Academic scholar writes book about Christianity

[Coito ergo sum]

The author is kind of a dick, though.

The guy launches into these indignant rants about his background, and even makes stuff up. Like, when he said he has a PHD in history/religion. He doesn't. He doesn't have any degree in history, and his PHD is in sociology. The author is kid of a dick.

What sort of reaction do you think would occur if a Christian author wrote a book called Zealot about Mohammed, and "debunked" a bunch of the Islamic claims about Mohammed? Other than the author getting a fatwa on his head and having to run into hiding, I think that the same question might be asked of him - why did you choose to write this book?

It's not really a bad question. I wold wonder what motivated him to write the book too. Did he have an agenda? Is he against the religion he's writing about? Was it an expose'? Was it a pure straight history piece? Etc.

I've seen this stuff going around and a lot of people are all up in arms that anyone would ask the author any questions about his motives and reasons for writing the book. But those are common areas of inquiry.

[PsychoSerenity]

CES: Will even try to defend fox news' idiocy just to be argumentative.

[Coito ergo sum]

CES: Will even try to defend fox news' idiocy just to be argumentative.

No, I'm never going to defend Fox News. I hadn't heard about it through Fox News, i was listening to a radio program locally hear in Florida on my ride into work and they were talking about it.

I really don't understand what everyone is upset about. Why did you write the book? That's a perfectly acceptable question. And, it is certainly not in the least unacceptable just because the guy is a Muslim. He's a Muslim, so one might certainly legitimately wonder what his motivation was for writing the book, particularly because converts (he converted to Islam) tend to have stronger feelings about their new religion than those who were born into it.

Moreover, the guy did like about his background during that interview with Lauren Green posted at the top of the thread. I listened to a few minutes of it, and he started going off on how stellar his background was and all his degrees, but he doesn't have the degrees he said he had. That makes him kind of a dick.

This smells of a manufactured controversy, and he'll probably make out like a bandit for it. What better way to draw attention to the book than create a controversy over whether he ought to have written the book. He sounds like his outrage was a bit contrived. She asks him why he wrote the book and he goes ballistic. now the issue is whether this is "Islamaphobia" or something.

Honestly if the book was about Mohammed, it would be the book itself that would be the subject of "Islamaphobia" allegations and CAIR and other such organizations would be out calling it "defamation."

Anyone rushing to the defense of this author might want to step back a bit, I think. There is no reason to think he's an innocent here.

Has anyone even read the book? Is it even good scholarship?

[PsychoSerenity]

CES: Will even deny trying to defend fox news' idiocy just to be argumentative.

[Robert_S]

So, did Fox News do the same homework that Coito did before their interview with him or did they just attack him for being a Muslim and daring to write about teh baby Jebus?

[Coito ergo sum]

CES: Will even deny trying to defend fox news' idiocy just to be argumentative.

What is it exactly that was idiotic?

I thought the thread was about the scholar who wrote a book on Christianity, not about Fox News' reporting of it. I mean, it can be about both. But, I don't care much about their reporting. I just thought the author seemed like kind of a dick, and it didn't seem to me to be too bad to ask him why he wrote it.

[Coito ergo sum]

So, did Fox News do the same homework that Coito did before their interview with him or did they just attack him for being a Muslim and daring to write about teh baby Jebus?

Did they even "attack" him for being a Muslim?

Granted, I did not watch the whole fox interview, so I'm not saying they didn't. but, they didn't in the beginning few minutes. The bit about saying, "so, you're a muslim -- why would you write a book about Jesus?" Is neither attacking Islam, nor an unfair question.

Maybe it's something else she said. I'll go back and watch it. I didn't really want to, though.

I'm planning on reading the book if this is still a topic of discussion after I drop by Barnes and Noble one of these days.

[Robert_S]

So, did Fox News do the same homework that Coito did before their interview with him or did they just attack him for being a Muslim and daring to write about teh baby Jebus?

Did they even "attack" him for being a Muslim?

Granted, I did not watch the whole fox interview, so I'm not saying they didn't. but, they didn't in the beginning few minutes. The bit about saying, "so, you're a muslim -- why would you write a book about Jesus?" Is neither attacking Islam, nor an unfair question.

Maybe it's something else she said. I'll go back and watch it. I didn't really want to, though.

I'm planning on reading the book if this is still a topic of discussion after I drop by Barnes and Noble one of these days.

Mah, maybe they didn't attack as much as get defensive. It's been a few days since I watched it. I don't much like watching Fox news, or MSNBC for that matter.

[Pappa]

The interviewer was right.

You can't properly misunderstand Christianity unless you've made a sincere incision to let Jesus enter your heart and mind.

[Svartalf]

If that guy is an academic, I ought to be dean of a college.

[Svartalf]

The interviewer is a cunt.

That too.

[pErvinalia]

The interviewer is a cunt.

Nowhere near as useful or productive as a cunt in my onion.

But probably as annoying, if not more, than an onion in your cunt.

[Animavore]

I'm reading it at the moment. I can't seem to put it down. It's very informative. Though some speculation leaves a bit to desire. Still more plausible than the "official" account.
It's not much different to similar accounts by Bart Ehrman and others. There's nothing particularly new here. If there is an ulterior motive by the author he's using standard academic stuff to do it (not that it wouldn't surprise me if he was, Bart Ehrman is an unwitting hero in Muslim circles, plenty of Ehrman vids on YouTube posted by Muslims).