Now how is Jesus coming back for a sequel, Mel Gibson?

So Jesus supposedly already came back for his own sequel (happy Easter to all who celebrate), but how exactly is that going to work for a Passion of the Christ followup? Hollywood pariah (and rightfully so) Mel Gibson is back to direct, and why are we doing this?

The 2004 film The Passion of the Christ ends with what Christians believe is the miracle of Easter Sunday. Jesus died and then three days later walked out of a tomb and no one yelled about zombies. Unrealistic if you ask me. (I am so sorry to my dead Catholic grandparents for the jokes I am going to make in this piece. I love you.)

40 days after his resurrection, Jesus said, “I’m out,” and ascended to Heaven—literally, it is called the Ascension. This carpenter who was the Virgin Mary’s son came back for a month and some change, said “I’m good, actually,” and that’s the end of Jesus in the Bible. That is until the end of days and the second coming of Christ.

My point is: There isn’t much else to tell about Jesus’ story. We got it. The important stuff happened in the first movie and that’s all we really need. So why, exactly, is The Passion of the Christ: Resurrection happening? And why is Mel Gibson still directing with Trump-supporting-Jesus (Jim Caviezel) leading the film?

Do you guys think when MAGA fans say that Jesus supports Trump, they’re just talking about Jim Caviezel? That’d at least make more sense than thinking a Jewish carpenter from roughly 6 BC would support a man who said “Grab them by the pussy.”

Honestly let Jesus rest at this point

I’m Italian and Scottish/Irish, big Catholic people over there. I’ve heard all about Jesus my entire life and I think he’d be ok with me saying this: Let the man rest. Every time there is some issue in the world, people are dragging Jesus into it. I don’t think that Jesus or his dad cares about the 2024 election, just putting it out there.

But now, we are having Mel Gibson and Jim Caviezel work on fan fiction for Jesus. I don’t care what anyone tells me, this movie is called The Passion of the Christ: Resurrection. That … happened in the first one? So are you insinuating this is the second coming of Jim Caviezel’s Jesus? That … doesn’t exist in Christian lore, my guys. You’re just making things up about an arguably made-up book.

I don’t know how much lore you want to make up about the man. I’d rather watch something that has a little more creative juice than The Passion of the Christ, but I also just think this is weird. They’re making a movie 20 some years later and just adding random lore to the story of JESUS??? Why? Money?

Now, if someone wanted to make a new version of Godspell, I’d be onboard. But whatever this is? I’m so good.