- RSS FeedSubscribe
- « Previous PostA La Carte (05/02)
- Next Post »A La Carte (05/03)
The People Who Shape Our World
- 05/02/06
- 41
The recent edition of Time Magazine features “The People Who Shape Our World.” Time has created a list of 100 men and women whose power, talent or moral example, they feel, is transforming our world. It is important to note, before we take a peek at this list, that it is not really the world which these people shape. Rather, it is people within the world that are shaped and transformed by these people. A person can only shape the world by shaping the people in the world. So bear that in mind as we move along here.
Having reviewed this list, the cynic in me does not hold out much hope for the world. Here are some of the men and women who are apparently shaping the world we live in. The first category is of artists and entertainers—“influential stars [who have] won fans and spawned imitators around the globe.”
- J.J. Abrams
- George Clooney
- Dixie Chicks
- Ellen DeGeneres
- Wayne Gould
- Philip Seymour Hoffman
- Arianna Huffington
- Ang Lee
- Renzo Piano
- Rain
- Rachael Ray
- Jeff Skoll
- Kiki Smith
- Will Smith
- Zadie Smith
- Howard Stern
- Meryl Streep
- Reese Witherspoon
- Rob Pardo
- Daddy Yankee
- Tyra Banks
- Dane Cook
- Matt Drudge
- Stephen Colbert
I only rarely watch movies and television and almost never listen to the radio so am not entirely up-to-date on Hollywood’s latest shining stars, but I had a great deal of trouble thinking that most of these people could possibly shape our world. And even more so, I had trouble understanding why anyone would want to emulate and idolize many of these people and allow themselves to be shaped by them. For again, a person can only shape the world by shaping the people in the world. To be influential a person must have influence over others.
On this list we have such notables as the Dixie Chicks. Their influence is felt in disrespecting and scorning their President, setting a terrible example to their fans of people who loudly and proudly disregard authority. We have Ellen DeGeneres and Ang Lee who are notable primarily for being advocates and champions of the homosexual agenda. There is Reese Witherspoon who really has not done much of anything beyond acting in quite a few movies. Howard Sterm has popularized all manner of perversity and profanity while Tyra Banks complains and has a lot of plastic surgery. Rachael Ray teaches people to cook (I know this because I saw an episode of her show once while flying from Los Angeles to Atlanta).
The article goes on to list Scientists & Thinkers, Leaders & Revolutionaries, Heroes & Pioneers and Builders & Titans. Some of the names are familiar to just about anyone. Others are not. Noticably absent from this list was a firm Christian presence (and yes, I do realize that “Christians” Bono and Pope Benedict were represented).
As I thought about this list I was reminded of something Os Guinness wrote in The Call. He discusses fame and heroism and the call of Christ. He provides three reasons that heroism has fallen on hard times. The first of these is the modern habit of bebunking. Modern people are (often necessarily) cynical and “look straightaway not for the golden aura but for the feet of clay, not for the stirring example but for the cynical motive, not for the ideal embodied by for the energetic press agent.” The third reason is the death of God in Western society, or as Guinness terms it, “the drowning out of the call of God in modern life.” Having lost a perspective of the transcendence of human life, we can no longer properly talk about an ideal human character. In previous generations, to be a great human being was to be a “knight of the faith.” This is, of course, no longer the case. Because there is no Caller and no higher calling, there is no knights of faith and no one who can dub them.
It is the second reason, though, that most gripped me. Guinness points to the press and media and their role in creating the modern celebrity. He did this long before “American Idol” and the rise of the “reality” show. These forces widen the gap between “fame and greatness, heroism and accomplishment.” It used to be that heroism was linked to the honor of accomplishment so that only those were regarded as heroes who had actually made some grand accomplishment, whether in “character, virtue, wisdom, the arts, sports or warfare.” Sadly, this is no longer the case. Today we find that the media offers a shortcut to fame—“instantly fabricated famousness with no need for the sweat, cost and dedication of true greatness. The result is not the hero but the celebrity, the person famously described as ‘well-known for being well-known.’ A big name rather than a big person, the celebrity is someone for whom character is nothing, coverage is all.”
Guinness often points to Winston Churchill as a true hero. Churchill was a flawed man, but one who rose to true fame, greatness and heroism through character, virtue, wisdom and warfare. Churchill was able to say once that “I know why logs spit. I know what it is to be consumed.” Yet through the trials he developed great character and has been memorialized as a true hero. Guinness points to Moses who was a man ablaze with a passion for God. Moses was transformed from being a man of action to a man of words and slowly became a leader, a prophet, a hero who was given the tribute “Since then, no prophet has risen in Israel like Moses, whom the Lord knew face to face.”
The heroes and influencers of our culture are rarely heroic. We prefer fleeting fame to grand accomplishment, coverage to character. Sadly, it seems that this lack of discernment is seen within the church as much as without. Many of the men and women who have risen to the ranks of influencers and leaders within the church lack the godliness and character that ought to set apart those to whom we give special honor. How else to we explain T.D. Jakes, Joyce Meyer, Creflo Dollar and so many other Christian “heroes?”
Great men and women will have great heroes. This was brought home to me last week when I had the privilege of touring through the offices and library of Dr. Albert Mohler. On the walls of the library and his offices were portraits of truly great men—Charles Spurgeon, John Knox, William Tyndale and other heroes of church history. There was even a portrait of Winston Churchill and several biographies of the man. Clearly Dr. Mohler is deliberately surrounding himself by the examples of men who are truly great—men whose example he can learn from and emulate.
Like Dr. Mohler, I aspire to be a great man. I don’t much care if you or anyone else remembers my name months or years from now, as long as God knows me as a man who knew and loved and honored Him. I wish to be great in His eyes. If I am to strive after godliness and to become a man who is great in God’s eyes, I must pay close attention to who influences me, to who shapes my world. I must know for certain that I will imitate those I allow to influence me. And thus I must be sure that those who influence me are not merely those who are well-known for being well-known, but those who are men and women of character, virtue and wisdom.
I am a follower of Jesus Christ, a husband to Aileen and a father to three young children. I worship and serve as a pastor at 
Releasing on April 1, The Next
Published in 2008, this book
This is a guide that calls men,
This review of the bestselling
New to the site? You can get
This is a guide written
Comments (41)
bleh…
Forgive me for being so profound in my comment here… but it is all my mind could continually think of as I read through that list.
Tim: Rachel Ray apparently does more than cook… word is she was in a recent issue of “FHM” or “Maxim” or one of the other softcore porn mags. Obviously, this makes her one of the world’s most influential people. She can cook and be a sex-symbol. Next she’ll be up for the Nobel Prize!
What we need to consider is that this list is not merely an accurate reflection of the “worldy” culture, but also speaks accurately to much of the visible church (please pay particular attention to the word “visible” prior to church). Although they might not be bold enough to admit it to themselves many of our “Christian” youth would much rather attend a concert or watch a movie or television show by the entertainers mentioned on that list then consider the glory of the one who has redeemed them. Entertainment seems to be the chief good in our society, and much of the church has bought into it. Whether it is rationalizing what we listen to or watch by stating, “but it is a great movie.” Or adopting those principles ourselves (i.e. church growth methods). When scripture teaches that the church is a holy nation, a people set apart for God, it seems that the church is looking more and more like the world. What is more alarming to me than professing believers holding up men like T.D. Jakes as heroes(which is very alarming don’t get me wrong), is when the church conforms to the world and sings the praises of George Clooney and The Dixie Chicks, based entirely on the fact that they entertain them.
“Rachel Ray apparently does more than cook… word is she was in a recent issue of “FHM” or “Maxim” or one of the other softcore porn mags.”
I guess that’s important. It’s good to be multi-talented, I guess.
“Rachel Ray apparently does more than cook…”
Is this a known fact? I wonder if there is a means to verify this (without actually checking out the magazines ourselves) before smearing her character unnecessarily. If it is true, then I grieve for her. If it is not true, then we should be more careful about posting rumors; even rumors about “influential” celebrities.
Lisa writes: Is this a known fact?
Yes. A quick Google search for “rachel ray FHM” finds many hits, including links to the pictures. It is referenced in answers.com and Wikipedia as well.
The pics aren’t pornographic, but suggestive. If you don’t wish to see them, I advise not clicking on any of the Google links.
Lisa, just do a Google image search if you have any doubts.
I guess I was hoping against hope that it wasn’t true. I don’t personally care about her celebrity status, but I am saddened by how this could influence others and how she could choose to degrade herself. Again, it’s a very sad reflection of our culture although I guess I should not be very surprised. Romans 1 speaks very loudly to American/Western culture day after day.
Since when does making fun of unbelievers promote godliness (reference “bleh…” comment)? For crying out loud, apart from God’s grace, you are among them. Does making fun of lost people promote the gospel to them or to believers? Also, if you truly believe in the depravity of man, why are you surprised that someone who is blind to Christ would behave or be expected to behave in a Christlike manner?
This was a list of “The People Who Shape Our World.” In that context, I’ll see that “bleh” and raise you a “yuck.” That’s not “making fun of unbelievers,” it’s commenting on their influence in the world. I am disgusted that Time considers them so influential, and that, in fact, they are very influential to many. No, it is not surprising, but I don’t think anyone has expressed surprise.
My first reaction to this list was that it should be labeled “most influential people as it seems to us who live in this celebrity/west/left coast cocoon”- though I realize not all on the list are far left of center types. Sadly, that list is probably more accurate than I want to admit.
Bo, “bleh” is not making fun of… it is an expression of justifiable sadness and sickness to the reality of what is defined as influential apart from Christ. It is not an expression of surprise but encompasses a bit of comprehension of what I truly deserve and from whence I came. Apologies for the total misunderstanding due to my lack of defining my initial reaction.
(By the way, my name is also Lisa… but I am not the Lisa making comments up there… I quite honestly don’t know who Rachel Ray is. I get the impression she cooks… among other things. Call me too sheltered, but I don’t watch much TV. So most of the people on the list I have never heard of, and yet the ones that I do recognize speak volumes of the depravity of man . I do agree with what this other Lisa says about the genuinely “sad reflection of our culture…”.)
And Bo… I mean that tearfully, not “holier than thou-fully”
Sincerely,the other Lisa
“‘Rachel Ray apparently does more than cook… word is she was in a recent issue of “FHM” or “Maxim” or one of the other softcore porn mags.
I guess that’s important. It’s good to be multi-talented, I guess.’”
So David, This is not making fun of unbelievers? Had someone just made this comment to Rachel Ray to her face, and then attempted to tell her of the love of Christ for her, do you think she would listen and see a heart of compassion for her?
This has created quite the debate — and some excellent food for thought. (It’s also exposed the limitations of blogging where you can’t interact face to face and hear another’s voice or see their expressions.) It’s made me realize I have much to learn about how I think about the world, our culture, and how I am to engage in it.
Here’s a turn in thought: I enjoy history and one era that I have read a bit of is WWII. Churchill is quite an amazing character. Should be consider him a hero, even though he was not a believer? Can we admire aspects of his character and strength even though there is no accompanying faith? I’m not so sure I know the answers. What do you think?
To do what I’m about to do is perhaps to run afoul of what Guinness says about cynics. Perhaps heroes are in the eyes of the beholder; perhaps heroism is a subjective matter. It seems to me that SOME (not all) of the well known Christian leaders enjoy their status by dint of celebrity. Your (Tim) words about celebrity creation by some in the world seems appropriate also to some of the big name people in Christian circles.
While there is undeniably some media machinery puffing Mohler, his work strikes me as qualitatively different than a celebrity Christian leader. Mohler has attained his status as an influential theologian by very hard work. Dever is starting to receive broader acclaim but his stature results from years of hard work not well known outside of certain circles. And while I likely disagree with each on some non-essential matter or another, I agree with you that both are models and inspirations.
Mohler and Dever are so very different in this regard from celebrity leaders who have mastered marketing or hired those who have mastered marketing or whose hard work is in an area like “entertainment” or “relevance” that is by definition ephemeral. I don’t doubt that it takes constant vigilance to be relevant, but the fruit of such vigilance is evanescent. I think Mohler and Dever and those like them are actually BUILDING something durable, by God’s grace. Would that more pastors would abandon image and style as their first loves and commit themselves to truly substantive matters.
Everywhere I turn I see more and more evidence of the truth of the “city of man” and the “city of God.” The antithesis is there - it’s evident. Unfortunately, some in the Church, too often, forget in which city they reside (by His blood). Thanks for the reminder.
TomDoctrine Matters
I appreciate your thoughts on heroes, Tim. I, too, was at the T4G conference and also toured Dr. Mohler’s library (at a preview conference the week before). One thing that is amazing is Dr. Mohler’s HUGE section on Winston Churchill. Like you, he clearly has a great appreciation for the heroic Brit!
I continue to be suspicious that when we get to heaven, we’ll find that the greatest of heroes will be the ones who came the closest to pure faithfulness, whatever that looked like for them. I think that’s the quality I recognize in Al Mohler, Mark Dever, Ligon Duncan, and CJ Mahaney… a desire to be faithful above all else.
Sorry I missed meeting you at T4G! It was a nuthouse, that’s for sure.
Lisa,You ask a good question about Churchill, and let me give my 2cents. Yes, absolutely! While I may be found guilty of liking Churchill too much, in my defense there is so much about Churchill to like!
Regarding his Christianity (or lack thereof), let me throw out the bone that there is much more to his Christian faith than is popularly known.
On the aspect of Churchill’s faith, let me recommend Stephen Mansfield’s short little bio on Churchill. While this particular work does not make my “Top 25” of Churchill biographies, it does at least push our eyes in the direction of Churchill’s religion - something most biographers don’t get around to doing b/c of the more weightier matters of statesmanship and war.
Bo,
Tim wasn’t making fun of anyone, and neither was Lisa. I get really tired of people who miss the point and can’t actually engage the topic but are quick to jump in and scold someone for their attitude or tone. Frankly, you have to have a pretty high opinion of yourself to play attitude cop like that. Lighten up.
While you might not agree with every position held by Bono or Pope Benedict, why take potshots at them? It would have made your point equally well IMO to say, “I noticed that the only Christians who made the list were Catholic.” None of us can say for certain that Bono or Benedict are merely “Christian,” not Christian. Who knows, perhaps even Rachel Ray will one day end up being among us elect!
Catholics may be in serious error (and yes, I did read your live-blog of RC Sproul’s talk!), but I don’t think that this post was the place to take that issue up again. I think you diluted what otherwise would have been a well-taken point.
David,
You win.
Tim, I tried leaving a trackback, but it will not work - got a big long error message saying your trackback URL didn’t exist. :(
The Dixie Chicks!!! I was wondering who was moving and shaping things around here!
Thanks, Tim!:-)
I’m surprised that Paris Hilton didn’t make the list. Talk about someone who is “well-known for being well-known” with zero accomplishments to her name. A perfect example of what it means to become a celebrity in our culture.
Tim said,
“I aspire to be a great man…great in God’s eyes”.
How are you defining “great”? Do you think God requires you to be great? Or is that your flesh talking?
It seems to me that God delights in your worship and your holiness, neither of which require you to be “great”.
Leslie said,
> Tim said,>> “I aspire to be a great man…great in God’s eyes”.
> How are you defining “great”?
I think he defined it right there — “great in God’s eyes”. Greatness, as defined (ultimately) by God doesn’t preclude holiness, worship, or humility. In fact I would dare say that they are requisite. Now, greatness as defined by man, bleh.
Purely by the grace of God alone, I want to be great in God’s eyes too! I want Him to say “Well, done good and faithful servant”… and not “You just didn’t get it, Lisa.” or perhaps suddenly wake up to eternal burning hell because I was delluded and on a roller-coaster ride of self-sustained religion. I long to live a life that glorifies God… not to be great for the sake of getting praise from men, but great in the sense that I lived my life for the glory of God, preserved by God, progressively sanctified and being prepared for eternity for the great and amazing honor to PRAISE my Maker, my Heavenly Father, for ETERNITY.
I think you should be careful about Tyra Banks. I saw a program once and she had this Doctor actually complete a live test on public T.V. to verify that her breasts were authentic and not silicon as many tabloids had falsely claimed.
KTC -
Good point. FYI, though, Bono is not Catholic. I would guess that he rejects denominational distinctions as “labels”, but he is, in fact, Protestant. He met most of the members of U2 through a Protestant charismatic group in Ireland.
Hmmm. Let’s see. Christians should not make fun of non-believers, but it is OK to be hypercritical of the opinions of Christians. Interesting.
Tim, I thought this was a good post and was somewhat dismayed by the focus of the “world” on those of little ultimate contribution thereto.
But then I am prone to express more than a little “Christian cynicism.”
Amen! Yes Tim, great in the eyes of the Lord!
You know I believe some of the “greatest” saints are those who are quietly faithful to the task that God has called them to. I am certain that a stay at home mom who faithfully carries out the call on her life to minister to the needs of her famiily and circle of influence is valued in the eyes of the Lord as much as any other person also fulfilling the call of God on their lives, no matter what that call is. I feel certain we will all be surprised when we stand before our God and King to have our deeds exposed/ It will be interesting then to see who is “great” in the eyes of the Lord. I too, as you Tim, desire to have “well done though good and faithful servant, enter the joy of your reward.” spoken over my life by the only ONE who counts.
Tim you said,”while Tyra Banks complains and has a lot of plastic surgery.” Tyra banks is on the record and has stated in interviews she is against plastic surgery. Many in the modeling world have been critical of Tyra for being proud of her natural figure and looks - which are very different from the wafer thin bodies of almost everyone else in the modeling world. While you have some excellent points about our culture, I’m sure they can be made without the slander or gossip.
I think the Time list is probably accurate unfortunatley. We live and die by the media-Entertainment is god.
I didn’t get the Joyce Myer, TD Jake comparrison. I honestly have only had one experience with Joyce Myer, I sat waiting for two hours for her sermond to start, holding a hungry new born, watching her crew sell her stuff. I left before she spoke and I haven’t listened to her since. But I know many who love what she has to say and do consider her a hero in that she showed them the way to a deeper and truer walk with Jesus. TD Jakes, is sonmeone I know even less about, I heard him talk at the Presidential prayer breakfast and thought it was wonderful, it even made me cry. So I guess I don’t understand why they are so bad that you would use them as a “bad example” of Christian heros. Maybe you could enlighten me?
Joyce Meyers took in 90 million a year ago. Southern Seminary, one of the largest institutions of theological training in the world, taught thousands of students last year for well less than 40 million (and a portion of that was obviously paid for by the students themselves). 90 million for one woman and her ministry.40 million for 3-4000 future vocational ministers.Hmmm….
I still don’t get why she is bad, because she made money? Did she give some, any, most away? Is it bad to “make” money at all? What about TD Jakes, why is he a bad Hero? I really am trying to follow you here.
Featheriron,Meyers does not make money. As a IRS 501c(3), non-profit ministry, she only receives money from either direct donation contributions or from the sales of her books and conferences.
No, it is not wrong for a non-profit to have a sufficient flow of funding in order to operate their ministry. But 90 million dollars?
The St. Louis Post-Dispatch has written extensively about her, inferring that she is just a female version of the money-grabbing televangelists of the 80’s. That is what the secular press thinks of her due to major problems in how she operates the ministry (google to find the PD articles if you are interested in more).
The worst part is that it is not just a money grab, for when asked about the money she clearly states her theological position - “God wanted me to be rich with material blessings and He wants the same for you!” When combined with her own rags to riches story of personal failure turned into personal victory… it is quite compelling. Especially to financially struggling women whose husbands have left them and they are working 3rd shift to pay the bills.
I am in the middle of reading Martin Gilbert’s(Churchill’s official biographer) biography of Churchill. So far I have not seen any proof that Churchill was a Christian. Quite the contrary. Here is a quote from a letter to his mother when he was involved in fighting in the Sudan and Egypt conflicts as a young man: “I may be killed….But I can assure you I do not flinch -though I do not accept the Christian or any other form of religious belief.” I have not finished the biography, so perhaps there is some later evidence that he had a conversion experience. If not,however, then we should be careful to “christianize” heroes, such as many do with our founding fathers. God is really the one who shapes our world, and He uses whoever He chooses to do so. We can admire the courage and intelligence of those He uses throughout history to fulfill His sovereign purposes, without having to make them out as Christians.
That being said, if anyone knows if Churchill did have a conversion experience, then I would be interested in hearing about it.
Thank you for the detailed answer.
I worked for Jimmy Swaggart Ministries for 4 years right up till the first “fall”. There is nothing I can stomach less then a televangelist, maybe that is why I have never sat and watched her. I also detest the whole “christian’s should be rich” theology especially when the income comes from teaching about Jesus. All that being said, I do know many who really feel she has helped their walk with the lord. I would not be a christian today if not for the ministry of Jimmy Swaggart, SO God used a donkey ages ago and he uses them today too I guess :-)
This post encouraged me to go read the article. I actually think Time did a great job in selecting various kinds of people in various fields. It wasn’t just movie stars, celebrities and politicians. I felt the list had a depth that is not usually seen.
But the comments on this page really made me think. Does one have to be a Christian to be a hero? Or to be great? If you influence someone to become a better person is that meaningless because you don’t believe in Christ? I mean I understand that truly good acts can only be rooted in faith in Christ. But sinful people still do good things. Which “conservative, evangelical” person has worldwide influence to mobilize people all over the world to be interested in the AIDS crisis in Africa? Rick Warren has started to do some work in that area, but at this can we really say he has global influence to the point that nonbelievers and believers the world over will pay attention to the project just because he’s been involved? And let’s look at Angelina Jolie. Clearly Angelina is no saint. But isn’t she displaying God’s heart of compassion for the poor, by adopting children from other countries and trying to raise awareness about malnutrition and the miseducation of children? I just want to know where the “conservative, evangelical” people are who are impacting the world on various levels, not just studying theology and preaching sermons. I am not saying these things are not good or important, however one must admit that it might be a tad difficult for someone who is deep into the system of this world to just sit down and start reading “Systematic Theology” because it has good ideas and it was written by moral persons.
All I’m saying is: as Christians we need to do a better job of engaging the world. If we didn’t make Time’s list in great numbers, I think it’s indicative of the impact and influnce we have on the secular world.
I read this for the first time today, and I must say I was quite offended by the author’s referring to the Pope as “Christian.” If you have something to teach people about where they are going wrong, just do that. Don’t make disparaging remarks such as that. I am Catholic and it kind of hurt. Moderate your language. Even a “Christian” such as myself can tell you that is not the way a Christian (without quotation marks) should go about things.
I always was taught that the pope was the Antichrist http://www.ianpaisley.org/antichrist.asp