I’ve always admired great teachers that can bring a complex subject alive and draw their students in. This gentlemen is even giving free lectures for the public. Sounds like quite a remarkable teacher.
Seems to me that the original article never gets to the point. What teachings from Cecil changed the guy’s thinking? How did he change. Yeah, he’s an agnostic now, but did he lose his faith first, and, thus without assurances of a God, there’s no reason to be upset about depictions of his Prophet, or did he, as I would hope, discover that non-Muslims had no reason to honor Muslim proscriptions, and only from there decide to question his other beliefs?
Why in the world does the article jump to be all about Cecil and what other people think of him, instead of the more interesting case of a radical Islamist who was convinced of the error of his ways?
The Daily Mail article is at least a little more focused, even if it does feel like they just gloss over that part as well. Why did he embrace existentialism? What crisis of faith did the guy have?