Joy Behar told her co-host, on national television, that Jesus Christ never claimed to be the Messiah. She was wrong, and the correction came live from the seat next to her.
The exchange happened Tuesday on ABC's "The View," as the panel discussed a since-deleted AI image that President Donald Trump posted to Truth Social. The image depicted Trump cloaked in divine light, healing a stricken man, with orbs of light emanating from his hands. It drew sharp criticism from Catholics, Republican lawmakers, and media figures across the political spectrum, and it gave Behar, 83, a chance to hold forth on theology she apparently hadn't reviewed.
The result was an on-air stumble that undercut her own argument. And it captured something broader: the tendency of certain television commentators to reach for moral authority on subjects they haven't bothered to study.
Moderator Whoopi Goldberg opened Tuesday's segment by noting the AI post had been "finally" deleted Monday morning. The panel then turned to Trump's claim, made to reporters on Monday, that the image was meant to portray him as "a doctor," not as a Christ-like figure. Co-host Alyssa Farah Griffin, a Republican who served as Trump's communications director during his first term, pointed out the garb in the image appeared Christ-like. Co-host Sunny Hostin added a jab of her own.
The Daily Mail reported that Hostin said:
"I'm married to a doctor, and I usually don't see that outfit."
Then Behar weighed in with a claim about Jesus himself. She declared that "Jesus was not narcissistic like this guy", meaning Trump, and flatly denied that Christ had ever called himself the Messiah. "No, he did not," Behar said when challenged.
Co-host Sara Haines wasn't having it.
"That's exactly what Jesus said!"
Haines pushed further: "When you are the Messiah, it's not narcissism to say it!" Behar doubled down, "Yes, it is", and Haines shot back incredulously: "When you are the Messiah!?"
Goldberg, apparently sensing the segment was spiraling, stepped in. "I'm going to move this along, because this is like, too much for me," she said. The theological dispute was left unresolved on air, though the Gospels are not ambiguous on the point Haines raised.
The AI image at the center of the controversy appeared on Truth Social as part of what the Daily Mail described as a late-night tirade. Trump posted it Sunday, and it sparked immediate backlash from figures across politics and media. Megyn Kelly called the image "blasphemous." CNN's Dana Bash and Kaitlan Collins were among journalists who rebuffed Trump's later claim that the figure in the image was meant to be a doctor.
The post stayed up a little over a day before it was deleted Monday morning. Behar seized on the image to argue that Trump "seems to really believe American people are so stupid that they would believe, you know, light is emanating from a doctor's hands." That line drew attention, but not as much as her Bible error.
The broader media landscape has been filled with similar moments of broadcast-world controversy lately, where public figures trip over their own arguments on camera.
The criticism of the AI image was not limited to left-leaning commentators. Republican Sen. John Curtis of Utah told reporters Monday, after the image was deleted, that he found it offensive.
"I found it offensive. As a Christian myself, I was offended by it. I think any religion should be offended by it."
Curtis added: "I would have been equally offended if he had made fun of Muhammad or any other religious leader, and I'm glad he took it down." He also said simply, "I'm sorry he posted it."
Georgia Rep. Austin Scott posted a Tuesday tweet invoking scripture and stating plainly: "posting a picture portraying yourself as Jesus is not okay."
Those are not voices from the resistance. Curtis and Scott are Republicans making a straightforward point about reverence. Their objections landed without the theatrical overreach that defined the segment on "The View."
Pope Leo XIV, the first U.S.-born pontiff, age 70, responded to Trump's remarks during the first day of his trip to Africa on Monday. Trump had called Pope Leo "weak on crime" and a "liberal." The Pope, who has made appeals for peace since the conflict in Iran started on February 28, said he had "no fear of the Trump administration."
"I will continue to speak out strongly against war, seeking to promote peace, promoting dialogue and multilateralism among states to find solutions to problems."
American Bishop Robert Barron called on Trump to apologize to the Pope on Monday. Barron had spoken at a National Day of Prayer event in the Rose Garden at the White House last May, making his public rebuke notable. Trump refused to apologize, saying he stood by his assessment.
The back-and-forth between the White House and the Vatican is a serious matter, one that deserves serious commentary. What it got instead, on at least one daytime talk show, was a co-host confidently mangling the New Testament while trying to score a political point.
Television has long been a space where public spectacles collapse under their own contradictions, and Tuesday's segment fit the pattern.
Behar's error matters less as a theological question and more as a credibility question. When a commentator uses Scripture to attack a political figure and gets the Scripture wrong, on live television, the argument collapses on itself. The audience isn't left thinking about Trump's AI image. They're left thinking about whether the person delivering the lecture knows what she's talking about.
This is a recurring pattern on "The View." The panel reaches for moral high ground, overextends, and ends up undermining its own case. Haines, to her credit, pushed back in real time. But the segment moved on before anyone could reckon with the fact that Behar had just told millions of viewers something false about the central figure of Christianity.
It's worth noting that prominent television personalities carry outsize influence precisely because of the trust audiences place in them. When that trust is misused, or simply unearned, the consequences extend beyond a single segment.
The AI image itself was a legitimate target for criticism. Republicans said so. Catholics said so. Even commentators sympathetic to the president said so. The post was deleted. The debate moved on to the Pope's response and the broader diplomatic implications.
But Behar couldn't resist turning a policy and cultural argument into a theology seminar she wasn't prepared to teach. And when Haines corrected her, she didn't pause or reconsider. She doubled down.
That instinct, to lecture first and learn later, is not unique to Joy Behar. It runs through an entire class of commentators who have confused volume with authority and airtime with expertise. The slow fade of public credibility among media figures is not a mystery. Moments like Tuesday's explain it plainly.
If you're going to use the Bible to make your case, you should at least know what it says.
