quote:

ORIGINAL: kalikshama

The Gospel According to Bill O'Reilly's New Book "Killing Jesus"

In Killing Jesus: A History, Bill O’Reilly and writing partner Martin Dugard bring us their long-awaited “accurate account of not only how Jesus died, but also the way he lived.” This should settle two millennia of Christian debate. Although it lacks suspense (SPOILER ALERT: he dies), it’s a pretty good read and it’s fleshed out with tidbits about the ancient world.

But it should have been called The Gospel of Bill O’Reilly.

Here are some of the reasons why.

...O’Reilly argues that Temple taxes and profits from the moneychangers were back-channeled to Rome. Thus when Jesus overturned the tables of the moneychangers he “interrupted the flow of funds from the Temple to Rome.”

He’s right: the Temple incident led to Jesus’s arrest and execution and the Romans were responsible for killing Jesus. But there is no evidence that the Romans benefited from the financial affairs of the Temple during Jesus’ lifetime. Pilate didn’t get dibs on the lamb shanks some used to pay the priests. Jesus died because he was a rabble-rouser who disturbed the peace and challenged the authorities. Jesus didn’t die for our W2s.

Even if Jesus’s actions had been all about taxes, he died protesting a skeletal taxation system that privileged the rich. Wealthy citizens were exempt from most taxes altogether, non-citizens paid a flat-rate poll tax regardless of income, the property tax was 1 percent, and the money from taxes was used to build roads and fund the military. It's not like the Romans did anything obscene like tend to the poor.

...The most striking part of O’Reilly’s biography is what is left out.

When O’Reilly tells Luke’s story of John the Baptist, he includes the Baptist’s insistence that tax collectors stop overcharging and that soldiers stop extorting the poor, but casually omits the instruction to everyone (the crowds) that “whoever has two coats must share with anyone who has none; and whoever has food must do likewise.”

There’s no mention of the free health care offered by Jesus and his followers or the insistence that the wealthy give away their possessions.

The single most consistent social teaching in the New Testament is that Christians must support the poor, widows, and orphans, but this hardly gets a mention in Killing Jesus.

According to Fox News CEO Roger Ailes, “the first rule of media bias is selection.” Perhaps O’Reilly was squeezed for space.

Read more: http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2013/09/27/the-gospel-according-to-bill-o-reilly-s-new-book-killing-jesus.html

quote:

do you have any proof of this other than a badly translated work of fiction?

quote:

ORIGINAL: kalikshama

...

Read more: http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2013/09/27/the-gospel-according-to-bill-o-reilly-s-new-book-killing-jesus.html

quote:

ORIGINAL: kalikshama

quote:

do you have any proof of this other than a badly translated work of fiction?

To what does your "this" refer?

quote:

Did you have some thoughts, comments or questions on this article?

quote:

ORIGINAL: deathtothepixies

quote:

ORIGINAL: kalikshama

quote:

do you have any proof of this other than a badly translated work of fiction?

To what does your "this" refer?

spoiler alert...
oh hang lets make it a quiz
name a fictional book that has profoundly influenced the whole world for thousands of years?

clue it wasn't by Dan Brown or J K Rowling