Key passage:
The extent to which he can recover seems to me depends on his faith. He is said to be a Buddhist. I don't think that faith offers the kind of forgiveness and redemption that is offered by the Christian faith. So, my message to Tiger is, "Tiger, turn to the Christian faith and you can make a total recovery and be a great example to the world."That's just so weird coming from a news commentator. I could understand if he'd put it in PR terms: Tiger, the American people will embrace you once again if you do a big Christian conversion routine. But Hume has phrased it in terms of psychological well-being. That is, he's presented it as sincere advice, the way a truly religious person would promote his own religion. It's very strange to see that on a mainstream TV opinion show, and it is especially off for the way it pits one religion against another.
That said, I wonder which religion provides the best rehabilitation to a person who's indulged in great and transgressive sexual adventures and ruined his family and his reputation. Put aside which religion, if any, is the true one. Let's examine Hume's assertion that Christianity is the psychological solution for Tiger Woods. From what I understand, Buddhism originated as way to deal with suffering in this world. Perhaps all the religions will give you some foothold as you struggle to deal with your personal problems, and whether it brings you peace and happiness depends mostly on you.
So, let's talk about how weird Hume was and which religion works best in the pre-afterlife. And PR. And the strength of our aversion to talking openly about the way a particular religion falls short.
Posts
207 comments:
«Oldest ‹Older 201 – 207 of 207How might Hume understand the word "proselytizing" such that his response was honest?
I consider it proselytising, but lots of Christians, particularly protestants, have this whole hierarchy of different things you do -- like "witnessing" and so on -- to the point that mentioning on a talk show host that you think someone should convert just may not rise to the level of personal involvement and commitment worthy of being called actual "proselytization." I mean, I've seen Christians in full-on missionary mode, and it goes a lot further than that.
My initial reaction to this story was not very thoughtful. I don’t know Hume’s motivations and I shouldn’t (in some smart-alecking way) presume to. After thinking about this for a few days two things strike me. First, I’m very uncomfortable with public proselytizing. It’s the Anglo/protestant in me, I suppose (I’m from the school of “promotion by attraction, not promotion”). The message is fine, in itself, but it’s the venue that I’m not so comfortable with. Had it been part of a larger panel or topic discussion, would have been fine.
I agree with Hume that there’s a spiritual solution to this. Where I break with him is that it needs to be religious, let alone, any particular religion. I am loathe to pit one religion against another or critique anyone’s choice in the matter. I trust Tiger will find his way, if he seeks it out. I believe that each of us has a God, a Higher Power or however one wants to couch it, that we can rely on to relieve us of our insanities, whatever those might be. It’s a personal relationship that does not require organized religion.
Anglo/protestant in me . . .
The Anglican more than the Protestant, I'd think. Catholics and Orthodox have never bothered me about converting -- it's always someone from this or that Protestant group. Of course, I live in America, so the Christians are mostly Protestants anyhow.
The thing is, if there were some Buddhist who got on TV and said that some famous adulterer should convert to Buddhisms, it would set loose a whiny victimization shit storm of biblical proportions from the right wing.
They like to tell us, as Hume did on O'Reilly, how victimized Christians are in this country.
A sure sign they're lost their fricking minds.
William, can I get a DVD of that?
Interesting that so many miss the point.
The recovery Brit Hume was talking about was Tiger recovering his family and respect (among other things) not about making it easier to commit adultery.
What is wrong about talking your beliefs on tv? It is sad to see how human beings are growing distant from their creator and denying Him who came to this earth to save them! Go Hume!! Good job! Keep on sharing your faith that pleases our Lord!
Think about this:
Buddha never claimed to be God. Moses never claimed to be Jehovah. Mohammed never claimed to be Allah. Yet Jesus Christ claimed to be the true and living God. Buddha simply said, "I am a teacher in search of the truth." Jesus said, "I am the Truth." Confucius said, "I never claimed to be holy." Jesus said, "Who convicts me of sin?" Mohammed said, "Unless God throws his cloak of mercy over me, I have no hope." Jesus said, "Unless you believe in me, you will die in your sins." --Unknown
Jesus of Nazareth, without money and arms, conquered more millions than Alexander the Great, Caesar, Mohammed, and Napoleon; without science and learning, he shed more light on things human and divine than all philosophers and scholars combined; without the eloquence of school, he spoke such words of life as were never spoken before or since, and produced effects which lie beyond the reach of orator or poet; without writing a single line, he set more pens in motion, and furnished themes for more sermons, orations, discussions, learned volumes, works of art, and songs of praise than the whole army of great men of ancient and modern times. –Philip Schaff
Post a Comment