- RSS FeedSubscribe
- « Previous PostA La Carte (9/8)
- Next Post »A La Carte (9/9)
Who Shapes Your World?
- 09/08/08
- 20
Every now and again TIME Magazine features "The People Who Shape Our World." A couple of years ago, they 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, Rachael Ray, Will Smith, Howard Stern, Reese Witherspoon, Tyra Banks, Matt Drudge and Stephen Colbert.
I only rarely watch movies, have gotten rid of our cable 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, at least in a way that was at all positive. 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. 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, well, stars in movies. Howard Sterm has popularized all manner of perversity and profanity while Tyra Banks has a talk show and lots of surgery, I guess. 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. Noticeably absent from this list was a firm Christian presence (which I say despite Bono and Pope Benedict both being 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 debunking. 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 but 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 are 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 rightly 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 he slowly became a leader, a prophet, and a hero who was given the tribute "Since then, no prophet has risen in Israel like Moses, whom the Lord knew face to face." This is so vastly different from the Paris Hilton brand of celebrities in our culture who are known for being well known.
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 so many of the Christian "heroes" who are watched by millions and who sell millions of copies of their books?
Great men and women will have great heroes. This was brought home to me some time ago 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 with the examples of men who are truly great--men whose example he can learn from and emulate. I've since toured other similar libraries and time and again I see portraits and biographies of great men and women--people who are heroes in the truest, purest sense of the word.
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 will not find too many of those in the lists of "People Who Shape Our World."
I am a follower of Jesus Christ, a husband to Aileen and a father to three young children. I write books and blogs for fun while doing web design and consulting for a living. I worship and serve at 
Published in 2008, this book
This is a guide that calls men,
This review of the bestselling
New to the site? You can get
Comments (20)
It doesn't surprise me that those recognized for shaping the world are those who are most 'in the world'.
Give me the men and women who are concerned about eternity.
Give me Moses, who 'chose to be mistreated along with the people of God rather than to enjoy the pleasures of sin for a short time. He regarded disgrace for the sake of Christ as of greater value than the treasures of Egypt (the world), because he was looking ahead to his reward.'
Our purpose in this world is not to consume or conserve life, but to create it. The life God intended in Creation. The life He allows us to participate in creating through our families and evangelism. Eternal life in relationship to Him.
Thanks for the reminder Tim.
Good thoughts.
Martin Luther King was an inspiration to many. But when he was shot and killed, the riots were horrendous. And yet these people who caused all the destruction, were doing just the opposite that King did when they white supremists fire bombed his house.He was an amzzing guy. The firemen who wnet to the Twin Towers and gave their lives, in order to save lives were inspiring.But we need to remmeber we are sinners, being inspired by sinners. And it can be good, but we need to never forget, "But for the grace of God,.."
King David is an inspiration, and also a man who did despicable things. As did Jacob, Abraham, and others. But they are heros of the faith.
Indeed, a noble desire. He is great in God's eyes who has what it matters: "For God opposes the proud but gives grace to the humble."
To build on what Brian said, it seems to me more like these "world shapers" have themselves been shaped by the spirit of this age. Plus ça change, plus c'est la même...
Tim, for the most part - of course I agree with your conclusion and thesis about influencing and being influenced by the right things.
My push back for you is one of tone - it seems like it had a tinge of self-righteousness. This paragraph in particular.
"I only rarely watch movies, have gotten rid of our cable 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, at least in a way that was at all positive. 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."
Some other helpful thoughts from this sort of piece could be an attempt to understand people and their culture:
- What are people looking for by embracing a culture of celebrity? How might God have you connect with those people and share Jesus with them? - What part of their story (even in depravity) might show some longing for something transcendent. I don't think they are "looking for God" but perhaps God might be doing something in people that we can seek to understand and connect with. It seems Paul did this in Acts on several occasions (Lystra and Athens both come to mind) and articulated as much in 1 Cor 9.- What would the non Christian down the street understand about a Christians view of them given your article?
Just some questions I think might add something to the discussion...and many thanks for warning me about the Dixie Chicks :)
I think your post is right on the money Tim. The immoral cesspit which is Hollywood is not to emulated but rather avoided. To be great in God's sight - that is something of real value.
Perhaps a more accurate heading would be "The People Who Misshape Our World".JBC
Christians need to re-think their admiration of Winston Churchill. We have bought into the culture of war that accepts the notion that the most willing to sacrifice life for the state are the great leaders. Churchill, in my view was cynically willing to sacrifice millions for the preservation of the British empire. He had ambition of greatness that contrasts greatly with what a Christian citizen should want for his country. WWI was the destruction of Christendom and Churchill played a significant part in it. His pride kept him sacrificing troops in the Dardanelles beyond all reason. The bombing of civilian populations in Germany in WWII was immoral and set a new standard for unjust war. To name but a few reasons, I don't get the worship of Churchill, other than if you were in a fight he was relentless.
Doug (#8),
You raise some interesting points worth pausing to consider. Even as one fascinated with the Last Lion (as William Manchester calls Winston Churchill), I agree with everything you have said except for WWI being the end of Christendom - but that's a topic for another time.
Lambeth Palace has an intriguing article about Churchill's Christianity (of lack thereof).
It sheds some light on Churchill's 'religious sense' via primary sources.
I thought Hitler was out to destroy Great Britian, as he was out to conqueror the world, wasn't he? Shouldn't the nation of Great Britian fought against such an evil regime? And shouldn't a leader like Churchhill be an inspiartion for a nation that was almost annihilated?I heard that London was leveled just about to the ground by Hitler's war planes.I must be missing something here?
Tim, Reid makes a good point.
Reid makes a good point.
Am I wrong to assume that the whole world, from then until now, up and down humankind's scaling of society, is inclusive in the great commission? Everyone needs to hear and see the Love of Jesus...from those of us that know it.
When we start categorizing sin groups as untouchable / unreachable we do we not become (at least in our own minds) arbiters of the law and grace of God. Fame is a silly little game that people play. If we truly believe that God is sovereign and the controller of our destinies, then isn't this post's point a bit moot. So what if man sets up tiers of recognition
It's my guess that God honored the prayers of a humble, elderly village widow (who no one knew) that stopped Hitler. God may have used Churchill to accomplish His designs, but prayer warriors are always God's real movers and shakers.
Tim, Mark, and any other Discerning Readers,
I'm going a little off topic, but I would like recommendations for a good, concise (read short to medium length) bio of Churchill and also of Harry Truman--something engaging that I could read at a leisurely pace in three weeks or so. Any suggestions? Thanks.
DougI appreciate where you are coming from, but please understand, Britian was fighting for there survival. Churchill knew they were only weeks or even days away from being wiped out. Hitler would have extermintated much of the resistance once they were conquered. War is a bloody mess, any way you slice it, your actions, as noble and necessary as they may seem at the time, will always meet the scorn of those who don't fully understand it, and weren't there.
I do not worship Churchill, I worship Christ, but I do respect many of the decisions made by Churchill, as they helped prolong the invation of Britian and save the lives of countless people. However at the same time I could just look at all the sins he committed and stand and wag my finger, but I have too many sins of my own to be busy ridiculing dead mens pasts.
I thank God that men like Churchill have'nt met with the full extent of their depravity, and as twisted as Hitler was, I thank God he was not as manifestly wicked as he could have been. Please consider these thoughts and I hope you take time to reflect on not only our lives and how we have lived in the sight of God, but how we all fail and fall into sin in our own ways.
You and I, Churchill and Hitler are all sinners, and all deserve Gods wrath, I don't know if either of them were Christians, they may have repented in their dying moments, I don't know, but I do know he offers us the same grace and mercy he offered them.
God bless.
Kevin (#12),
Thanks for the question. Always happy to recommend a book!
A helpful, readable, and engaging primer on Sir Winston is Never Give In: The Extraordinary Character of Winston Churchill by Stephen Mansfield, in the Leaders in Action series published by Cumberland House. I haven't ventured into Churchill biographies outside of Martin Gilbert and Roy Jenkins, so I'm really not up on what else is out there.
And I'm definitely not up on Harry Truman, so I wouldn't dare to help you there!
Curtis , Mark and Donsands,
Those who say Jesus is Lord, in my mind, should be so repulsed by men like Churchill that regardless of his determination and ability to play a needed role in a crisis, that we could never call him a hero. He must be judged by the moral standards of Scripture.
Pat Buchannan just wrote a book on WWII that devestates the Churchill myths. Every war produces such horrors that in order to live with them we need to create great heroes, Lincoln and Churchill are two examples, in order to feel justified.
Churchill was in charge of the British Navy during WWi and his insistence on the Naval blockade of Germany in WWI, of even food supplies starved 750,000 civilians from the outset of the war and for many months afterwards until Germany signed the one sided Versailles Treaty. Again defied biblical concepts of just war, set forth by the church since Augustine. The nighttime bombing of civilian targets in WWII, is to me a new low. It did not end or even shorten the war or protect Briatain from the Luftwaffe, in fact you could argue that the desire to payback the people of Germany was so strong that Churchill shifted bombing from military targets, and harmed the British people.
Churchill was only exceeded by Truman, the first and only user of nuclear weapons in warfare again against civilian targets. All to enforce Churchill and Roosevelt's unconditional surrender demand, when Japan was ready to surrender, had offered to if we would allow the emperor to remain (which ironically we later did allow, but only after killing a quarter million civilians, and Hiroshima contained no real military targets). That was a Hitler like war crime IMO.
Churchill was an opportunist, a believer in empire, a racist without question (British colonialism was based on a racist view of the right of whites to invade and rule, you can say it did a lot of good but the racism was at the core).
So Christians, wake up, we have a lot of thinking to do about war and heroes and the limits of state authority to ask us to be involved in murder. I am not a pacifist and believe in killing in self defense only as a last resort, after an attack has begun, not to prevent one. As much as possible we are to live at peace with all men, that men staying out unless invited, not stealing or harming them, instead loving our enemies. How many Muslims would hate us enough to commit suicide to kill us
How many evangelicals are willing to send their children to invade and occupy a nation that presented no threat and had not harmed them? They never question it because they have been taught to admire Churchill and others like him.
Wait , that is right Britain did invade and occupy Iraq, Saudi Arabia, etc. Remember the double cross that was Lawrence of Arabia? We did the same thing to Saddam. Set him up and then took him down. That is the price of empire, you have to be ruthless to get in the game. it is the opposite of the Great Commission, the satanic counterfeit.
Um, Tim, you can either be an informed culture critic or an innocent naif -- but you can't do both. Reading your woefully ill-informed condemnation of cultural figures is like watching the Church Lady pinch her face up into pious denunciations as she proceeds to get all the facts wrong. Cringe-worthy, really. I recommend you stick with the pious and sheltered innocent schtick.
And, as other readers have already pointed out, there is plenty of biographical material available on Churchill. You can branch out beyond the hero-worshipping hagiographies so preferred by right-wing apologists.
"I am not a pacifist and believe in killing in self defense only as a last resort, after an attack has begun, not to prevent one. "
So you wouldn't have tried to prevent Pearl Harbour? The attack has to happen, and thousands of innocent people have to die, then we can kill them back.
Christians need to re-think their admiration of Winston Churchill. We have bought into the culture of war that accepts the notion that the most willing to sacrifice life for the state are the great leaders. Churchill, in my view was cynically willing to sacrifice millions for the preservation of the British empire. He had ambition of greatness that contrasts greatly with what a Christian citizen should want for his country.
I've been reading a lengthy biography of Churchill and it is making me reconsider my admiration for Churchill. However, I do think he can rightly be regarded as a hero, not for every aspect of his life, but for character he showed in one of history's darkest moments. I certainly do not condone all that he did or was--but I do think he was the right man at the right time and that he was heroic in the circumstances.
My push back for you is one of tone - it seems like it had a tinge of self-righteousness. This paragraph in particular.
That's probably a fair critique. I meant to point to my ignorance in matters of culture, but I can see how it could easily have read differently. I should have been more clear.
I recommend you stick with the pious and sheltered innocent schtick.
OK then...
I’m going a little off topic, but I would like recommendations for a good, concise (read short to medium length) bio of Churchill and also of Harry Truman—something engaging that I could read at a leisurely pace in three weeks or so. Any suggestions? Thanks.
I don't know of any short to medium ones. I'm reading Martin Gilbert's biography of Churchill and will soon begin McCullough's book on Truman. Both come in at around 1000 pages. I'm not sure that either could be done justice in much less than that!
Tim, Check out this article today for a further revision of your view of Churchill, I fear you will be regarded as a dangerous radical in evangelical circles. Certain orthodoxies we are not to question, you know. :)
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/newstopics/britainatwar/2990111/Winston-Churchill-Secret-conversations-reveal-views-on-Stalin-and-Gandhi.htmlThanks for your labors,
Doug
donsands,
OK, an imminent attack, when it is certain enough to justify the killing, a gun pointed, a naval armada on its way to deliver attack despite warning, or a drawn back fist I can't escape.
I am not arguing for no self-defense, although turning the other cheek should be considered as our our Lord instructed (that decision should more lightly than to fight) just against preventive war as practiced especially by the West for the last 100 years.
Picking a fight and getting someone else so mad or desperate they come at you is a sin and in that case war would not be justified in response. Many have argued that is just what Roosevelt did to Japan. Politicians are part of the cause of war wars, they don't just happen. The German and Japanese people did not just wake up one morning and decide to leave their farms and factories and go on a killing spree.