The Real Root of Reza Aslan's Worldview and book, Zealot

This interview of Reza Aslan by Jennifer Danielle Crumpton reveals the real underlying worldview and presuppositions of Reza and his book, Zealot.  Jennifer Crumpton got her M. Div. from Union Theological Seminary, no surprise there, and is ordained in the "Christian Church" (Disciples of Christ) denomination.   Jennifer is a Pastoral Associate of Park Avenue Christian Church in Manhattan, New York.  This is one of the most liberal of all mainline churches; along with the United Church of Christ and affiliated denominations.  (Hard to say which one is the most liberal.)

She also says she is a blogger and minister to young people, Gen-Xers and Millennials, etc. a "Femmevangelical" (her web-site), and most of what she writes seems to be similar to other post-moderns and Emergent/Emerging church thinking.  She writes for the Huffington Post and other liberal leaning blogs.   If you look further at her web-site and videos on You Tube, it is obviously she is against the complimentarian position of women's roles in the Bible and church and family, and very negative against Patriarchal society in the Bible.  Unfortunately, the past sins of some men against women are being imputed to God and the Bible itself. (Nothing new there either.)

The scholars who have criticized Reza Aslan's book, Zealot, have focused on the fact that his theory that Jesus was a revolutionary against Rome is not new, but not many of them talk about the roots of his worldview in the book, and the separation of "the Jesus of history" vs. "the Christ of Faith".

A roundup of significant reviews of Zealot:

John Dickson - this one seems to me to be the most devastating to Aslan.  (per Denny Burk's blog)
seems like Denny Burk's blog is being hacked, or having problems sometimes, so below is the direct link:

John Dickson

Justin Taylor at The Gospel Coalition. 

Darrell Bock.

Craig Evans.  (Per Denny Burk again) 

Larry Hurtado  (by way of Ben Witherington III) 

Calvinist International 

The Economist

The Weekly Standard. 

Warning - this link shows Reza Aslan's frequent cursing, dirty language, and bullying on twitter and media outlets, with anyone whom he doesn't agree with. (on the second page)

Aslan is classic liberalism that has come back with a vengence in our society through the Emerging/Emergent church movement and their spokespeople like Brian McLaren, Rob Bell, and Rachel Held Evans.

It is the same classic Rudolph Bultmann type stuff I heard in the liberal United Methodist Church that I grew up, in the 1960s and 1970s.   But the ministers never admitted it until the Lord saved me in 1977 as a teenager, and then, later, in 79-81, when I went and asked them specific questions, I learned where they were coming from.  

The biggest problem is that in sound bite media and Reza Aslan's interviews (like on PBS programs and the Daily Show and Huffington Post type blog/video interviews, and this one above; is his views are "baptized" in the general idea that "The Jesus of History" is separate from "The Christ of Faith", and that seems to be overall worldview of most liberal and modern scholars today - John Dominic Crossan, Marcus Borg, Bart Ehrman, etc. - they don't allow truth of theology and miracles to be brought into history or historical research. Doubt and skepticism toward the gospels and Bible are the takeaway message in our sound-bite culture.

Most people seeing these things (interviews, media videos and blogs) don't care about Reimarus or S. G. F. Brandon, (Though it is good for thoughtful readers to know about that and that those theories have already been dealt with in earlier times); but what dumbs everything down and the basic message that gets spread, is that Jesus existed and was crucified, but beyond that, we cannot trust anything else, because it is suppossedly out of the realm of the canons of historical research to allow miracles or theology into it.

I am still reading the book Zealot, I have probably read 3/4 of it; but to be honest, it is boring!!  Liberalism is boring to me; and before I cull together specific quotes and specific problems, I thought I would give an overview of the basic worldview first.

See also my earlier post about "Understanding John Dominic Crossan". 

Understanding John Dominic Crossan

I am still working through Reza Aslan's book, Zealot: The Life and Times of Jesus of Nazareth.  When I finish it, I hope to write some blog articles and comments on the substance of the book.   The ghosts of classic liberals like Reimarus, Adolph Von Harnack, Rudolph Bultmann, F. C. Bauer, Walter Bauer and modern "Jesus Seminar" type liberals like John Dominic Crossan, Marcus Borg, the late Robert Funk, Raymond Brown, and John P. Meier,  James Tabor, and Geza Vermes are all through his book; and the end-notes/works cited/bibliography are full of this stuff. In that sense, Aslan's book is nothing new; and will probably be a "flash in the pan". But many younger people, bloggers, skeptics, and atheists today are reading this book.   It it interesting for me, because Aslan has become a famous western Iranian, and just knowing his material is helpful in my ministry with Iranians.  Therefore, I wanted to read Zealot, as I had also already started his other book, No god but God: The Origins, Evolution, and Future of Islam.  I got it in English and Farsi to improve my language skills.

A lot of Aslan's experiences and thinking are typical for westernized Iranians that fled the Iranian Islamic Revolution, lead by the Ayatollah Khomeini in 1979.  Aslan was 7 when his family fled the Iranian Revolution; and he says that his family was very nominal Muslims and enthusiastic atheists.  He says his mom prayed when no one was looking, and maybe a Qur'an could be found in a drawer hidden away; and for the most part, his father tried really hard to scrub Islam and religion from his family.  Many Iranians go that route when they flee Iran and come to the west.  I have meet many Iranians like this here in the USA.

In order to get a grasp on what Aslan really means, one needs to understand John Dominic Crossan.

Dr. White debated Dr. Crossan on the Bible - this one is worth ordering here. Debate Title: "Is the Bible True?"  I love Dr. White's comment he has made several times over the years about J. D. Crossan, "He is the nicest heretic you will ever meet."  (something like that)


Dr. White and James Renihan also debated John Dominic Crossan and Marcus Borg:






William Lane Craig on John Dominic Crossan:  (this is a very good and I think WLC nailed this.  Similar to J. Greshem Machen calling out Liberalism as another religion and not Christian at all.) 





The book that WLC mentions, Will the Real Jesus Please Stand Up?  (A Debate between John Dominic Crossan and William Lane Craig; edited by Paul Copan)  I read this years ago; and it was good to pull it out and go through some of it again.


Here is a very interesting doctoral dissertation for Southern Seminary by Tawa J. Anderson on John Dominic Crossan's theology. I found this very helpful in getting a better overall handle on understanding John Dominic Crossan.  (the first couple of pages are blank, so scroll down to start reading it.)

Comparing Mormonism and theological Liberalism in the Two main candidates Faiths

1.  An excellent summary of the bottom line of the Mormon religion.  It is not Christian, as it at its core denies monotheism and God as the eternal uncaused Creator of all things.

"The Real Issue with Mormonism:  God is an exalted man" by James White
http://americanvision.org/6549/the-real-issue-with-mormonism-god-is-an-exalted-man/

Here is just one excerpt, I encourage everyone to read Dr. White's article and also get his two books on Mormonism, which are mentioned and highlighted in this article at American Vision.

"We will look more at the evidence supporting this view of Mormonism below, but it must first be insisted that on any meaningful analysis of religious faith, Mormonism is far, far removed from Christianity. In fact, if one takes as one’s starting point the belief of a religion relating to God’s nature and God’s relationship to the universe, Mormonism is about as far removed on the theological spectrum from Christianity as any religion could be. Whether a religious movement believes in monotheism or polytheism is the first indicator of its nature and categorization, and on this point, Joseph Smith separated his followers for all time from Christianity when he made the statement, quoted above, “We have imagined and supposed that God was God from all eternity. I will refute that idea, and take away the veil, so that you may see.” In refuting this idea, Smith made it possible for me accurately and forthrightly to say today: Islamic theology of Allah is significantly closer to Christianity in its affirmation of God’s uniqueness, creatorship, and eternality, than Mormonism ever could be. This is a fact known to anyone who takes seriously the teachings of the General Authorities of the LDS Church."  Dr. James White

2.  President Obama's Faith - the article here by Denny Burk, linking to an interview that a journalist did with then Senator Barak Obama, shows he doesn't believe in the Bible or the doctrines that would make his "faith" true faith.  Also, he supports radical abortion and infanticide, same sex marriage, and refuses to call Islamic terrorism what it is.  And the Benghazi/Lybia scandal will eventually become worse than the Watergate/Nixon scandal, I think, given enough time.  Unfortunately, the main stream media is not reporting on this very much, and they and Obama's team seem to be trying to avoid it until after the election.  Among many other bad economic and social and defense policies . . .

"President Obama's Christianity" - By Denny Burk
http://www.dennyburk.com/president-obamas-christianity/

When Denny uses the term "liberal Christian" to describe President Obama, he means a theological liberal, which means Obama is not a Christian at all, since theological liberalism denies all the essentials of doctrine that make faith in Christ true faith in the real Christ.  J. Greshem Machen wrote a famous book, Christianity and Liberalism, in 1923, where he shows that theological liberalism using Christian words in main line churches, is not Christianity at all.

Denny Burk February 27, 2012 at 6:14 pm #

When I use the term “liberal Christian,” I mean to denote a theological liberal, which is not a synonym for political liberal. A person can have politically liberal views and still have conservative theological beliefs.

Excerpt: 

In short, though candidate Obama professes to be a Christian, his beliefs are that of a theological liberal. Here’s a summary with some quotes:

• He believes that “there are many paths to the same place,” and he doesn’t believe that God would “consign four-fifths of the world to hell” for not believing the gospel.

• When asked about his belief in the afterlife, he says he doesn’t know if there is one.

• Obama defines “sin” as “being out of alignment with my values.”

• Obama says that one need not embrace “Jesus Christ as their personal Lord and savior” to avoid judgment.

• When asked “Who’s Jesus to you,” what Obama didn’t say is as important as what he did say. He confesses Jesus to be a “historical figure” and “wonderful teacher” but says nothing about Jesus being a Savior, Messiah, or Son of God.

• He confesses that he doesn’t necessarily subscribe to his own church’s “set of doctrines.”