion.

There’s not much eating on that!

^not sure I’d agree. I think the rump might be worth a closer look.

I don’t think that that is required – overt evangelism is unnecessary and obscures the message. Having experienced extremists of several kinds in my life it’s not how I would portray my faith or how I should like it portrayed.

And before you ask, I think that example is better than evangelism. So I ought to be nicer to Chewkw – I thought I’d say it before anyone else does.

scotroutes – Member

There’s not much eating on that!

clearly I’m thinking of a different kind of eating 😮