Two more items on Brit Hume appeared since yesterday and are worthy of note. First, Albert Mohler has devoted an entire episode of his radio program to this topic. Perhaps the most helpful part of the conversation is Mohler’s careful explanation of what Buddhism is. It’s not a theistic religion, but a philosophy. Thus, Brit Hume was correct to say that Buddhism does not offer redemption and forgiveness as Christianity does. You can listen to the program here or press the play button below.
‘True tolerance consists in engaging deep disagreements respectfully — through persuasion — not in banning certain categories of argument and belief from public debate.
‘In this controversy, we are presented with two models of discourse. Hume, in an angry sea of loss and tragedy — his son’s death in 1998 — found a life preserver in faith. He offered that life preserver to another drowning man. Whatever your view of Hume’s beliefs, he could have no motive other than concern for Woods himself.
‘The other model has come from critics such as Shales, in a spittle-flinging rage at the mention of religion in public, comparing Hume to “Mary Poppins on the joys of a tidy room, or Ron Popeil on the glories of some amazing potato peeler.” Shales, of course, is engaged in proselytism of his own — for a secular fundamentalism that trivializes and banishes all other faiths. He distributes the sacrament of the sneer.
‘Who in this picture is more intolerant?’