Loading ...FOX news guy to Tiger Woods: Ditch Buddhism
flockwoodFox News regular Brit Hume says Jesus can help Tiger Woods bounce back in 2010.
“The extent to which [Woods] can recover, it seems to me, depends on his faith,” said Hume, appearing on “Fox News Sunday.”
Hume continued on in this vein, according to the Washington Post: “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 would be, ‘Tiger, turn to the Christian faith and you can make a total recovery and be a great example to the world.’ ”
The Post’s TV critic is blasting Hume for making the statement — urging him to apologize.
What do you think? Should Hume apologize?
January 5th, 2010 at 7:55 pm
That does seems like an awfully odd comment for a political analyst. If Hume were a regular commentator on religious issues, or better yet a spokesperson for a not-so-tolerant branch of Christianity, then one could accept his position as a typically partisan point of view.
As to whether Hume’s actions were objectionable, my usual guideline is rather simple. Take the same situation but reverse the roles. Suppose that someone scolded a Christian for moral transgressions and advised them to take up a different faith, would you be offended? Imagine a disciple of Louis Farrakhan appearing as a network anchor and telling Sen. David Vitter or former Speaker Newt Gingrinch how Islam could save their depraved and adulterous souls. I don’t see a great difference in principle between that and Hume’s homily.
January 5th, 2010 at 11:35 pm
“Suppose that someone scolded a Christian for moral transgressions and advised them to take up a different faith, would you be offended?”- Jose
Off course not, because there is no force involved for conversion. Freedom of expression is natural norm of civil society, unless it interferes with one’s freedom. I do not see any objectionable with Hume’s advice to Tiger Woods for his spiritual crisis. There are many people like Woods who have been benefited by transformation to Christ, and received inner peace. Christianity is the only faith in all religions, where individual sins are forgiven if a person believe Christ. And that state of mind is necessary for a person who are in this crisis. The shoe bomber Richard Reid an Islam converted, no one blame the person who converted him to Islam. It is people’s choice to accept or reject anyone’s advice. I would only laugh if Farrakhan advice anybody to convert to Islam for inner peace and LOVE.
January 6th, 2010 at 3:37 am
So, who exactly is this Post TV critic, and what are his religious values? Shouldn’t we first settle that question, before we assume his opinion is worth much?
January 6th, 2010 at 6:40 am
I could imagine if Humes was a Buddhist telling Woods to change from Christianity to Buddhism, the reaction would be different. Of course, thats not the case here. In light of constitutional freedom, I don’t see what he said as unconstitutional. Watch other reporters at FOX, MSNBC, CNN, et al, and they’ll all share their religious beliefs and how they think others should be. Personally, I don’t think as a political analyst he should be telling Woods to change his religion. It’s not neccessary, but I’m not Brit Humes.
The issue is whether he should apologize. I am sickened that we promote political correctness over individuality. Its a paradox that those of liberal political conviction promote individual rights and liberties but bend over backwards for political correctness. And this is coming from a man of moderately liberal conviction. Don’t label me as a right-winger.
January 6th, 2010 at 11:46 am
No apology necessary for Hume speaking his mind, but he shouldn’t (and hopefully won’t) complain when others respond by lambasting him for his choice.
And while some clearly and admirably say they wouldn’t be offended under Jose’s scenario of reversed proselytizing, I suspect that many of my fellow Christians would be all up in arms and organizing a boycott by now. You know the type I mean: those who take offense and feel persecuted because a stranger who works as a store clerk says “Happy Holidays” instead of “Merry Christmas” (even though that store clerk stranger hasn’t a clue about the customer’s faith, or lack thereof).
January 6th, 2010 at 12:28 pm
Julian, you say: ” Christianity is the only faith in all religions, where individual sins are forgiven if a person believe Christ.”
Really? There are no rules in Islam or Buddhism or Hinduism about forgiveness? Julian, in all honesty, I don’t know why you make statements like that. EVERY religion has the belief in the forgiveness of sins: If you think about it for a minute, you realize that they either have to allow forgiveness, or they would have no members, because we all sin.
I know to you, Julian, Christianity is the one true faith, and you believe in every jot and tittle in the Bible, but surely you can defend your faith without making untrue statements about the faiths of others.
January 6th, 2010 at 1:13 pm
I thought it was a pretty bigoted thing to say. He obviously doesn’t know a lot about Christianity or Buddhism either one (after all, Ted Haggard is quite publicly Christian but he still had all sorts of sexual issues). I guess he has a right to his opinion but comments like this make Christians generally look like simplistic oafs.
January 6th, 2010 at 1:55 pm
That’s right, Madge, and the other thing it shows is that Christians often seem so ignorant of the beliefs of other religions. I suspect that, if anything, Buddhism promotes forgiveness every bit as much as Christianity does. As the Dalai Lama, who probably knows more about Buddhism than Brit Hume knows about anything, says: “All major religious traditions carry basically the same message, that is love, compassion and forgiveness … the important thing is they should be part of our daily lives.”
Another quote applicable to this situation from the Dalai Lama is: “The very purpose of religion is to control yourself, not to criticise others. Rather, we must criticise ourselves. How much am I doing about my anger? About my attachment, about my hatred, about my pride, my jealousy? These are the things which we must check in daily life.”
January 6th, 2010 at 1:58 pm
Ahh c’mon magdebaby, bigoted? He’s not a bigot. I may not agree with his politics but the man does have a right to his opinion. One cannot “guess” that a man has a right to freedom of speech.
Julian, maybe what you meant is that Christianity is the only religion to offer forgiveness and grace not of works but of faith through God’s mercy. Other religions (as Caleb stated) do offer forgiveness but in a works manner.
January 6th, 2010 at 3:59 pm
I don’t agree with that, KC. Nothing I have read in Buddhist thought suggests that one has to “work” for forgiveness; rather, Buddhists are taught to forgive freely, something that many Christians might want to look into. What Julian really meant is that he believes that salvation comes only through Jesus Christ, and since Christianity is the only religion that propounds salvation through Jesus Christ, ergo, only Christianity offers forgiveness. It’s really a rather low grade argument based entirely on the exclusive nature of Christianity.
If that’s the analysis, then by definition, no religion other than Christianity can ever suffice. However, when one advances a step beyond that, and looks at what Buddhism actually teaches, it’s a bit different analysis. One needs to be careful to differentiate arguments one makes from a belief that Christianity is the One True Faith, and arguments made from actual, you know, logic. The former are easy; the latter are a bit more tough.
January 6th, 2010 at 4:48 pm
I doubt political commentators or anyone else who joins the Fox Network uniformally have a religious conversion to the Fox brand of Christianity at the time of hire. One does what ones employer or sponsor desires. Rupert Murdock is not known for being a supporter of human rights nor is Glen Beck a real buyer of gold ingots. Beck is a shill for one of his sponsors who wants it that way.. Hume is nothing more than another shill Murdock hired off the street to mouth his right wing convictios.
January 6th, 2010 at 5:23 pm
Caleb, not to my knowledge I know any person, Buddha, Ram, Krishna (Hindu gods), etc who claimed to be in this world had ever said like Christ did to a lame man that his sins had been forgiven and commanded him to stand up and walk, and he did by his faith. I also do not know any religious figure like Christ in any other religion who paid price for human sins which we commit everyday conscience or unconscientiously and even forget that these sins could kill our souls, if uncontrolled like HIV AID virus and protected by blood of Christ like antivirus soft wares do for all computers in the world. If you know any religious figure past or present who claimed to forgive sins of others like Christ, please share with us. Please note that there is significance in comparing Jesus with other persons in this world. If you have that kind of eyes, I am sure you would find without difficulties.
I believe nothing is free in our living system, neither materially nor spiritually and Christ paid for my foolishness for spiritual matter and no one else in other religion did. If you do not see your life this way, it is up to you and your freedom is guaranteed by both Holy God as well as constitution of America. I know Caleb, you are man of evidence and documentations, as we discussed earlier but let us be frank, religious is a subject you need more than your eyes can see. You need inner eyes, to receive tangible benefits from every jot and title from the Bible as you stated above. Though God gives everybody eyes, head but how many of us become like Einstein? If you or other different faiths’ people do not see the Bible like Christian see, it is problem with you guys, not to those who find everything truthful and get benefited. But in any case I know I am OK and you are OK too, even though you do not see the Bible as I see. But your statement above “I know to you, Julian, Christianity is the one true faith, and you believe in every jot and title in the Bible,” does sounds to me you feel “I am OK, you are Not.” This is not rational attitude for diversified world.
January 6th, 2010 at 10:54 pm
“Rather, we must criticise ourselves. How much am I doing about my anger? About my attachment, about my hatred, about my pride, my jealousy? These are the things which we must check in daily life.”- Caleb
Caleb, finally I found something I can agree with you. Christ’s commandment to attain God’s grace is also same, we should find chips from our own eyes first before we find from somebody’s eyes. But I believe all religions’ final destination of the race or reward of being a good human is not same, as Christ described in the Bible “Kingdom of Heaven”. Many may think kingdom of heaven is located nowhere but in individual mind. To me that’s not true and because of that we exist with different philosophy of God/gods. Diversified faiths should not bother any person, because God is ultimate judge. It also does not make sense holding the light under a bed, if somebody believes s/he found the truth and shares the light for benefits of others. Therefore freedom of expression is inevitable character. Bottom line truth is that yours believe is yours and mine is mine and we should make the world a better place to live for everybody.
January 7th, 2010 at 6:41 am
Caleb..haha. seriously.. do you know what a works salvation view contains? Christianity offers salvation by grace through faith not of works. No other religion does that. A works salvation means that man gains his salvation through his work towards it. If he tries hard and is good, he will gain salvation when he dies. Its all about merit not of grace. Christianity states that its not about trying hard to reach God because God has already came down to us. Yes, Caleb, our religion is the only one that teachs a salvation through God’s grace through our faith.
January 7th, 2010 at 9:08 am
And Caleb, I don’t mean that Buddhist believe in a force to forgive and love.
January 7th, 2010 at 1:42 pm
Julian, every religion is full of miracle stories; it’s just a question of which ones you believe. I generally doubt all of them, Christian or not.
KC, I think you’re beginning to get the Julian disease, of believing that Christianity is fundamentally different from every other religion, just because it’s the one you believe in.
To the best of my knowledge, the Buddhist idea of forgiveness is not substantively different than that of Christianity; the only difference is in the phraseology. Buddhism certainly doesn’t teach that one can achieve salvation by works, it teaches that one may reach Nirvana by having a proper mindset. How is that different than being saved by one’s faith? Again, the phrasing is different, but the substance is the same: It is one’s belief and mindset, not one’s works, that counts. No doubt you will find a hundred metaphysical reasons that the two are different, but I suspect those reasons come from the special feelings you feel for Christianity, not from logic. It is difficult to step back and evaluate one’s own ideas.
January 7th, 2010 at 9:54 pm
“I generally doubt all of them (religions), Christian or not.”- Caleb
By reading all your posting so far, I understood you are man of little faith, oppose to what Christ taught Christian to have full faith on God and on Him. You believe what your eyes could see such as documents and evidence and overlook important facts, which are unseen. Most of scholars would agree that more than 99% of truths are unseen. You refer anti-Christ writers’ statement in your posting but never from the Bible. I am not surprised about your dilemma on Christianity, because your one leg sets on Christianity, as you claim yourself Christian and the other leg on Buddhism and other mystic religions, such as Hindu, Islam etc. In one stage you believe all religions are true and again you believe none. Your mind is contaminated with different philosophy, including atheism and is confused. As my experience says you are sure to fall unless you protect your Christian faith relying on words of God in the Bible. YOU do not need to seek truth in other religions if your inner eyes are capable of perceiving mighty God thru the Bible.
January 8th, 2010 at 6:48 am
The “Julian disease” ?? Believing Christianity is different gives me a plague that you beleive someone else inhabits? Give me a break.
Christianity is fundamentally different in the justification of sin, the sanctification of man’s faith, and the glory received at death. So, I’m not sure where the epis. church lines up in salvation and grace but if its other than these things, its heresy.
January 8th, 2010 at 8:07 am
As a reformed guy myself, I believe in all those three things (justification, sanctification, and glorification) the same way Calvin did. This does seperate Christianity much from other religions. Calvinism isn’t much accepted here in the south- primarily because the Bible Belt has it own odd ways.
January 8th, 2010 at 2:38 pm
Addressing the statement of Hume’s: Going from Buddhism to Christianity would be like going from lunch to a new pair of shoes…. Buddhism is a more of a philosophy of how live a “good” life, whereas the bible is a rule book on how to get to heaven. Christians think they have the upper hand on knowledge of mysticism, but Buddhism has been around a lot longer. Woods does not follow Buddhism any more than Fallwell follows Christ!
Christian Mysticism is based on the writings of old Jewish guys. It is a ‘borrowed’ religion that has nothing going for it of it’s own. Even the one guy Christians think is their savior died a Jew.
Anyone who believes that Woods would be better off pretending to be a Christian is a fool and a golf fan.
January 8th, 2010 at 3:01 pm
Julian, as usual, you misquote me. What I said was that I tend to doubt miracle stories in all religions, and I do. Every time I disagree with you, you suggest that I am not a real Christian because I don’t subscribe to your view of the accuracy of the Bible.
That is simply not true. As I’ve pointed out again and again here, there are many perfectly orthodox churches which do not see the Bible as either the sole source of inspiration about God, or as in some way inerrant. You seem to believe that your brand of Christianity is the only brand, and that’s not merely presumptuous, it’s factually wrong: Most mainstream Christian denominations don’t believe those things.
KC, you prove my point: Everyone believes that his or her own brand of Christianity is the one true faith. I do appreciate your willingness, though, on short notice, to declare anyone who disagrees with you as heretical.
January 8th, 2010 at 3:41 pm
My point in saying “I’m not sure where the epis. church lines up in salvation and grace but if its other than these things, its heresy” is to say that if churches are not teaching the gospel of Christ, then they are heretical. I doubt there are mainstream churches that are, but I said it as an example. I am not saying your church is simply because they may disagree with the tenets of Calvinism.
We all have our brands like you say. We are not perfect. By no means do I promote such a thing. Calvin, St Paul, Timothy, Spurgeon and so on were not the Christ but I know they were humans all trying to understand and preach the gospel of Christ’s grace and mercy for people and this is why I do the same.
Don’t portray me as a fundementalist looney. I don’t see you as anything but a brother in Christ. I would appreciate to same respect to all brothers & sisters in our merciful God’s name.
January 8th, 2010 at 4:06 pm
Nobody listen to KC! He’s just a right-wing, fundamentalist looney!
January 8th, 2010 at 4:39 pm
Julian,
I don’t think anyone benefits from refusing to investigate other faiths. Truth exists everywhere. With the right mindset (faith) we will find elements of it in the Bible, the Koran, Buddhist texts, and even a John Girsham novel. No written source or person has a monopoly on all truth and every, yes EVERY source, including the Bible, is flawed. If you put your complete trust in anything other than the truth itself (and not an object or person containing SOME truth) you will inevitably fall. I’ve seen it too many times with misguided zealots who thump the Bible or any other such external source.
As for Brit Hume, putting your political biases aside, what he said was his opinion, on an opinion news show. If Dan Rather had said the same, nobody would blink an eye. Dan said some odder stuff in his years. But, because it is coming from a conservative, everybody is jumping up and yelling, “See, see? This proves he’s a right-wing bigot!”
The evidence shows that Buddhism doesn’t appear to be working for Tiger and Brit offered an alternative he thought would work. Buddhism obviously works for others, however. If Brit gave his advise out of genuine concern for Tiger, more power to him. Would I have given Tiger the same advice? Maybe, but in private. Anyway, Christianity works for Brit Hume, so he thought he would pass it on.
How we reach “salvation” is ultimately up to the individual. If Mr. Hume reaches it by taking Elm Street and Tiger reaches it taking Plum Street, it makes no difference. If Mr. Hume says, “Elm Street is the best!,” that’s fine. I’m not going to dismiss him and everything else he says because of it. Dan Rather still said some intelligent stuff, even if he had some wacking-sounding opinions a time or two.
January 8th, 2010 at 6:28 pm
Dan Rather has said some odd things, and he has been roundly criticized for many of them.
If Brit Hume were merely a retired anchorman giving a speech to some church or religious group, or if he offered his advice to Woods in a personal and private communication, that would be a different matter. But this was a political commentary sponsored by a major network and directed to the public. I don’t think anyone here has suggested that what Hume did was illegal or unconstitutional, but it was certainly ill-informed and rude, just as it would be for someone to blame the Christian faith for the sins of who-know-how-many religious hypocrites. (Citations available, if required.)
January 8th, 2010 at 7:48 pm
what a low one cheese… ha
January 8th, 2010 at 9:39 pm
John, you say “If you put your complete trust in anything other than the truth itself (and not an object or person containing SOME truth) you will inevitably fall.” What is this “truth?” and how are you different from folks you call zealots?
I know many people that use the bible for misguided reasons. I also know many democrats that do things I don’t like but I won’t discredit all their policies because there are some loonies in their party.
Truth exists everywhere…okay.. How much exists in different places? I.e., what truth from one place is good and what truth from another is good, and where do we find that information? It seems you are making a confidential statement the same way Christians make their confidential and objective statements. So we are different logically….how???
January 11th, 2010 at 11:19 am
Who bothers with searching for truth when you can find an annotated, King James Version of the truth at your local Barnes & Noble for $19.95?
January 11th, 2010 at 1:08 pm
Even that truth is not complete; modern editions of the KJV leave out the apocrypha.
January 11th, 2010 at 1:38 pm
Somewhere in the world an angel’s head just exploded. I hope you’re happy, Caleb.
January 11th, 2010 at 2:19 pm
Mea culpa, mea maxima culpa . . .
January 12th, 2010 at 1:27 am
Hume should not apologize since he did nothing wrong. I don’t think Tiger CAN convert just because he’s in trouble –it won’t be sincere. Of course, Buddhism offers nothing compared to the resurrected, miracle worker who forgives sins. It WOULD be a powerful testimony if Tiger REALLY converted —as Chuck Colson’s transformation was powerful and started an international prison ministry that has reduced rescidivism among the incarcerated who go through his entire program.
Tiger is a sex addict like Haggard –but it’s true that the power of Christ could transform him. Tiger would seem to be remorseful only because he was caught.That’s not the remorse that leads to true repentance and conversion.
January 12th, 2010 at 8:05 am
You guys are hilarious! Truth is, I don’t know where all the truth is. It is up to the individual, I suppose, to figure out what it is and where to find it. I just want to express the idea of keeping an open mind to where it can be found. I’ve even found a little itty bit of it in the Democratic party, believe it or not!
I only worry about dogmatic statements by Julian and others that “all truth” is encompassed in a perfect Bible. They’re certainly welcome to believe that if they want, but in my opinion, they are only limiting themselves.
What Brit Hume said was probably ill-advised, being in a public forum and such. I admire his convictions though—that he is not afraid to declare his beliefs. Doing so when not directly asked for them could be taken as insensitive and arrogant. But, that is the nature of belief—it can’t be proven to the satisfaction of another and is therefore taken as bigotry or arrogance. It’s always going to be a touchy topic and Mr. Hume might have fared better to have not brought it up in the context he did. We are all human though—I still like Dan Rather, even though I wonder what he’s smoking sometimes.