Fox News’ Lauren Green Doesn’t Understand Religious Scholarship

[Cave Johnson]

You're a Chiefs fan, yet you have an opinion on the Broncos. Isn't that odd?

[stevieray]

Originally Posted by Pawnmower

I guess I'll have to try again...I really didn't care for genesis compared to almost any of the books in the new testament. Much of it bored me to tears.

I'll have to give it another shot.

Side question:

I really like "Young's literal Translation" and "weymouth's new testament" of all of the translations.

Would you possibly ask someone at your church where (or if it is even possible) to obtain these two bibles with REALLY nice leather cover and top quality binding?

I have been searching for a long time, and I'd really like to get my son the Young's Literal Translation bible in a nice leather with 5 star binding and large pages etc...

You know any places to get custom or hard to find bibles like that?

Getting a couple weymouths new testaments in a similar quality would be a huge bonus.

there's a store not too far from me...I'l check it out...

[cosmo20002]

Originally Posted by Bambi

People watch Fox News?

lol

Originally Posted by Mojo Jojo

A lot more than any of the other pretend to be news networks

A large portion of their audience consists of invalids and the homebound who tend to leave the TV on one station all day due to inability to operate the clicker.

[cosmo20002]

Originally Posted by Prison Bitch

I'm laughing that you keep making the same dumb point. Aslan himself writes that he relies on the New Testament to construct his view of Jesus. So the entire point is what that text says or does not say. You cannot possibly be this stupid. Even Aslan would tell you to start following the discussion.

Where's he say that? So, he just sat down with the Bible and wrote his interpretation of it? I don't think that is a correct description of his book.

[Loneiguana]

Originally Posted by Mojo Jojo

Now you are misrepresenting his credentials. PhD is in Sociology. Not Sociology of Religion. His dissertation was titled "Global Jihadism as a Transnational Social Movement: A Theoretical Framework" He was exploring a theory on current social behavior based on a religion.

Which requires massive amounts of research into History. Besides the fact he is a professor of religious history.

A PhD requires broad general knowledge of a topic in order to write a specific thesis. Hence the undergrad course work.

[patteeu]

Originally Posted by Loneiguana

Which requires massive amounts of research into History. Besides the fact he is a professor of religious history.

A PhD requires broad general knowledge of a topic in order to write a specific thesis. Hence the undergrad course work.

A medical doctor requires extensive knowledge of biology but he doesn't go around telling people he's got a doctorate in human biology.

No one should doubt that this guy is an expert in religious history, but he should have described his degree accurately and explained his expertise in religious history instead of taking a shortcut.

[Prison Bitch]

Originally Posted by patteeu

Link?

There's very little outside of the Bible that contemporaneously mentions Jesus. Therefore Aslan's not going to have much else to go on when he's writing a book on him. The Bible is about all you have.



The only information we have about Jesus — or the only reliable information, rather — comes from the New Testament (Aslan, too, actually admits this in his own book, which we will discuss later).

http://www.theblaze.com/stories/2013...s-zealot-book/

[Prison Bitch]

Originally Posted by cosmo20002

Where's he say that? So, he just sat down with the Bible and wrote his interpretation of it? I don't think that is a correct description of his book.

You don't know what you're talking about. Aslan takes the Bible and creates a "likely Jesus" based on the text and his understanding of 1st Century Palestine. That's it. There's nothing more to this. That's because the Bible is the only book that discusses Jesus' actions anyway.

[patteeu]

Originally Posted by Prison Bitch

There's very little outside of the Bible that contemporaneously mentions Jesus. Therefore Aslan's not going to have much else to go on when he's writing a book on him. The Bible is about all you have.



The only information we have about Jesus — or the only reliable information, rather — comes from the New Testament (Aslan, too, actually admits this in his own book, which we will discuss later).

http://www.theblaze.com/stories/2013...s-zealot-book/

So you're saying you don't have a link and that you're just guessing at what Aslan's case is. OK. I think it's pretty clear that you're wrong.

[Mr. Flopnuts]

Shocker. Fox news focuses their energies and debunking this man over his religion, when they clearly knew his history, and what his job ensued. Flame the fans of racism you ignorant ****s.

[patteeu]

Originally Posted by Mr. Flopnuts

Shocker. Fox news focuses their energies and debunking this man over his religion, when they clearly knew his history, and what his job ensued. Flame the fans of racism you ignorant ****s.

Where did you get racism out of this?

[Prison Bitch]

Originally Posted by patteeu

So you're saying you don't have a link and that you're just guessing at what Aslan's case is. OK. I think it's pretty clear that you're wrong.

JFC. You've hit a new low. Even for you.

I guess your prior argument "You can't use the Bible!" was so dumb even you've dropped it.

[Prison Bitch]

Originally Posted by Mr. Flopnuts

Shocker. Fox news focuses their energies and debunking this man over his religion, when they clearly knew his history, and what his job ensued.

Entailed.

Flame the fans of racism you ignorant ****s.

How is this racism, exactly? Isn't this merely a religious issue?

[patteeu]

Originally Posted by Prison Bitch

JFC. You've hit a new low. Even for you.

I guess your prior argument "You can't use the Bible!" was so dumb even you've dropped it.

No, I haven't dropped it. You can't use a document that Aslan says isn't historically accurate to test the accuracy of his historical theory.

[Prison Bitch]

Originally Posted by patteeu

No, I haven't dropped it. You can't use a document that Aslan says isn't historically accurate to test the accuracy of his historical theory.

As long as you finally understand Aslan's entire book does rely on the document, we've made a huge breakthrough:




All Greek translations of the New Testament are my own (with a little help from my friends Liddell and Scott). In those few cases in which I do not directly translate a passage of the New Testament, I rely on the translation provided by the New Revised Standard Version of the Bible. All Hebrew and Aramaic translations are provided by Dr. Ian C. Werrett, associate professor of religious studies at St. Martin’s University.

Throughout the text, all references to the Q source material will be marked thus:

(Matthew | Luke), with the order of the books indicating which gospel I am most directly quoting. The reader will notice that I rely primarily on the gospel of Mark and the Q material in forming my outline of the story of Jesus. That is because these are the earliest and thus most reliable sources available to us about the life of the Nazarean. In general I have chosen not to delve too deeply into the so-called “Gnostic Gospels.” While these texts are incredibly important in outlining the wide array of opinions among the early Christian community about who Jesus was and what his teachings meant, they do not shed much light on the historical Jesus himself.

Although it is almost unanimously agreed that, with the possible exception of Luke-Acts, the gospels were not written by the people for which they are named, for ease and the sake of clarity, I will continue to refer to the gospel writers by the names by which we now know and recognize them.


Read more: http://www.utne.com/media/fox-news-r...#ixzz2ajZ36pmg

[Pawnmower]

Originally Posted by patteeu

Where did you get racism out of this?

maybe he thinks all muslims are black?

I always though Islam was a religion but I guess he is smarter than me.