Jehovah's witness: "It's like scientology for black people" LMAO!! That's a classic.

'Is this incisive commentary or persecution?"

I think it could be classified as both although instead of "persecution" I would personally label it mocking.

1) Brit Hume is from Fox news and let's face it – ANY time the liberal media can do anything to belittle that news organization (whether it's deserved or not – many times it's not) – they'll jump right on it. So quite frankly – at least in THIS particular situation – I'm not all convinced that the mocking was completely towards the remark more than it was towards someone from a news organization that they hate.

But to get more to the point

2) Any time you have a society with different views (gee THAT never happens – haha), you're going to have the "my faith is better than your faith" debate constantly. And especially in a politically correct society such as ours – where the idea that "it doesn't matter what or how you believe, we're all going to the same place of sunshine, rainbows and unicorns" – it's just not "nice" or politically correct to make the statement that your faith is superior – ESPECIALLY if you're a Christian.

[...] This post was mentioned on Twitter by Twoshirts.org and Jason Coker, Jason Coker. Jason Coker said: John Stewart and the Daily Show Lampoon Tiger Woods, Brit Hume, Avatar, and Religious Superiority: http://bit.ly/6TkcaU [...]

Let’s get this out of the way quickly — it’s not persecution. Nowhere even close. Brit Hume escaped the Daily Show without a scratch.

But, Jason, I have a bone to pick with you. From your brief commentary: You observed Stewart’s comedy sketch is a critique of the way Christians “have turned the practice of faith into a kind of consumer product.” Many Christian approaches to evangelism are on this account, and it doesn’t take Jon Stewart to bring it home. But Brit Hume’s comments were among the most courageous witnesses I have seen in some time. He spoke up in his workplace (which happens to have millions of lookers-on) and contributed a comment of real substance (something rare in the flow of daily news broadcasts). In fact, among all the players represented in the You Tube clip, only Hume exhibited any real concern for Tiger’s spiritual condition. Major, mad, crazy props to Brit Hume who used the platform of a career in news broadcasting to remind people what really matters.

Jesus has been given a name above every name, and there’s coming a time when every knee will bow and every tongue declare his superiority. Christians themselves are not superior, but Jesus is. We must, in the end, be honest–because Jesus is the ultimate reality. In our efforts to build bridges with those who don’t yet recognize God’s gracious initiative, there is a time to “call the question.” Peter did it at Pentecost and Paul did it at Mars Hill. In the public square, we do not do it enough.

Man, I’m getting worked up! May I deviate for a moment and comment on the Daily Show? It’s excellent has political and social satire. Jon Stewart and his team are LMAO funny (Julie Waters is right about the Jehovah’s Witness gag). I turn to the Daily Show for entertainment. What is truly frightening is how many people turn to the Daily Show for information. I can’t quote polls here, but my sense of it is that the under 40-demographic may consider the Daily Show their prime source for current events. If I’m right — yikes!!

Peace!

Hi Ray - I agree it’s not persecution, and I’m glad you weighed in on this. You make some important points, and there are more nuances to this that can really be covered well in blog comments.

But I do think The Daily Show brings an incisive and important commentary. The question being discussed was, “What will be the biggest sports story of 2010?” In that context Hume’s response seems bizzarely off topic and possibly even a little crass.

Part of the problem, in my opinion, is that Brit tries to shoehorn an evangelisitc tract into a space where it doesn’t fit. If religion or philosophy were the context or the subject (as it was at Pentecost and on Mars Hill) then Brit’s comments would have been completely relevant – and the exact words would have come across in a very different way. Or even if the subject was Tiger’s personal well-being (which, as you point out, it wasn’t), then Hume’s comments would still have been in context and appropriate, although, very courageous because they would have been unwelcome in a secular format. I think most people who applaud Brit’s remarks see them in this latter category, but I think that misses the important distinction of context. Brit does what many of us have been taught to do: find a way to work Jesus into every possible conversation. The problem is, if the conversation is jams and jellies, that has the unpleasant side-effect of turning Jesus into a condiment.

Like I said, there’s more to this. Thanks again for your thoughts.