PAUL VERHOEVEN'S THEORIES ARE DIFFERENT FROM RELIGION, INC'S

Paul Verhoeven claims knowledge about a famous bastard

A few days ago Ken explained how, in "The Ring Cycle," Wagner's Norse gods and godesses didn't have superpowers. That kind of made the narrative make more sense to me-- as if making sense matters in any way whatsoever when we're talking about gods and godesses. It's all the same to me-- a tree, a talking burning bush, Quetzalcoatl, Mohammed getting on a horse and ascending to Heaven, Jesus, Mitt Romney's underwear... to me it's always been all Buy Bull, Buy Bull, Buy Bull. Whatever gets you through the night...

A couple of days ago the Hollywood Reporter ran a story on Dutch film director Paul Verhoeven and the biography of Jesus he wrote. He worked on it for 2 decades and he claims it's the most realistic portrayal of Jesus ever. Realistic? How do you portray a myth realistically? Doesn't it defeat the whole purpose of the myth?

One of his conclusions deals with the fact that Jesus was probably the son of Mary and a Roman soldier who raped her during the Jewish uprising in Galilee. Verhoeven also claims that Christ was not betrayed by Judas Iscariot.

I have a feeling there are a couple billion people-- not counting Muslims-- who wil be willing to overlook the latter but could turn pretty nasty over the former. And needless to say, Fox "News" is stoking those flames. The book will be out in English next year, although Dutch readers like myself will get a chance to read it in September. I'll probably pass and just get reports about what O'Reilly and Hannity have to say about it in a never ending quest for the kinds of ratings that sell advertising that provide them with their salaries. Their first critique comes not from a biblical scholar, but from a loud-mouthed political hack, Catholic League President Bill Donohue who calls Verhoeven's claim about Mary "laughable."

"Here we go again with idle speculation grounded in absolutely nothing," Donohue told FOXNews.com. "He has no empirical evidence to support his claim, which is why they say 'may have.'"

Hard to imagine a Buy Bull thumper demanded empirical evidence of something related to Jesus and Mary. I mean, does that make any sense at all? Isn't the whole religion racket-- regardless of brand-- entirely predicated on mumbo jumbo and the suspension of reason? I think I'll just stick to the Jesus and Mary Chain:



UPDATE: McCAIN, IN NEED OF SUPPORT IN THE BUY BULL BELT, HAS FOUND RELIGION

Paul Verhoeven's theories about the origins of Jesus aside, John McCain, a lifelong secularist, has made sure the word is out-- big time-- that he is "privately" being baptized. Whatever it takes! Let's be happy that eating live, beating hearts of sacrificial victims isn't in mode.