Fox News Interview: "Why Would a Muslim Write a Book About Jesus?"

[childeroland]

Whoa, they have a Scientologist working there? Who?

Greta Van Susteren

 

[Godzilla2000]

Why would a Muslim want to write a book about a religious figure they don't believe in?

 

[Teelie]

... hmm you did not read any responses in this thread, did you?

 

[JJJ's Ulcer]

Why would a Muslim want to write a book about a religious figure they don't believe in?

Muslims DO believe that Jesus existed. They just don't believe he was the son of God. And why shouldn't he be allowed to write a book anyway? Christian authors have written tons of books about Islam since 9/11, haven't they? Jews and atheists have written some great Christmas jingles and TV specials over the years. This is pure bullying and discrimination and it's not surprising you're the only one in this thread who thinks FOXNews had a valid critique. The interviewer had clearly not even cracked the book open and I seriously doubt you have either.

 

[NickNitro]

Why would a Muslim want to write a book about a religious figure they don't believe in?

I hope you understand that the stupidity of the Fox Reporter we are all making fun of, is because of this very statement right?

Muslims believe Jesus was a Prophet, but not the Son of God. Do a seconds worth of research on Wiki before writing something.

 

[Hal_Jordan]

Why would a Muslim want to write a book about a religious figure they don't believe in?

Why would a historian write about any person from the past?

 

[serendipity]

Such a stupid interview. The funny thing about scholarship is that it's a debate, as the author stated. This interview isn't a debate, it's a lesson on ignorance and trigger-happy controversy. Wait, I think I just described the entire media!

 

[The Question]

Why would a Muslim want to write a book about a religious figure they don't believe in?

Because he has a doctorate in religious history.

 

[Teelie]

And to make it even clearer, there are four degrees in religious studies he has on top of studying Christianity for 20 years.

 

[amazingfantasy15]

Because he has a doctorate in religious history.

And to make it even clearer, there are four degrees in religious studies he has on top of studying Christianity for 20 years.

Yeah, but all that is trumped by him being Muslim, therefore he should not care about Jesus and should just be chanting Death to America!

 

[Doctor Evo]

Why would a Muslim want to write a book about a religious figure they don't believe in?

Get out.

 

[DirtyHarry]

Its really sick how the media has poisoned the public's mind about what Muslims are like. To most people here, Muslim and terrorist are the same word.

Why would a Muslim want to write a book about a religious figure they don't believe in?

 

[JJJ's Ulcer]

As any visitor of the Relationship thread knows, Godzilla loves making dumb drive-by comments and then never addresses the 8 or 10 replies she gets challenging said dumb comment.

 

[Spider-Who?]

I dunno…like I said before, it’s a valid question. Let’s be realistic here: having a PHD in no way, shape or form means one is not above letting their beliefs influence their views. It has nothing to do with the author being Muslim or even religion at all (though religion does add some gravity and emotion to the issue) - I would expect a Muslim to ask the same question about a Christian writing about Muhammad, or a rap artist writing a biography about hair metal - it has everything to do with the responsibility of checking the quality of the facts by validating the source.

The problem lies in WHY and HOW the question is being asked, both from the point of view of the one asking the question, and those hearing the question.

A: As someone who follows (insert topic here), what is your purpose for writing a book about (opposing topic)?
B: As someone who follows (insert topic here), what gives you the right to write a book about (opposing topic)?

These two questions are very similar, but illustrate very different meanings:

Question A aims to see if/how that persons beliefs will affect contents of the book, and therefore effect people’s opinions on the topic. It’s an absolutely valid question that should be considered, because EVERYONE’s beliefs or viewpoints can and most often DOES affect what they say, regardless of education, religion, topic or severity. I think it’s irresponsible to not consider the source of any amount of information and how their positions may affect what is being said, be it a religious topic or not.

Question B, however, makes the assumption that because the author believes differently, then his book is automatically biased and therefore risks being invalid, slanderous, hurtful, etc – it also asserts that the simple fact that because the author believes differently, he should not be allowed to write on a particular topic, because the possibility that bias will influence the book is an absolute one.

Question A is valid. Question B is wrong. Hearing Question A and automatically assuming it is really Question B (because how dare anyone ask any question in this uber-PC world) is also wrong.

All that being said, FOX interviewer obviously asked Question B, but tried (and failed miserably) to mask it as a legitimate question. And while I believe the author to be innocent of bias at present (him being muslim is no where near enough evidence to suggest otherwise); the only way to know if he is guilty of anything (or truly innocent) is to read the book.

 

[Manic]

BUT Jesus as a religious figure isn't exclusive to Christianity. He's also an important figure in Islam.

A Christian asking a Muslim why they'd write a book about Jesus is like a Jew asking a Christian why they'd write a book about Moses. He's part of the other religion too.

 

[Pink Ranger]

BUT Jesus as a religious figure isn't exclusive to Christianity. He's also an important figure in Islam.

A Christian asking a Muslim why they'd write a book about Jesus is like a Jew asking a Christian why they'd write a book about Moses. He's part of the other religion too.

You're using too much logic and objectivity.

Obviously, that idiot's questioning is based on the premise that Christianity is the norm, and everybody else (Muslims, Jews, atheists, agnostics, followers of Cthulhu, Florida Panthers fans) are some kind of alien deviant that must be explained.

 

[zeroapoc]

Why would a Muslim want to write a book about a religious figure they don't believe in?

 

[Siby]

Jesus actually is one of two figures (the other being Adam) in Islam who is unique because both Jesus and Adam before him were the only two prophets directly created by God = Allah. To further illustrate Jesus' importance, also known as Isa-a-salam in Arabic, God actually saves Jesus from the crucifixion and gives him a life where he dies of old age.

Muslims have just as much stake in Jesus as Christians but the whole point is moot because anybody should be able to write about anything if that is what they want to do. After the book is written readers can judge the contents of the book accordingly.

By attacking the author about his religion rather than the content of the material shows a clear bias. Now that I think of it, if you use Lauren Green's logic neither Christians or Muslims can write about Jesus because Jesus was a Jew.

I wonder if there are Christians out there that believe Jesus was Christian?

 

[Hal_Jordan]

The interviewer was ridiculous and clearly thought she had a "gotcha" card or was just trying to force her agenda. It might as well have gone like this...

Author: “I have studied the great apes for 20 years, have 4 degrees in the study of primates, and even lived among them for a few months. I have written a book about my findings.”

Interviewer: “But you are a human.”

Author: “Yes, but I am also a researcher who has studied apes for the last two decades.”

Interviewer: “But you aren’t an ape. Don’t you think that makes you a little bit biased?”

Author: “No, because I have studied apes for two decades. It is my field of study.

Interviewer: “But why would you even want to write a book about apes if you are a human?”

Author: “Because it is my job to study apes. That is what my degrees are in.”

Interviewer: “Don’t you think it is a little bit disingenuous to write a book about apes when you are not upfront about you not being an ape?”

Author: “From my writing and interviews, it is clear that I am not an ape, nor am I trying to say that I am an ape. I am not trying to hide anything.”

Interviewer: “I want to get back to the fact that you are not an ape.”

 

[jmc]

I dunno…like I said before, it’s a valid question. Let’s be realistic here: having a PHD in no way, shape or form means one is not above letting their beliefs influence their views. It has nothing to do with the author being Muslim or even religion at all (though religion does add some gravity and emotion to the issue) - I would expect a Muslim to ask the same question about a Christian writing about Muhammad, or a rap artist writing a biography about hair metal - it has everything to do with the responsibility of checking the quality of the facts by validating the source.

The problem lies in WHY and HOW the question is being asked, both from the point of view of the one asking the question, and those hearing the question.

A: As someone who follows (insert topic here), what is your purpose for writing a book about (opposing topic)?
B: As someone who follows (insert topic here), what gives you the right to write a book about (opposing topic)?

These two questions are very similar, but illustrate very different meanings:

Question A aims to see if/how that persons beliefs will affect contents of the book, and therefore effect people’s opinions on the topic. It’s an absolutely valid question that should be considered, because EVERYONE’s beliefs or viewpoints can and most often DOES affect what they say, regardless of education, religion, topic or severity. I think it’s irresponsible to not consider the source of any amount of information and how their positions may affect what is being said, be it a religious topic or not.

Question B, however, makes the assumption that because the author believes differently, then his book is automatically biased and therefore risks being invalid, slanderous, hurtful, etc – it also asserts that the simple fact that because the author believes differently, he should not be allowed to write on a particular topic, because the possibility that bias will influence the book is an absolute one.

Question A is valid. Question B is wrong. Hearing Question A and automatically assuming it is really Question B (because how dare anyone ask any question in this uber-PC world) is also wrong.

All that being said, FOX interviewer obviously asked Question B, but tried (and failed miserably) to mask it as a legitimate question. And while I believe the author to be innocent of bias at present (him being muslim is no where near enough evidence to suggest otherwise); the only way to know if he is guilty of anything (or truly innocent) is to read the book.

In which case they shouldn't have bothered having him on. There was no way Fox wasn't going to try and corner this guy into saying something against Christianity, but kudos to him for his composure. I do agree Question A is an appropriate question, but unless there's clear evidence to suggest something to the contrary there's no need for it to be asked in the first place. I don't particularly like baseball, but I do like the history of the sport and how it evolved in America - would people be up in arms if I were to write a book about the game's history in spite of me not liking the sport? Unless I was casting its history in an overly negative way I doubt it. The issue is she was getting defensive over the Jesus myth, not the factual Jesus who actually existed, that's where the core of this thing comes from. That the person pulling back the curtain is not one of them somehow invalidates their perspective. The great irony is a lot of religious people don't actually know a hell of a lot about the person they are worshiping other than what's written in the Bible. If anything a person of another faith is going to rely more on the actual written text and records of the time in order to understand who this person was.

 

[The Question]

I dunno…like I said before, it’s a valid question. Let’s be realistic here: having a PHD in no way, shape or form means one is not above letting their beliefs influence their views. It has nothing to do with the author being Muslim or even religion at all (though religion does add some gravity and emotion to the issue) - I would expect a Muslim to ask the same question about a Christian writing about Muhammad, or a rap artist writing a biography about hair metal - it has everything to do with the responsibility of checking the quality of the facts by validating the source.

The problem lies in WHY and HOW the question is being asked, both from the point of view of the one asking the question, and those hearing the question.

A: As someone who follows (insert topic here), what is your purpose for writing a book about (opposing topic)?
B: As someone who follows (insert topic here), what gives you the right to write a book about (opposing topic)?

These two questions are very similar, but illustrate very different meanings:

Question A aims to see if/how that persons beliefs will affect contents of the book, and therefore effect people’s opinions on the topic. It’s an absolutely valid question that should be considered, because EVERYONE’s beliefs or viewpoints can and most often DOES affect what they say, regardless of education, religion, topic or severity. I think it’s irresponsible to not consider the source of any amount of information and how their positions may affect what is being said, be it a religious topic or not.

Question B, however, makes the assumption that because the author believes differently, then his book is automatically biased and therefore risks being invalid, slanderous, hurtful, etc – it also asserts that the simple fact that because the author believes differently, he should not be allowed to write on a particular topic, because the possibility that bias will influence the book is an absolute one.

Question A is valid. Question B is wrong. Hearing Question A and automatically assuming it is really Question B (because how dare anyone ask any question in this uber-PC world) is also wrong.

All that being said, FOX interviewer obviously asked Question B, but tried (and failed miserably) to mask it as a legitimate question. And while I believe the author to be innocent of bias at present (him being muslim is no where near enough evidence to suggest otherwise); the only way to know if he is guilty of anything (or truly innocent) is to read the book.

Here's the thing, he answered the question. "I'm a doctor and this is my area of study and there aren't any opinions in this book that are not academic in nature." He said that right off the bat. But she kept asking.

And yes, a Muslin news anchor on Al Jazheera might ask a Christian historian why it is that he had an interest in writing about Mohammed, but I doubt that would happen on a major American news network.

 

[Spider-Who?]

BUT Jesus as a religious figure isn't exclusive to Christianity. He's also an important figure in Islam.

A Christian asking a Muslim why they'd write a book about Jesus is like a Jew asking a Christian why they'd write a book about Moses. He's part of the other religion too.

I think you're missing an extremely important detail: Muslims do not consider Jesus to be God, while the entirety of the Christian faith is based on the notion that he IS. So a muslim (or any religious person who denies that divinity) writing about the "real" Jesus is going to be a very big deal and make people stop and question the author on his motives. Especially considering that massive disagreement is at the hearts if hundreds of years worth of aggression. And the Moses comparison doesn't work because the religions don't disagree on the nature of Moses, nor do the religions worship him as their god.

I haven't read the book yet, so I can't comment on what it says, but I think it's safe to say that the reason anyone would have an issue with a Muslim writing a book about Jesus has NOTHING to do with the author being a Muslim in particular, but it's the simple fact that he is of a faith that believes Jesus was far less than what Christians believe he was, and they would naturally take offense to him using his authority as a scholar and author to try and push his belief of Jesus as nothing more than a simple man or prophet which is a very direct attack on an entire religion's belief (whether the author intends it to be such or not). THAT's why people are saying "hold up, what's this now?"

 

[Schlosser85]

By that logic, Christians should stop churning out books about Islam.

 

[Doctor Evo]

I haven't read the book yet, so I can't comment on what it says, but I think it's safe to say that the reason anyone would have an issue with a Muslim writing a book about Jesus has NOTHING to do with the author being a Muslim in particular...

That's not safe to say in the slightest. In fact it's incredibly naive.

 

[Spider-Who?]

Here's the thing, he answered the question. "I'm a doctor and this is my area of study and there aren't any opinions in this book that are not academic in nature." He said that right off the bat. But she kept asking.

And yes, a Muslin news anchor on Al Jazheera might ask a Christian historian why it is that he had an interest in writing about Mohammed, but I doubt that would happen on a major American news network.

Don't get me wrong - I'm not defending the Fox reporter. Like I said on the last page, she wasn't asking out of a philanthropic desire to understand his intentions, she was asking and forcing the issue in hopes of getting him to say something she could take out of context and create an uproar about. But as it stands, the simple fact that a Muslim scholar is writing about the historical Jesus is NOT a controversy; my point is merely that honestly wanting to understand intentions in order to accurately react/respond to the material is important in this and any situation, because bias IS common - even among scholarly material - and should be made aware of (if present) in order accurately judge the text. Unfortunately this was not the intention of the journalist, though the author did his best to get her to understand.