<iframe width="560" height="315" src="//www.youtube.com/embed/YY92TV4_Wc0" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe> She got destroyed
yea posted in the D&D earlier. But it was cringe worthy, not even talking about all the other stuff that was wrong...but at what point do journalists not do any of their hw? fox actually increased his book sales, they always have the bar set at a special place, but even for them this was really really embarrassing.
As well he should be. This woman has absolutely no ability to comprehend that someone who has devoted his adult life to being an expert on world religions could possibly have anything relevant to say about Jesus simply because he's a Muslim. Even speaking to her on a third-grade level couldn't make this idiot understand. Clarifying that he is a religious scholar who happens to be a Muslim seemed like a fairly important point that needed to be established.
Since this will get moved to the D&D anyway: I think the gist of the argument was that she implied that someone who believes in a different religion can never write an unbiased book about Jesus. He disagreed and said that, while he is a Muslim, he is also a scientific scholar and expert, and therefore qualified to write about this. Basically, she implied an agenda. In my opinion, her argument is flawed because you could say the same to anyone, be it an atheist or a Christian or a Hindu. You could always say they have an agenda. I disagree with her argument just as much as I disagree with the Muslim zealots in the D&D forum who have been saying (as a means of trying to shield their ideology from criticism) that you cannot criticize Islam without actually having studied the Quran extensively (which you would normally only do if you were raised to believe in it, so they are basically saying that no one from the "outside" is allowed to criticize, which is basically also what this lady is wrongly saying). But his tone and demeanor was still defensive and rather insecure. This video didn't look to me like a video of someone who owns someone else, just two people arguing in a petty way.
Completely agree. It did not come off as boasting at all. He was being attacked and had to respond. The lady was a complete and utter moron and the scholar completely annihilated her. All she did was bring attention to this book and i presume sales will only increase. Nice video it is always fun to see fox news anchors get destroyed seems to happen all too often.
Yea it sounded a bit weird but I got it towards the end. She was trying to tailor the conversation and send it in the direction where his stance was in the context of his religon, but he kept maintaining it was a scholarly work. Saying PhD like 10 times wasn't too good on my ears, but his method was effective and made her sound like a complete idiot, not because her opinion differed, but because she was too stupid to hold an intelligent conversation and by the looks of it didn't even read the book. The funny thing is, this guy will be getting just as much flack from the Islamic community for stating that Jesus was crucified and will be labeled a blasphemer. We'll see how strong his resolve is when both Muslims and Christians rain down on him.
I can see how you'd view it that way. I see it more as trying to remain calm and rational in the face of someone who is either grossly ignorant or deliberately combative. To paraphrase him from his Reddit AMA today, "when you're a brown Muslim man from Iran talking about Jesus, you have to remain calm."
So when you are a white Non-Muslim man from the USA or Germany talking about Mohammed, you have to remain calm, right? Not sure if that statement makes him look less biased and more scientific.
What he was saying: I'm a scholar for nearly 20 years on the subject What she was hearing: I'm a part of Al Qaeda
If he had become emotional about his credibility being questioned then we would say he is definitely religiously biased. Remaining calm does make him look more scientific. The Fox lady would have a point if Reza Aslan practiced any religion. I don't know that he does
He does... Islam. I thought that was made pretty clear in this interview. She only brings it up something like 17 times.
He claims to be muslim but doesn't seem to be practicing. Muslims don't believe that Jesus was crucified while he actually does. He probably claims to be a Muslim because if his background. Did he precised that he has a Ph.D ?
Ah ok - I thought he is writing as someone who was just born into a particular religion and didn't really practice. You're right though, the Fox lady introduces him as a former Christian who has switched back to Islam (doesn't say when he changed; could have been as a kid and that he doesn't practice now). This softens the blow of the interview a bit for me: who knows whether or not his choices in interpretation and deduction from those old texts had religious bias in them or not (it could have been subconscious). It would be ideal if he didn't practice any religion, I'd be happier to trust his judgment/conclusions.
