Reviews of Bill O'Reilly's 'Killing Jesus' flood in

Return To Article
Add a comment
  • cjb Bountiful, UT
    Nov. 6, 2013 12:17 p.m.

    O’Reilly writes, “Jesus chooses Judas as one of his twelve disciples and refers to him openly as a friend. One day that will change.”

    I have always had a hard time believing that Judas an Apostile would acutally betray Jesus given his relationship with him and then throw away the silver he got paid for doing this as stated in the New Testament. A recently discovered book, called the Book of Judas gives a possible and I believe probable answer to this dilemma.

    In this book it states that Jesus approached Judas and explained to him that he needed to be sacrificed for the sins of the world. Jesus asked Judas if he would help play a part in this. He also explained to Judas that if he did he would be sacrificing his reputation and his good name for the Glory of God. Judas agreed to do this and the rest is history.

  • Owl Salt Lake City, UT
    Nov. 5, 2013 12:21 p.m.

    It is still odd when people confuse faith with science. As Stephen Jay Gould, a noted Harvard atheist, concluded - they are separate magisteria. Judging faith by scientific criteria is as misguided at judging science by faith criteria. People expose their bias when the step outside their area of knowledge.

  • terra nova Park City, UT
    Sept. 29, 2013 10:29 p.m.

    If "Killing Christ" makes people talk about or think about Christ, isn't that a good thing?

  • The Scientist Provo, UT
    Sept. 29, 2013 7:30 p.m.

    O'Reilly writing fiction and speculation about fiction... Now there is a "no spin zone" for you!

  • jttheawesome Scranton, PA
    Sept. 28, 2013 8:29 p.m.

    The idea that any history of Jesus could be written, which separates the historical from the Spiritual, seems to be a fool's errand. Indeed, the great majority of information we do have about Jesus the Christ comes from the Bible, especially the four Gospels. Unfortunately, other inane books have been written about the Christ over the centuries, and this one will eventually end up on the scrapheap with the others. All one truly needs to know about Jesus comes from the Scriptures - and, from a personal relationship with Him.

  • happy2bhere clearfield, UT
    Sept. 27, 2013 5:30 p.m.

    As O'Reilly explained and many seem to have forgotten, the book was not intended as any kind of religious story. That's why OReilly never used the word Christ to identify Jesus of Nazareth. There are some people out there who don't believe that there was ever a real person who was the Jesus written about in the Bible. They would say Jesus was as fictional as Bilbo Baggins. The book was meant to be an historical fact based account of the person Jesus as he lived, not an account of him doing miracles and walking on water. The most important thing from what I've heard of the book is that it is an historical fact that the man Jesus did indeed proclaim himself to be God. Many in the world do accept Jesus as a teacher, or even prophet, but don't agree that he is the Messiah. Christians of course do, and that is beyond the intended scope of O'Reillys book.

  • gmlewis Houston, TX
    Sept. 27, 2013 4:20 p.m.

    @Happy Valley Heretic - The Savior encouraged showing mercy to the poor, but never did He discourage them from becoming as self-sufficient as possible. He fed the multitude on at least two occasions during His mortal life, but afterwards He upbraided them for seeking the free food rather than His salvation.

    As for the money changers and the animal vendors, they were not castigated because they were in business; rather, it was because they were operating inside the temple. Jesus didn't oppose Peter and his brothers from owning a fishery business, although He asked them to love Him more than the business. He healed the sick without price, but then told them "Lift up thy bed and walk."

  • Gildas LOGAN, UT
    Sept. 27, 2013 11:39 a.m.

    I like the original books authored by Matthew, Mark, Luke and John. I think it's impossible to improve on them although scholarly works can try and provide accurate background information.

  • ute alumni paradise, UT
    Sept. 27, 2013 11:17 a.m.

    bill acts shocked that his book sold so many copies in the first day, really? he has advertised it daily for six months on his show. the guy thinks he knows everything. he refers to the Savior as a regular guy. That alone tells me I won't be reading '"his".book. In reality billy lets someone else write it, he puts his name on it and takes all the credit.

  • Happy Valley Heretic Orem, UT
    Sept. 27, 2013 10:22 a.m.

    “Simply put, there is nothing here beyond an attempt at agenda-driven drivel produced for the lowest common denominator,” Watts wrote.
    Like Minzesheimer’s review, Watts said the authors don’t present anything new.
    “Further, at no point in their book do they tell the story completely,” he wrote. “They leave out details that might otherwise hurt their credibility in the conservative punditry community.”

    Sounds just like foxes other radio and entertainment. Void of any new info, agenda driven, incomplete quotes and info.

    But I'm sure the religious conservatives will love to read how Jesus told the poor to get a job, and fought for the money changers not against them.

  • Leo Femedlers El Paso, TX
    Sept. 27, 2013 8:08 a.m.

    Jesus the Christ by James E. Talmage is the best non scriptural account of the Savior's pre, mortal, and post life I have read. Elder Talmage's insight is stunning and his eloquence is masterful.

    Although I am a luke warm fan of Bill O'Reilly I won't read his book. The title itself is a turnoff...