I am, of course, very interested in the whole topic (see, for example, my musings on the role of Pontius Pilate ). So, I needed no encouragement to watch the show. Yet, the conclusion of that attack piece was interesting. I found only one of the article's rants plausible -- that the electric conversion of Paul from an oppressor of Christians to an evangelist was given short shrift in the program. Yet, attack pieces, especially on popular culture straying into religion, are not uncommon. What intrigued me was the exhortation to watch the PBS program carefully.
Even the attack piece has its origins in a tolerant culture -- its aim is not to ban the program or to urge people not to watch it. The aim is only to ensure that people keep certain tenets in mind when watching the program. This is a far cry from the fatwah that went out for Salman Rushdie's head. A very far cry indeed. The article merely prods us to consider that faith might be an issue, that rationality might play no part in religious conviction.
The tolerance carries more significance to me, now that Hindu nationalists are in power in India. The "secularists" who previously held sway banned Rushdie's book criticising a minority religion. Will the new rulers seek to eradicate critical appraisals of the majority religion? There have been no tests so far. One can only hope.
