Posted on 07/24/2013 1:25:13 PM PDT by arthurus
Reza Aslan, author of the new book, “Zealot: The Life and Times of Jesus of Nazareth” has been interviewed on a host of media outlets in the last week. Riding a publicity wave, the book has surged to #2 on Amazon's list.
Media reports have introduced Aslan as a “religion scholar” but have failed to mention that he is a devout Muslim.
His book is not a historian’s report on Jesus. It is an educated Muslim’s opinion about Jesus -- yet the book is being peddled as objective history on national TV and radio.
Aslan is not a trained historian.
(Excerpt) Read more at foxnews.com ...
But it’s all about feelings ...who cares if it’s accurate.
In reality, there is zero evidence of any kind to suggest that He was engaged in a political struggle.
The entire book begins with the assumption - based on nothing - that the Gospels must be the opposite of what He really was.
The book says nothing that has not been said one thousand times before.
It does not rise to the level of boring.
Mohammed says He was not the Son of God so the devout muslims repeat the warlord’s cult writings.
Muslims making up lies....what else is new
The left would really love to eliminate Christianity and replace it with a bloodthirsty culture of headchopping and rape of women.
Sorta like Zimmerman not being Jewish, but later determined
to be a new catagory of "Hispanic/ white" by the 'New World Media'
Muslims believe that Jesus was just an ordinary prophet, and that if he were alive today he’d be a Muslim. They say the bible was corrupted and reports the events incorrectly. They especially attribute this to Paul, who they say is a liar. This is because the Bible and the Koran are conflicting texts, and one of them must be wrong. Therefore it has to be the Bible, right?
Mohammed would be Weiner’s beard.
His take on the subject is agnostic.
A believing Muslim would describe Jesus as being a misunderstood precursor to Muhammed, not as a political revolutionary.
He’s as secularized as he is born again Christian (which he also once claimed).
Ironically his parents opposed his conversion to Christianity then his mama converted and remains one.
Maybe he’s trying to get back at his parents eight was from Sunday.
Wouldn’t a devout Muslim actually be offended by this? They claim Jesus is a profit to them, and supposedly the no. 2 prophet, and he is supposed to return to earth and break the cross. Couldn’t Muslims go all Satanic Verses on him for besmirching their faith? He better watch out, he could be the target of a fatwa.
No, they will get rid of Muslims later, when they outlive their usefulness.
No, they will get rid of Muslims later, when they outlive their usefulness.
No, I think he actually is secularized as opposed to Christian. His rhetoric in this book is from the viewpoint of "progressivism" not jihadism.
Maybe he’s trying to get back at his parents eight was from Sunday.
I think you have hit the nail square on the head with that one.
sorry when you use the term Persian I only think of those who supported the Shah. So let’s cut the crapola. This is another slam at Christianity and it’s fundamental tenet by one who claims to be muslim....ideologue or not.
There are four chapters in the Bible that tell me all I need to know about Jesus.
Jesus was not a Palestinian revolutionary when He said, “My kingdom is not of this world” and, “Render unto Caesar the things that are Caesar’s”, or to Pilate, “Your authority is given unto you by God”.
BTW, Reza Aslan is not to be trusted on this or any other subject.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.