Brit Hume on Buddhism, Forgiveness & Redemption
Jan.04, 2010 by
in
General
On Fox News Sunday, Brit Hume discussed Tiger Woods’ recent difficulties, along with a brief mention of the golfer’s Buddhist faith. But Hume went on to say, “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…turn to the Christian faith and you can make a total recovery and be a great example to the world.”
January 4th, 2010 at 11:33 am
I commend Brit for calling out Tiger’s ultimate problem as being one an idol will never solve… That said, he refers to “the Christian faith” instead of Jesus. I’m probably being too cynical here, but that phrase just seems so broad these days. Faith and redemption don’t come from “our faith”, they come from the work of the one in whom we trust. Splitting hairs?
Anyway, it’s good to see someone call a spade a spade.
January 4th, 2010 at 11:39 am
The worst part was, if you listen to the whole bit, he said it in a theology of glory type of frame. He was talking about subjective forgiveness and redeption, not objective.
January 4th, 2010 at 2:06 pm
Oh – come ON, gentlemen! So he didn’t recite the Heidelberg Catechism in his statement. Please. We should be thankful for this uncommon prop from a news commentator like Hume and commend him sticking his neck out there (thanks, Mark T.).
You’re right. It probably isn’t genuine and there’s probably no reason that this was genuine work of grace. If there’s anyway God would get glory for this statement, it CERTAINLY would be through some weak and imperfect statement like Humes. (Talk about a theology of glory?)
Our kind of *cynicism* about this makes Israel’s grumbling years in the wilderness look like a glory march! Hume, for all his “could-have-done-better’s” had some guts for the faith and went for it. The pessimists whine about him. There’s honor for him in my book, and think God’s. Thank God for Britt Hume.
January 4th, 2010 at 5:13 pm
I think we have to understand that they weren’t exactly having an academic roundtable discussion there. Each person has about 5 seconds to say something before commercial breaks.
When he said the “Christian faith”, instead of Jesus, I think he used that phrase because it was coming in distinction of the “Buddhist” faith that was mentioned previously. Perhaps he wasn’t a scientist with his wording, but I dont think theres a need to read into that an overarching pluralism and Christlessness of society today..
It would be hard to have a lot of confidence in saying that Hume had a theology of glory motivating his statement. Horton once said about testimonies, “if you want to look at my life, watch me when I fall and see who I turn to.” I think that can be seen in this statement for Tiger.
January 5th, 2010 at 8:33 am
I don’t know if anybody happend to catch the O’Reilly factor on monday night, but Bill O’Reilly had Brit on ,and Bill asked about his comments with regard to Mr. Woods, and Mr. Hume actually specified more clearly that it was Jesus Christ only who offers forgiveness and everlasting peace to one’s soul. So I to commend Mr. Brit Hume for his unwavering stance to turn to the Christian faith God Bless Brit Hume. SOLO DEL GLORIA!!!
January 5th, 2010 at 12:30 pm
Not one single person is left out in this business of “changing people’s minds” once this definition is applied:
>>So how does Merriam-Webster define the word [proselytize]? Let’s see: “to induce someone to convert to one’s faith” or “to recruit someone to join one’s party, institution, or cause.”<<
This is a classic case of “some are more equal than others.” –The implication is that Hume was wrong to offer his opinion when asked since it’s considered proselytizing, but it’s o.k. for other to proselytize Hume that he should not proselytize? Of course, O’Reilly’s argument against Hume’s so-called “proselytizing” is self-defeating.
“We have to get the other person to the level of maturity where they see that they need to apply the very same methods that they must use to survive in the world to avoid being run over by a bus when it comes to religious truth.” — Dr. John Warwick Montgomery, “Testing Truth Claims of Christianity” on Issues Etc.
http://www.politico.com/blogs/michaelcalderone/0110/Hume_stands_by_Christianity_remarks.htmlSee More
January 5th, 2010 at 4:12 pm
I posted my thoughts on a couple blog posts:
http://endued.wordpress.com/2010/01/05/keith-olbermann-and-dan-savages-response-to-brit-hume-my-appeal-to-olbermann-and-savage-to-embrace-the-gospel/
http://endued.wordpress.com/2010/01/05/brit-hume-says-that-tiger-woods-needs-redemption-should-turn-to-christianity/
http://endued.wordpress.com/2010/01/05/brit-hume-stands-by-his-words/
January 6th, 2010 at 7:44 am
Forgive me for not applauding, but I think that this is a prime example of what people like Ken Myers, Neil Postman, Marshall McLuhan, Jean Baudrillard, etc., see as form contradicting content. I like the words that came out of Brit Hume’s mouth, but because of his identity as a Fox News political neoconservative, many will not be able to hear the gospel. I dare say that this contradiction would only be intensified by a more blatant gospel presentation by Brit Hume on the Bill O’Reilly show.
There are sensibilities inherent in the technological form of the television “news” show and of the political position of neoconservatism that are simply incompatible with the gospel.
January 6th, 2010 at 7:50 am
The only unfortunate thing about this is that Brit Hume is a Fox News commentator. This means that while just about every conservative Christian might have heard the comment, Tiger most likely never heard it. It’s all good to share your faith, and I’m happy for him (he did the right thing), but I wonder if it will work. Essentially, this is the old-school shotgun effect of evangelism. What Tiger needs is someone close to him to show him faith. I hope he gets that.
January 6th, 2010 at 4:14 pm
I agree with James that Britt Hume is to be commended for his bravery and faithfulness. For someone in his position — network newscaster, journalist, inside the Beltway favorite — to commend Christ in any formulation cost him dearly, and more than it would cost any of us. When our default position is to criticize his formulation or fault him for theological imprecision, we evidence a serious immaturity and sinful arrogance. How many times have any of us publicly witnessed for Christ in front of an audience of 54 million people at great personal cost?
January 8th, 2010 at 6:25 pm
Come on, please, he was not attempting a theological discourse or making his Reformed bones…the mere fact that he made the statement – and knew that Christianity was about forgiveness, not just ethics – should be cause for celebration.
January 9th, 2010 at 7:49 am
Chris, your leftist politics are showing in that bon mot. The Gospel is powerful enough to save even neoconservatives, and the Gospel is powerful enough to save even when declared out of the mouth of a conservative Fox News journalist.
January 10th, 2010 at 10:35 pm
Please, when was the last time one of you detracters heared anyone say anything possitive about christianty.We are under the bus before any other religion that go for islam. As for HUME you expect R.C. SPROUL I belive a word of thanks is in order and not so self rightous I like that “SOLO DEL GLORIA”
January 11th, 2010 at 1:52 pm
I am delighted that Mr. Hume took a chance and then further reiterated that Christ and that name only provides redemption. I understand those who ‘fear’ that the association with news, conservativism, etc., might negatively impact the reception. But I must say: Mr. Hume may have sacrificed much to make his statement. Folks will hear about it and some will openly and vehenmently mock Mr. Hume and the Faith. But : God’s word does not go out void and always accomplishes His purposes. Praise God for any opportunity to tell of Christ’s work and sacrifice and the very real human need of forgiveness and cleansing. Let us pray for Tiger’s salvation and more bold and appropriate witness for Christ!
January 11th, 2010 at 7:54 pm
Several months ago when Brit Hume was about to retire I read a posting on a reformed list that was written by someone that knew Brit Hume. He had said on Fox News that after retiring he was going to concentrate on 3 G’s. God Golf and Grandchildren. The posting said that he was very interested in learning about reformed theology. I was glad to hear that. Most of the people on Fox are Catholic.
January 17th, 2010 at 10:45 am
“What then? Only that in every way, whether in pretense or in truth, Christ is proclaimed, and in that I rejoice.” – Philippians 1:18
It’s easy to be a critic. Surely Paul could’ve pointed out a million things that weren’t right about the people who were preaching the gospel out of ill motives. But he refrains. Instead, he rejoices. Why? Because Christ is proclaimed.
Brit proclaimed Christ, though imperfectly. We should follow his example and do the same.