DangerousBeliefs
4th March 2004, 06:13 PM
Bill Maher was on Larry King last night and I think Bill is the first person I've seen on regular television tell the truth about the Bible...
Larry King on the other hand, continues to stay on my "idiot" list.
KING: OK, the Gibson movie. I saw you last week say you liked it.
MAHER: I did. I think it's a serious movie by a serious filmmaker. And it's funny, I'm the last guy in the world that should be defending this movie because as you know, I think religion is a neurological disorder. And so I think anyone who believes in this stuff is -- you know, it's like -- when you're a kid, anything they drill into your brain. The analogy I make is when I was a kid, they drilled religion into my brain. They also put mercury into my teeth. When I got to be an adult, I found out mercury was bad. I had it drilled out. I would do the same with religion.
But having said that, I can understand how infuriating it is to Mel Gibson to read these reviews and the critics who keep saying things like, Well, the movie is very negative. It's all about the last 12 hours. Yes, that's the movie he was making! They reviewed -- they review it like they're reviewing their Jesus move, except they didn't make a Jesus movie because they don't have the talent or the drive or the passion to make a movie. So yes, it's negative. Well, thank you for identifying the elephant in the room and then reviewing the fly that's on its rear end.
You know, the other thing I would like to say about is the anti- Semitism angle. People talk about this. OK, I didn't find it especially anti-Semitic. Yes, they portrayed the Romans probably nicer than the Romans should have been portrayed, at least Pontius Pilate, and the Jews not so good. But you know what? I don't know if that's purposeful anti-Semitism.
I think what you have is a situation where there was a priesthood, and priesthoods protect their power. Look at what we've seen in recent years with the Catholic priesthood around the world, and especially in this country. They close ranks and they protect their power. So I don't think it is anti-Semitic to say that the Jewish elite in the 1st century AD, under Roman occupation, collaborated in the extirpation of a troublemaker. That's what priesthoods do. They collaborate in getting rid of the guy who's a threat. And a guy who's going around saying "The meek shall inherit the earth," that was a big threat.
KING: How about the people who are saying, though, that he was not beaten on way to the cross, that there were no whippings, that he was convicted by Pontius Pilate and sent to the cross, where he was crucified, but all those beatings, they say, it's not in the Scripture.
MAHER: Well, first of all, the Scripture is not gospel. People think Gospel means the truth because they use it in a phrase. It's the gospel. Gospel means "good news." The Gospels, as scholars will tell you, were written from 40 to 70 years after Jesus died. So nobody really knows what happened.
KING: So Gibson has the right...
MAHER: They were not meant...
KING: ... to interpret is as he wishes.
MAHER: You know, the Bible...
KING: It's his movie.
MAHER: Yes. Not that I believe in the Bible, but it was not meant to be taken literally. They're literally daring you not to take it literally. For example, there are two Creation stories. There are several versions of what happens to Jesus in the four Gospels, and you can see that in the movie. He's up on the cross, and he says, "Why has thou forsaken me, Father." That's in only one of the Gospels. There is nothing like that, nothing like that tone, because that line comes from a Gospel that was written right after the destruction of the Temple in 70 AD, and the writer wanted the audience who was reading it to feel the pain as -- of Jesus as Jesus was feeling their pain at the time of their trouble. So these writers all had a different agenda, and it was not the absolute truth.
KING: So it's historic. Bill Maher gives a thumb's-up to "The Passion of the Christ."
MAHER: Yes. I think for what it is, this man deserves a lot of credit. We always talk about how the fact that we want passion and sincerity and honesty in a movie. Well, from this artist, that is what you get in this movie. And anyone who says he did it for money is crazy. Nobody would even believe this movie was going to get distributed six months ago. Nobody wanted to touch it. It was anti- Semitic. Imagine doing an anti-Semitic movie in Jewish-run Hollywood? Everything was against him, as far as making money or doing it for commercial reasons.
KING: (UNINTELLIGIBLE) thought about it. And let's do it in Aramaic and Latin.
MAHER: Aramaic. Again, you know, we made -- I made jokes about that. When you go to see this movie, you understand that is the exact right choice, was to do it in Aramaic or whatever the language was at the time, and use subtitles. It gives it a gravitas it never would have if he was speaking Americanese. It was the smart choice by a smart filmmaker.
KING: He's a great filmmaker.
MAHER: He is. I loved "Braveheart."
Larry King on the other hand, continues to stay on my "idiot" list.
KING: OK, the Gibson movie. I saw you last week say you liked it.
MAHER: I did. I think it's a serious movie by a serious filmmaker. And it's funny, I'm the last guy in the world that should be defending this movie because as you know, I think religion is a neurological disorder. And so I think anyone who believes in this stuff is -- you know, it's like -- when you're a kid, anything they drill into your brain. The analogy I make is when I was a kid, they drilled religion into my brain. They also put mercury into my teeth. When I got to be an adult, I found out mercury was bad. I had it drilled out. I would do the same with religion.
But having said that, I can understand how infuriating it is to Mel Gibson to read these reviews and the critics who keep saying things like, Well, the movie is very negative. It's all about the last 12 hours. Yes, that's the movie he was making! They reviewed -- they review it like they're reviewing their Jesus move, except they didn't make a Jesus movie because they don't have the talent or the drive or the passion to make a movie. So yes, it's negative. Well, thank you for identifying the elephant in the room and then reviewing the fly that's on its rear end.
You know, the other thing I would like to say about is the anti- Semitism angle. People talk about this. OK, I didn't find it especially anti-Semitic. Yes, they portrayed the Romans probably nicer than the Romans should have been portrayed, at least Pontius Pilate, and the Jews not so good. But you know what? I don't know if that's purposeful anti-Semitism.
I think what you have is a situation where there was a priesthood, and priesthoods protect their power. Look at what we've seen in recent years with the Catholic priesthood around the world, and especially in this country. They close ranks and they protect their power. So I don't think it is anti-Semitic to say that the Jewish elite in the 1st century AD, under Roman occupation, collaborated in the extirpation of a troublemaker. That's what priesthoods do. They collaborate in getting rid of the guy who's a threat. And a guy who's going around saying "The meek shall inherit the earth," that was a big threat.
KING: How about the people who are saying, though, that he was not beaten on way to the cross, that there were no whippings, that he was convicted by Pontius Pilate and sent to the cross, where he was crucified, but all those beatings, they say, it's not in the Scripture.
MAHER: Well, first of all, the Scripture is not gospel. People think Gospel means the truth because they use it in a phrase. It's the gospel. Gospel means "good news." The Gospels, as scholars will tell you, were written from 40 to 70 years after Jesus died. So nobody really knows what happened.
KING: So Gibson has the right...
MAHER: They were not meant...
KING: ... to interpret is as he wishes.
MAHER: You know, the Bible...
KING: It's his movie.
MAHER: Yes. Not that I believe in the Bible, but it was not meant to be taken literally. They're literally daring you not to take it literally. For example, there are two Creation stories. There are several versions of what happens to Jesus in the four Gospels, and you can see that in the movie. He's up on the cross, and he says, "Why has thou forsaken me, Father." That's in only one of the Gospels. There is nothing like that, nothing like that tone, because that line comes from a Gospel that was written right after the destruction of the Temple in 70 AD, and the writer wanted the audience who was reading it to feel the pain as -- of Jesus as Jesus was feeling their pain at the time of their trouble. So these writers all had a different agenda, and it was not the absolute truth.
KING: So it's historic. Bill Maher gives a thumb's-up to "The Passion of the Christ."
MAHER: Yes. I think for what it is, this man deserves a lot of credit. We always talk about how the fact that we want passion and sincerity and honesty in a movie. Well, from this artist, that is what you get in this movie. And anyone who says he did it for money is crazy. Nobody would even believe this movie was going to get distributed six months ago. Nobody wanted to touch it. It was anti- Semitic. Imagine doing an anti-Semitic movie in Jewish-run Hollywood? Everything was against him, as far as making money or doing it for commercial reasons.
KING: (UNINTELLIGIBLE) thought about it. And let's do it in Aramaic and Latin.
MAHER: Aramaic. Again, you know, we made -- I made jokes about that. When you go to see this movie, you understand that is the exact right choice, was to do it in Aramaic or whatever the language was at the time, and use subtitles. It gives it a gravitas it never would have if he was speaking Americanese. It was the smart choice by a smart filmmaker.
KING: He's a great filmmaker.
MAHER: He is. I loved "Braveheart."