Hermenuetics

Comments

Just so you know, I find Lady Gaga (and her contemporaries) outrageous. She, among many others, is banned from our home.

Posted By: Robyn | May 17, 2011 10:21 AM

I was wondering when someone would start mentioning "Judas" - I remember first seeing Lady Gaga on "So You Think You Can Dance" and thinking....whaaaaaaaaaaat????? I never dreamed that she would end up having 3 of the top 10 songs last year. At first I liked *some* of her music - "Just Dance" and "Pokerface" (before I found out what that song was actually about) but now I just... well I can't really put my feelings and thoughts into words at the moment.

So recently I heard part of "Judas" but wasn't in the mood to listen to the whole thing - I heard just enough though to get the idea that she knows better - she KNOWS better but is purposely choosing a life away from God.

Which explains it all.

Its good to remind us to not just assume that our Christian leaders are always providing the right message as well. We must always look to God first for our answers.

Posted By: Leslie | May 17, 2011 11:31 AM

Gaga is the granddaughter of Cher and the child of Madonna. Why should we be further shocked by the deterioration of pop culture when moral outrage might have ended this trend in the 1970s when Bob Mackey began semi dressing Cher?

Posted By: BRUSSELL | May 17, 2011 11:43 AM

Deep "fandom" always has elements of religious fervor; when Douglas Fairbanks and Mary Pickford visited London in the 1920s, they were set upon at the train station by thousands of frenzied fans who wanted to glimpse their "idols." Fairbanks had to hoist Pickford on his shoulders to protect her from the mob, whose members wanted a "relic" and thought nothing of tearing apart their god to get it. When Brad Pitt was asked why he left the Baptist faith he was raised in he pointed out that he found the feeling he got from a rock concert and the experience that was supposed to be the infilling Holy Spirit indistinguishable from each other. There is nothing new under the sun--but as I write this, I'm humming "Bad Romance."

Posted By: Lane | May 17, 2011 11:43 AM

When she says, "I'm teaching people to worship themselves," is that really necessary? Don't we all do that according to our old Adam? We really don't need her to show us "how"
to do that. But the person who belongs to Christ has a new
nature, as St. Paul says, "your life is hidden with Christ in God." (Col. 3:3)

Posted By: Not without hope | May 17, 2011 11:45 AM

This post makes an important point. I would say, though, that I manage regular conversation without an informed opinion of either of these women, so I question this bit:

"Self-definition as a “fan” has become part of our culture, so much so that having an informed opinion about icons such as Oprah and Lady Gaga is necessary in regular conversation."

Posted By: Sheila | May 17, 2011 11:47 AM

GIGO- Garbage in - Garbage out, we have to choose what we will fill our minds with. I am profoundly disappointed in our current times. This is a generation who cannot think for themselves, they rely on the government and media to tell them how adn what to think,Heaven forbid we use the bible to teach the truth, now the truth comes from people like Gaga and a small but very vocal population of the country. God please spare this generation.

Posted By: Cheryl Sperling | May 17, 2011 11:58 AM

When a country or world tells God to take a hike,then that nation or country inevitably turns to making gods of themselves or other idols. This is what is killing America. Yet, people do not care about this - they are only wrapped up in themselves and what they can get for themselves. Worship of humans is destined for failure - even people like Gaga or Ophra - who put out false ideas to worship - in the end we all end up dust and ashes. This country is dying of its own lack of any kind of idol that has any meaning - all flesh is like grass that withers and dies - even Ga and Ophra. What comes after that? God alone knows the answer.

Posted By: gene | May 17, 2011 12:10 PM

This is a well stated article. I was unsettled that GaGa was on American Idol at prime time dressed the way she was dressed. Children were in the audience; they were seated around the platform at the beginning of the show. I tried for 20 minutes to find a way to respond and comment on this outrage for family t.v. but the ways one comments are merely through checking boxes about American Idol. Is there a way you can communicate with the American Idol group some of the concerns of GaGa being espoused to our young children and teens as a role model? Thanks for the good word.

Posted By: Donna | May 17, 2011 12:14 PM

I have actually done a couple of articles on her and discussed her on my radio show "Embracing Your Greatness" Thank you for contiuing to shed light on something people are not seeming to recognize on their own. For one thing, people have heard her music, but have not watched her videos and so are unaware of how demonic her work is.
Thank you and please keep bringing truth throug media to the world.

Posted By: Christina King | May 17, 2011 12:16 PM

Lady Gaga? I really have no idea who this person is. However, you want to speak Sunday idolatry, think NFL. I mean, what do you think is really important on Sundays for many, perhaps most, evangelical men? I suppose you could also rank NASCAR up there as well. Still, this is the world into which our Lord came and which he has redeemed with his life, not some world-to-be. Thus, we must still look for the good even in the most unexpected places. Paul found among the Athenians.

Posted By: Peter | May 17, 2011 12:17 PM

Anyone who thinks that moral outrage could have stopped anything in the 70s wasn't around in the 70s. Anyone who tried would simply have become targets themselves.

Posted By: chuck | May 17, 2011 12:31 PM

People like Lady Gaga and Oprah should be ignored--not analyzed! The analysis draws attention to them and that is exactly what they want and they don't care how they get it! Shame on CT.

Posted By: Conrad Cooperr | May 17, 2011 1:19 PM

I love Lady Gaga. I'm a Christian, but I find her message and songs inspiring. She's walking a path only few could dream of. When I think of Gaga, I think of Queen Elizabeth I. Two strong women, facing enormous pressure and scrutiny on every side, but still introducing change and reason to their societies. They even share a penchant for magnificent costumes. I find no wrong in her, or her message. And her music is great to dance to!!

Posted By: Drea | May 17, 2011 1:39 PM

@Conrad Cooper - Did Paul ignore the cultural implications of his day? Rather than overlook the apostates, he called them out and rebuked them. We have to be aware of what is going on in our world so we can better prepare ourselves for spiritual battle.

Obviously, this doesn't mean we listen to every Lady Gaga song out there or watch episodes of Oprah for the sake of "being informed". Rather, we need to have a general idea of what each icon presents to the world, so we can appropriately formulate our Biblical worldview.

Posted By: Kalyn | May 17, 2011 1:49 PM

@Kalyn - Gosh, that was only a mildly creepy post.

"...we need to have a general idea of what each icon presents to the world, so we can appropriately formulate our Biblical worldview."

Why in the world do you have to form a biblical worldview? Do you think God has to look at us, take two steps back, and form a biblically sound opinion of the things you and I do? It's not natural or healthy to run an analysis of everything you experience by a book that was written thousands of years ago. The amount of relavency anything that old can provide is severely limited. For instance, I can take the complete works of Shakespeare, and see my entire life through that lense. It would be a stretch, and it would be silly, but I could make it fit somehow. Is that really how you want to live your life, constantly filtering yourself, and reconditioning yourself to fit in with your peers? It's a waste of a life in my opinion.

Posted By: Drea | May 17, 2011 2:55 PM

There are more serious things to be outraged about.

Posted By: Vince | May 17, 2011 3:16 PM

Ugh, why was this posted on Google News? Y'all need to lighten up, except for Drea. I couldn't agree with you more!

Posted By: Lynne | May 17, 2011 3:21 PM

As a Christian, I'm tired of "outrage" over pop culture. I think the article is not appropriately titled, which to the author, is a compliment that your article has some thought to it. I'm all for intelliegent, critical conversation. I'm far past outrage, shunning, banning, and black & white thinking. It gets very old and doesn't help anyone.

Posted By: SJ | May 17, 2011 3:56 PM

The time has long past when our "outrage" would accomplish much more than harm. I think Gaga would like nothing better than to have us demonize her; for then she could claim persecution, and she would look "more inclusive" than us. That would give her more publicity than she deserves. I suggest that ignoring her is still the best method. I personally am not remaining ignorant of her; I think it important to know one's enemies.

Posted By: Alex | May 17, 2011 4:01 PM

@Kalyn, fully agree with you. We need to develop a Biblical view of the world. Thanks for stating that.

@Drea, hmm, you seem to not have a very high regard for the Word of God, and to not believe that the Bible is still the valid Word of God, and that the Holy Spirit speaks to it today, and that it's alive.
Recommend some of the works of Francis Schaeffer, e.g. "How should we then live?" or David Noebels "Understanding the Times".

(It's weird to compare Shakespeare and the Bible. That shows that you see the Bible as merely the work of humans, but not the revealed / living word of God).

It's definitely worth spending time and effort to develop that christian mind. You say it's a "waste of life". But how do you define life? True life is when you are connected to Jesus Christ, and are "living in the Holy Spirit."

You are actually doing the same thing: by reading newspaper, watching TV, going to the movies, and visiting school and college, etc, you are "reconditioning yourselv" in alignment with the way the world around you thinks. That's what I call waste of life - a worldly life.

Just try it out: read Shakespeare for 1 hour/day for 1 month, and then afterwards read the Bible for 1 hour/day for 1 month. You'll feel the difference.

Actually, most people spend 3-4 hours per day on TV, internet etc., reconditioning themselves with "worldly thinking". So one should try to read the Bible for 3-4 hours instead...
But 1 hour is enough for a start :-)

Posted By: Rod | May 17, 2011 5:09 PM

I am surprised at the supposedly "Christian" outrage. To rail against a singer who's songs are curse-wordless for the most part and about empowerment rather than oppressing women or doing drugs. And she is still a Christian, a Catholic to be exact, and many are misinterpreting "Judas" (the song, not the man) which actually is a commentary on son nature. Loving that which can't stop betraying you is something all of us in our fallen state experience often. She is also a young New Yorker with a massive gay following so she is obviously going to have a different worldview than you evangelicals. As a gay Catholic I see her music as beautiful and gospelic in it's message of how God loves us "we were still sinners" and he made us all special and beautiful, and that everyone deserves that respect. Sure it lacks the fire and brimstone of fundamentalism, but it's still Western values that came explicitly from our Christian heritage and we should glory in the message of God's Love reaching the outcasts of our society, especially in light of Christ's condemnation of religious zealotry in favor of prostitutes, sinners and other "sinners". Christ would be hangin out at gay bars and street corners, and hounding our televangelists and bishops had His firstcoming been in this century. (;

Posted By: Scott | May 17, 2011 7:29 PM

...say ...that reminds me..I have been in a truth project study. ieven have the cirriculum still Maybe those of you posters who are thinking you would like to help folks develop a biblical worldview should host a Truth Project Study in your home. Of course you have to attend one yourself, then get the materials. It is presented through Focus in the Family, I tell you it will help immensely if you are serious. You need to pray and be mature in your walk to present it. The attendees need to be serious also, it is not for the regular liberal mainstream believer, it will challenge you. Have you folks listened to Ravi Zacharias or Michael Yousef?

Posted By: k | May 17, 2011 10:08 PM

@Scott. I don't believe Christ would be hanging out at gay bars often but he would if the Father sent him there and I am sure the Father would send him there- from time to time.
Christ would be definitely hanging out at street corners of course because his goal was to do the will of the Father- to give water to those who are thirsty.
As a born again Christian, I found myself in a bar one day and ended up giving a word of encouragement and prophesying to a fallen Christian. I didn't want to go there but God led me there somehow. You see, he ended up telling me that God knows where to catch his fish. I had to be there at that exact time to deliver God's message to him.

Posted By: Anne | May 17, 2011 10:44 PM

Outrage? I find that word inappropriate here. I don't believe in idolizing any human being, but when others do it, I believe the appropriate response is to seek to understand it, not to be "outraged." I'm not a fan of Gaga or Oprah, but they have done nothing I would consider outrageous. Timothy McVey, the Taliban or the Unibomber-- now there's where I feel outrage.

Posted By: Kristen | May 18, 2011 12:32 AM

@Scott,
you say Lady Gaga promotes "Western values" as in reaching the outcasts. Christ did reach out to the outcasts - but only to call them to repentance from their sin. Not to condone sin.
Sure, there may be hypocrisy among *SOME* evangelicals, but that does not make their *view* wrong. (You can have the right view and still be hypocritical. But that does not mean you should change your view, but change your hypocrisy).

So even if there is a lot of hypocrisy in this world, including among religious, does not mean we should all become postmodernists and reject the notion that there *IS* truth, and that there *IS* sin.

Obviously, you don't see a gay lifestyle as sin, otherwise you would not consider yourself a (true) Catholic.
(My humble suggestion to you would be to re-consider if you - honestly - believe that God condones that sin, and then consider if changing the lifestyle might be worth it - in light of a possible eternal separation from God).
I am not saying everyone who call themselves evangelical will go to heaven - that depends on whether the Holy Spirit lives in them.

Posted By: Rod | May 18, 2011 8:16 AM

@Alex - Thanks for responding to me, I appreciate the respect you've shown me in your reply.

I want to confirm for you that I do believe that the Bible is merely a very old book, written by mere humans. To say that a book so old is still a valid thousands of year later is ridiculous to me. To better understand it, you direct me to books written by other men, who analyze the work of the men who wrote the book in the first place. That's a little messed up, and it kind of proves my point when I say, it's a stretch to make the Bible applicable in this day and age.

If I visited a christian book store, I bet I could find a score of different translations of the Bible, from the original Old English, to something that sounds suspiciously like a teenybopper paraphrasing the Bible. Again, all in an attempt to make it relavent to people in the 21st century. I'm not saying that the book is useless past all hope. But people need to be taking the core message of hope and love away, and reject all the divisive nonsense about gender roles and hell. It's just not healthy to make the Book holy unto itself.

As for the "conditioning myself with worldly influences", that's really not the case. I don't "recondition myself" to fill my head with Gaga anymore then I "recondition myself" to listen to my favorite worship CD. I do what I feel led to do, and no, I don't pray about it first, and I don't meditate on what scripture would have me do. If Jesus were around today, I have a feeling he'd slap some of us for wasting time and being silly. If it's really about a relationship, and not a religion, then it takes two to tango. Not one person bowing and scraping superstitously their entire lives, while the other gently prods them on in the correct direction.

At least, that's my take on all this :)

Posted By: Drea | May 18, 2011 10:02 AM

Katelyn,

This is an excellent piece of cultural / theological analysis. You have hit on grounds for discernment that reach far deeper than "so-and-so uses cuss words" or "so-and-so doesn't profess faith the same way I do", which may sometimes be helpful but which are examples of the shallow way that some evangelicals approach culture. Especially helpful was your note, near the end, that idolatry can extend to evangelical leaders as well. This is not an issue of "us vs. them" so much as an issue of being discerning vs. naive, wise vs. unwise, biblical vs. unbiblical.

It is crucial to understand what it means to be "biblical." This means to have one's patterns of thought and action and belief shaped along the contours of the wisdom found in the canon of Scripture, which ultimately testifies to God's Word, Jesus Christ. To discern correctly is to have one's perspectives continually formed along Christ-shaped lines. To say that the Bible is merely an old book written by merely old humans is a bit naive. First, from a cultural / world historical standpoint, much of our culture simply would not exist without the influence of the Bible and persons who made the Bible central to their belief and practice, and so it must be recognized from the outset that anyone wishing to simply dismiss the Bible's importance must prove their case - not the other way around.

Second - and this is to simply focus on one example in the face of what is honestly a rather silly point of view - scripture testifies to the resurrection, without which the Christian faith would simply not be the Christian faith. Paul argues this in 1 Corinthians 15 and ties the reality of Christ's resurrection in with both the believer's future hope and the motivation for believers to be tireless in their present work for the kingdom. In other words, the possibility of "relationship not religion" rests on the reality of the scriptural witness to Christ's life, death, and - most importantly, because if this didn't happen, he's still dead and therefore can't be in a relationship with anyone - his resurrection.

That is why the scriptures are still important and are not just really old books, letters, poetry, etc. If God truly is a person who can be known, then it is possible to be mistaken about his identity - just as you or I can be mistaken about people we know. And if what Jesus said about himself is true, and if he was then vindicated by the Father in his resurrection, as the Gospel writers and the earliest Christian writings we have claim, then this means that scripture is always relevant because it reveals the true face of the creator God. If scripture is true, then Jesus is risen, and he is our contemporary, and this is something that changes just about everything. C. S. Lewis was fond of making this point: whether or not you believe in Jesus, the question of whether or not the claims about him are true is the most important question, because any answer has immense consequences at just about all levels of human thought and action.

That is my - and others' - take on all this. Being biblical is not a matter of arbitrarily assigning importance to a set of dusty old words. Being biblical means seeking to align your patterns of belief and action more and more closely to those of Jesus Christ, to whom Scripture (Old and New Testaments) witnesses and who is a very real and very knowable person.

Posted By: Rory Tyer | May 18, 2011 10:51 AM

I agree that this article is astutely written because it looks at the bigger picture of Lady Gaga as a whole. We could debate about the messages of her songs - which I think she leaves deliberately open to interpretation in order to make it impossible to accuse her of anything really - or the content of her videos (and her performances) - sometimes flirting with pornography - but the bigger, more dangerous issue is her overall presence and influence in our culture. Truly, society has not, at its core, changed since the time of the Israelites: they worshipped their idols and so do we. And remember God's outrage at them? "Outrage," indeed, is an appropriate word. Worshipping another god instead of the only true God IS an outrageous activity. I feel both outrage, AND, as other posters have said, a desire to just ignore Gaga and co. No true Christian desires to fixate on an idol, or even give them the time of day. Unfortunately articles like this need to be written for those who are smitten by these idols.

Posted By: Nadine S. | May 18, 2011 11:50 AM

@Rory - Rory, I just want to respond to your post.

You responded mostly to my previous posts on the topic of biblical authority. Continuing on that topic, I'd like to point out you consistently exhibit some of the pain points I've attributed to an over reliance on the Bible as a path to your relationship with God:

"If God truly is a person who can be known, then it is possible to be mistaken about his identity - just as you or I can be mistaken about people we know. And if what Jesus said about himself is true, and if he was then vindicated by the Father in his resurrection, as the Gospel writers and the earliest Christian writings we have claim, then this means that scripture is always relevant because it reveals the true face of the creator God."

Your arguments (if/then) are gramatically sound, but logically flawed. Even if the conflicting accounts of the gospels are shown to cohesively meld into one truely truthful and divine account, your argument can by no means cover every other book in the Bible under the same banner as direct support of the events of the gospel. A few of the books of prophecy do seem to include events pointing to the events of the Gospels, but most are not at all connected.

Again, my point is still that on many levels, if the Bible was really the relavent,cohesive and literal word of God, you and I would not need to be having this conversation. There's a lot of work you have to do, to get to a point where any of it makes rational sense.

As a final thought, I'm going to address one of the first points you made on the subject:

"First, from a cultural / world historical standpoint, much of our culture simply would not exist without the influence of the Bible and persons who made the Bible central to their belief and practice, and so it must be recognized from the outset that anyone wishing to simply dismiss the Bible's importance must prove their case - not the other way around."

My response to this is quite simply, that cultures are shaped by many different forces, religion not the least of them. However, there are cultures that exist, and have developed, entirely outside of the reach of Christianity, believe it or not. Just because the culture you grew up in was shaped by Biblical influences, does not mean that the whole of the rest of the world is required to accept the Bible as the foundation of their societies. Your argument appears to be that there are more Biblically shaped socities then alternative societies, therefore someone questioning the authority of the Bible would have the burden of proof based on a majority rules decision. Personally, I think majority rules decisons are pretty unfair. You've probably felt the same way at some point in your life. I'd like to submit in this case, we each have reasons to provide proof. I'm questioning age-old fundemental roots of your faith. You're clinging to a book I'm calling increasingly irrelavent. If you want it to remain relavent for the next thousand years, the time to start changing peoples minds about it is now. Saying that I'm the only one asking these questions would be dismissive and misleading. If you're harboring some sort of proof, but won't provide it since I'm the crazy one, you're only undermining your own cause. By all means, let me in on your theories, because I obviously don't withhold mine.

Posted By: Drea | May 18, 2011 1:48 PM

Oh, if Christians would only muster up one-tenth as much outrage over the horrific economic destruction that Wall Street and their political cronies are creating as they do for the latest 'here today/gone tomorrow' pop fad, I might have a little more hope for this soon-to-be banana republic.

Posted By: Jack | May 18, 2011 3:26 PM

@Drea

Drea, you said that you were a Christian, what makes you a Christian?
Afterall, the book that leads us to God is in your
Mind irrelevant? Or is just some of it irrrelevant? If so,
what part is irrelevant, and how do you choose what part is irrelevant

Posted By: mark | May 18, 2011 7:47 PM

Drea, I'm sorry if you're finding the Bible increasingly irrelevant. There is always the possibility that you are allowing worldly viewpoints influence you to a greater degree than the Bible, and that's a big mistake. You might want to investigate the Bible and why many people believe it to truly be the word of God. No other "holy" book has the history, archeology, and hundreds of fulfilled prophecies like the Bible does. Things taking place right now in the Middle East are lining up with things that will be taking place in Revelation. When Jesus became incarnate, he fulfilled over 100 prophecies. 500 years before He was born, it was foretold that a savior would be born in Bethlehem. It was prophesied that He would be betrayed for 30 pieces of silver hundreds of years before it actually took place. It was prophesied in Psalms that He would be crucified, and that was written before crucifixions were ever used as a means of putting someone to death. It was foretold that they would gamble over His clothes at the crucifixion, it was prophesied that He would come from the tribe of Judah, and many, many more. The odds of someone fulfilling all of these prophecies put it in the realm of being an impossibility, only they did happen, proving that He is God and that the Bible is truly the Word of God. If you find it increasingly irrelevant, you might want to reconsider your views and put them more in alignment with what the Word of God tells us.

Posted By: Barbara | May 18, 2011 8:09 PM

For these celebs and their "products", it all comes down to money. Ignore them, they lose influence

Posted By: Allie G | May 18, 2011 8:45 PM

Last week when our family watched Idol, I felt so sad watching Lady. She seems like her true nature is nice-not wanting to hurt the contestants feelings, etc. Then, her performance!I am sorry but only dark forces could influence a person made in God's image to demean themselves that way. Graphically sexual images are against the beauty of God's pattern of sexuality. That part of us is to be given to the one we commit to in love with fidelity in marriage. Yeah, it is old fashioned, but it has worked for my hubby and me for 30 yrs. It is working for my 22 year old daughter and her fiance. Pop culture's definition of love is a cartoonish shadow of the awesome reality of love in the pattern God calls us to.

I told my husband after that show, that she seems to nice to be able to bear that lifestyle for too long. We have seen too many celebrities saying they were having the time of their lives only to end tragically a few years later. I pray for her to really internalize the Christianity she says she belives in. She needs our prayers not our condemnation, but that doesn't mean we can't tell the media (Fox) that it was inappropiate to air that during a family oriented hour.

Posted By: Marsha | May 18, 2011 9:24 PM

Gaga,(I won't refer to her as a lady prancing around like she does to make money)came to our city for a concert. Of course, it sold out. She spent most of her time talking about gay rights and how her little monsters have to set the rest of us straight. Sounds like she's up to more than making money. Is she a lesbian? Does anyone know? Every news channel of course had to give their "news" over to what she "advocates", never mind the people dying in a house fire, two soldier's bodies being returned home, three funerals being held for pre teens killed in a drive by shooting while in their own home, the food bank running out of food, etc., etc. What's she telling her little monsters to do, tell the rest of us to vote for gay marriage. What Catholic upbringing did she have?. My kids are not going to her concerts again because I drive the only car we have, not them.

Posted By: Anonymous | May 18, 2011 9:31 PM

@Drea Generally, conversations across comment threads are unproductive and unable to cover the kind of ground that ought to be covered when discussing just about anything. I write at this point for the benefit of anyone who might have read thus far and been scratching their heads. Two points.

First, I reread your most recent post several times and I don't understand several things you are saying; you don't seem to be taking things seriously, which leads me to think that you are either joking or you have not read, for instance, a serious book on biblical authority (Wright's Scripture and the Authority of God is a helpful recent one). It is flippant, for instance, to say that it takes a lot of work for the Bible to make sense, and by that to imply that it is "increasingly irrelevant". Suppose that it did take a lot of work; would that logically mean it is unimportant or irrelevant? (The answer is, of course, no - difficulty in understanding or interpretation has no logical relation to the question of whether something is true or false; most of the sciences would necessarily be false if this were the case!) Many people have written many things about why scripture is important, and since you write the things you do I do not think you have really engaged the issue but are rather operating from some large and unquestioned assumptions about what certain people just now know to be true about the Bible. If this is the case, then you and I are actually quite similar: we both situate ourselves within a certain tradition of thought; yours, however, is one that is fairly new and modern, according to which the Bible ought to be questioned or ignored simply because it is seemingly old and frumpy and because some people have sometimes misused it. I myself have wrestled with this a great deal and so do not dismiss others' traditions flippantly, but it does not seem to me like you acknowledge that many very intelligent people have written many things about how and why scripture is relevant. My example about the resurrection was just that: one example, one specific way in which Scripture makes a claim that is automatically relevant because of its all-encompassing and surprising nature. If Jesus really was raised, everything is different, and many things follow from it.

Second, you have misunderstood the point I was making about the Bible being an influential book. I could make the same point if you and I were having this conversation in India regarding the Bhagavad Gita. That text has been incredibly formative on India's history and culture, so it would be foolish and ignorant to flippantly dismiss it as 'increasingly irrelevant' in the context of discussing how Indians live and think. It would be wise, were I in such a situation, to understand something about that text, and to do so on the grounds not of what I automatically think and believe but on the grounds of those who revere it and consider it authoritative. Only once I have done so am I then able to hold an (informed) opinion regarding its relevance when having discussions in such a context. Your flippancy with regard to the Bible betrays an ignorance that is not simply "religious" but that is cultural, social, historical; or perhaps you are not ignorant but are simply choosing, for the sake of internet comment thread rhetoric, to make your case a certain way, using terms and phrases that make you sound very sure of yourself and surprisingly self-righteous, which is ironic given the context (your defense of Lady Gaga in the face of seemingly self-righteous criticism!) in which your comments originally occurred.

My basic point is that the age of the Bible says nothing about whether it is relevant or not. Relevance in this case is a function of truth: if the Bible indeed tells the truth about Jesus (again, to pick an example; others could be cited, such as the truth about how reconciliation between persons might come about, or the truth about what constitutes the good life, or the truth about the purpose of human life), then it is relevant, because Jesus is not simply a person who lived and died but is resurrected and is our contemporary, someone from whom we might learn how to live our own lives.

And my other basic point (for anyone who has read this far and thinks, Who wastes time responding to comments on comment threads?) is simply that we can't take for granted that we understand what it means for the Bible to be authoritative. Katelyn's article did a good job of bringing scriptural wisdom to bear on a particular cultural phenomenon, and this is just one possible demonstration of how using the Bible to inform our reasoning and discernment is good, helpful, and important. People who consciously employ scripture in their reasoning ought to be less likely to simply consume and more likely to question, evaluate, pay attention and live accordingly. It should be obvious that those kinds of people are more likely to contribute to society's discourse as a whole, to help elevate all sorts of public discourse past the level of knee-jerk soundbite to the deeper questions about worldview and assumptions and beliefs that lurk at the background of all political and social questions.

It might seem counterintuitive to some, but biblical reasoning is healthy and true reasoning, and the fact that many people have used the Bible for awful and silly things in the past ought to spur us on more to living into the text in ways that do not do it violence but that allow it to challenge and inform us.

Posted By: Rory Tyer | May 18, 2011 11:25 PM

Lady Gaga will be washed up and forgotten in 10 years time, Jesus won't.

Live your life based on that which is timeless, not temporal.

Posted By: Paul Le Page | May 19, 2011 5:36 AM

@Rory - Rory, I'm going to respond to you first, since my last post was in reply to you as well.

I enjoyed reading your post, and I'd like to admit you're right about some things you said. First, you're point that I'm treating the Bible "flippantly", mostly for the sake of my point of view in the discussion. I can confirm for you, yes I am. I do want recognize to you, I do hold the Bible in high esteem. It's a very important history of our faith, without which, Christianity would not have had the influence it has had on the world.

However, I'm often reminded, how very misguided that influence has at times been. It disapoints me greatly, to see the "intelligent people", as you call them study, ponder, write books, and dedicate their lives to being biblically centered, to the point they ignore everything else in the world.

Is the bible relavent to Christians, and does it hold value for non-christians? Yes. Do we need to manically, irrationally, cling to it's literal translation to prove a point about it being the absolute word of God? Not in this reader's opinion. My point is very clear: if God REALLY divinely penned every jot and tittle in that book, he's a crappy author, and needs to hire an editor. Far more likely, men witnessed the events of God's works in turn, and wrote them down, to the best of their abilities. Is it an important, compelling piece of work? Yes. Is it the truth? From each individual's point of view.

My self-righteousness. I know, I KNOW, that it's been drilled into you, that if anyone has strong opinions differing from your own that will not yield them after a few rounds of conversation, your first course of action is to recognize the person you're talking with (me), is probably acting out of self-righteous knowledge. One piece of evidence you use in this regard, is the surety of my opinion. I have no doubt, you are also sure of your opinion, but I have no inclination to label your motivation self-righteous or otherwise. I'd appreciate it, if you also held back from labeling my motivations further. (Here the age old saying, "I am rubber, you are glue, anything you say bounces off of me and sticks to you" comes to mind, hahaha)

I'd also like to address your comments on this forum, and recognize, that a blog full of people who do not hold the same opinions at me, is a really bad place to start a discussion on an inflammatory topic. It's just that Christians who pick on Lady Gaga is a pet-peeve of mine, so I kind of got sucked into it. Prolly should have just gagged and moved on. :)

Lastly, I agree with your last point, in the respect, that people who live by the Bible need to live more constructively, V.S. destructively. Chrstians running around, saying and doing crazy things simply because they're directed to do so by the Bible is not a good thing in my opinion.

Posted By: Drea | May 19, 2011 9:33 AM

@Mark - Mark, I'd encourage you to read the post I just wrote in reply to Rory, as far as clarification to my opinion on Biblical irrelavancy. And I'd also respond, anything obviously written in out of an ancient cultural perspective regarding values i.e. an eye for an eye, women's head coverings, God flippantly killing people to make points, is more than likely irrelavent in my eyes.

@Barbara - Barbara, I have no doubt you have seen many reasons to be a Christian, Biblical and otherwise. So have I. However, it's obvious to me, that there are limitations to the practical usefullness of the Bible in the 21st century. If everything the Bible said was infallibly true, and I believed that, I'd be out there marching around with Fred Phelps right now, and so would you, and we'd both be certifiably insane. You can try really hard to reconcile everything in the Bible, but in the end, you're just living your life treading on thin ice, making comprimises in attempt not to break anything.

I'm going to conclude my reaction to your post by reponding to your last sentance:

"If you find it increasingly irrelevant, you might want to reconsider your views and put them more in alignment with what the Word of God tells us."

Your answer to my problem with the Bible, is to simply ask me to change my mind, and turn to the Bible. Forgive me, but I find it somewhat amusing to have such a wholly inadequate response to my dilemma. I understand it's more of a request for me to change my mind on your part, but still, not what I'm looking for. It's like saying, "If you find smartphones increasingly irrelavent, reconsider your views, and put them more in alignment with what your last voicemail message said." It's a plea to change, but it's not at all helpful to person looking for reasons to change their opinion, is it?

Posted By: Drea | May 19, 2011 10:05 AM

@anonymous - I'd like to point out to you, if your teens like Lady Gaga enough to go to a concert, they're obviously listening to her. If you restrict access to her, they'll rebel later and harder in that direction. If you really want to crack down on Gaga, you can, and it's definetly your right to do so, I just think you'll be giving your kids something to resent. If I were you, I'd sit down with my kids and have an actual discussion on the topic, and make it clear that your values don't match hers, and your not sure you want there values to be influenced by her. They'll call you nuts, and they'll probably still be listening to her, but they won't be running away from you and your beliefs at full steam either. Just a thought, you're the parent.

Posted By: Drea | May 19, 2011 10:18 AM

I agree with this article in the sense that I don't feel that the Oprahs and Gagas of the world have any place in our Lord's larger plan, and that we must be careful to prevent our admiration from turning to devotion of our fellow humans and their idols; but I also believe that such figures (pop, religious, and otherwise) are a test of our compassion for others and our ability to keep our eyes on God. We are constantly tempted to be swayed! But perhaps it is God's way of deepening our love, devotion and faith in Him. With any test, I've learned to respond with love and prayer for, I believe, that He is the judge. As a wise monk once said "moralism is no substitution for prayer." When I find myself filled with judgment or concerned with the moral acts of others, I recall what Christ said to His apostles: "what is that to thee...follow thou me." And then I pray.

Posted By: Amanda | May 19, 2011 12:21 PM

Drea, any words from me or any human would always be inadaquate, because only the Holy Spirit, by God's Word, can change your heart. It's not a cop-out, it's the truth.
If you pray to God to change your heart or give you guidance as you read, He will. But it's really between you and God. I can see God's work in my life every day, but unbelievers cannot. In Romans, it says that God reveals Himself to everyone through His creation. There is another verse in Romans that says He has written the moral code on your heart. There is nothing designed that does not have a designer. Our bodies, our entire universe, have a tremendous design. To me, it is so clear that there is a God, and also to my neurosurgeon, who is also a pastor, so it is not like it's an issue of intelligence. It's an issue of the Holy Spirit and you. Blessings to you.

Posted By: Barbara | May 19, 2011 1:01 PM

@Barbara - Barbara, it's clear to me you love God, and that's great; so do I. However you (and many others), seem to find the Holy Spirit and the Bible interchangable in many ways:

"Drea, any words from me or any human would always be inadaquate, because only the Holy Spirit, by God's Word, can change your heart."

You seem to be intimating that without the Bible, my access to the Holy Spirit is limited or gone. The last time I checked though, we answer to the Holy Trinity, not the holy quadrology (Father, Son, Holy Spirit + Bible).

Unfortunately, many Christians seem determined to edge the Bible into our list of deities. My point is still, that as inspiring as you find it, as much as it enlightens you, as much as you see it's words to be the truth, have you not created a shrine to the work of a man's hands? Can you see nothing wrong with that? It's not that I simply have no use for it; I do, it's a very important part of our faith. However, I also have no use for people who raise it up as the golden standard for everything in their lives, and ask me to do the same. My relationship with God is so much better then anything someone wrote down a thousand plus years ago, but some people miss the point entirely in my opinion.

Posted By: Drea | May 19, 2011 1:37 PM

Drea, the Bible is actually very relevant to the time period we are living in. It's almost like reading a newspaper at times, with the events occurring in the Middle East. The fact that Israel is once again a country is a fulfilled prophecy. The events taking place in the Middle East right now were prophesied. The Bible says that every nation will turn against Israel. Until Obama, Israel had a few allies, or at least countries that would help them and exchange rights with them, such as Turkey, Egypt, and of course the US. Now with Obama, we see a very different shift regarding our dealings with Israel.

Besides Jesus fulfilling over one hundred of the prophecies, making those prophecies the Word of God, Jesus quoted from all of the books in the OT except for Esther. The other prophecies about people and places were also fulfilled, making those verses the very Word of God. There are thousands of very ancient scrolls, matching each other, since the Jews transcribed each letter that was written, letter by letter, and not even word for word, so that mistakes would not be made. And I'm sure you're familiar with 2 Tim 3:16 "All Scripture is inspired by God and profitable for teaching, for reproof, for correction, for training in righteousness;"

Paul also wrote in Romans that the words he was writing were not his words, but were from God. In Luke 21:33 Jesus said His words would never be forgotten. If you believe He is God, I'm sure Jesus would want His words to be taken seriously, since He said they would never be forgotten.

Jesus made express reference to Daniel's "abomination of desolations" as the identifying sign of the "great tribulation" (Mt.24:15). You don't have to go back hundreds or thousands of years to see an exponential difference in the number of earthquakes, volcanoes, and other natural disasters. You can just go back to 1990 and see an amazing increase. Most of the time, earthquakes and volcanoes erupting don't make the news, but if you go to standeyo.com, every day they list major earthquakes and volcanoes that have become active, and other natural events occurring that never make the news. If you don't believe me, just check the site daily and read the headlines of the links, you don't need to read all the articles, but things are definitely happening on this globe that are very, very different than just 20 years ago, and they're the signs that Jesus told us to watch for, which definitely makes the Bible very relevant. They also have the chart showing the natural disasters going back in time.

It almost makes you laugh to look at 1960 compared to today, but each decade it has been increasing exponentially, and it can't all be just shrugged off, saying "they didn't keep good records back then", because you can just compare to 1990 and now, and you'll probably be amazed. Anyway, of course it's your decision, but I believe the Bible is more relevant than ever. BTW that group that is claiming a specific date is the end of the world, just makes Christians look foolish. We have signs to watch for, which Jesus said are like birth pangs. But He said only the Father in heaven knows the date of His return.

Posted By: Barbara | May 19, 2011 7:55 PM

Drea, I've been reading your posts and they've been pretty amusing! Your constant reassertion about the Bible being irrelevant in our times really wants to make me laugh...

As someone who was a cellular scientist at the nation's top university and is currently a professor at another institution, me and many of my colleagues found the Bible extremely relevant (Well the media is not always going to tell you that..!) Heck, we often met together to pray and spend time in Bible study! In fact, the director of the National Institutes of Health, the Human Genome Project and the discoverer of genes for Huntington's Disease is one dude who writes books about taking the Bible seriously!

As a Catholic Christian who finds my Bible (73 books) pretty relevant, the main reason I find your post so amusing is that you insist with "divine certainty" (even more than "scientific", since you can provide no evidence) that the Bible is irrelevant! Really!? I guess one could only make such a statement if one really understands every part of the Bible or has read it thoroughly or...
I'd dare to assume that even many liberal theologians with Ph.D.s in the study of the Bible would never dare to make such a statement.

Anyways, I wonder what parts of the Book are really irrelevant...?
- the command to "love" (God and neighbor)
- The birth, life, death and resurrection of Jesus?
- the creation narratives
- the formation of Israel
- all the moral teachings about behavior, attitude and the like
- the Book of revelation
- the Mosaic law and its ceremonial components?
- the history of Israel's Kings
- the Psalms?
- the teachings of the Apostles?

As one reader commented earlier, even if Christians no longer followed certain parts of the Bible (like the ceremonial law, for e.g. the command not to eat pork or cross-dress), those parts of the Bible are still relevant, because they tell us how the nation of Israel developed and how God intended for them to be a pure nation that is distinct from the pagan ones that surrounded them.

Or perhaps you are referring to certain misunderstood passages in Paul regarding women and the like...passages constantly abused by those who claim to know Paul better since 150 A.D. Heck, one dude thought he knew so much better and that so much of the Bible was irrelevant that in the second century he took off most of the OT and anything in the NT that was not Paul and created his own Bible. I guess, not too different from our own T. Jefferson and B. Franklin...

Your arrogance that the Bible is irrelevant is even more amusing when one considers other "holy books". For e.g. my native country India reveres both the Bible and the Gita. Now as a Catholic, I do not believe in Ram or Krishna as gods, but if you ask me whether the Gita is a relevant book, I would say heck yeah, it is! What about the Bible? The Bible was so relevant for my country's independence that much of Gandhi's inspiration for his non-violent Satyagraha movement came from Jesus' Sermon on the Mount!

Granted, certain individuals misuse the Bible. These fall into both the Christian and non -Christian categories! Granted that certain individuals misunderstand the Bible! In fact, our American forefathers did when it came to slavery, etc etc. But because a number of people abused a book, does not make a book irrelevant! The book was not irrelevant! It was their own inner vice that compelled them to find justification for their arguments in a book regarded so highly by the people! (Keep in mind slavery in Jesus' and Paul's day was unlike slavery in 18th century America! Keep in mind slaves in the first century were likely white!)

And that is the problem! The Bible describes the story of God's people from the beginning of creation and uses metaphors, images and all kinds of literary devices to convey this story. It describes victories and failures, good deeds and vices and cultural norms of the times. And underlying this metanarrative arching nations and peoples, it tells the story of God's love for humans, how He came to save them from their sins, by sending His One and Only Son as a ransom for those who were slaves to sin (and the devil). This Son died a gruesome death but by the power of the Spirit was raised to life. This is the Christ! And those who are filled with His Spirit and follow Him are Christians. He has given us the power to not only follow Him, but become adopted sons and daughters of God. The community that is formed of these children is the Church and the Apostles were the founding brick and stones. To the Apostles and their successors (the Bishops) He promised that the Holy Spirit would guide them into all truth.

Their are no new laws or commands that the Apostles and their successors teach. The only new command Jesus gives is to love others as "He has loved us". The rest of the Apostles message is the age-old message. The Spirit of Jesus will give us the power to live the law from our hearts and Jesus' new covenant will be written on our hearts. Thus the moral absolutes have always existed since creation...the order of the family at Creation, Jesus' own insistence that from the beginning God intended that a man and a woman should be married for life.., the 10 commandments, etc etc

Must I really go on??

In our own times the Bible is so relevant...the same Bible that compelled Mother Teresa to work with lepers, compels many liberals to yell "anti-war!". Even the gay man above claims that Jesus would visit bars! He at least finds the Bible relevant (albeit in his own distorted way, because as another reader correctly pointed out, Jesus visited tax collectors, prostitutes and sinners but never condoned sin!)

But I am digressing. One has to only carefully look at history. As for me and many of my scientist colleagues, we find the Bible extremely relevant!

Posted By: Vijay | May 19, 2011 9:51 PM

@Barbara - Barbara, the fulfillment of prophecy is highly disputed and subjective process... it's one reason you have no official list to refer me to; no two denominations have ever agreed on the subject. You could refer me to a book someone wrote on the subject, but there's no guarantee that it would be seen as factual by every Biblical scholar, (put a Catholic, a Protestant, and Jewish person in the room, and no one would agree at all!) Anyone can run through the Bible and claim a myriad of fulfilled prophecies based on any given verse in the bible. I can see where some make clear sense, but most veer into grasping at straws for me.

A quick aside, on your remark on Jesus quoting every book, in the old testament, mostly true, except of course for the caveat, that you need to include all four different books of the Gospel to make it true. Again, it's nice that we have access to so many accounts of the life of Jesus, but it only underscores for me the amount of conflict between even those four authors, not to mention the other even more disparate accounts of Jesus life we conveniently ignore because they were cast out of cannon centuries ago for being unworthy. Of course, the very fact that someone, hundreds of years ago was picking and choosing for the very people who are so much better educated and able to understand all this is not at all a comforting thought to me.

As for the disasters and signs that have been increasingly prevalent, every generation has felt that way...my grandparents felt it was happening soon and very soon, and they know this because their parents also felt the urgency of the event, and so on. It's a form of getting yourself hyped up about how soon the rapture is happening, without being bold enough to claim a specific date. And yes, the ability to cohesively list disasters and geological events is getting much better. (and 1990 IS important, the internet was really getting started then, making information sharing and cohesive lists way easier to keep up then paper records)

"Paul also wrote in Romans that the words he was writing were not his words, but were from God."

Again, this is just more circular thinking at work here. The Bible says it’s the Word of God and since it’s the Word of God and it’s without error, this statement has to be true. In other words, it is the Word of God. Huh? Again, I find you're attributing the status of deity to a book, written by a bunch of people, who simply wrote down what they felt was the truth. It's the best we have yes, but you act as though God himself penned it. I really wish he had, but it's clearly the work of a lot of people, who just wanted to share what had happened in their lives, in regard to God. What if you found an auto-biography of Billy Graham in a cave a hundred years years from now, and you thought "Wow, what a great incredible guy, and what experiences he had through God; God spoke through him and used him in a powerful way." Even so, I doubt your first urge would be to add it to the Bible; he was just man, and God's word is finished... per the Bible itself of course. I feel like that's what someone did though; a long time ago someone picked up the OT, cobbled it together with as many books of Gospel and post-crucifixion literature that could make sense, and let it loose. I see nothing Holy in this creation, nothing that should stop me from questioning it's motivations, nothing that should compel me to treat it's every advice as though it were from God's lips.

Posted By: Drea | May 20, 2011 5:02 AM

@Vijay - Vijay, you thank you for reading my posts, and for responding to my comments. However, I get the feeling you did more skimming then reading, because you've misquoted me, and asked some questions I've already addressed.

First, you used quotes in regard to the words "divine certainty" as though I myself verbatim claimed to have it at some point in these posts. I assure you, I never claimed to have "divine certainty", nor did I ever assert my strong opinions were given to me as a form of a message from the Lord. My opinions are very informed over a life time of searching, as are your own. However, it would be untowardly arrogant of me to claim they are anything other then my personal beliefs. Now let's talk about arrogance. This is how the dictionary defines it online for me: offensive display of superiority or self-importance; overbearing pride.

I have at no point inflated my sense of self worth over any other person on these posts. I have at times expressed bemusement, disillusion, and irony, in respect to several of my responses, but never arrogance. Saying that my very questioning of the Bible is arrogance; it is dismissal of me as a person and of the topic. Simply because people more experienced and educated then myself have broached the subject is no reason to disregard my questions. And while we are on the topic, giving me your resume, while I'm certain is the record of a most accomplished career, kind of fits in with text book definition of arrogance I supplied. (display of superiority) I'd appreciate it, if you find it in your heart to respond to me again, you'd drop pretenses of judgment on my fitness to participate in this conversation; I promise you, I will do the same.

Anyways, I wonder what parts of the Book are really irrelevant...?
- the command to "love" (God and neighbor) - Relavent
- The birth, life, death and resurrection of Jesus? - Relavent
- the creation narratives - A nice story
- the formation of Israel - A laughably nice story
- all the moral teachings about behavior, attitude and the like - Depends on what the author's motivation is
- the Book of revelation - Irrelevant, not true.
- the Mosaic law and its ceremonial components? - Stupid.
- the history of Israel's Kings - Boring
- the Psalms? - Pretty
- the teachings of the Apostles? - Dry.

I quote you here, and I provided notes on what I find to be true, and yes I am being flippant again with some of my opinions. A better answer is in another quote of something I said earlier:

@Mark - Mark, I'd encourage you to read the post I just wrote in reply to Rory, as far as clarification to my opinion on Biblical irrelavancy. And I'd also respond, anything obviously written in out of an ancient cultural perspective regarding values i.e. an eye for an eye, women's head coverings, God flippantly killing people to make points, is more than likely irrelavent in my eyes

And one more quote on the subject from me, from above:

Is the bible relavent to Christians, and does it hold value for non-christians? Yes. Do we need to manically, irrationally, cling to it's literal translation to prove a point about it being the absolute word of God? Not in this reader's opinion. My point is very clear: if God REALLY divinely penned every jot and tittle in that book, he's a crappy author, and needs to hire an editor. Far more likely, men witnessed the events of God's works in turn, and wrote them down, to the best of their abilities. Is it an important, compelling piece of work? Yes. Is it the truth? From each individual's point of view

In summary to biblical relevancy, this is my view.

"It was their own inner vice that compelled them to find justification for their arguments in a book regarded so highly by the people!"

Yes, and there is also my point: people in general regard the Bible far too highly as source of justification, not simply for basic instruction and knowledge. Over-reliance on the Bible is something I wish I could undo. As I've previously said, it breaks my heart to see people spinning their wheels in life trying to live according to the Bible. It's a constant battle of adjustment, and readjustment of the people's hearts, in order to feel accepted by God. People forget that God wants as we are, not as we should be. His work in our lives will bear fruit as his relationship with us deepens.

The rest of your post is focused on the historical importance of the Bible, which I agree with, but still do not find to be moving as far as making it God's actual message to us. You conclude by speaking of it's influence on present day society, which it has undeniably had. However, that influence is undeniably weakening. The removal of "under God" in the American pledge, the removal of laws that specifically created under Biblical influence, such as buying liquor on Sundays, allowing homosexuals to marry etc. At what point will you be unable to find the influence of religion in society? Maybe never, it is an important part of the culture of any given people. However, the emphasis on religion as driving factor in social policies is falling off the radar, at least in this country. In my opinion, that means that yes, the Bible is increasingly becoming irrelevant. Historically, as an account, it's important. Religiously, as a source of knowledge and learning, it is relevant, but again, not divinely so in my opinion. Socially, Culturally, it's relevance is on decline, to the point I don't expect any form of policy to shape around it again the way it's been demonstrated to have been in the past. Personally, it is not relevant to me; as I've stated earlier, it's instructive in history and teaching, but there's no way in the world I'd want to try to balance that check book, because someones obviously been fudging the numbers.. :)

Posted By: Drea | May 20, 2011 6:14 AM

There you go again Drea. You give me a long list of reasons for why you are "not arrogant", and then you summarize the answers to my questions, with "stupid", "dry", "nice story", etc. While you may think you do not sound arrogant or that you are not displaying a sense of superiority, it certainly comes across that way to others.

Why? Because you give no scholarly reasons...because you are "making absolute statements" about something that is relevant to a lot of people, even though you claim it is only your opinion. In other words, in your previous posts you were NOT saying "I find the Bible irrelevant". Instead, you were making an absolute statement, "The Bible is irrelevant". There is a huge difference. Of course you are not claiming that you received a message from God, but neither is the guy who is predicting the Rapture will occur tomorrow. But that guy is absolutely certain. And so are you!

Yes, I did provide a few of my credentials and those of my colleagues, but only to point out that "all" believers in the Bible are not stupid as some are wont to assume (I am not saying that you do). In fact, many scholars of all stripes believe in the Bible's authenticity and relevance.

You are right that many people in our society today do not find the Bible relevant anymore. There I certainly agree with you. But that is not something I am worried about. Like I said earlier, throughout history, nations and societies have found parts of the Bible irrelevant to their times. That does not diminish the "truth" of the Bible or the "authenticity" of it's message. Just because people dismiss something as old does not mean it's not true as well. The Bible is not a "walkman" or "286 computer" that is upgraded as time goes on. Moral epithets such as "Do not kill" and "Do not steal" are not bound to a particular society or generation. In fact much of our legal system is based on timeless values that we all recognize to be true (But that is a different topic!).

So yes I agree with you that some people today find the Bible irrelevant, but there is no guarantee they will tomorrow. Voltaire thought he would see the end of the Bible in his own day. Little did he know that his house would be used as a Bible publishing factory in the next!

And so yes, maybe in America and Europe more and more people dismiss the Bible. But they don't in Asia or South America or the Middle East or Africa. And the last time I checked, these regions constitute 80% of the world's population.

For all I know in 50 years, America might go through tumultous times and become a religious nation again and the Bible will be relevant all over again.

Whatever your opinion, to claim absolutely that the Bible is irrelevant is an arrogant statement in my opinion. Perhaps you do not intend that. But when you make statements such as "God is a crappy author", don't you think you are saying that you have read every part of the Bible and if you were the editor you would make the Bible really relevant! (If you don't think that fits the dictionary sense of "arrogance",I don't know what to say). Well I'm glad God didn't hire you as the Editor, and I like the Editors He already did. Apparently, so do many other people. The last time I checked, the Bible is still the best-selling book of all times. So it definitely looks like He's a fantastic and superb author!

Posted By: Vijay | May 20, 2011 1:19 PM

Wow. I just read this article today and saw all the posts. The author really hit something that touches a lot of people in a real way. You know, people who are icons in our culture are still people. Jesus loves Oprah. Jesus loves Lady Gaga. Jesus loves every single person who walks this earth. He wants everyone to know Him and enjoy fellowship with Him.

I love the Bible. I read it daily and know the power that is in it. People who haven't experienced the life-changing ways of the Bible haven't really experienced the Word of God. It isn't just a book. It is living and breathing - -truly. It is the only book that can claim this (and I am a lover of books, all kinds).

I urge you, if you have never experienced the Bible this way, to give it another chance. Read it daily for 30 days. You don't have to read tons - -maybe just a paragraph. Before you read, ask God to speak to you. Open your heart to it. Then, do this daily as your read whatever you choose to read in it.

It will change you in a good way.

God is good. He is good all the time. He isn't into condemnation. He isn't into blaming people. He knows we are dust. He knows our weaknesses.

Posted By: Jane Hinrichs | May 20, 2011 1:50 PM

@Vijay - Vijay, thank you for your response. My last replies to you and Barbara almost weren't posted, the admin of this site removed them for being too off-topic from the original article. I had to make a personal appeal to the author of this post to get them able to be viewed by the public, so I'm gratified simply by the fact you were able to read mt words. Because I've been warned not to go off topic again, this will be final response to you on the matter.

I feel I do owe you an apology for my remarks on your original questions on specific topics of relevancy. I wouldn't go so far as to call them arrogant, but they were made in an off-hand way, partly to bait a response from you in some way. However brusque my comments were, they do more or less reflect the way I feel on those topics, but I should have more eloquently addressed your questions, and for that, again I do apologize.

My statements are in no way scholarly, they are my personal opinions. In fact I'm sure if I found scholars who agreed with me, you'd still have plenty of reasons to disagree with them at any rate. I'm sorry you find my opinions to be arrogant since they are not back by any form of outside proof, but I would like to submit that your opinions are equally strong, and you have not introduced any empirical evidence beyond quoting the occasional reference to scripture, and one unqualified statistical observation on the worlds population. Forgive me, but I see no difference between us that would keep us from being lumped together with the guy who thinks the world is ending tomorrow evening. :)

Let me quote myself one more time:

" My point is very clear: if God REALLY divinely penned every jot and tittle in that book, he's a crappy author, and needs to hire an editor."

My statement was IF God really wrote the Bible, he was a crappy author. However, the clear intention of the sentence is to provide my belief that he did NOT write every word in the book, hence it's a jumbled together editing disaster. In no way is the statement made to mean I could edit it better myself, or that God is a bad author. It's just a way of expressing my disbelief that he really did create the book.

I'm certain you have many other ideas to exchange with me Vijay, and I with you, but it's been made clear to me that anymore off-topic discussion on this post would be unwise on my part. I hope that even if you don't agree with my opinion, or even comprehend it, that you can respect me as person, as I do for you. Godspeed.

Posted By: Drea | May 20, 2011 4:12 PM

I know this is a ladies page but, I just have to say "Outrage" is what sells the albums, cd's, books, shirts, concert tickets and products you try and fight against! Safe gaurding the spiritual growth of your home will by definition cast a wide net over many things. God bless you ladies for minding your homes the way you believe Gods word convicts you. My personal opinion; America will be a better place if God ever decides to purge Oprah from us!

Posted By: Kirk Morris | May 20, 2011 11:37 PM

I know this comment thread has veered off in another direction, but getting back to the original topic, I think Alicia Cohn makes an excellent point about how we can make an idol of anyone, Christian or not, when we glorify them and unquestioningly hang on their every word. We need to be very careful that we don't take the words of any human as gospel truth. All humans err, as we've found out the hard way watching star after star of the evangelical world succumb to one sin or another and crumble before our eyes.

I don't have much of an opinion on Oprah since I don't watch her show, although her interest in New Age beliefs has made me wary of her. However, I have quite a few thoughts on Stefani Germanotta (aka, Lady Gaga).

I'm consistently shocked at how beloved Germanotta is even by followers of Christ. I've been listening to pop music for so long that I easily recognize hits they now call "vintage," and I've heard a lot of great tunes, but I haven't seen this kind of fervor over anyone since Michael Jackson even though her music is virtually indistinguishable from that of any other female dance pop "artist."

No, what's different about Germanotta isn't her music; it's her belief system. Just like I haven't seen this much buzz about a pop singer since Michael Jackson, I also haven't seen a pop singer this dedicated to thumbing her nose at God since Madonna. She seems to DELIGHT in flouting the church. Her videos are FILLED with images of filth and ugliness, including the mockery of Christian symbolism. The graphic sexual and violent content in her videos is akin to the stuff that used to be banned from MTV before 10:00PM. Now it's just another way to fill an afterschool time slot.

All this is to say nothing of her own testimony in interviews. How can anyone doubt that a woman who wants to teach her fans to "worship themselves" stands for anything but evil? That is the POLAR OPPOSITE of what Christ calls us to do. Germanotta has stated herself that she supports drug use, homosexuality and bisexuality, and casual sex. She dresses without regard to modesty (some of her public costumes border on indecent exposure) and peppers her speech with vulgarity. Plus, you don't have to listen to her very long to realize how arrogant she is.

For a long time, I wondered how so many people, including Christians, could be so fooled by this woman. And then I remembered...the devil can appear as an angel of light. She tells us just what we want to hear, doesn't she? It seems like such a beautiful message--self-acceptance, tolerance, peace. But as soon as she hooks you in and you open your ears for more, she sneaks in her true message--self-glorification, promiscuity, rebellion, materialism, and hatred of everything Christ stands for.

I've often wondered why a young woman who sounds like...well, everybody else...is so very famous. I know this is a strong statement, but I think she's given herself over to Satan, probably not in any conscious way but through her choices and actions. In return, the prince of this world has done everything possible to elevate her to a position where she can get his message out to impressionable ears.

Parents, please think about this before you let your kids listen to her and make a role model out of her. We know that you can't serve two masters, and it's clear that the Living God is not the one she serves.

Posted By: TheLordIsMyShepherd | May 21, 2011 9:21 PM

Hi Drea, I apologize for not replying sooner. Was busy all day yesterday. Drea, I want to let you know that I certainly respect you as a person, I respect your views and what you have to say. No question about it. My only issue was that it is not possible to make an absolute statement about anything that can be scientifically tested such as "the Bible is irrelevant". In fact, in the science business, we know that all our observations and interpretations are the result of hypothesis testing and we can never completely disprove a hypothesis.

On the other hand things like "Is there a God" can never be tested scientifically, so when people have a range of opinions and make absolute statements such as "there is no God", or "there is a God", whatever their opinion maybe, even if I disagree with it, I still respect it.

Now while your assertion that the Bible is irrelevant bothered me in that sense, your other assertion that the Bible is not a divine book in your opinion, is something that I completely respect. That cannot be scientifically tested (only theologically) and thus you do have grounds to make such a statement based on logical reasoning.

As a believer, I completely understand your doubts regarding the Bible's divine inspiration, especially in the light of the human factor involved in putting together the NT canon. I am beginning to understand that this is the root of your doubts regarding the Bible and while it is a separate issue from what we were discussing above, I think you are addressing a core issue of the Christian faith.

While we cannot discuss that here (feel free to email me on maranatha_patrick@yahoo.com), I would like to assure you that many Christians believe in the Bible's inspiration being fully aware of how the Canon was put together. Thus my faith is not shaken in the BIble, despite knowing that fallible men put it together. there is a reason for this which we obviously cannot discuss here, but it stems from belief in the person of Christ and His message. It is very difficult to explain it here. Basically, faith in the Bible follows because of faith in Christ and not the other way around. Sadly, many Christians have it the other way around and that is the source of our problem for many other issues as well.

Peace. I will stop these discussions on this blog at this point since we are way off topic.

Posted By: Vijay | May 22, 2011 9:16 AM

I personally deplore Madonna, but, dogonit!, I love some of/ her music. LADY GAGA may be an equal talent; no denying it. It is not necessary for me to wait until she 'gets hers': idols-worshipers will/do get their 'come-upance'. 'God is not mocked.' Maybe we should have more faith in God and his veracity as Judge over all; that fact tends to take the edge off of my judgementalism.

'Outrage' is precisely what she and Madonna have always wanted.

Posted By: CBob | May 31, 2011 11:24 PM

it's either Lady Gaga is craving for so much attention and FAME -VAINGLORY- or she is pure E.V.I.L. who preys on people's weakness for "music" eventually leading them into the fiery abyss of idolatry and satanism, if this is her intention, we are indeed entitled to put a stop to it for it states:

"THOU SHALT NOT SUFFER A WITCH TO LIVE." -Exodus 22:18

Posted By: EvilHaaater_12 | June 2, 2011 12:08 AM

On Lady Gaga...she is an artist, doing her craft, pushing the envelope...it must be liberating. I think her "little monsters" celebrate that with her. I am intrigued enough hear what she has to sing/wear/say, but not endorse/embrace/judge.

On Oprah...she and Martha Stewart gave us the scope of branding well; I see it being copied in the Christian-celebrity market, full-tilt.

Are both creating a religious experience among their fans? How will we know unless we get informed and actually read an interview or listen to a song or watch a show or performance...thanks for the post.

Posted By: Trixie | June 10, 2011 1:24 PM

Post a comment:

Name:

Email Address:

URL:

Remember Me?

Comments: (you may use HTML tags for style)

Verification (needed to reduce spam):

I'm Not Julia: Why Obama's American Woman Doesn't Speak for Me

Mourning with Those Who Mourn on Mother’s Day

How Mother’s Day Hype Can Ruin Your Mother’s Day

Death to the Perfect Christian Woman

Amazing Grace, How Slow the Work: Why We Still Have Slaves

HBO’s Girls and Today’s Emerging Adult Women

Bearing Life in a Broken World: A Review of No Easy Choice

The Genealogy Gospel: Why We All Want to Know Our Family Tree

Where Are All the Women Apologists?

Why Marilynne Robinson, Narrative Calvinist, Doesn't Fear Fox News