Mar 8, 2011
neil

Why does the BBC think it’s time to give Christianity a good kicking (again!)

The article in today’s Daily Telegraph had a sad ring of familiarity to it.  The opening sentence begins ‘The BBC’s new face of religion is an atheist who claims that God had a wife and Eve was “unfairly maligned” by sexist scholars.’ And it goes on to explain that the BBC have decided to invest your licence fee and mine in a primetime BBC Two series, The Bible’s Buried Secrets, which will set forth controversial and provocative views on the text of the Bible as interpreted by an atheist scholar at Exeter University.  No doubt this will all be out in time for Easter.

The head of BBC’s religious output is Aaqil Ahmed. So today’s headlines got me wondering when the BBC’s series attacking all the other world religions is likely to be commissioned. I thought I’d draft Mr Ahmed a letter to find out and I thought I’d share it with you.

Dear Mr Ahmed

I note with interest that the BBC has commissioned another series of programmes designed to disparage orthodox Christianity, The Bible’s Buried Secrets. No doubt in pursuing your agenda of equality and diversity you have also begun prelimenary work on spending my licence fee on programmes designed not just to ridicule the faith of Christians but Muslims, Buddhists and Hindus too.  When, for example, can we expect to find The Kuran’s Buried Secrets on our TV screens? There are a number of Islamic scholars who are themselves either liberal Muslims or atheists whose unorthodox views would be as interesting to hear as that of Dr Stavrakopoulou.

If, because of the time you’ve had to spend considering how to offend Christians, you haven’t quite got round to thinking how best to insult other people of faith maybe I can suggest one or two avenues that you could explore.  For liberal scholars who have done a fair bit of work deconstructing Islam how about commissioning Ibn Warraq  to make a series based on his scholarly books such as The Origins of the Koran and The quest for the historical Mohammed. No doubt his views broadcast by the BBC will help boost ratings and make a few newspaper headlines. Or you could turn to Christopher Luxenberg and his ground-breaking ideas that the text of the Kuran is based on pre-existing Christian Aramaic texts.  Syro-Aramaic Reading of the Koran: A Contribution to the Decoding of the Language of the Koran is the work to consult for more on that line of thinking.

I look forward to hearing back from you on how work is progressing on these series but I won’t be holding my breath.

Yours not very sincerely…

4 Comments

  • Funny, I refferred to this book (below) cited here in this article preparing for an essay I did on the portaryal of Christian belief and practice studying under Dr Anthony Mc Roy -

    Syro-Aramaic Reading of the Koran: A Contribution to the Decoding of the Language of the Koran is

    Yep, that would raise the temperature alright if that was on prime time telly – he makes an interesting point though …..

    – that the SyroAramaic script serves as a “cursive” for Arabic script. He cites Alfons Mingana linguistic analysis of the Qur’an that around 70% of the Qu’ranic language has Syriac roots (Syro-Aramaic). Christoph Luxenberg draws the reader’s attention to the fact that the Qur’an has been incredibly difficult to understand. He estimates that despite considerable scholastic
    effort around a quarter of the Qur’an is still considered “unexplained”. He suggests that this
    is due to Syro-Aramaic linguistic roots of the Qur’an not having been appreciated enough
    and that the key to greater understanding of the Qur’an comes from grasping this point.

    The bottom line is that the Qur’an’s Arabic may simply be a rehashed SyroAramaic -

  • I liked this. Any response?

  • I believe the BBC’s approach to religious programming, especially in the case of Christianity, is that the corporation may be seen to humour or tolerate Christianity; but never to endorse it. I can’t actually remember any programmes which have presented an actual argument for faith, even in the context of a reasoned debate. On the opposite side of the fence, it is apparently perfectly acceptable to commission one-sided programmes which ridicule or attack the basis for Judeo-Christianity.

    Sounds fair.

Leave a comment

Facebook Twitter RSS Feed