Posted on 04/12/2010 9:44:33 AM PDT by Dawebman
When Tiger Woods badly missed a shot Sunday during his Career Revival Tour at The Masters, CBS microphones clearly recorded him cursing the name of "Jesus Christ."
I thought Tiger was a Buddhist?
Asked about two strings that Tiger wears near his watch, "It's Buddhist. It's for protection and strength and I certainly need that," he told the Golf Channel's Kelly Tilghman. He said he began wearing the Buddhist bracelet before he went into therapy treatment and said he will "absolutely" be wearing it at the Masters and forever.
In fact, Tiger attributes straying from Buddhism for losing control in his life: During an interview with "Faith & Reason" dated March 23, 2010, Tiger said, "I quit meditating, I quit being a Buddhist and my life changed upside down."
If Tiger is indeed still a Buddhist, why is he cursing the name of Jesus Christ?"
Shouldn't he have beeen cursing Buddha instead?"
So how's that "protection and strength" thing working out for you, Tiger?
My husband says in one way it's a victory for Christ that even idiot Buddhists use the name of Jesus as the universal curse word. The calendar is dated world-wide from His birth and His name is invoked as the preeminent sounding-board.
Whether Buddhists understand it or not, the world was made by Christ, for Christ and through Christ. He is in charge; not Woods. God willing, one day Woods will know that. Until then, he's just a snarky kid with an attitude, few friends and one marketable skill.
Yep.
“If Tiger is indeed still a Buddhist, why is he cursing the name of Jesus Christ?”
Because he is a sinner....
Barack Obama is no Christian and the media continues to cover for him. Nothing about the man says he sees Jesus Christ as his personal savior.
He’s as dishonest on matters of faith as he is on matters of Marxism.
Still so what. I considered the source a looser of a man and Im tired of poor old Tiger Plus my wife would beat the crap out of you
Jesus after hitting a bad shot...”Tiger Woods, YOU SUCK.”
It was because of my father that from the ages of seven to fifteen, I thought that my name was ‘Jesus Christ’ and my brother, Russell, thought that his name was ‘Dammit’. “Dammit, will you stop all that noise?” And, “Jesus Christ, sit down!” One day, I’m out playing in the rain, and my father yelled, “Dammit will you get back in here!” I said, “Dad, I’m Jesus Christ!”
- Bill Cosby
Counter-question: If a buddhist uses the name of Christ in vain, is it a curse to the utterer?
BTTT
I was there once.
His problem is his problem.
He was never elected to office and no tax dollars go to his career.
His problems are between him and his wife and no one else.
Pursuing issues like this make us look foolish and mean-spirited.
If he were a Senator or Congressman or governor, then I would be concerned, as in the case of Sanford of South Carolina, or Spitzer of New York.
The man has a problem. He is sick. Leave him alone to play golf, try to repair his marriage, and get rid of his addictions.
“Oh for the love of Cthulhu......”
Iä! Shub-Niggurath! The Black Goat of the WOODS with a Thousand Young!
Freegards
Remember,he’s a Bootyist,not a Buddhist.
Why does anyone use “Jesus Christ” as an expletive? I don’t believe that one’s religious affiliation makes one bit of difference. I mean, is the author really suggesting that it’s better for christians to use their god’s name in vain than for someone else to use it that way? lol
“Atheists routinely invoke the names God and Jesus when they are outraged.”
Yes, the truth comes out. I’ve never heard anyone using any other “god”’s name like that.
“Counter-question: If a buddhist uses the name of Christ in vain, is it a curse to the utterer?”
It’s a sin to the utterer; the third commandment is broken.
The 3rd Buddhist or Christian commandment - which is the point of the question to begin with...
The point of my answer is that there is only one God. If you take His name in vain, you have broken the 3rd commandment. Whether you admit it or not.
I understand your point of view, and I personally agree with it.
But, the fact that it breaks a christian commandment does not make it a sin from another religion’s point of view.
Oh, Tiger may not “feel” like he’s sinning. Obviously he’s pretty hard-hearted to that sort of thing!
But whether he “feels” good or “feels” bad is irrelevant, of course. It is God’s opinion of the matter that counts.
I’ll try one more time to convey my meaning, which I fear is not coming across properly.
You and I (and the Pope, for that matter) can recognize the utterance as a christian sin. But from a theological (as opposed to dogmatic) point of view, “sin” is defined differently by different faiths. Your absolute assertion that it is a sin is dogmatic - you adhere to your definition of sin, no matter the context.
The assertion, no matter that I agree with it, is insufficient to address the theological debate I was proposing. Because this debate must be predicated on balancing one religion’s tenets against another’s, the dogmatic assertion of primacy of christianity is unsupportable - on an academic level.
The debate has nothing to do with feelings - it has to do with the definition of “sin”.
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.