This is a very interesting discussion, not at all what I expected. Dr Ally comes across as intelligent thoughtful and even handed. Too bad some of the self pronounced Christians in the comments here don't do the same, rather, they are caught up in their dogma, they are modern zealots. I now can see how that term has negative connotations for their zeal blocks critical thinking and therefore their ability to exchange information.
Bernie Zelvis what an ignorant fool you are Shabir Ally is well respected by top Christian scholars such as James White. Anyone can make a comment on RUclips video yet not know anything of the history of Christians. You can’t just make a blanket ignorant statement as if it’s true. You absolute disgrace!!!!
I must say, thank you Dr. Shabir Ally for giving such a professional review of Aslan's book. It is so refreshing to find scholars who can be Muslim, but still speak of other non-Muslim perspectives in a detached manner so as to maintain professionalism. I admire that. Jazak Allah khayr!
I found this question/answer interview quite good! Thank you for sharing. I definitely appreciate an obviously well educated, on both sides, interview. It provokes thought and encourages one to educate themselves to form their own views.
Dr. Shabir has it accurately. When Mark, Matthew, Luke, were writing the bible based on what was going on at the time, and they molded these messages about what Jesus would have said, not actually what was documented that he said. I like people that speak from what is, and not really a pre-disposition. Cheers Mr. and Dr. Shabir.
+TeTe Musica Kinda sorta. I'm sure that's true for parts. But they may have also been copying earlier texts that are now lost. But fact remains it's pretty hard to decipher what in the Gospels are historical truth and what is legend. Most is legend, but pretty much all scholars agree on a few basics: Baptized by John the Baptist; began his own ministry around age 30; from Galilee; had a close group of followers; crucified by the Romans under Pontius Pilate. That's about it.
TeTe Musica ... the same could be said for Bukhari and Muslim ibn Hajjaj's Sahih collections of the Gospels of Muhammad (Peace and Blessings of God be upon him). These collections hold the testimonies of his companions; the same community who assassinated three of the four Khullafah Rashidun.
May I ask Dr. Ally, why Jesus was crucified or (someone crucified at his place as the quran says)? If his disciples were just fabricating these stories than why this crucial account took place? Why the Jews and Romans were so mad at Jesus Dr. Ally? Also why Christians were so heavily persecuted if all they were trying to do is fabricate stories to fit in peacefully with romans and Jews??? Many apostles were infact killed by romans brutally! Why if it was all fabricated to fit in peacefully????
Reza Aslan, in his book "Zealot", denies not only Christian beliefs but also Muslim beliefs, for he suggests that Jesus was crucified by the Romans, that Mary wasn't a Virgin when she conceived Jesus, and that Jesus was not the Messiah. Its difficult to see how Aslan can describe himself as a Muslim, except in some kind of "postmodern", very loose fitting, kind of sense
It is not that Aslan is stating what he believes to be the truth in his book, but instead that he intended to portray, in this book, what is most likely. I understand that he believes in immaculate conception, but such an idea has no place in a book of history except as a 'fabrication'. By no stretch of the imagination is a virgin birth likely, so how could it be asserted as truth in a book of history?
Guys, Zealot is a great book, even if you hate Islam. It barely has anything to do with Islam, and Mr. Aslan is a great writer. So just forget the ad hominems and just read the book.
Dr. Aslan is a well spoken scholarly person who has a lot of interesting things to say. While he and I don't share a similar worldview on many issues, I like that he approaches this "God Debate" from an intellectual point of view. It is a breath of fresh air to finally have an intellectual, non-radical fighter in the corner of theist's everywhere. Too often people take the polar extremist point of view, very few people seem to take the middle ground. A lot of people could learn from Reza Aslan.
saleem83 Well, he is right that Reza Aslan can discuss such things without "facts" pulled from a Bible or Quran. People should try to look at things in a different light. It's often hardcore religious followers or hardcore atheists who argue with each other. Very few people discuss such topics in a self-controlled manner. So many people cannot discuss religion because a disagreement turns into fighting. It's quite pathetic when you think about it. I think many people understand that Muslim and Muslim extremist are not the same. Although it does appear the "growing pains" or whatever you would label it, which have occurred for other religions, including Christianity, have yet to take place in Islam. In other words, Islam has a lot of people who claim to be Muslims but use it as a method to implement their bullshit. There is little place for that in today's world regardless of the religion, or lack of. So, I am not simply going at Islam for it. People have a right to religion. But those who follow their religions need to understand that not everybody agrees with that. Therefore, people will occasionally do something which Islam, Christianity, or Judaism finds blasphemous. What seems to be the difference is how some Muslims react to this. They should not get so offended to the point they kill people for a cartoon of Muhammed. Doesn't the Quran teach that if you kill one person it's like killing all of humanity? Those who follow religions should be as tolerant and peaceful as they claim. People are entitled to their opinions or beliefs, regardless of what your or anybody thinks of it. They should not be attacked for it. It's not fair to paint one group with a broad brush. That's right. However, I find something concerning about even the most "progressive" Muslim majority nations being statistically supportive of death as a punishment for apostasy. Also, one has to admit that virtually every religion has parts of it which are at least (or appear) somewhat nonsensical. You seem to imply that Islam makes more sense than Christianity. What is it about the Trinity that you are opposed to? Do you not believe that Christianity is a monotheistic religion like the other Abrahamic religions?
@Dann: Re your "A lot of people could learn from Reza Aslan." Not disputing that. The world *is* full of imbeciles. Doesn't make Dr Reza right at all. BTW, he ain't sayin' nuthin' that ain't already been said... a zillion times over! HC-JAIPUR (27/10/2018)
Dr. Shabir Ally is co authoring a books with James White on the topic " Trinity or Tawheed ( Islamic Monotheism ), May Allah protect him and give him strenght to finish the book
puneet repalle and his mother Mary is the most honored woman in Islam. A chapter is named after her and she is considered the best woman of all time. Allah's peace and blessings upon them both. The Prophet Muhammad's daughter Fatimah,r.a., is also the best among the young women if Paradise. There are different hadiths or narrations about the women of the Prophet's household which show the great respect he and the followers all had for them.
It is Isa Alayhi salaam rather meaning "peace of God be with him" The statement is quoted after the mention of any prophet of God as a show of love and admiration.
@@araz5367 I think it's more of an affectionate way of describing this since there seems to be a real respectful teacher student connection between the two
Interesting to see a Muslim scholar giving such a reasoned, considered, historical discussion about Jesus and the biblical sources. I wonder if he's able to do the same when it comes to Islam and its scriptures...
Bahoz Taufik I would rather doubt it but I'd like to see some proof, because if he was to do that, he would certainly conclude that Mohammed was not a prophet, hence the good doctor probably wouldn't be a muslim...
Fat Buddha Fitness Why would he conclude that ? I mean, a carpenter from the middle east can be the son of god, may as well be possible that a ladysman from the middle east is his prophet.
Bahoz Taufik Look we're talking about the good doctor's reasoning. If he was to use the same logic he does with Jesus, with Mo, he'd have to conclude that he wasn't a prophet. It's not even really up for dispute, it's blindingly obvious. As is the fact the Koran could not have come from a perfect, omnipotent, merciful creator deity -- one who apparently considers eating pork such a heinous crime that it must be totally banned, but that slavery is part of the natural order of things and therefore should only be discouraged but certainly tolerated... Seriously? How can any intelligent empathetic person believe such hogwash?
Fat Buddha Fitness lol obviously it's all made up. The thing is that he is a thesist and as such he takes care of scripts. Without some of those guys, the followers would interpret some shit ( more like they already do ) and go around and massacar people.
What is missing in Reza's research is the very thing he missed while having fellowship with Young Life; a life lived in the spirit of Jesus. The reason Muslims acknowledge Jesus as an important figure is the same reason even the demons realize his person and shudder; Yet the reality is not just in the Gospels..
Brother dont label yourself, there is no such thing as Shia etc. Rather just call yourself Muslim. As the sect Shia is nowhere to be mentioned in the Quran and Dr. Zakir Naik also a great educated man on the subject has given speech about this. No offence btw, Peace
fatihalt Nonsense! I judge these people by the content of their character. Do I think bearded, pajama types who discourse on the proper discipline of their wives, or how female genital mutilation keeps women "clean", or morons like Andy, cider and ass, Chowderhead, are detestable? Yes. So back to you a simple question. Where do you, my fine fellow, stand on each of these examples?
Hannibal EnemyofRome I like the art and agree with ur '... chowderheads...' comment tho i think anyone who can believe in any human description of gods is a fool
That is a matter of debate. According to the New Testament it is recorded that Jesus was crucified because it served as a form of atonement for mankind's sins.
8 лет назад+2
None of the writers of the NT were themselves eye-witnesses to Jesus crucifixion, so their testimony is based on mere hearsay and will amount to zero in a modern court of Law.
Wow, christians are very mad at Shabir Ally. The destruction of the Trinity in official debate against Jay Smith must have been traumatizing for them, lmao.
Lol no one can destroy the trinity- don't be so foolish our God cannot be destroyed by his creation 😂😂😂.... I'm an ex muslim, now christian, I don't hate shabir I feel sorry for him in his debates and pray that the Lord opens eyes- so please don't make judgement when you don't even know christians. If you watch full debates who destroys who? Shabirs great because he has the guts to debate people like jay smith but does he even respond to his questions? Check out the debate on 'is the quran the word of god' shabir responds by going on and on and on about the so-called numerical patterns. He never destroys anyone
Monica Gill No one can ‘destroy’ the trinity? Don’t you mean no one can understand the trinity? Was Abraham and the prophets after him trinitarians? 🤔 We’ll stick with the doctrine of Abraham, Moses and Co. You carry on with your ‘deeper’ Triune god understanding taught by your Roman Catholic church fathers
monica gill our God cannot be destroyed by his creation 😂😂😂. your god Jesus was literally killed on the cross by his creation according to the bible he asked God to save him but God didn't respond nor accepted his prayers now that's what Christians call a god and you are feeling sorry for Shabir im sorry but i just dont understand chritians
Paul definitely lied when depicting Jesus because he particularly did not like Judaism, he liked the Roman way of life . On the other hand , Jesus had to preach traditional Judaism because he was a Jew , is not historically supported . Then there would not be any reform any where in the world .
Safiyyah Ally- The daughter of Shabir Ally...MashaAllah, how does it feel to interview your own father, did he give you any advice on you way of interviewing...?
hbk711x hmm plz tll me which Bible is corrupt, better yet produce the original manuscripts so we can make a comparesion, why would quote from a Bible that's been corrupted as you say, or maybe you could tell me in what year and by whom the Bible have been corrupted, you should also know that we have manuscripts dating way before muhd and guess what a perfect match with the Bible we have today, ill-allah didn't seems to have any problem with the gosple or the torah, so why should you
hbk711x Romans 7 13 Their throat is an open sepulchre; With their tongues they have used deceit: The poison of asps is under their lips: 14 Whose mouth is full of cursing and bitterness: 15 Their feet are swift to shed blood; 16 Destruction and misery are in their ways; 17 And the way of peace have they not known: a perfect picture of muslims
I’m not sure all of the commenters here are watching the interview openly. This is not a full fledged endorsement of the book, or an attack on Christianity, so we should be cautious in trying to draw out those conclusions from it. One thing on the book itself, it seems to overstate the emphasis on sedition and draws revolutionary conclusions in the conventional sense from that. But take scholars like NT Wright, who would agree that this was an insurrection of Roman rule, but in a new way which none at the time had expected. Drawing on the novelty of the claims themself to the ears of first century Jews, Wright would argue that we must reimagine what it is we think of revolutions and zealotry. The zealous nature of Paul is really emphasized in Wright’s biography of him, and the Damascus encounter is a sort of upheaval of his entire worldview, which repurposed it in the end. He was still a zealous Jew in the end, praising the zealous attitude of others, but he’d reimagined what the true zeal for God is, how the upheaval of worldly powers would occur. I think this nuanced view is more appropriate, because the idea Aslan has about softening the views to make them palatable to Romans seems to have a really hard time dealing with the acceptance of martyrdom in the early church. Although the revolutionary nature of Jesus’ idea of the kingdom of God is acknowledged by many scholars, there doesn’t seem to be many so toss out everything else having to do with tradition. I mean the first epistle of Paul being written 20ish years after the crucifixion isn’t commonly regarded among scholars as liberty to toss it out entirely as a historical account of the character of early Christianity. Polycarp, taught by John, confirms the renown of Paul in the movement. He and Clement were contemporaries who speak to each other and others with firsthand stories explaining what the apostles meant. For example Polycarp more or less says “look, I don’t know what Paul meant either, he’s hard to understand, here’s the righteousness I was taught”. Were these letters, written and never canonized into the Bible just forgeries, part of a conspiracy to soften Christianity and hide its true nature from Rome, even in private communication with each other, trying to reconcile the things Paul said with the things that John said? It just feels too novel for me, and i think a real problem is that the only scholars that people have exposure too are often Aslan and Ehrman, so we assume that the majority of academia is represented in these two views (which differ a lot). All of that said, Dr Shabbir is measured and careful and I really appreciate his caution in avoiding overstating anything, I think that many in the comments are falling victim to what he warns us about scholarly bible reading: we’re reading our own views into his words!
This is one of the best talk I have heard on Reza Aslan's - 'Zealot'. Its not all that difficult to sort out who Jesus was - all one need to do is to look as his disciples. Now as per Aslan Jesus had over 72 followers who were following him on a regular basis/ number of women being among his followers - Now where the followers young strong fighters looking to establish a kingdom or weak & oppressed - looking for some solace in Jesus's teaching. According to the Bible, most of Jesus's disciples were fishermen and the marginalized - why would a Zealot chose fishermen - one could say because they are good at using sharp tools - skilled in chopping of the roman heads when the opportunity strikes or it is that fishermen have other qualities. What about the women who were following Jesus. were they trained in the art of fighting or were they going to be used to seduce roman guards or were they Just following Jesus for his teachings of forgiveness, love & sharing. If Aslan could prove that the people following Jesus were skilled fighters, willing to die he might have a case of a Zealous political agenda - if not - he has a agenda of his own.
as a former Christian .I found you fair and even.If you reflect a real Muslim then why do we have all this hate .Truth n facts not emotions will helps us all.I would love to hear you speak .
I must confess, I was hoping Dr. Ally would explore what a denial of the Virgin Birth or affirmation of the Curcifixion by a scholar like Dr. Aslan says about the methodology employed. Are their flaws in his approach, and if so, where.
When we have 10 people like Mr Shabbir and 10 people like Mr aslan in the world we would have a different Muslim world which to me is phenomenal , love these guys
I think this is an eye opener for a lot of people who see these figures in history nothing more than, a political figures of their time....well-done aslan
Thank you .. and ur right … many people who study the historical Jesus often have to chose which layers they want to peel back. Usually in order to conclude whatever agenda they’re seeking .
The Zealots of 1st Century were fundamental extremists fighting a guerilla war against the Roman rule & their puppets. Jesus disciples still carry terrorist nicknames. Most famous is Judas Escariot. Escariot meaning a man of the dagger or assassin. A member of the scicarii (plural for escariot). Pacifist Jesus is from Paul the Deciever. Jesus in the Qur'an was a mighty mujahid, calling the people to jihad, leader of the messianic zealots. *from the Qur'an -* Indeed, Allah has purchased from the believers their lives and their properties [in exchange] for that they will have Paradise. *They fight in the cause of Allah , so they kill and are killed. A true promise upon Him in the Torah and THE GOSPEL and the Qur'an.* And who is truer to his covenant than Allah ? So rejoice in your transaction which you have contracted. And it is that which is the great attainment. 9:111 As you can see the Qur'an is clear. Crystal clear. *They fight in the cause of Allah , so they kill and are killed. A true promise upon Him in the Torah and THE GOSPEL THE GOSPEL THE GOSPEL and the Qur'an.*
+Adam Maher i stopped reading at "jesus calling the people to jihad" ... maybe in your book idiot, which was written 60-100 years after "muhammads" death, if this guy even ever existed according to several scientists/historians ... your book is so likely to be the word of god like jesus was violent (who actually existed because there is REAL historic al proof) ... how the fuck could Muslims know the story of jesus better when they appeared 7 - 8 hundred years later? (thats a rethorical question, so dont bother answering) ... it is argued that this "Muhammad" guy wasnt even trying to establish a new religion in the first place ... and that the first leaders of the umayad-Dynastic were even christian! But they then realized that you can USE RELIGION to control the people under your rule better and to set up the myth of being "blessed by god himself" ... this is just utter nonsense ... people, read books, take on different sources, make up your minds ... its not too late!
Dr. Shabir Ally gives very professional and open-minded answers to the Questions he was asked about the credibility of the idea of a "Zealot" and politically oriented Jesus his intelligence is really remarkable!! :-)
i was raised Roman Catholic i think to look back as well as we can into history, especially when it comes to religion, in this regard why are we not looking back into the life of Mohammad who came out of the Byzantine Empire which was part of the Roman Empire and the links between the two religions, as in recent times have seemingly become good friends at least in the politic's of the world.
After Islam was established and Prophet Muhammad (pbuh) died, the third caliph of Umar ibn Al Khattab defeated the Byzantines at Yarmouk and then at Palestine (inc. Jerusalem).
truly-gone-fishing even in its height the Eastern roman empire had not reach south enough to be even remotely close to medina & then mecca. They mostly had territory a bit south to the sinai peninsula & might have had influence over places which will be north western Saudi Arabia today. But Mecca is actually near SOUTH western Saudi Arabia.
Why is everyone so threatened by Jesus that so many books are written about him? If we are confident in what we believe then nothing outside of that matters.
And why should I accept it??? You are not GOD to tell me anything!!! Shame on you, for thinking that you are superior, you are just dust that will turn into dust!!! This is what bugs me about the Muslim religion! It makes you think that you are superior to others, no one is perfect, so stop judging others as if you are!!! Only GOD is perfect!!!
This is sooooo DEMONIC!!! JESUS is the way & the LIGHT!!! You will only see the light of GOD through him alone!! Accept that!!! You will be Happier here on earth if you do. You will be very peaceful without inner conflict!!
Scholars have studied the bible that is before the byzantine era, we still have the original copies. The Greek, Hebrew & Aramaic. Your information is inaccurate. The Church has preserved the original Bible & protected till death, from people that are against GOD! It is not available to anyone for that reason.
@Stevie Koch I'm sure it's a new information for you, but the gospels were most propably not written by the apostels themselves. Reza Aslan simply states that the gospels of Matthew and Luke "were written" in 90 - 100.
Am a Muslim and I have not read Reza Aslan's controversial book, however if it surely describes Jesus as Zealot, born by unvirgin Mary and crucified then he has commuted a heresy and must be made aware of his mistakes and told to repent. If he refuses he should be warned that his claims border on blasphemy and if he steps inside Pakistan he could face the blasphemy law.
This is good. But compare with Bishop Barron's views for another view and ideas fro further reading. Bishop refers to N T Wright's book on Jesus as his favourite book to get an good insight into Jesus.
New International Version Luke 19:27 But those enemies of mine who did not want me to be king over them--bring them here and kill them in front of me.'" What does it Mean??
this is not at all a review of the book. the lady keeps bringing the Doctor back to the subject in hand and he seems not to be interested in the review of the book and in fact, I don't think the doctor has read the book at all.
Yeah, I always trust the opinion of people who think muhammad rode a winged horse into heaven, or jesus walked on water, or the evil lord zenu is conquering the galaxy. They are always the most objective people out there.
Wire, people in the past had that same type of narrow minded thinking. "Will God bring us back to life when our bones turn to dust?!" And the simple response was that God can created us from nothing -literally- and He can do it again. I believe that I have billions of living creatures inside my body that work together to sustain my existence. Wouldn't this also be a fantastical belief a few centuries ago, before the advancement of science? But it wouldn't make it any less true.
I have literally never heard of ANY New Testament scholars who have a view similar to Aslan. The only people I have heard of something similar were German Anti-Semites who did not believe in the Bible. This is the source from which Aslan is drawing from. Anyone who would honestly read the Gospels and New Testament will see the historic Jesus of Nazareth. To know Scripture is the know Christ. "All who live by the sword will die by the sword" ~ Jesus of Nazareth (Matthew 26:52). Its interesting that Shabir takes the view that Mark was the first Gospel written. I don't know if he is ignorant of the fact or is just being deceptive, but the view that Mark was the first one written is theoretic. No scholar knows which one was written first because that is only one "theory" of many. Some scholars say Matthew was written first. Each one of the Gospels was said at one time or another to be written first. Who knows, Maybe the first two or three were written at the same time. The view of Aslan that John was written as late as 120 AD is a complete fabrication. We have a fragment of Johns Gospel (P52) manuscript dated between AD 90 - AD 125. Johns Gospel had to have been authored long before the manuscript was found (Logically). Many NT scholars date all 3 Gospels Pre-AD 70. Some even thought John was written before AD 70.
I think you are right, no one knows for certain when the gospels were written or in what order. We do know that Paul wrote very early because he was executed 64AD - It may be that the gospels were all written before 70AD as none of them mention the destruction of the Temple, something so devastating to the Jews that it would surely have been mentioned. Shabir has a very extreme liberal and secular view of the Gospels, he believes in the "evolution" of the gospels to turn Jesus from just a man into a God - From Mark to John - he forgets Paul whose writings have a very high Christology even before (or at the same time) as Mark. So Shabir is not the right bloke to comment on the Gospels when reviewing Reza's book
nicerperson You are correct on your analyses of Shabir. Yet he does not employ the same standards to the Quran. He uses two sets of standards, contradicting his own methodology. He contradicts himself and does not understand the people who he quotes actually contradict his own arguments. You can see an evolution in the author of the Quran, which is why they split it up into the Meccan and Medinan surahs. This is meant to be the same author, remember. I can show in the Quran some parts were not written by Muhammad, Surah 17 for example. I know this was not written when he was alive because it mentions the Al-Aqsa Mosque, which was not built until 75-80 years after he died. It was clearly written as a propaganda coop to make some claim on Jerusalem by later Muslim scribes. Muhammad was never in Jerusalem. The Mosques on the Temple Mount should be demolished.
Yes, I have also never heard any New Testament scholar with Aslan's view. By looking at the gospels, Jesus tries to avoid the term messiah, he rather gave subtile hints like choosing the twelve disciples. He calls himself very rarely son of god. That being said, it rather seems that the four gospels are jewish sources. So what would be the reason for such an avoidance, probably it's the historical jewish idea that the messiah will conquer Jerusalem and will defeat the enemies of the jews. Since Jesus never had any of this intention of a Zealot, it seems that indeed Jesus was no Zealot. Another point which Shabir Ally (which Aslan also makes) talks about is that there were multiple people that claimed to be the promised messiah. But it seems that all of them indeed tried to fit into the historical idea of the jewish messiah. So therefore the question remains why did people worship Jesus after his death, but none of the other self-proclaimed messiahs. It seems to me that Shabir Ally's view on why the gospels portray Jesus as they do is also problematic. The idea that the gospel of mark Mark was written after the destruction of the temple at around 70AD actually destroys Ally's hypothesis to write Roman friendly gospels. Christians are already persecuted by Rome (especially under Nero), so there is no reason to be nice to the Roman empire. Mr. Ally only can avoid this by saying the gospel of Mark was written prior to 70AD, but then again his hypothesis fails, since the temple was not destroyed at that time. In this respect it seems to me that it simply does not matter when these gospels were written.
Feature87 Jesus very clearly sates he is the Messiah AND the Son of God - Here are just a FEW Matthew 23:8 ... one is your Master, even Christ; and all ye are brethren. Matthew 26:63-64 ... And the high priest answered and said unto him, I adjure thee by the living God, that thou tell us whether thou be the Christ, the Son of God. Jesus saith unto him, Thou hast said: Matthew 27:22 Pilate saith unto them, What shall I do then with Jesus which is called Christ? They all say unto him, Let him be crucified. Luke 9:20 He said unto them, But whom say ye that I am? Peter answering said, The Christ of God Luk 22:67-70 Art thou the Christ? tell us. And he said unto them, If I tell you, ye will not believe ... Then said they all, Art thou then the Son of God? And he said unto them, Ye say that I am ... And they said, What need we any further witness? for we ourselves have heard of his own mouth. John 4:25-26 The woman saith unto him, I know that Messias cometh, which is called Christ: when he is come, he will tell us all things. Jesus saith unto her, I that speak unto thee am he. And the same for calling himself the Son of God
Feature87 Yeah. Aslan likes to inject his own image of what a zealot is... i.e. murderous insane jihadist. However that is not how Jews used the word zealot and it is not what the Greek means. A zealot is someone who is enthusiastic about something. ζηλωτής, - BDAG Lexicon of the New Testament and other early Christian literature (3rd Edition). ① one who is earnestly committed to a side or cause, enthusiast, adherent, loyalist. ② an ultranationalist, patriot, zealot Here are two examples of how the word is used in the New Testament. Acts 21:20 "... they are all zealous for the Law" Titus 2:14 "... zealous for good deeds." Aslan fails again. All I think of when I hear the name Aslan is the lion, from "The Lion, the Witch and the Wardrobe". Ironically the lion in it represented Christ.
I do not know about this book. If the main hypothesis of the book was that Jesus was a zealot then is plain wrong. Among the 12 apostles was Simon the Zealot. It is not clear that this Simon was called Zealot because he was hard working or he was part of the Zealot movement. Joseph Flavius, in his book History of the Judean war against Romans, describe this sect a derived from Pharisee group. The big difference was that the Zealots had the fix idea to incite the people of Judea to rebel against the Roman Empire and expel it from the Holy Land by force of arms. They have some initial succes, most notably during the First phase of the Jewish-Roman War (66-70). Zealotry was the term used by Josephus for a "fourth sect" or "fourth Jewish philosophy" during this period. They were so decided to fight that they refused any compromise or peace offering. They were very confident that Yahwe will intervine and Romans will be defeated. They preferred to die, Jerusalem to be destroyed and the brand new Temple of Jerusalem to be burnt. The temple was a splendid construction started by Herod the Great and finished few years before the war. So, they were fanatics that committed mass suicide (including women, children, elderly) instead of giving up the fight and looking for a compromise. A similar story took place 30 years ago. In April 1993, some 75 members, including many children, of the millennial sect known as the Branch Davidians-including their messianic leader, David Koresh-perished in the blaze that destroyed their compound near Waco, Texas, after a 51-day siege by federal agents. A very similar event to smaller scale. NOT at all was Jesus a Zealot.
This is one man's opinion..... not facts at all, his opinion. FIRST of all, he is MUSLIM, and a great public speaker.... He has mentioned in the ASPEN talk ( 50 people in the audience?) that every Jesus gets mentioned on FOX he sells more books.... He said to be glib.... of course he doesn't mind being glib because he doesn't mind making a living on writing his perspectives on Jesus. Bishop Barron and many serious Catholic-Christian Intellectuals EASILY de-bunk Zealot shallow perspective. Check them out!
wow surprisingly awesome review of the book,he has clear understanding and knowledge about the life and nature of Jesus PBUH from the Gospels and how different each understanding are.this is really interesting
Shabir Ali i think you are great person and often made sense but If Reza Aslan RIGHT about Jesus then ISLAM can't be true for numbers of reasons. 1. Reza agreed that Jesus was Crucified.YES The Quran, chapter 4:157 says: NO "They declared 'We have put to death the Messiah, Jesus, the son of Mary, the apostle of God'. They did not kill him, nor did they crucify him, but they had only his likeness." i hoped shabir could address this point because if a muslims accept that Jesus died on the CROSS he is no longer Muslims because it goes against his holly book. 2.Muslims view Jesus as a peaceful man who taught love and just nice stuff never killed any one he healed the sick and raised the dead. But Resza describes JESUS as a violent man which means the Quran is wrong about JESUS. The famous Zealot book CONTRADIC the Quran. Sabir i was stunned when asked is Reza's view on JESUS is WRONG or RIGHT,but Sabir did not say he was WRONG.which means many stupid things but i have not read the book yet but what is the point if its going to contradict both the Quran and the Bible.
A pleasant, interesting and civil interview (in contrast it to the many crude comments). You can notice a kind interviewer (peace be upon her and all that) was trying to get Dr. S.A. to more firmly bolster the Islam agenda; that is, to declare that Jesus (Issa) was within the "Prophet" class of human being, though of a lesser rank than Overlord Mahomet (with all due respect). The book itself, Zealot, by Reza Aslan, presents no new ideas, merely recapping and refreshing the established scholarly notion that there was a guy, "Jesus," who was a non-unique product of his time -- a zealous Jew -- and that a legend later grew up around him. Here's the kicker, folks (those folks with brain cells, anyway): for Islam to get people keep buying into it, it needs for there to have been such "a guy," even a zealous local prophet. Reza's book functions as a crafty distraction from the actual current of academic action. Reza the zealous sympathist, along with the sellers of the Islam agenda don't want you to see that there might not have been any guy. Rather, the Jesus character could plausibly have been a Greek-Jewish hybrid (synthetic) deity package historicized for mass consumption. Good work, though, Prophet Reza. Your years of Theology have paid off on the crowd-pleasing circuit.
Why is it so hard for everyone to admit this is the kingdom God gave us(humans) this kingdom and we are all His children made in His image and given every opportunity to make life that He has given us beautiful. I dislike tragedy as much as anyone but I try to be happy, joyous and free. Use time to demonstrate His omnipotence.
How about Dr. Reza Aslan writing about Prophet Mohammad' life? Will there fatwa? There was no problem among Christians in the book Zealot? No protest, no fatwa etc etc
What did he plagiarize? As for him denying, understand that he wrote the book from a "historian/scholar' perspective, removing the "Islamic" Lens. There isn't anything wrong with that. Now, if he wrote an Islamic book doing that, then that would be a problem.
shabir can comment and make assumptions on Jesus and clearly say the book cites facts but cannot say anything about mohammed , a religion he follows. he starts kind of belittling the writer of the book, but agrees with the book as facts.
5 лет назад+1
If the temple was destroyed in year 70A.C, why it is not mentioned in any of the gospels or letters? Specially when it was predicted by Yeshua?
Dr. Ally was kind & polite to plagiarist Reza Aslan. He should have talked about his status as a "Muslim " after he denied the virgin birth & accepted the crucifixion of Jesus(pbuh). Plagiarist Reza Aslan's thoughts are very much in line with Jewish thoughts about Jesus(pbuh). Dr. Ally almost let him off the hook- could they be of the same denomination?
The word Bible means books. The Bible is 66 books written by different authors and their tombs and cities have been verified by scientists. The people in the Bible were deceased when it was translated into English in 1611. They are not making money off the memoirs of their lives they lived thousands of years ago.
Aslan said that Jesus pbuh in Islam isn't the Messiah. What does the book have, if anything, about what the Quran says? Christ and Messiah are the same. In the Bible in Hebrew (I assume) there are many "annointed" things as Ahmed Deedat had pointed out decades ago. Aslan is not an Islamic scholar so makes mistakes as do other non scholars.
Why the Christians while commenting in a Islamic video always use abusive, filthy, dirty words is because, they are the seeds of the bad tree, " Even so, every good tree bears good fruit,but a bad tree bears a bad fruit (Matthew 7:17). They are the descendants of a generation who were " wicked and adulterous" ( Matthew 16:4); "Hypocrites" (Matthew 15:7); "Brood of Vipers" (Matthew 12:34); " Faithless and perverse generation" (Matthew 17:17);"Fools and blind" (Matthew 23:19); "Serpents, brood of vipers!" (Matthew 23:33). They are the 'corrupted seed' as has been promised by their 'God' in their "Holy Bible' in Malachi, Chapter 2, Verse 3 - " Behold, I will corrupt your seed, and spread dung upon your faces, even the dung of your solemn feasts; and one shall take away with it." So, they are having dung ( not of cow, but of human) spread upon their faces. Also, they must be eating the 'cake' prepared as has been taught by their "God' in their "Holy Bible" in Chapter 4, Verse 12 - " And thou shalt eat it as barely cakes and thou shalt bake it dung that cometh out of man in their sight."
Take heed, brother, in the way you mention Christians. It sounds like you are calling all Christians abusive- it'd be more correct to say why do *some* Christians act abusive.
Lemon Breezz Reza Aslan is not a scholar. And since so many Muslims like Bart Ehrman here's what he says about Reza (Aslan’s Zealot: To Start With…, ehrmanblog.org/aslans-zealot-start-members/ ) "In response to a question about whether Aslan was a recognized scholar in the field of NT or early Christian studies, I indicated that he is not - and does not claim to be. He teaches creative writing and as one might suspect, he is indeed a highly talented writer. " Which is why book reads like a novel because he is a creative writing professor not a scholar. Of course I would not really care if he's a scholar or not as long as the thesis is sound and is accepted by a good number of experts but here's what part Ehrman says on its acceptance (Aslan’s Zealot: To Start With…, ehrmanblog.org/aslans-zealot-start-members/ ) "His basic thesis about who Jesus was (a zealot, obviously), has been floated for over three hundred years, and has never seemed convincing to the majority of experts, or even a large minority of experts, or even a, well reasonable minority of experts."
Lemon Breezz sorry my mistake but I do think a lot of what he says about Reza aslan's book is incorrect as he keeps saying that it's the opinion of most Scholars even though I've shown that according to Bart Ehrman his theories are not held by hardly anyone.
If i were a Roman ruler who is having problem with zeolots and the problem of maintaining peace and order in the land i would pay all the academians, writers, story tellers to rewrite the character of revolutionary Jesus to be a passive non mililtant gandhi like leader.
It's a cocktail dicussion that profits nothing Jesus is compared as a violent person in the book of Zealot and I have no doubt that Shabbir would support Reza and even he would quote the book Zealot in his debate because Reza knew exactly what he has done in the book Zealot and Shabbir has a more clear idea how to place the book which I would say correct place at correct time . Shabbir would get an upper hand in any debate through this book because Mohammmed becomes a milk washed Apostle as the book Zealot depicts Jesus
thetruth we know that he was. I think Aslan doesn't know? He didn't lie about it but he seems not to know. Allahu A'alam. Or he rejects some of the basic ideas like the miraculous nature of Jesus creation.
i also like the lost books of understanding to,Enoch name means teacher but to know what he taught you have to look to the lost books,the Bible has no teaching on Enoch
Dr Shabir is historically INCORRECT The Catholic Church KNOWS there never was a Jesus the Christ. The Catholic Church knows that Desiderius Erasmus wrote the synoptic gospels Matthew Mark and Luke. His book was printed in 1516 in Basel Switzerland, the Novum Instramentum. He was a play write a humanist. It was not supposed to be take literally. That was not his intention. The joke is on people who Believe.
5:50 If the apostles really wanted to (and successfuly) change jesus from a zealot to a non-threatening icon, in order to save their own lives in Roman, why there were more and more believers (unaccountable) being executed in the next 300 years? The data never lie! Why so many readers ignore such simple fact?
Samuel 15:3-8 says,now go,attack the amalekites and totally destroy everything belongs to them.do not spare them,put to death men,women,children and infants,cattle and sheep,camels and donkeys he took agag king of the amalekites alive,and all his people he totally destroyed with the sword. What a peaceful religion Christianity is.
Kind of ridiculous to call Aslan a scholar in this case. The guy just rehashed a bunch of viewpoints on Jesus that have been floating around at least since the 19th century origin of secular "Biblical criticism." He rehashed some of these views and made a buck off of it is all. There is nothing remotely interesting or original in Aslan's writings. Generally speaking, any book that QUICKLY becomes a best seller is going to be mediocre, with exceptions only proving the rule. Books usually become quick best sellers because they are easy to read and stay on the surface of things while claiming to go deep. You want to hear or read a real Muslim scholar, look up Seyyed Hossein Nasr.
Jesus was sent to the Israelites with a clear message-repent or be replaced as god chosen people.The Israelites ignored him and had chosen the latter path. It did not take long- 40 years it was as promised by God's messenger, the entire nation-the people and the belief system was decimated. The question is-Will God change his mind in making Israelites as God chosen people again,knowing that He has destroyed their presence beyond recognition.
How is that possible, when his own Apostles asked at least twice, when, when will you return to essentially 'overthrow Rome', and Christ's response was always evasive I think, he'd say the times and place only the Father knows His thoughts that the early Christ followers were afraid of Rome, simply does not know history ~ he unfortunately is misinformed.. the Church had grown due to the harsh Roman treatment of them at this time and how did he get represented in 4 different ways, as teh Dr suggests? I too have heard this, and it's a common theme in Christian thought as well, but he neglected to expound (on how these 4 Gospel's expound in these 4 manners) :D
Chapter 19 Mary سورة مريم - Maryam: Verses 33-34 وَالسَّلَامُ عَلَيَّ يَوْمَ وُلِدْتُ وَيَوْمَ أَمُوتُ وَيَوْمَ أُبْعَثُ حَيًّا ذَٰلِكَ عِيسَى ابْنُ مَرْيَمَ ۚ قَوْلَ الْحَقِّ الَّذِي فِيهِ يَمْتَرُونَ "So peace is on me the day I was born, the day that I die, and the day that I shall be raised up to life (again)"! Such (was) Jesus the son of Mary: (it is) a statement of truth, about which they (vainly) dispute. "a statement of truth, about which they (vainly) dispute." Again. "So peace is on me the day I was born, the day that I die, and the day that I shall be raised up to life (again)"! Don't doubt"... a statement of truth,... " especially one" about which they (vainly) dispute."
Faris Mee I actually made that very clear. But thanks for trying to help. It definitely is a difficult Ayat if you are unfamiliar with the Qur’an and not the best exegete, something that the Qur’an has been a victim of misrepresentation-due-to (poor exegesis by non Muslims who can't interpret their own scripture accurately and tell the truth at the same time, and I mean by and large Christian Islam haters and other assorted fanatics who desire to criticize Islam more than they desire to learn about it or the truth in general). So I understand your concern. I got this though, الحمد لله. "So peace is on me the day I was born, the day that I die, and the day that I shall be raised up to life..." Only one of which is past tense, "born." "The day that I die. " Is not. He is saying on that day peace is with him (as). Peace being always with him (as) my suggestion for the answer to the question why does he speak about peace being upon him (as) in the present tense and then say "the day that I die" so much so that he can only say it that way and because he exists in the present moment but knows that eventually he will have to die and that peace will never abandon him (as). Unless one says " the day that I DIED" which makes no sense if you ARE dead, it is inherently clear from the words I used myself and quoted here, that Isa (as), according to the Qur’an, can't be dead, speaking, AND waiting to be resurrected at the same or concurrently. "The day that I die, and the day I WILL BE raised up to life." Like all humans, Isa (as) must die a natural death to be raised up to life, not life as we or even he (as) know it but the life that occurs after "The Day of Allah" Judgment Day, when the unrepentant wicked will be raised up and punished, and the people of Allah will be rewarded. I am sure you understand, but for the sake of the readers, as you requested, I clarified. السلام عليكم ورحمة الله
He plagiarized "his" first anti-Islamic book "No god but God". "historian/scholar perspective does not mean you profess an atheist/agnostic views of religious personalities . Don't forget he still claims to be a Muslim! If one removes the "Islamic" or Christian lens & deny the virgin birth what more does he/she has to say about Jesus(pbuh)-that he was not a messiah?
So true, im muslim myself and what you said is something ive been thinking before...i think we should be saying peace be upon him or sending any kind of salutation while talking about ALL prophets. That would show to christians for example, the respect we have for Jesus ,on whom be peace, and show that we are not their enemies, n we have so much in common.
Laura Velásquez I don’t know what you’re talking about I’m a muslim and I’ve been taught to say “peace be upon him “ when mentioning any prophet of God
Jews find God's revelation in the Torah, Muslims in the Quran and Christians find God's revelation, disclosure, epiphany in the life of a first century Jew by the name of Jesus of Nazareth who lived in the land the Romans called Palestine and this is great news for the whole world.
Little correction there: that piece of land was called Judea back then. It was renamed Palestine by Emperor Hadrian after the failed Bar Kokhba revolt in 133 AD.
this book is a personal opinion from the author not historical facts, her discribes Jesus base on the enviroment that he was born in not on his actual actions and this is what made Jesus an outstanding character compare to others, he spoke about the redemption of the whole world and for humanity to come and reconcile with God, specially the Jews since they where the chosen to be Gods people in this world, but they fail to do so . This is a book to discredit Jesus as the messiah or savior more then reveal the historical fact of his life.
This is a very interesting discussion, not at all what I expected.
Dr Ally comes across as intelligent thoughtful and even handed.
Too bad some of the self pronounced Christians in the comments here don't do the same, rather, they are caught up in their dogma, they are modern zealots. I now can see how that term has negative connotations for their zeal blocks critical thinking and therefore their ability to exchange information.
Bernie Zelvis what an ignorant fool you are Shabir Ally is well respected by top Christian scholars such as James White. Anyone can make a comment on RUclips video yet not know anything of the history of Christians. You can’t just make a blanket ignorant statement as if it’s true. You absolute disgrace!!!!
Very perceptive.
I must say, thank you Dr. Shabir Ally for giving such a professional review of Aslan's book. It is so refreshing to find scholars who can be Muslim, but still speak of other non-Muslim perspectives in a detached manner so as to maintain professionalism. I admire that. Jazak Allah khayr!
I found this question/answer interview quite good! Thank you for sharing. I definitely appreciate an obviously well educated, on both sides, interview. It provokes thought and encourages one to educate themselves to form their own views.
Dr. Shabir has it accurately. When Mark, Matthew, Luke, were writing the bible based on what was going on at the time, and they molded these messages about what Jesus would have said, not actually what was documented that he said. I like people that speak from what is, and not really a pre-disposition. Cheers Mr. and Dr. Shabir.
+TeTe Musica
So they are not the word of God?
+TeTe Musica Kinda sorta. I'm sure that's true for parts. But they may have also been copying earlier texts that are now lost. But fact remains it's pretty hard to decipher what in the Gospels are historical truth and what is legend. Most is legend, but pretty much all scholars agree on a few basics: Baptized by John the Baptist; began his own ministry around age 30; from Galilee; had a close group of followers; crucified by the Romans under Pontius Pilate. That's about it.
TeTe Musica ... the same could be said for Bukhari and Muslim ibn Hajjaj's Sahih collections of the Gospels of Muhammad (Peace and Blessings of God be upon him). These collections hold the testimonies of his companions; the same community who assassinated three of the four Khullafah Rashidun.
"The same community who assassinated three of the four Khullafah Rashidun"
I'm sorry what?
May I ask Dr. Ally, why Jesus was crucified or (someone crucified at his place as the quran says)? If his disciples were just fabricating these stories than why this crucial account took place? Why the Jews and Romans were so mad at Jesus Dr. Ally?
Also why Christians were so heavily persecuted if all they were trying to do is fabricate stories to fit in peacefully with romans and Jews??? Many apostles were infact killed by romans brutally! Why if it was all fabricated to fit in peacefully????
Reza Aslan, in his book "Zealot", denies not only Christian beliefs but also Muslim beliefs, for he suggests that Jesus was crucified by the Romans, that Mary wasn't a Virgin when she conceived Jesus, and that Jesus was not the Messiah. Its difficult to see how Aslan can describe himself as a Muslim, except in some kind of "postmodern", very loose fitting, kind of sense
It is not that Aslan is stating what he believes to be the truth in his book, but instead that he intended to portray, in this book, what is most likely. I understand that he believes in immaculate conception, but such an idea has no place in a book of history except as a 'fabrication'. By no stretch of the imagination is a virgin birth likely, so how could it be asserted as truth in a book of history?
bayreuth79 exactly.
I've heard from Aslan about exact the point you made about Aslan. But I didn't remember that what that was
Kerrie Anne So, he's still a Muslim. :.)
Jesus was messiah but his messianic period will be at the end of the world at his second comming
Guys, Zealot is a great book, even if you hate Islam. It barely has anything to do with Islam, and Mr. Aslan is a great writer. So just forget the ad hominems and just read the book.
Dr. Aslan is a well spoken scholarly person who has a lot of interesting things to say. While he and I don't share a similar worldview on many issues, I like that he approaches this "God Debate" from an intellectual point of view. It is a breath of fresh air to finally have an intellectual, non-radical fighter in the corner of theist's everywhere. Too often people take the polar extremist point of view, very few people seem to take the middle ground. A lot of people could learn from Reza Aslan.
saleem83 Well, he is right that Reza Aslan can discuss such things without "facts" pulled from a Bible or Quran. People should try to look at things in a different light. It's often hardcore religious followers or hardcore atheists who argue with each other. Very few people discuss such topics in a self-controlled manner. So many people cannot discuss religion because a disagreement turns into fighting. It's quite pathetic when you think about it. I think many people understand that Muslim and Muslim extremist are not the same. Although it does appear the "growing pains" or whatever you would label it, which have occurred for other religions, including Christianity, have yet to take place in Islam. In other words, Islam has a lot of people who claim to be Muslims but use it as a method to implement their bullshit. There is little place for that in today's world regardless of the religion, or lack of. So, I am not simply going at Islam for it. People have a right to religion. But those who follow their religions need to understand that not everybody agrees with that. Therefore, people will occasionally do something which Islam, Christianity, or Judaism finds blasphemous. What seems to be the difference is how some Muslims react to this. They should not get so offended to the point they kill people for a cartoon of Muhammed. Doesn't the Quran teach that if you kill one person it's like killing all of humanity? Those who follow religions should be as tolerant and peaceful as they claim. People are entitled to their opinions or beliefs, regardless of what your or anybody thinks of it. They should not be attacked for it. It's not fair to paint one group with a broad brush. That's right. However, I find something concerning about even the most "progressive" Muslim majority nations being statistically supportive of death as a punishment for apostasy. Also, one has to admit that virtually every religion has parts of it which are at least (or appear) somewhat nonsensical. You seem to imply that Islam makes more sense than Christianity. What is it about the Trinity that you are opposed to? Do you not believe that Christianity is a monotheistic religion like the other Abrahamic religions?
@Dann: Re your "A lot of people could learn from Reza Aslan."
Not disputing that. The world *is* full of imbeciles.
Doesn't make Dr Reza right at all.
BTW, he ain't sayin' nuthin' that ain't already been said... a zillion times over!
HC-JAIPUR (27/10/2018)
Dr. Shabir Ally is co authoring a books with James White on the topic " Trinity or Tawheed ( Islamic Monotheism ), May Allah protect him and give him strenght to finish the book
James White? How peculiar, Mr James White is an evangelical Christian, is he not? Strange, how does that work?
Isn't Jesus also a prophet of Allah, according to the Quran. I'm from Indo-Pak region and Muslims here call Jesus Isahi-as Salam.
puneet repalle yes he is the second last prophet of Islam
yes,muslims do recognize him as a messanger of God not son of God.
puneet repalle and his mother Mary is the most honored woman in Islam. A chapter is named after her and she is considered the best woman of all time. Allah's peace and blessings upon them both. The Prophet Muhammad's daughter Fatimah,r.a., is also the best among the young women if Paradise. There are different hadiths or narrations about the women of the Prophet's household which show the great respect he and the followers all had for them.
It is Isa Alayhi salaam rather meaning "peace of God be with him"
The statement is quoted after the mention of any prophet of God as a show of love and admiration.
aww, daughter-daddy interview!
ma sha Allah :-)
how do you know shes his daughter?
@@araz5367
I think it's more of an affectionate way of describing this since there seems to be a real respectful teacher student connection between the two
maybe they are relatives they have same family name
@@araz5367 she said so in one of their videos when she was leaving..its like she came back though ..he is her real/ biological father
I had no idea, they are that professional
Interesting to see a Muslim scholar giving such a reasoned, considered, historical discussion about Jesus and the biblical sources. I wonder if he's able to do the same when it comes to Islam and its scriptures...
Fat Buddha Fitness jupp he is, most scholars can, that's why they are scholars...
Bahoz Taufik I would rather doubt it but I'd like to see some proof, because if he was to do that, he would certainly conclude that Mohammed was not a prophet, hence the good doctor probably wouldn't be a muslim...
Fat Buddha Fitness Why would he conclude that ? I mean, a carpenter from the middle east can be the son of god, may as well be possible that a ladysman from the middle east is his prophet.
Bahoz Taufik Look we're talking about the good doctor's reasoning. If he was to use the same logic he does with Jesus, with Mo, he'd have to conclude that he wasn't a prophet. It's not even really up for dispute, it's blindingly obvious. As is the fact the Koran could not have come from a perfect, omnipotent, merciful creator deity -- one who apparently considers eating pork such a heinous crime that it must be totally banned, but that slavery is part of the natural order of things and therefore should only be discouraged but certainly tolerated... Seriously? How can any intelligent empathetic person believe such hogwash?
Fat Buddha Fitness lol obviously it's all made up. The thing is that he is a thesist and as such he takes care of scripts. Without some of those guys, the followers would interpret some shit ( more like they already do ) and go around and massacar people.
What is missing in Reza's research is the very thing he missed while having fellowship with Young Life; a life lived in the spirit of Jesus. The reason Muslims acknowledge Jesus as an important figure is the same reason even the demons realize his person and shudder; Yet the reality is not just in the Gospels..
I really like dr shabir ally. I am shia. But i listen to him. Very respectful and insightful
Brother dont label yourself, there is no such thing as Shia etc. Rather just call yourself Muslim. As the sect Shia is nowhere to be mentioned in the Quran and Dr. Zakir Naik also a great educated man on the subject has given speech about this. No offence btw, Peace
Let him
Label himself and follow ‘12 imams’ blindly
That's good brother.
@@Global_just don't spread hate.
I m Christian and I do not find Shabir threatening. I find the art on the wall kind of stupid, though.
that's definitely an improvement!
fatihalt An improvement on what?
Over thinking that every person who has a beard and wears a robe is a terrorist of course! -_-
fatihalt Nonsense! I judge these people by the content of their character. Do I think bearded, pajama types who discourse on the proper discipline of their wives, or how female genital mutilation keeps women "clean", or morons like Andy, cider and ass, Chowderhead, are detestable? Yes. So back to you a simple question. Where do you, my fine fellow, stand on each of these examples?
Hannibal EnemyofRome
I like the art and agree with ur '... chowderheads...' comment tho i think anyone who can believe in any human description of gods is a fool
Reza Azlan definitely committing blasphemy for admitting that Jesus was crucified when it's clear mentioned in the Quran that Jesus was not crucified.
That is a matter of debate. According to the New Testament it is recorded that Jesus was crucified because it served as a form of atonement for mankind's sins.
None of the writers of the NT were themselves eye-witnesses to Jesus crucifixion, so their testimony is based on mere hearsay and will amount to zero in a modern court of Law.
how did you know?
Wow, christians are very mad at Shabir Ally. The destruction of the Trinity in official debate against Jay Smith must have been traumatizing for them, lmao.
rofl
Lol no one can destroy the trinity- don't be so foolish our God cannot be destroyed by his creation 😂😂😂.... I'm an ex muslim, now christian, I don't hate shabir I feel sorry for him in his debates and pray that the Lord opens eyes- so please don't make judgement when you don't even know christians. If you watch full debates who destroys who? Shabirs great because he has the guts to debate people like jay smith but does he even respond to his questions? Check out the debate on 'is the quran the word of god' shabir responds by going on and on and on about the so-called numerical patterns. He never destroys anyone
Monica Gill
No one can ‘destroy’ the trinity?
Don’t you mean no one can understand the trinity?
Was Abraham and the prophets after him trinitarians? 🤔
We’ll stick with the doctrine of Abraham, Moses and Co.
You carry on with your ‘deeper’ Triune god understanding taught by your Roman Catholic church fathers
monica gill our God cannot be destroyed by his creation 😂😂😂. your god Jesus was literally killed on the cross by his creation according to the bible he asked God to save him but God didn't respond nor accepted his prayers now that's what Christians call a god and you are feeling sorry for Shabir im sorry but i just dont understand chritians
Paul definitely lied when depicting Jesus because he particularly did not like Judaism, he liked the Roman way of life . On the other hand , Jesus had to preach traditional Judaism because he was a Jew , is not historically supported . Then there would not be any reform any where in the world .
Sabrina Shahab WOW very important observation
'Zealot' is a polite way to say 'fanatic ' much like ' Muslim fundamentalist ' really means 'Islamic terrorist' -to many if not most westerners.
+o shah true in many instances- they're all nuts
Safiyyah Ally- The daughter of Shabir Ally...MashaAllah, how does it feel to interview your own father, did he give you any advice on you way of interviewing...?
An insightful interview, thank you. Its always nice to see some intelligent discussion about these topics.
newtonianromance
hmm what dif does it make if this intelligent discussion is but a lie
hbk711x
hmm plz tll me which Bible is corrupt, better yet produce the original manuscripts so we can make a comparesion, why would quote from a Bible that's been corrupted as you say, or maybe you could tell me in what year and by whom the Bible have been corrupted, you should also know that we have manuscripts dating way before muhd and guess what a perfect match with the Bible we have today, ill-allah didn't seems to have any problem with the gosple or the torah, so why should you
hbk711x
Romans 7
13 Their throat is an open sepulchre; With their tongues they have used deceit: The poison of asps is under their lips:
14 Whose mouth is full of cursing and bitterness:
15 Their feet are swift to shed blood;
16 Destruction and misery are in their ways;
17 And the way of peace have they not known:
a perfect picture of muslims
I’m not sure all of the commenters here are watching the interview openly. This is not a full fledged endorsement of the book, or an attack on Christianity, so we should be cautious in trying to draw out those conclusions from it. One thing on the book itself, it seems to overstate the emphasis on sedition and draws revolutionary conclusions in the conventional sense from that. But take scholars like NT Wright, who would agree that this was an insurrection of Roman rule, but in a new way which none at the time had expected. Drawing on the novelty of the claims themself to the ears of first century Jews, Wright would argue that we must reimagine what it is we think of revolutions and zealotry. The zealous nature of Paul is really emphasized in Wright’s biography of him, and the Damascus encounter is a sort of upheaval of his entire worldview, which repurposed it in the end. He was still a zealous Jew in the end, praising the zealous attitude of others, but he’d reimagined what the true zeal for God is, how the upheaval of worldly powers would occur. I think this nuanced view is more appropriate, because the idea Aslan has about softening the views to make them palatable to Romans seems to have a really hard time dealing with the acceptance of martyrdom in the early church. Although the revolutionary nature of Jesus’ idea of the kingdom of God is acknowledged by many scholars, there doesn’t seem to be many so toss out everything else having to do with tradition. I mean the first epistle of Paul being written 20ish years after the crucifixion isn’t commonly regarded among scholars as liberty to toss it out entirely as a historical account of the character of early Christianity. Polycarp, taught by John, confirms the renown of Paul in the movement. He and Clement were contemporaries who speak to each other and others with firsthand stories explaining what the apostles meant. For example Polycarp more or less says “look, I don’t know what Paul meant either, he’s hard to understand, here’s the righteousness I was taught”. Were these letters, written and never canonized into the Bible just forgeries, part of a conspiracy to soften Christianity and hide its true nature from Rome, even in private communication with each other, trying to reconcile the things Paul said with the things that John said? It just feels too novel for me, and i think a real problem is that the only scholars that people have exposure too are often Aslan and Ehrman, so we assume that the majority of academia is represented in these two views (which differ a lot). All of that said, Dr Shabbir is measured and careful and I really appreciate his caution in avoiding overstating anything, I think that many in the comments are falling victim to what he warns us about scholarly bible reading: we’re reading our own views into his words!
It was surprise to me this explanation about the book to be honest I expected something else so bravo Very clear and academic insight about the book
This is one of the best talk I have heard on Reza Aslan's - 'Zealot'.
Its not all that difficult to sort out who Jesus was - all one need to do is to look as his disciples. Now as per Aslan Jesus had over 72 followers who were following him on a regular basis/ number of women being among his followers - Now where the followers young strong fighters looking to establish a kingdom or weak & oppressed - looking for some solace in Jesus's teaching.
According to the Bible, most of Jesus's disciples were fishermen and the marginalized - why would a Zealot chose fishermen - one could say because they are good at using sharp tools - skilled in chopping of the roman heads when the opportunity strikes or it is that fishermen have other qualities. What about the women who were following Jesus. were they trained in the art of fighting or were they going to be used to seduce roman guards or were they Just following Jesus for his teachings of forgiveness, love & sharing.
If Aslan could prove that the people following Jesus were skilled fighters, willing to die he might have a case of a Zealous political agenda - if not - he has a agenda of his own.
as a former Christian .I found you fair and even.If you reflect a real Muslim then why do we have all this hate .Truth n facts not emotions will helps us all.I would love to hear you speak .
Mr Wild hate is good business for war lords
I read the book, and it is a well written book. This interview is also very solid, reflects the objectivity in criticism. Very good.
Not so much.
I must confess, I was hoping Dr. Ally would explore what a denial of the Virgin Birth or affirmation of the Curcifixion by a scholar like Dr. Aslan says about the methodology employed. Are their flaws in his approach, and if so, where.
When we have 10 people like Mr Shabbir and 10 people like Mr aslan in the world we would have a different Muslim world which to me is phenomenal , love these guys
I like the artwork above the shelf.
I think this is an eye opener for a lot of people who see these figures in history
nothing more than, a political figures of their time....well-done aslan
Thank you .. and ur right … many people who study the historical Jesus often have to chose which layers they want to peel back. Usually in order to conclude whatever agenda they’re seeking .
The Zealots of 1st Century were fundamental extremists fighting a guerilla war against the Roman rule & their puppets.
Jesus disciples still carry terrorist nicknames. Most famous is Judas Escariot. Escariot meaning a man of the dagger or assassin. A member of the scicarii (plural for escariot).
Pacifist Jesus is from Paul the Deciever.
Jesus in the Qur'an was a mighty mujahid, calling the people to jihad, leader of the messianic zealots.
*from the Qur'an -*
Indeed, Allah has purchased from the believers their lives and their properties [in exchange] for that they will have Paradise. *They fight in the cause of Allah , so they kill and are killed. A true promise upon Him in the Torah and THE GOSPEL and the Qur'an.* And who is truer to his covenant than Allah ? So rejoice in your transaction which you have contracted. And it is that which is the great attainment. 9:111
As you can see the Qur'an is clear. Crystal clear.
*They fight in the cause of Allah , so they kill and are killed. A true promise upon Him in the Torah and THE GOSPEL THE GOSPEL THE GOSPEL and the Qur'an.*
+Adam Maher i stopped reading at "jesus calling the people to jihad" ... maybe in your book idiot, which was written 60-100 years after "muhammads" death, if this guy even ever existed according to several scientists/historians ... your book is so likely to be the word of god like jesus was violent (who actually existed because there is REAL historic al proof) ... how the fuck could Muslims know the story of jesus better when they appeared 7 - 8 hundred years later? (thats a rethorical question, so dont bother answering) ... it is argued that this "Muhammad" guy wasnt even trying to establish a new religion in the first place ... and that the first leaders of the umayad-Dynastic were even christian! But they then realized that you can USE RELIGION to control the people under your rule better and to set up the myth of being "blessed by god himself" ... this is just utter nonsense ... people, read books, take on different sources, make up your minds ... its not too late!
really
Dr. Shabir Ally gives very professional and open-minded answers to the Questions he was asked about the credibility of the idea of a "Zealot" and politically oriented Jesus his intelligence is really remarkable!! :-)
Mr. Shabir , you are very nobleman , God bless you .
This is a really good review! You can almost always trust RT!
i was raised Roman Catholic i think to look back as well as we can into history, especially when it comes to religion, in this regard why are we not looking back into the life of Mohammad who came out of the Byzantine Empire which was part of the Roman Empire and the links between the two religions, as in recent times have seemingly become good friends at least in the politic's of the world.
The Byzntines did not control the Hijaz (Arabian Peninsula), where Islam arose (or ever). The Byzantines controlled Yarmouk (Syria) and Palestine.
After Islam was established and Prophet Muhammad (pbuh) died, the third caliph of Umar ibn Al Khattab defeated the Byzantines at Yarmouk and then at Palestine (inc. Jerusalem).
Adil Justin Theriault yes. Muhammad pbuh came out of the Hijaz. It was controlled by the pagans when he was born.
truly-gone-fishing ft
truly-gone-fishing even in its height the Eastern roman empire had not reach south enough to be even remotely close to medina & then mecca. They mostly had territory a bit south to the sinai peninsula & might have had influence over places which will be north western Saudi Arabia today. But Mecca is actually near SOUTH western Saudi Arabia.
REZA is awesome, an intelligent author.
Wow not meeting the stereotype at all. Measured, thoughtful analytical, calm and straightforward.
Why is everyone so threatened by Jesus that so many books are written about him? If we are confident in what we believe then nothing outside of that matters.
Thank you for speaking truth to this. Reza made lots of money.
Shabir ally and Reza Aslan are brothers we are inside the house of Islam
Mesopotamian Glory IN YOUR DREAMS!!! This will happen! Satan worshiper.
And why should I accept it??? You are not GOD to tell me anything!!! Shame on you, for thinking that you are superior, you are just dust that will turn into dust!!! This is what bugs me about the Muslim religion! It makes you think that you are superior to others, no one is perfect, so stop judging others as if you are!!! Only GOD is perfect!!!
This is sooooo DEMONIC!!! JESUS is the way & the LIGHT!!! You will only see the light of GOD through him alone!! Accept that!!! You will be Happier here on earth if you do. You will be very peaceful without inner conflict!!
Scholars have studied the bible that is before the byzantine era, we still have the original copies. The Greek, Hebrew & Aramaic. Your information is inaccurate. The Church has preserved the original Bible & protected till death, from people that are against GOD! It is not available to anyone for that reason.
*****
Sorry I was being sarcastic at the time. i thought it would be funny. In retrospect, guess not!
@Stevie Koch I'm sure it's a new information for you, but the gospels were most propably not written by the apostels themselves. Reza Aslan simply states that the gospels of Matthew and Luke "were written" in 90 - 100.
Follow anyone that advances love, peace and compassion. Your soul will be nourished.
Now lets all sit down and watch Star Wars together.
Am a Muslim and I have not read Reza Aslan's controversial book, however if it surely describes Jesus as Zealot, born by unvirgin Mary and crucified then he has commuted a heresy and must be made aware of his mistakes and told to repent. If he refuses he should be warned that his claims border on blasphemy and if he steps inside Pakistan he could face the blasphemy law.
This is good. But compare with Bishop Barron's views for another view and ideas fro further reading. Bishop refers to N T Wright's book on Jesus as his favourite book to get an good insight into Jesus.
New International Version
Luke 19:27
But those enemies of mine who did not want me to be king over
them--bring them here and kill
them in front of me.'"
What does it Mean??
this is not at all a review of the book. the lady keeps bringing the Doctor back to the subject in hand and he seems not to be interested in the review of the book and in fact, I don't think the doctor has read the book at all.
Yeah, I always trust the opinion of people who think muhammad rode a winged horse into heaven, or jesus walked on water, or the evil lord zenu is conquering the galaxy. They are always the most objective people out there.
Wire, people in the past had that same type of narrow minded thinking. "Will God bring us back to life when our bones turn to dust?!" And the simple response was that God can created us from nothing -literally- and He can do it again.
I believe that I have billions of living creatures inside my body that work together to sustain my existence. Wouldn't this also be a fantastical belief a few centuries ago, before the advancement of science? But it wouldn't make it any less true.
wiremessiah why are you even here...Mr. Aethist. your idea of "truth" is not the one that people in this thread believes. go see some Atheist forums.
I have literally never heard of ANY New Testament scholars who have a view similar to Aslan. The only people I have heard of something similar were German Anti-Semites who did not believe in the Bible. This is the source from which Aslan is drawing from.
Anyone who would honestly read the Gospels and New Testament will see the historic Jesus of Nazareth.
To know Scripture is the know Christ.
"All who live by the sword will die by the sword" ~ Jesus of Nazareth (Matthew 26:52).
Its interesting that Shabir takes the view that Mark was the first Gospel written. I don't know if he is ignorant of the fact or is just being deceptive, but the view that Mark was the first one written is theoretic. No scholar knows which one was written first because that is only one "theory" of many. Some scholars say Matthew was written first. Each one of the Gospels was said at one time or another to be written first. Who knows, Maybe the first two or three were written at the same time.
The view of Aslan that John was written as late as 120 AD is a complete fabrication. We have a fragment of Johns Gospel (P52) manuscript dated between AD 90 - AD 125. Johns Gospel had to have been authored long before the manuscript was found (Logically).
Many NT scholars date all 3 Gospels Pre-AD 70. Some even thought John was written before AD 70.
I think you are right, no one knows for certain when the gospels were written or in what order. We do know that Paul wrote very early because he was executed 64AD - It may be that the gospels were all written before 70AD as none of them mention the destruction of the Temple, something so devastating to the Jews that it would surely have been mentioned. Shabir has a very extreme liberal and secular view of the Gospels, he believes in the "evolution" of the gospels to turn Jesus from just a man into a God - From Mark to John - he forgets Paul whose writings have a very high Christology even before (or at the same time) as Mark. So Shabir is not the right bloke to comment on the Gospels when reviewing Reza's book
nicerperson You are correct on your analyses of Shabir. Yet he does not employ the same standards to the Quran. He uses two sets of standards, contradicting his own methodology. He contradicts himself and does not understand the people who he quotes actually contradict his own arguments.
You can see an evolution in the author of the Quran, which is why they split it up into the Meccan and Medinan surahs. This is meant to be the same author, remember.
I can show in the Quran some parts were not written by Muhammad, Surah 17 for example. I know this was not written when he was alive because it mentions the Al-Aqsa Mosque, which was not built until 75-80 years after he died.
It was clearly written as a propaganda coop to make some claim on Jerusalem by later Muslim scribes. Muhammad was never in Jerusalem.
The Mosques on the Temple Mount should be demolished.
Yes, I have also never heard any New Testament scholar with Aslan's view. By looking at the gospels, Jesus tries to avoid the term messiah, he rather gave subtile hints like choosing the twelve disciples. He calls himself very rarely son of god. That being said, it rather seems that the four gospels are jewish sources. So what would be the reason for such an avoidance, probably it's the historical jewish idea that the messiah will conquer Jerusalem and will defeat the enemies of the jews. Since Jesus never had any of this intention of a Zealot, it seems that indeed Jesus was no Zealot. Another point which Shabir Ally (which Aslan also makes) talks about is that there were multiple people that claimed to be the promised messiah. But it seems that all of them indeed tried to fit into the historical idea of the jewish messiah. So therefore the question remains why did people worship Jesus after his death, but none of the other self-proclaimed messiahs. It seems to me that Shabir Ally's view on why the gospels portray Jesus as they do is also problematic. The idea that the gospel of mark Mark was written after the destruction of the temple at around 70AD actually destroys Ally's hypothesis to write Roman friendly gospels. Christians are already persecuted by Rome (especially under Nero), so there is no reason to be nice to the Roman empire. Mr. Ally only can avoid this by saying the gospel of Mark was written prior to 70AD, but then again his hypothesis fails, since the temple was not destroyed at that time. In this respect it seems to me that it simply does not matter when these gospels were written.
Feature87 Jesus very clearly sates he is the Messiah AND the Son of God -
Here are just a FEW
Matthew 23:8 ... one is your Master, even Christ; and all ye are brethren.
Matthew 26:63-64 ... And the high priest answered and said unto him, I adjure thee by the living God, that thou tell us whether thou be the Christ, the Son of God. Jesus saith unto him, Thou hast said:
Matthew 27:22 Pilate saith unto them, What shall I do then with Jesus which is called Christ? They all say unto him, Let him be crucified.
Luke 9:20 He said unto them, But whom say ye that I am? Peter answering said, The Christ of God
Luk 22:67-70 Art thou the Christ? tell us. And he said unto them, If I tell you, ye will not believe ... Then said they all, Art thou then the Son of God? And he said unto them, Ye say that I am ... And they said, What need we any further witness? for we ourselves have heard of his own mouth.
John 4:25-26 The woman saith unto him, I know that Messias cometh, which is called Christ: when he is come, he will tell us all things. Jesus saith unto her, I that speak unto thee am he.
And the same for calling himself the Son of God
Feature87 Yeah. Aslan likes to inject his own image of what a zealot is... i.e. murderous insane jihadist. However that is not how Jews used the word zealot and it is not what the Greek means. A zealot is someone who is enthusiastic about something.
ζηλωτής, - BDAG Lexicon of the New Testament and other early Christian literature (3rd Edition).
① one who is earnestly committed to a side or cause, enthusiast, adherent, loyalist.
② an ultranationalist, patriot, zealot
Here are two examples of how the word is used in the New Testament.
Acts 21:20
"... they are all zealous for the Law"
Titus 2:14
"... zealous for good deeds."
Aslan fails again.
All I think of when I hear the name Aslan is the lion, from "The Lion, the Witch and the Wardrobe". Ironically the lion in it represented Christ.
Why does he have framed pictures of random colors? Is there a particular meaning behind those?
The red color denotes fertility of Venus Goddess while Black is the return if the jedi time of evil. I hope this explanation enlightened your path.
can someone block commenting on this video?
In my humble opinion I think that this matter should be also tested in the Seerah and Hadith sciences..
I do not know about this book. If the main hypothesis of the book was that Jesus was a zealot then is plain wrong. Among the 12 apostles was Simon the Zealot. It is not clear that this Simon was called Zealot because he was hard working or he was part of the Zealot movement. Joseph Flavius, in his book History of the Judean war against Romans, describe this sect a derived from Pharisee group. The big difference was that the Zealots had the fix idea to incite the people of Judea to rebel against the Roman Empire and expel it from the Holy Land by force of arms. They have some initial succes, most notably during the First phase of the Jewish-Roman War (66-70). Zealotry was the term used by Josephus for a "fourth sect" or "fourth Jewish philosophy" during this period. They were so decided to fight that they refused any compromise or peace offering. They were very confident that Yahwe will intervine and Romans will be defeated. They preferred to die, Jerusalem to be destroyed and the brand new Temple of Jerusalem to be burnt. The temple was a splendid construction started by Herod the Great and finished few years before the war. So, they were fanatics that committed mass suicide (including women, children, elderly) instead of giving up the fight and looking for a compromise. A similar story took place 30 years ago. In April 1993, some 75 members, including many children, of the millennial sect known as the Branch Davidians-including their messianic leader, David Koresh-perished in the blaze that destroyed their compound near Waco, Texas, after a 51-day siege by federal agents. A very similar event to smaller scale. NOT at all was Jesus a Zealot.
This is one man's opinion..... not facts at all, his opinion. FIRST of all, he is MUSLIM, and a great public speaker.... He has mentioned in the ASPEN talk ( 50 people in the audience?) that every Jesus gets mentioned on FOX he sells more books.... He said to be glib.... of course he doesn't mind being glib because he doesn't mind making a living on writing his perspectives on Jesus. Bishop Barron and many serious Catholic-Christian Intellectuals EASILY de-bunk Zealot shallow perspective. Check them out!
wow surprisingly awesome review of the book,he has clear understanding and knowledge about the life and nature of Jesus PBUH from the Gospels and how different each understanding are.this is really interesting
Shabir Ali i think you are great person and often made sense but If Reza Aslan RIGHT about Jesus then ISLAM can't be true for numbers of reasons.
1. Reza agreed that Jesus was Crucified.YES
The Quran, chapter 4:157 says: NO
"They declared 'We have put to death the Messiah, Jesus, the son of Mary, the apostle of God'. They did not kill him, nor did they crucify him, but they had only his likeness."
i hoped shabir could address this point because if a muslims accept that Jesus died on the CROSS he is no longer Muslims because it goes against his holly book.
2.Muslims view Jesus as a peaceful man who taught love and just nice stuff never killed any one he healed the sick and raised the dead.
But Resza describes JESUS as a violent man which means the Quran is wrong about JESUS.
The famous Zealot book CONTRADIC the Quran.
Sabir i was stunned when asked is Reza's view on JESUS is WRONG or RIGHT,but Sabir did not say he was WRONG.which means many stupid things but i have not read the book yet but what is the point if its going to contradict both the Quran and the Bible.
Jesus did not cancel the law or the commandments of Moses. Matthew 5:17
A pleasant, interesting and civil interview (in contrast it to the many crude comments). You can notice a kind interviewer (peace be upon her and all that) was trying to get Dr. S.A. to more firmly bolster the Islam agenda; that is, to declare that Jesus (Issa) was within the "Prophet" class of human being, though of a lesser rank than Overlord Mahomet (with all due respect). The book itself, Zealot, by Reza Aslan, presents no new ideas, merely recapping and refreshing the established scholarly notion that there was a guy, "Jesus," who was a non-unique product of his time -- a zealous Jew -- and that a legend later grew up around him. Here's the kicker, folks (those folks with brain cells, anyway): for Islam to get people keep buying into it, it needs for there to have been such "a guy," even a zealous local prophet. Reza's book functions as a crafty distraction from the actual current of academic action. Reza the zealous sympathist, along with the sellers of the Islam agenda don't want you to see that there might not have been any guy. Rather, the Jesus character could plausibly have been a Greek-Jewish hybrid (synthetic) deity package historicized for mass consumption. Good work, though, Prophet Reza. Your years of Theology have paid off on the crowd-pleasing circuit.
Why is it so hard for everyone to admit this is the kingdom God gave us(humans) this kingdom and we are all His children made in His image and given every opportunity to make life that He has given us beautiful. I dislike tragedy as much as anyone but I try to be happy, joyous and free. Use time to demonstrate His omnipotence.
I tried to admit, but ithe contradictions, confusions and doesnt make any sense made me wait a minute.. Whatttt????? Sorry
How about Dr. Reza Aslan writing about Prophet Mohammad' life? Will there fatwa? There was no problem among Christians in the book Zealot? No protest, no fatwa etc etc
What did he plagiarize?
As for him denying, understand that he wrote the book from a "historian/scholar' perspective, removing the "Islamic" Lens. There isn't anything wrong with that.
Now, if he wrote an Islamic book doing that, then that would be a problem.
Thank you for a woman that stays focused. We want information not entertainment
shabir can comment and make assumptions on Jesus and clearly say the book cites facts but cannot say anything about mohammed , a religion he follows. he starts kind of belittling the writer of the book, but agrees with the book as facts.
If the temple was destroyed in year 70A.C, why it is not mentioned in any of the gospels or letters? Specially when it was predicted by Yeshua?
Dr. Ally was kind & polite to plagiarist Reza Aslan. He should have talked about his status as a "Muslim " after he denied the virgin birth & accepted the crucifixion of Jesus(pbuh). Plagiarist Reza Aslan's thoughts are very much in line with Jewish thoughts about Jesus(pbuh). Dr. Ally almost let him off the hook- could they be of the same denomination?
The word Bible means books. The Bible is 66 books written by different authors and their tombs and cities have been verified by scientists. The people in the Bible were deceased when it was translated into English in 1611. They are not making money off the memoirs of their lives they lived thousands of years ago.
Wow this was almost 6 years ago today
"He" is for God(Allah) the One Christians call "The Father" and "he" is for Jesus, Moses, Mohamed(pbut) etc.
I would on Dr Shabir to review the work of Eisenman on the Dead Sea scrolls
Very interesting topic
Aslan said that Jesus pbuh in Islam isn't the Messiah. What does the book have, if anything, about what the Quran says? Christ and Messiah are the same. In the Bible in Hebrew (I assume) there are many "annointed" things as Ahmed Deedat had pointed out decades ago. Aslan is not an Islamic scholar so makes mistakes as do other non scholars.
Why the Christians while commenting in a Islamic video always use abusive, filthy, dirty words is because, they are the seeds of the bad tree, " Even so, every good tree bears good fruit,but a bad tree bears a bad fruit (Matthew 7:17). They are the descendants of a generation who were " wicked and adulterous" ( Matthew 16:4); "Hypocrites" (Matthew 15:7); "Brood of Vipers" (Matthew 12:34); " Faithless and perverse generation" (Matthew 17:17);"Fools and blind" (Matthew 23:19); "Serpents, brood of vipers!" (Matthew 23:33). They are the 'corrupted seed' as has been promised by their 'God' in their "Holy Bible' in Malachi, Chapter 2, Verse 3 - " Behold, I will corrupt your seed, and spread dung upon your faces, even the dung of your solemn feasts; and one shall take away with it." So, they are having dung ( not of cow, but of human) spread upon their faces. Also, they must be eating the 'cake' prepared as has been taught by their "God' in their "Holy Bible" in Chapter 4, Verse 12 - " And thou shalt eat it as barely cakes and thou shalt bake it dung that cometh out of man in their sight."
Take heed, brother, in the way you mention Christians. It sounds like you are calling all Christians abusive- it'd be more correct to say why do *some* Christians act abusive.
YHAAAAASSSS!!! I was searching for a muslim scholar's view on his book.
Lemon Breezz Reza Aslan is not a scholar. And since so many Muslims like Bart Ehrman here's what he says about Reza
(Aslan’s Zealot: To Start With…, ehrmanblog.org/aslans-zealot-start-members/ )
"In response to a question about whether Aslan was a recognized scholar in the field of NT or early Christian studies, I indicated that he is not - and does not claim to be. He teaches creative writing and as one might suspect, he is indeed a highly talented writer. "
Which is why book reads like a novel because he is a creative writing professor not a scholar. Of course I would not really care if he's a scholar or not as long as the thesis is sound and is accepted by a good number of experts but here's what part Ehrman says on its acceptance
(Aslan’s Zealot: To Start With…, ehrmanblog.org/aslans-zealot-start-members/ )
"His basic thesis about who Jesus was (a zealot, obviously), has been floated for over three hundred years, and has never seemed convincing to the majority of experts, or even a large minority of experts, or even a, well reasonable minority of experts."
I was not referring to Reza being a scholar, i meant Dr. Shabir. 'His' Referring to 'Reza's'.
Lemon Breezz sorry my mistake but I do think a lot of what he says about Reza aslan's book is incorrect as he keeps saying that it's the opinion of most Scholars even though I've shown that according to Bart Ehrman his theories are not held by hardly anyone.
Jesus was a zealot (northern) Palestinian, and was crucified by European ancestors of Ashkenazim.
Thank you Dr Ally!
If i were a Roman ruler who is having problem with zeolots and the problem of maintaining peace and order in the land i would pay all the academians, writers, story tellers to rewrite the character of revolutionary Jesus to be a passive non mililtant gandhi like leader.
Excellent statements. I did not know that Islam shared belief in the virgin birth.
It's a cocktail dicussion that profits nothing
Jesus is compared as a violent person in the book of Zealot and I have no doubt that Shabbir would support Reza and even he would quote the book Zealot in his debate because Reza knew exactly what he has done in the book Zealot and Shabbir has a more clear idea how to place the book which I would say correct place at correct time .
Shabbir would get an upper hand in any debate through this book because Mohammmed becomes a milk washed Apostle as the book Zealot depicts Jesus
I think Dr Ally should write a book about the Historical
notice how they don't want to mention Jesus was the messiah. Zealot was design to make money no truth to it.
thetruth we know that he was. I think Aslan doesn't know? He didn't lie about it but he seems not to know. Allahu A'alam. Or he rejects some of the basic ideas like the miraculous nature of Jesus creation.
i also like the lost books of understanding to,Enoch name means teacher but to know what he taught you have to look to the lost books,the Bible has no teaching on Enoch
Dr Shabir is historically INCORRECT The Catholic Church KNOWS there never was a Jesus the Christ. The Catholic Church knows that Desiderius Erasmus wrote the synoptic gospels Matthew Mark and Luke. His book was printed in 1516 in Basel Switzerland, the Novum Instramentum. He was a play write a humanist. It was not supposed to be take literally. That was not his intention. The joke is on people who Believe.
I find this ridiculous to listen to deniers of Jesus as Savior talking like they know anything about it, the truth and the bible. Smh
i think its just worth mentioning that the scholar here has a bachelor in biblical theology.
who? sheikh shabbir Aly?
Your bible says that God is the only savior, and that God is greater than Jesus.
much hate comments, jeez, just enjoy the video guys
5:50 If the apostles really wanted to (and successfuly) change jesus from a zealot to a non-threatening icon, in order to save their own lives in Roman, why there were more and more believers (unaccountable) being executed in the next 300 years? The data never lie! Why so many readers ignore such simple fact?
Samuel 15:3-8 says,now go,attack the amalekites and totally destroy everything belongs to them.do not spare them,put to death men,women,children and infants,cattle and sheep,camels and donkeys he took agag king of the amalekites alive,and all his people he totally destroyed with the sword. What a peaceful religion Christianity is.
Are you perhaps confusing Judaism and Christianity?
Perhaps that samuel is coming from your holy bible which you believe the words of god???
Anything that oppose islam's dogmatism is wrong. All the verses were from Muhammad, the sole narrator.
Kind of ridiculous to call Aslan a scholar in this case. The guy just rehashed a bunch of viewpoints on Jesus that have been floating around at least since the 19th century origin of secular "Biblical criticism." He rehashed some of these views and made a buck off of it is all. There is nothing remotely interesting or original in Aslan's writings.
Generally speaking, any book that QUICKLY becomes a best seller is going to be mediocre, with exceptions only proving the rule. Books usually become quick best sellers because they are easy to read and stay on the surface of things while claiming to go deep.
You want to hear or read a real Muslim scholar, look up Seyyed Hossein Nasr.
Jesus was sent to the Israelites with a clear message-repent or be replaced as god chosen people.The Israelites ignored him and had chosen the latter path. It did not take long- 40 years it was as promised by God's messenger, the entire nation-the people and the belief system was decimated.
The question is-Will God change his mind in making Israelites as God chosen people again,knowing that He has destroyed their presence beyond recognition.
How is that possible, when his own Apostles asked at least twice, when, when will you return to essentially 'overthrow Rome', and Christ's response was always evasive I think, he'd say the times and place only the Father knows
His thoughts that the early Christ followers were afraid of Rome, simply does not know history ~ he unfortunately is misinformed.. the Church had grown due to the harsh Roman treatment of them at this time
and how did he get represented in 4 different ways, as teh Dr suggests? I too have heard this, and it's a common theme in Christian thought as well, but he neglected to expound (on how these 4 Gospel's expound in these 4 manners) :D
Chapter 19 Mary سورة مريم - Maryam: Verses 33-34
وَالسَّلَامُ عَلَيَّ يَوْمَ وُلِدْتُ وَيَوْمَ أَمُوتُ وَيَوْمَ أُبْعَثُ حَيًّا ذَٰلِكَ عِيسَى ابْنُ مَرْيَمَ ۚ قَوْلَ الْحَقِّ الَّذِي فِيهِ يَمْتَرُونَ
"So peace is on me the day I was born, the day that I die, and the day that I shall be raised up to life (again)"! Such (was) Jesus the son of Mary: (it is) a statement of truth, about which they (vainly) dispute.
"a statement of truth, about which they (vainly) dispute."
Again.
"So peace is on me the day I was born, the day that I die, and the day that I shall be raised up to life (again)"!
Don't doubt"... a statement of truth,... " especially one" about which they (vainly) dispute."
Faris Mee I actually made that very clear. But thanks for trying to help. It definitely is a difficult Ayat if you are unfamiliar with the Qur’an and not the best exegete, something that the Qur’an has been a victim of misrepresentation-due-to (poor exegesis by non Muslims who can't interpret their own scripture accurately and tell the truth at the same time, and I mean by and large Christian Islam haters and other assorted fanatics who desire to criticize Islam more than they desire to learn about it or the truth in general). So I understand your concern. I got this though, الحمد لله.
"So peace is on me the day I was born, the day that I die, and the day that I shall be raised up to life..."
Only one of which is past tense, "born."
"The day that I die. " Is not. He is saying on that day peace is with him (as). Peace being always with him (as) my suggestion for the answer to the question why does he speak about peace being upon him (as) in the present tense and then say "the day that I die" so much so that he can only say it that way and because he exists in the present moment but knows that eventually he will have to die and that peace will never abandon him (as).
Unless one says " the day that I DIED" which makes no sense if you ARE dead, it is inherently clear from the words I used myself and quoted here, that Isa (as), according to the Qur’an, can't be dead, speaking, AND waiting to be resurrected at the same or concurrently.
"The day that I die, and the day I WILL BE raised up to life."
Like all humans, Isa (as) must die a natural death to be raised up to life, not life as we or even he (as) know it but the life that occurs after "The Day of Allah" Judgment Day, when the unrepentant wicked will be raised up and punished, and the people of Allah will be rewarded.
I am sure you understand, but for the sake of the readers, as you requested, I clarified.
السلام عليكم ورحمة الله
He plagiarized "his" first anti-Islamic book "No god but God". "historian/scholar perspective does not mean you profess an atheist/agnostic views of religious personalities . Don't forget he still claims to be a Muslim! If one removes the "Islamic" or Christian lens & deny the virgin birth what more does he/she has to say about Jesus(pbuh)-that he was not a messiah?
Muslims believe that Jesus is a great prophet yet these to do not say "Jesus peace be upon him" 🤔
So true, im muslim myself and what you said is something ive been thinking before...i think we should be saying peace be upon him or sending any kind of salutation while talking about ALL prophets. That would show to christians for example, the respect we have for Jesus ,on whom be peace, and show that we are not their enemies, n we have so much in common.
watch it from 1:30 "Jesus on him be peace"
Laura Velásquez I don’t know what you’re talking about I’m a muslim and I’ve been taught to say “peace be upon him “ when mentioning any prophet of God
You say it one time no need to repeat it over and over.
Reza is pure gold ❤️
good interview....
Is that his real beard or snap--on?
I am waiting for a scholar to write on Historical Mohammad vis-a-vis Mohammad of Faith
They already had Sahib Raamii
*****
is that the name of the book or author?
If my Christian brother and sister listen to dr Reza aslan historic jesus lecture they going to revert to Islam
Jesus (pbuh) was a prophet like prophets before him, he lived for almost 120 years on earth and died and is buried in srinagar in kashmir.
Seek help.
Any proof he died in kashmir?
Can a Muslim change or turn his or her back to religion?
Jews find God's revelation in the Torah, Muslims in the Quran and Christians find God's revelation, disclosure, epiphany in the life of a first century Jew by the name of Jesus of Nazareth who lived in the land the Romans called Palestine and this is great news for the whole world.
Little correction there: that piece of land was called Judea back then. It was renamed Palestine by Emperor Hadrian after the failed Bar Kokhba revolt in 133 AD.
this book is a personal opinion from the author not historical facts, her discribes Jesus base on the enviroment that he was born in not on his actual actions and this is what made Jesus an outstanding character compare to others, he spoke about the redemption of the whole world and for humanity to come and reconcile with God, specially the Jews since they where the chosen to be Gods people in this world, but they fail to do so . This is a book to discredit Jesus as the messiah or savior more then reveal the historical fact of his life.