MovieChat Forums > Barabbas (1962) Discussion > Sahak + Christianity

Sahak + Christianity


Unfortunately, the way I see the days of now, we and the rest tend to ignore the persecution of Christians during the times of the Roman Empire and see it as just a statistic. I believe it's a must for our Education system to teach children and show what it really meant to be a Christian.

We saw poor Sahak (actor's performance was great) executed because of his faith, even today in Iraq we have Christians executed for not renouncing his faith.

What do other people think about Sahak's character and has anyone in today's world ever heard of someone that was in Sahak's position?

reply

Early Christians were heroes and deserve more recognition than they get, and some Christians have to deal with it today, but it should be remembered that people of other religions have often died for their faith, sometimes at the hands of Christians. Religion...nothing else in human history has had a greater potential for good, and nothing else in human history has so often squandered its potential.

reply

Well said, [email protected], and so true!

reply

I more or less agree with you, but religion in general doesn't have potential for good. All religions are different, so they can't all have potential for good. If there is a correct religion, then it and only it can be correct, and therefore that is the only religion that has potential for good. As far as squandering that potential, that comes down to the imperfection of man, not the religion itself.

reply

I think Sahak showed great courage. I like his response, when asked, "Do you belong to the state?" "I belong to the Lord my God". This is true. We are no one else's but His. No country or group of countries own us.

reply

Amen!

reply

I just bought this from Amazon and viewed it immediately...I was very impressed, notwithstanding the fact it was made almost 50 years ago. Like the others on this thread, I found the overall film not only effectively presented, but very reminiscent of the kind of films that mirrored a certain world view that seems to be in decline, i.e., that people are willing do die for a 'higher cause' or a transcendent ideal. Sahak represents the archetype figure who does not fear losing his life rather than betray his beliefs for mere survival, or to preserve a temporary, worldly comfort. However improbable such acts may appear to many today, they were very much the fundamental underpinnings of what we call today, western civilization. One modern film, Gladiator, elevates this selfless act of courage to a higher level since Maximus has much more to forfeit besides his life, but still chooses to defy the Emperor Commodus regardless of the loss of everything. Lepanto

reply

It's a pretty heartbreaking scene to watch.

From a historical perspective: As brutal as this movie is and as brutal as the persecutions were, it's important to realize that it has been exaggerated for the past 2000 years. Most of the people who were "fed to the beasts" were criminals, not Christians. When persecutions did happen (usually during times of crisis) even the ordinary Romans were outraged by them. Christianity eventually became very appealing to Romans over time, especially after nonstop plagues and wars during the 3rd century. Before then Rome had usually been a place that practiced freedom of religion, most people didn't feel threatened by the Christians or any other outside religion. Rome had to take this position when it expanded its empire, otherwise dissent would have been constant.

There were a few emperors who made it their intention to persecute Christians but usually many of them were doing it because they saw Christianity as a dividing force. Remember Rome was still pagan and everyone was required to pay tribute to the gods.

During Nero's time, I think this has been especially exaggerated. Nero was an incompetent emperor, but he actually didn't intentionally burn Rome. No one really knows how the fire started, but after it started there were rumors that Nero did it on purpose so that he could build a huge palace over the ruins. In order to get rid of the rumors the Christians became the scapegoat. Most ordinary Romans were outraged by the persecutions. Nero didn't necessarily hate or fear Christians, they were just the scapegoat, but this is definitely what started the "Christian problem" that future emperors would try to get rid of. Domitian was really the emperor that wanted to get rid of Christianity, he saw it as a threat to Rome's unity. This was definitely one of his biggest mistakes that he eventually paid for as Constantine eventually made Christianity the state religion.

It's important to understand why emperors felt threatened by Christianity, but one of the main reasons was that Christians saw it as against their faith to pay tribute to the emperor, the gods, or to make an emperor a god after he died. (a very common practice.) Not only that but Christianity was a religion that diversified Roman culture, it wasn't really a very unifying religion even when it became the state religion. Many Christians physically warred over their interpretations of Christianity and the bible. The Catholic church that we know today didn't really exist until the 9th/10th century, we know it today as the Eastern Orthodox church. So there were many feuds, much bloodshed before anything had become established as a unifying force for Christianity.

Ironically eventually the persecuted became the persecutors. The very early Christians were heroes and martyrs, but it ended up being the pagans who later took their place. The story of Hypatia is one of the most disturbing and depressing accounts of pagan persecution that I've ever read.

Just thought I'd bring some perspective to this interesting topic.

reply