For those who defend Fox News

[Asher]

Really?

[Guynemer]

Saw that.

Sweet monkey tap dancing Jesus Christ on a pogo stick.

[loinburger]

[Elok]

It's making the rounds on Facebook. The weird thing is, he's not actually a particularly impressive historian; he has advanced degrees in theology, sociology, and creative writing, but minimal grounding in ancient history. If she'd attacked him on his scanty credentials (or on the general tiresome silliness of the whole "historical Jesus" quest in the first place), she might have gotten somewhere. Instead she tried to pummel him for being a Muslim, which is completely irrelevant. That Ehrman guy is an agnostic, FFS, and he commands a great deal of respect.

Also, this guy's book is now selling very nicely. Good job, Fox.

[Imran Siddiqui]

Let's be honest, though... Reza was kind of a dick. Of course people are going to wonder about a Muslim writing a book on Jesus. The proper response is to acknowledge that and then say he's not writing it from a Muslim point of view, but a scholarly one. Instead his answer drips with condescension.

[DinoDoc]

Of course people are going to wonder about a Muslim writing a book on Jesus.

You'd know better than I would but why wouldn't a Muslim be interested in Jesus even if he wrote it in a Muslim PoV? Isn't he considered to be a major prophet in Islam? Also if Elok's post is correct, both participants in the interview are a bit dickish here. If the aim was to attack him his general lack of credentials would have been a better place to go.

[Sava]

See this is what I don't get. Christianity is closer to Islam than Judaism. Although to be fair, conservative Christians don't really like the Jews or Israel. They just want them to die in a nuclear holocaust because they think Jesus will come back when that happens.

[Imran Siddiqui]

You'd know better than I would but why wouldn't a Muslim be interested in Jesus even if he wrote it in a Muslim PoV? Isn't he considered to be a major prophet in Islam? Also if Elok's post is correct, both participants in the interview are a bit dickish here. If the aim was to attack him his general lack of credentials would have been a better place to go.

You are correct in the Muslim view towards Jesus. However, I'm sure that a lot of the audience doesn't know that, and any interviewer should ask questions that the audience may be confused about.

I'm not saying the interviewer wasn't dickish btw... I agree both were.

[loinburger]

In Aslan's defense, this may be the dozenth time that he's been asked why a Muslim is writing about Jesus. Or maybe he's just a dick.

[Guynemer]

I think Aslan was just replying in kind; she started the interview with those asinine questions, he was more than justified in using that tone of voice with her. I'm not sure I wouldn't have just called her a stupid ****ing ******* and walked off the set.

[loinburger]

"Did you name yourself after the lion from 'The Lion, The Witch, and the Wardrobe' in order to troll its dead anti-Muslim author?"

[Elok]

If you're referring to the Calormenes, they're polytheists, so Lewis was more anti-Hindu. Also, showing contempt for the unwashed masses may have been R.A.'s way of showing that he was a bona fide scholar.

[H Tower]

Not having read the book, it's hard to determine whether he is being fairly attacked by other scholars for his conclusions.

Fox simply wanted the story about why the Muslim wrote a book about Jesus. After watching that interview, I couldn't tell what the author's views even were except that Jesus pissed off the Romans and was considered very dangerous by them, so he was executed. Nothing about whether or not he was the son of God, the Resurrection, or whether or not he was a Republican.

[Colon™]

You're not inferring that you learned little from a Fox interview, are you?

[MikeH]

No, he's implying it.