The Muslim Jesus: a big row
Better watch this. ITV's programme tonight on the Muslim idea of Jesus has already caused flak - and none more violent than the splendidly splenetic Christian blog by "Archbishop Cranmer". He says that the programme "is both blasphemous and offensive to Christians the length and breadth of the country, but as long as it’s not blasphemous for Muslims, everything’s alright".
Views welcome here.
Spendidly splenetic?
Not without just cause, Ms Purves, not without just cause.
As His Grace explains, he is mildly irritated by the perpetual fawning deference displayed towards Islam in the UK, by both the media and by politicians, in contrast to the constantly eroding disrespect shown toward Christianity.
If production companies and TV broadcasters were truly impartial and genuinely investigative on such matters, there would be a documentary on the alternative view to the hagiographical Islamic account of the life of Mohammed.
Of course, no-one dare make such a programme because they fear either for their lives, or, as Channel 4 discovered, being investigated by the police and the CPS for incitement.
Posted by: Cranmer | 19 Aug 2007 15:41:05
Well, Blasphemy is a victimless crime!
Posted by: dan | 20 Aug 2007 13:27:12
The program can be described as 'dodgy' at best when it trots out Islamic apologist Karen Armstrong as a 'religious scholar'. That would be like having a catholic priest on a program attacking Islam as a 'religious scholar'.
Posted by: gabe | 20 Aug 2007 13:29:13
tee-hee, good uppercut Gabe!!
Posted by: Ian | 20 Aug 2007 23:25:14
Quite. The lack of reciprocity annoy me. Islam is allowed to run riot in this country, and anything which causes offence to its followers is promptly outlawed. The media make programmes like this giving the Islamic side of the argument, but you can bet your bottom dollar that no refutation will ever be screened for fear of muftis from Malaya shrieking about beheading.
Posted by: Martin | 22 Aug 2007 17:12:35
I like it - hear hear!
"the biblical view of Mohammed, which would have to assert that he was not merely not the last prophet; he was not a prophet at all. Indeed, he manifests all the attributes of what the Bible terms a false prophet and an antichrist:
Who is the liar but he that denieth that Jesus is the Christ? He is antichrist that denieth the Father and the Son (1Jn 2:22)."
Posted by: Martin | 22 Aug 2007 17:17:34