fwiw, I don't quite get the outrage over this.
- Who expected
any cable news host to have some in-depth factual understanding of the historical origins of christianity? I don't. Neither on Fox nor MSNBC, to be honest. RMaddow would probably let their staff write better questions, but it would still, effectively, be a number of talking points. So that the host is just stupidly sticking to her script is basically to be expected in any kind of cable news reality, imo.
- Since when do we get outraged that Fox is innuendo-laden and tendentious?
- The basic question "Why does a Muslim write about Jesus" may seem offensive or w/e, but it's probably the most prevalent question on any watchers mind - so any host not asking that would actually do a disservice for greater understanding.
- His appeal to his 4 degrees "including fluency in biblical greek" (OMIGAWD!! what a wizzard!!) is sort of lol in itself. I guess he wants to establish credentials, but I can't help thinking that esp. vs. a Fox audience, that won't work. Re anyone else, it comes across like an appeal to authority.
So, overall,
in particular since he seemed to have a decent idea of what he was getting into, I think he was quite complicit in the overall head-assplode of the interview.
(I have to admit I clicked it away after four minutes or so)