Reply #26: You missed the part in the article

[markses]

about the nine theologians who reviewed the script and came to that conclusion?

Here's a bit more, from a Salon article today:

http://www.salon.com/ent/feature/2003/08/14/gibson/index.html

The Guardian newspaper this week quoted a panel of three Jewish and six Catholic scholars who translated and studied a draft script, and concluded that the film is indeed anti-Semitic and theologically inaccurate, portraying "The Jews" as bloodthirsty and vengeful. "All the way through, the Jews are portrayed as bloodthirsty," said Sister Mary C. Boys, one of the panelists and a professor at New York's Union Theological Seminary. As for stirring up anti-Semitic passions, Sister Mary told the New Republic that she has already begun receiving "vicious letters filled with personal attacks and anti-Semitic drivel." Confronted with these accusations, Gibson, a fundamentalist Catholic who has bankrolled an obscure Los Angeles sect that refuses to accept the Second Vatican reforms, including the Vatican's apology for Jewish persecution, readily admits the film may ruffle a few Jewish feathers, though it is not meant to. "It's meant just to tell the truth." Besides, he says, the Holy Spirit was dictating what really went into the film.

---snip---

The article goes on to talk about the general mythology in Christian (and - I would say - especially Catholic) circles that blame the Jews for "Jesus'" death. While the article assumes - without warrant - the actual existence of a historical Jesus (we have no reason to do so), and the events surrounding his death, it does give a nice replay of the way the myth has its own historical conditions.

As a personal note, growing up Catholic I was always taught - unofficially, of course - that it wasn't really the Romans who wanted to do this thing, but the Jews. Pontius Pilate desperately wanted to execute Barabbas, who had "killed a soldier in the insurrection" rather than this Jesus fella, who he took for a sad sack loony toon (probably correctly). Once you say "render unto Caesar what is Caesar's," Pontius Pilate has little concern about you. It was the Jews who refused it. That's the way we were taught it, always on the hush, of course, after Vatican Two. Anti-semitic? You betcha.

There is, of course, a larger point to the allegory: Barabbas represents all that is temporal - resistance here below, including violent struggle. Jesus represents ending temporal resistance for the sake of otherworldly salvation. The Barabbas - Jesus choice is the key scene in that whole silly book, quite frankly - it is where we see the emergence of what Nietzsche calls the slave revolt in morality.