June 15, 2012
"Jesus Take the Wheel" was a hit for the American Idol turned superstar, Carrie Underwood, when it came out, and the song seemed fitting for the young lady who touted her Christian faith throughout her rise to stardom.
The song featured a troubled woman whose life, just like the car she drove, was spinning out of control until she called upon Jesus to take the wheel of both her car and her life, and with this song, it appeared that the rising superstar was the “devout Christian” that one report pegged her to be – so goes the rumor.
Underwood’s recent affirmation of gay marriage, however, brings that assessment into serious question. Taking what she believed to be the moral high-road, Carrie said what so many others say, "It's not up to me to judge anyone," she noted, and then tops her verbal affirmation with a walk to match her talk by attending, per the report, a "gay-friendly nondenominational church" (http://music.yahoo.com/blogs/our-country/carrie-underwood-supports-gay-marriage-001952640.html).>
It doesn’t really surprise me. The entertainment industry is replete with backward thinking, but the fact that so many professing Christians in "high places," like Carrie, discard the kind of thinking that makes moral judgment possible in the first place, is a bit troubling. How can she think, for example, that she can affirm one thing, here gay marriage, without trampling underfoot the divine paradigm so explicitly stated in the Bible she claims to believe? Fact is, however, Carrie's affirmation of gay marriage is a subtle but sure judgment upon the very Bible and faith she purports to revere. In her efforts to avoid 'judging" others, gays particularly, she opted to pass judgment upon the very God she claims to serve. In doing so, she denied Scripture's authority and declaration of ultimate reality; namely, God, and those contingent realities for which this same God is responsible for creating, including, but not limited to, the sexes, sexuality, and marriage. In other words, never mind that her defense of gay marriage tramples antithetical thinking, because the reality is, her refusal to “judge” the gay community passes “judgment," by default, upon the very God who created the marital paradigm in the first place. Never mind that the Bible presents God as the architect of men and women as complimentary partners and marriage between them as the marital paradigm that Jesus affirmed and then confirmed with his physical resurrection. Never mind that Jesus said, "He that is not with me is against me" (Luke 11:23), and since Jesus was against any other marital model than the one He created and confirmed, i.e. antithetical thinking, then any other conclusion is "against" him. In Carrie's defense, however, I really don’t expect her to be as well-versed in theology or ethical theory as some, but I do expect those who claim to believe the Bible to think in a way at least somewhat consistent with its content as the authority they claim it has over their lives. I expect them to understand that the affirmation of one standard is the automatic rejection, or "judgment," of that which contradicts it - something that many professing Christians, Underwood included, just don’t get. I do expect those who believe the Bible to be uncomfortable living in the same world of contradiction in which the world at large lives. Ironically, Underwood just snatched the "Wheel" back from Jesus and kicked him out of the car in the process. Tony can be reached at Tony@link2eternity.com
- Print print this page
- Discuss 8 comments, Blog about
Comments
Easygoing 11 months, 1 week ago
Never understood this unyielding adherence to the translated words from some book of fables written maybe 2 to 4 thousand years ago by desert nomads claiming the entire word was created in 6 days. Buddhism and Hinduism are probably just as realistic and useful. It wasn't too many years ago when many Christians were claiming the world was flat (Daniel 4:11).
link2eternity 11 months, 1 week ago
Hello Easygoing,
Just thought I would respond to your allegations above.
Buddhism and Hinduism just as "realistic" and "useful"? If by "realistic" you mean equally true, then, perhaps you should study the three, Christianity included, but the fact is that all contradict one another at the most foundational level. Hence, the idea that B. and H. are "just as realistic" strikes at the heart of logic itself, the law of non-contradiction specifically. They cannot be equally "realistic" unless you mean that they are all absolutely false. That is probably what you mean, but just stating it offers no evidence for your position.
As for the translational work, the accuracy rate is around 99.9 percent per the comparisons made over the years involving older and numerous discoveries. If I'm not mistaking there are over 6000 manuscripts by which to measure the translational accuracy - document and pieces of documents found in different places and from various ancient time periods, in fact. No other work of antiquity can come close to this volume of evidence nor its consistency.
As for the idea that "It wasn't too many years ago when many Christians were claiming the world was flat (Daniel 4:11)," there are a couple of issues.
a. First, what Christian's believe may not accurately reflect the voice of Scripture. Second, and more importantly, the text you cite does not deal with what "Christians" actually believe, but reflect your opinion that Scripture itself errs on its perception of reality - an idea easily answered with the consideration of the context.
b. the statement was not an ipso facto statement about reality but a metaphor indicative of Nebuchadnezzar's dream, power, and fall. The kingdom was a great world power with great influence.
c. while Daniel 4:11 was not a statement about reality that missed its mark, Isaiah 40:22 is a statement that hit the proverbial "bull's-eye." This passage says, "It is he that sitteth upon the circle of the earth, and the inhabitants thereof are as grasshoppers; that stretcheth out the heavens as a curtain, and spreadeth them out as a tent to dwell in."
I would hope that you investigate the issue personally rather than don the typical arguments of the skeptic.
Tony
SH59 11 months, 1 week ago
link2eternity, have you studied the Logia fragments and how do you reconcile some of the contradictions found there in relation to the Bible as we know it today?
link2eternity 11 months ago
Hello SH59,
I am vaguely familiar with the Logia Fragments. Regarding the "contradictions," and I am assuming you mean the contradictions between the fragments and the Bible, I see no need to "reconcile" them. It is possible that other ancient documents contradict the Bible without being a threat to the Bible's content. Many extra-biblical material contradicts Scripture. The apocrypha, for example, is not part of the Bible, the "Protestant" versions, that is. The Gnostic gospels are not part of the accepted canon either, but the fact that contradiction exists between those other ancient documents and the 66 books we call the Bible does no harm to the conservative view of the Bible. Contradiction between what those documents say and what the Bible says, is not a real problem. Not sure if I understood your question perfectly, but I hope this helps.
Tony
link2eternity 11 months ago
SH59,
I probably should have added that those contradictions are usually related to the person and work of Jesus. The Bible's historicity and translational accuracy has long been defended and established. Those sayings and works attributed to Jesus by the Gospels are well established and confirmed by the physical resurrection. Hence, the grounds for rejecting those sayings and works attributed to him that are out of known character.
Hope this clarifies some.
Tony
SH59 11 months ago
There is the discovery of a parchment written by Jesus stating that heaven is here on earth. It is acknowledged in the King James Bible as a foot note. This is a conflict relating to the common Bible as we know it. There are many other notations worth researching in the Logia fragments.
SH59 11 months ago
My point is, the Bible isn't a concrete document.
link2eternity 11 months ago
Hello again, SH59,
Not sure what you mean by "concrete" in regard to the bible.
I would not say that every fragment is worthless and may, in fact, give insight to certain historical particulars, but since the testimony of the Bible is so good concerning Jesus and confirmed with his physical resurrection, those testimonies concering the Messiah are accurate and serve as the plumline on Jesus, his life and ministry.
The bible was completed within a few decades of Jesus death, burial, and resurrection. it was written by mostly eyewitnesses, particulalry to the resurrected Christ, or by a close associate to the apostles, Luke for example. The witnesses were reliable, particularly since most of them gave their lives for the truth claims they made with the physical resurrection being central to their Gospel - a clear indication that they really beleived that they saw Jesus inhis resurrected body.
The evidence for the bible's authenticity and accuracy is phenomenal.
If you could clarify what you mean it will give me a better indication as to where I need to go with the answer.
Enjoying the interaction.
Tony
Sign in to comment
Or login with:
OpenID