Strict//EN" ""> EAGLES' REST: Because I Still Don't Know Any Better, That's Why

Friday, February 19, 2010

Because I Still Don't Know Any Better, That's Why

And, besides, the News media are jumping all over Tiger Woods' apology, so why not me?

Fox News shows a nice article, which seems to present a reasonable approach. But they also stuck a poll right in the middle of it, as to whether folks thought his apology was enough. Like we have to do something in reaction to it.

CNN, from whom I swiped the photo above, is a little more in-your-face about it, and titles their article with the question "Does Tiger Woods' apology hold weight?"

I'd like to say some things about this whole apology deal. First thing is it sure seemed heartfelt, to me. He really didn't have to do that, did he? How many other famous folks have trod the same path and never said boo to the public?

I can think of White House residents who've done as much or more, and said less.

Another thing is, I'm not sure he even owes me an apology. I never idealized him, or idolized him, and I guess I expect rich famous people to act like .. well .. rich famous people. And on that score, if folks out there held him up as a role model or hero of some sort, they shouldn't have!

Then, is his apology "enough"? On this one, I really have an opinion.


We believers are under instructions from God to forgive folks. God doesn't even mention waiting for an apology, and He usually links the instructions to cases where somebody wronged us personally. I'm not sure Tiger did!

For anybody who might stumble in here and read this, who's not a believer, let's think of this: have you ever apologized to anybody for anything? If you have, then you don't have a choice but to accept the apology. That is, if you ever want to be forgiven for anything you've ever done, yourself.

Brit Hume said a while back:

"He's 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."

Well, he's right as far as he goes. Tiger needs more than forgiveness and redemption, though; he needs to change. And no set of rules or laws can offer that. What it'll take is the power of the Holy Spirit, indwelling in a believer, to make that person into a new creation in Jesus. That's what Christianity offers that no other religion does ... a Living Savior Who can change our hearts.

I think it takes a Living Savior to save and guide a living person. And we've got One. I hope Tiger finds Him.

I know Jesus would like to find Tiger.

Labels: , ,


At 3:13 PM, February 20, 2010, Blogger Aussie John said...


We are certainly of one mind on everything you wrote. Thanks for writing it!

I'm finding the hypocrisy of the media, on these issues, unbelievably offensively blatant: On the one hand Tiger Woods has been lambasted for his infidelity; on the other hand, the media promotes the very same behaviour!

At 6:43 PM, February 20, 2010, Blogger Bob Cleveland said...

Aussie John,

Thanks for the nice words and you're right about the multi-faced actions of the media.

I'm glad we agree but I'm reminded of what a friend of mine in Latvia said a few weeks ago:

"Sometimes the majority only means all the morons are on one side".

:) Let's hear it for the morons!

At 6:21 AM, February 23, 2010, Blogger Rex Ray said...

I like your attitude toward Tiger; his apology shows what Wade’s blog is about today: Being gracious…something that Paige Patterson doesn’t have a clue.

Your writing: "Sometimes the majority only means all the morons are on one side" reminds me of a letter of mine that was printed by the Baptist Standard.

Legalistic rules Jan. 7, 2002
___Why are you angels crying?
___Remember Acts 15:28, man said it seemed good to the Holy Spirit when legalistic rules were given to Gentiles which eventually led the majority to become Catholic?
___The Holy Spirit wasn’t pleased then, and he’s not pleased now.
___What happened?
___The minority that rejected anything but God’s gift for salvation 2,000 years have been fooled by their fundamentalist leaders to follow legalistic rules.
___How did they do that?
___They won the majority by naming themselves "conservative" and their opposition "moderate."
___What’s their rules?
___ Board Report 4-9-97 Jerry Rankin, president of the International Mission Board: "...guidance and anointing of God will require a significant shift in attitudes...change will come when...a confidence and willingness to follow the wisdom and guidance of God- appointed leadership whether we necessarily understand or agree."
___Doesn’t that abolish priesthood of the believer?
___ Yes.
___ Has this taken place?
___ The majority’s 2000 Baptist Faith & Message priesthood must conform to the group.
___ Who is the group?
___ Some say the local church, but churches have been removed because they ordained women to preach the gospel, which opposes their legalistic BF&M.
___Oh, no!...persecuted by Christians for obeying the Holy Spirit? The Christian majority accused Paul of preaching against their legalism in Acts 21:21, and had him take vows (sign BF&M) to show he was in line with their thinking.
___Their thinking was a stumbling block then and is today. It’s sad the majority has all the fools on one side again!


Post a Comment

Links to this post:

Create a Link

<< Home