It's denigrating to suggest someone would benefit from a conversion?
Sounds like they are reaching.
"Blessed are the poor in spirit..."
Posted on 01/04/2010 11:04:04 PM PST by bogusname
During the 3PM ET hour of live coverage on MSNBC, anchor David Shuster claimed that Fox News political analyst Brit Hume "denigrated Christianity" when suggesting that scandal-ridden golfer Tiger Woods convert to the faith.
Shuster made the comments while discussing the issue with MSNBC political analyst Pat Buchanan, asking: "Doesn’t it also denigrate Christianity when you do that on a Sunday political talk show? This isn’t church, this isn’t some sort of holy setting, this is a political talk show....Doesn’t that minimize the significance of Christianity, when you bring a discussion of Christianity into a conversation about politics?"
Buchanan replied: "He’s not denigrating Christianity....A lot of us feel that there ought to be more discussion of religion in politics and religious beliefs and what’s moral and right and wrong."
(Excerpt) Read more at newsbusters.org ...
MSNBC’s Shuster: Brit Hume ‘Denigrated’ ChristianityShuster should keep his pie hole shut.
Shuster has a penchant for saying STOO-PID™ things ON AIR and has previously been suspended by MSNBC. And if you get suspended at that place, you know you really went overboard.
(1) As a child, he was part of the Zionist Youth Leadership Training movement Young Judaea.
(2) iirc, Brit Hume was Managing Editor of the FoxNews DC Bureau.
Thanks for the ping!
Brit stated his opinion and in true Roman fashion the Media is Crucifying him for it....
I'm with Hume.
Hume explained last night that Buddhism is not a religion that deals with redemption and forgiveness but that Christianity majors on both of those, and that Tiger's life falling apart after the pain he's caused to those close to him is a situation that cries out for redemption.
Hume went on to mention how odd the firestorm that gets lit when one mentions Jesus.
You prove him right.
As far as I'm concerned, Hume showed great courage and was right on the money. And balanced. No craziness, no fanaticism, just pure calm balance. I was proud of him.
AMEN, Brother!!!!
Amen !
I was very proud of Britt not backing down in the interview last night..
We should have the freedom to say the name of Christ without apology !!!
Buddhism, according to Hume, is not a religion that deals with redemption and forgiveness but Christianity majors on both of those, and Tiger’s life falling apart after the pain he’s caused to those close to him is a situation that cries out for redemption. Hume appears to be rather presumptuous to assume that Tiger, public posturing aside, is crying out for redemption, however. Hume doesn’t know Tiger Woods, doesn’t have a personal relationship with him; how can he then recommend a personal relationship with Jesus as the cure for whatever it is that seems to be ailing Tiger? A firestorm often gets lit when someone famous and powerful mentions Jesus, because, through history, many literal fires were lit by the powerful, invoking Jesus, at the feet of those who were branded heretics or blasphemers or Jew-lovers and tied upright to stakes. Hume may mean well, as you probably do, xzins, but the famous or powerful pushing a Savior to strangers from the television studio usually does more harm than good.
It's denigrating to suggest someone would benefit from a conversion?
Sounds like they are reaching.
"Blessed are the poor in spirit..."
I was so proud of Brit. Go guy, go.
God’ Word never returns to us void. Someone heard it and I’m willing to bet people got saved because of it.
How are you feeling, Mary?
It is not presumptuous of Christians, whose mission was well-defined in Matthew 28, to bring up Jesus as the solution to someone's need. It is simply doing what they've been directed to do. Testifying to Jesus also glorifies God which is the chief end of humanity.
Hume doesn’t know Tiger Woods, doesn’t have a personal relationship with him; how can he then recommend a personal relationship with Jesus as the cure for whatever it is that seems to be ailing Tiger?
The same way that I can recommend anti-biotics for what ails a person sick with a biotic-based illness. I've been there and it works. Hume has been there, and it works.
A firestorm often gets lit when someone famous and powerful mentions Jesus, because, through history, many literal fires were lit by the powerful, invoking Jesus, at the feet of those who were branded heretics or blasphemers or Jew-lovers and tied upright to stakes.
That's a bit of a strawman argument. Because some have abused our American independence, then we should stop protecting it, right? Because some have abused Christianity does not make Christ wrong. On the contrary, it underscores how right He is.
Hume may mean well, as you probably do, xzins, but the famous or powerful pushing a Savior to strangers from the television studio usually does more harm than good.
The television is simply today's form of mass media. In the past it was the printing press. Therefore, I assume you'd be among those in favor of forbidding the Bible to be printed and given to the common people? Of course you wouldn't be.
My recommendation would be that we allow the religious voice to be heard as well. The truth is that Hume is the first who's probed this line of inquiry: What's broken inside Tiger Woods (or any person) that they'd hurt those so severely who they purportedly love.
The Bible's answer is that it is an inherited sinful nature that can only be forgiven by a new birth from above through faith in Christ Jesus by the power of God's grace.
Let me recommend Jesus to you, as well as to Tiger Woods.
“The television is simply today’s form of mass media. In the past it was the printing press. Therefore, I assume you’d be among those in favor of forbidding the Bible to be printed and given to the common people? Of course you wouldn’t be.”
And what was the mass media of Jesus’ time? Most common people could neither read nor write, and very few could afford to own and store papyrii or parchment scrolls. Did Jesus ever take himself to Rome and gather tens and tens of thousands? Did Jesus ever make big money-drive miracle shows, like that idiot Rick Warren with this year’s “$900,000 before New Year’s Day or we’re belly up!”? As Ray Stevens has asked, did Jesus wear a Rolex on his television show? Or did he often request silent appreciation? Was Jesus afraid of his message being corrupted and misinterpreted? Was he the kind of guy who’d sometimes ask people he had healed to tell no one who had done the healing? If Jesus wants his messages on television, he’ll get ‘em there, I guess, but he’ll never get me to smile into the camera like a salesman and be his on-air pitchman. It’s not me, not my style, and not his, in my opinion.
Your question is: “Was Jesus in it for the money?” The answer is no. However, the Bible indicates that large sums (for that time) passed through their movement. (Patronage by some wealthy women, the Judas pilfering problem, the Barnabas-type gifts)
You should also note that fishermen like Peter and John were literate men. The age was more literate than many have been led to believe. After all, they were people of the Book, and Jewish males did read from the Torah in synagogue.
It is probably a mistake to assume that all media Christians are charlatans. It’s also short-sighted not to recognize that the media is enormously expensive.
All that Jesus did was according to God’s plan for Jesus’ unfolding mission. One must not lose sight of that. As Jesus said, “Not my will, but thine be done.”
I’m weak because of heart issues but o/w okay.
My question is not: “Was Jesus in it for the money?” My question is, should network newsman Brit Hume have taken advantage of his network soapbox to counsel Tiger Woods? And my answer is, no, he should not have.
John was well-connected; in fact, he was personally known by the High Priest. The same would go for his brother Jacob (James).
Peter's family home is just spitting distance from the Capernaum synagogue. This again is an indicator of wealth. In fact, his father may have owned the local fishing fleet.
Paul's family was downright rich and connected. It was no small thing to be apprenticed to Rabban Gameliel, Roman citizenship was expensive, and he doesn't bat an eye at being asked to pony up for fifteen animal sacrifices all at once (in Acts 21, the necessary expense for four men plus himself to come out from under their Nazrite vows). His seeming poverty on the road had more to do with not having access to an ATM than anything else.
Matthew was a tax-collector, a position that came with considerable income, though not prestige. He's also highly educated in book Greek and Hebrew, to judge by his Gospel account.
In addition, many of the women were wealthy enough to support the movement.
Btw, carpentry was not exactly low-end work in those days. A skilled craftsman made a good living.
Shalom,
Amen, pastor.
The Bible's answer is that it is an inherited sinful nature that can only be forgiven by a new birth from above through faith in Christ Jesus by the power of God's grace.
Let me recommend Jesus to you, as well as to Tiger Woods.
Thank you so very much for your witness, dear brother in Christ!
What a great post!! Very well done my friend! Thanks!
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.