哈蟆在「百变耶稣和历史上的耶稣」（https://www.douban.com/group/topic/176998373/）所宣传的《狂热者：拿撒勒人的耶稣的生活和时代》（Zealot: The Life and Times of Jesus of Nazareth）无人相信！
请来看这些负面评价值！！！
单是维基就有一堆非常负面的批评：「Dale Martin, …… writes in The New York Times that …… He faults Aslan for presenting early Christianity as being simply divided into a Hellenistic, Pauline form on the one hand, and a Jewish, Jamesian form on the other. 他指责阿斯兰（Aslan，该书的作者）提出早期基督教的原因是，一方面将其简单地分为希腊化的波琳式，另一方面将其分为犹太的詹姆士式。……that recent scholarship has dismissed Aslans view that it would be implausible that any man like Jesus in his time and place would be unmarried, or could be presented as a "divine messiah".最近的学术研究驳斥了阿斯兰的观点，即认为像耶稣这样的人在他所在的时间和地点将不会结婚，或者被称为“神圣的弥赛亚”，这是令人难以置信的。……
Elizabeth Castelli, the Ann Whitney Olin Professor of Religion at Barnard College and a specialist in biblical studies and early Christianity, writing in The Nation, argued that Aslan largely ignores the findings in textual studies of the New Testament, and relies too heavily on a selection of texts, like Josephus, taking them more or less at face value (which no scholar of the period would do). 阿斯兰在很大程度上忽略了《新约》文本研究的结果，而过分地依赖于约瑟夫斯这样的经文选集，或多或少地将它们视为具有表面价值（这一时期的学者都不会这样做）。 ……
Craig A. Evans, an evangelical New Testament scholar and professor at Acadia Divinity College, writing in Christianity Today, states that Aslan made many basic errors in geography, history and New Testament interpretation. He said it "relies on an outdated and discredited thesis", consistently fails to engage the relevant historical scholarship, and is "rife with questionable assertions阿斯兰在地理，历史和新约解释方面犯了许多基本错误。 他说，这“依靠的是过时和失信的论点”，始终未能参与相关的历史学术研究，并且“充满了可疑的断言”。."[8]
A review in USA Today cited Stephen Prothero, a professor of religion at Boston University, who said Aslans perspective as a Muslim may have influenced his writing as he found the picture of Jesus in Zealot seems more like a failed version of the Prophet Muhammad than the figure depicted in the Bible阿斯兰对穆斯林的看法可能影响了他的著作，因为他发现《狂热者》中耶稣的照片看起来更像是先知穆罕默德的失败版本，而不是圣经中描绘的人物。……
A review in ABC Online by Australian historian John Dickson questioned Aslans expertise in the subject, claiming "Aslan has not contributed a single peer reviewed article", and further said "Aslans grandiose claims and his limited credentials in history is glaring on almost every page. “阿斯兰没有发表过一篇同行评审文章”，并进一步说：“阿斯兰的宏伟主张和他有限的历史资历几乎遍及每一页"[10] ……
〖哈蟆所崇拜的〗Bart D. Ehrman, James A. Gray Distinguished Professor of Religious Studies at the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, 同样批评里扎·阿斯兰（Reza Aslan）缺乏专业知识，[11]评论说，阿斯兰在新约或基督教史上没有任何高级学位，并且他唯一的高级学位是宗教社会学。[11] [12] ……厄尔曼（Ehrman）注意到阿斯兰（Aslan）担任创意写作教授的职位，他评论说这本书写得不错，[11]"[11]」（https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zealot:_The_Life_and_Times_of_Jesus_of_Nazareth）
===================================
《纽约时报》评：「Some of Mr. Aslan’s other claims are just speculations with no supporting evidence, more at home in fiction than in scholarship阿斯兰先生的其他一些说法只是猜测，没有任何佐证，在小说中比较适合学术…… Aslan is not a scholar of ancient Judaism or Christianity. He teaches creative writing. And he is a good writer. 阿斯兰（Aslan）不是古代犹太教或基督教的学者。 他教创意写作。 他是一位好作家。“…… it makes an entertaining read. 它是有趣的读物…….」（https://www.nytimes.com/2013/08/06/books/reza-aslans-zealot-the-life-and-times-of-jesus-of-nazareth.html）
===================================
Biola大学的Gary Manning 说：「However, Zealot is seriously flawed in many ways. There are many factual errors (some of which I will highlight below), but more importantly, Aslan’s approach matches the flawed approach of Jesus Seminar scholars, which is almost guaranteed to produce a skewed picture of Jesus. 但是，《狂热者》在许多方面都存在严重缺陷。 存在许多事实错误（我将在下面重点说明其中的一些错误），但更重要的是，阿斯兰的方法与耶稣研讨会学者〔这也是哈蟆所推荐过的反基督教组织〕的错误方法相匹配，几乎可以保证产生出歪曲的耶稣图画。」（https://www.biola.edu/blogs/good-book-blog/2013/a-response-to-zealot-by-reza-aslan）
NIV
靈修
新聞
貼圖
為教會
檢舉不當內容/回應
