Letters

Grand Ole Oprah

It saddens me to think Oprah Winfrey is comforting others with such sentiments as “When you lose a loved one, you gain an angel whose name you know” [“The Church of O,” April 1].

She makes spirituality easy, simple, and self-motivating. What real spiritual power could be wielded if Oprah were using the Word of God to comfort others. Instead, she says, “One of the biggest mistakes we make is to believe there is only one way. There are many diverse paths leading to God.”

Thanks but no thanks, Oprah, Phil, Deepak, Iyanla, Marianne, and Gary. I’ll stick with Jesus’ statement, “I am the way, and the truth, and the life. No one can come to the Father but through me.”

Maybe Oprah’s next Book Club selection should be the Bible.

Cindy GlanzerLoveland, Colorado

Thank you for not bowing to “Pope-rah” Winfrey and her brand of spirituality. I do hope this is an eye-opener for so many Christians who want to see Christ in everything that is “good.”

Wholesome or positive media do not necessarily mean Christian media; yet I often hear Christians espousing the virtues of certain movies and TV programs (e.g., Oprah’s Dr. Phil, Touched By an Angel, etc.) without analyzing the content for signs of the true gospel.

Use of the word God has become virtually meaningless in America. It can mean anything from inner strength to Satan himself. Oprah’s spirituality, though laced with Christian terminology, is not only devoid of biblical understanding but is also a deceptive counterfeit that leads people away from salvation.

Trish HaunFort Worth, Texas

I wish LaTonya Taylor well as she indicates she “would love to do a book on Oprah,” as quoted in Inside CT [“Using a Knife, Fork, and Spoon,” April 1]. If that happens, it is my hope that this gifted young African American writer might understand that even as she and I find “power, grace, and love … through a personal relationship with Jesus Christ,” many persons, Oprah Winfrey included, might articulate their relationship in different ways and still embrace that power, grace, and love.

Winfrey’s program is another “vehicle for elucidating important Christian principles,” as Stephen L. Carter says of the film A Beautiful Mind in the same issue of CT [“A Beautiful Reminder”]. I believe that an unconscious/conscious error we who call ourselves Christians make is to demean and dismiss persons and their productions/creations because they do not fit our sometimes subjective and narrow views of what a “relationship” with Jesus Christ should be.

We run the risk of limiting a Spirit “that blows where it will” when we dismiss the possibility that the Spirit just might be moving through an Oprah Winfrey. She does not claim to be a preacher. I do not think she considers her program a “church,” but I imagine there are those who come closer to having a spiritual experience through her program than they do in many a church.

Gilbert H. CaldwellRetired United Methodist ministerDenver, Colorado

The gospel according to Oprah offends no one, promises everything, and asks nothing except that devotees earn their way to a nebulous salvation. The story here is the great hunger of the human heart, which persists even in our self-satisfied, postmodern world.

Having tried it all myself, I can say from experience that only Jesus will satisfy and only the Cross can save. But who can say? Oprah may yet repent of her sins and accept Christ and his saving blood.

Russell OsmianskiWilmington, Delaware

Oprah Winfrey’s popularity only makes her one of the most spiritually dangerous people in America.

Gary SkagerbergNampa, Idaho

Broadcast Bullying

Wayne Pederson was a ray of hope for the National Religious Broadcasters [“Enough Bullying,” April 1]. Though decidedly conservative, this man of God determined that nrb would represent Christian broadcasters, not necessarily conservative ones.

He believed the message would be first about how Jesus’ love can reconcile a sinful world to a merciful Father, and second about other issues and concerns. Unfortunately, the power brokers and theocracy-minded Christian Reconstructionists in broadcast ministry have chosen again to exercise power, rather than real authority.

I quit Christian broadcasting in 2000 after 20 years because I felt Reconstructionists and theocrats like Dobson, Falwell, Kennedy, and Robertson held the industry in a death grip. I admire Pederson and Moody Broadcasting’s Robert Neff; they are better than me for sticking it out.

But this dismal chapter proves one thing to me beyond the shadow of a doubt: Jesus is increasingly unwelcome at NRB.

Jim StanleyFort Wayne, Indiana

Your editorial is correct in asserting that Christians should, first and foremost, be associated with Jesus Christ. Your premise, however, that Wayne Pederson was “bullied” is flawed.

The editorial contains, but fails to recognize the importance of, the seed of why Pederson had to go: The fact that he gave a newspaper interview and did not know that the term “far Christian right” was pejorative. The leader of the National Religious Broadcasters association should know that.

Bob MorrisonNews and Sports DirectorUSA Radio NetworkDallas, Texas

Robert Neff of Moody Bible Institute was right on target when he said that Wayne Pederson lost his job because of “an aggressive, small minority of 600-pound gorillas” and “power boys.”

Kenneth A. Olenik Kearney, Nebraska

Bible Ire

The article and editorial about the TNIV [“TNIV Critics Blast Scripture ‘Distortions,'” and “Why the tniv Draws Ire,” April 1] provide information that helps promote informed opinions. Much more could be said, but one point about the use of plurals may be helpful.

Unfortunately, this topic was cut short during the discussion on CNN in which Wayne Grudem and I participated. Note, for example, the following statement: “Shaking a baby can cause brain damage that will affect them the rest of their lives.” The words them and their refer to a single, generic baby. Some might phrase it another way: “Shaking a baby can cause brain damage that will affect him the rest of his life.” In either case, there is only one baby.

The first form (baby/them/they) compares exactly with the TNIV’s Rev. 3:20, referred to in CT‘s first article and alluded to in the editorial: “If anyone hears my voice and opens the door, I will come in and eat with them, and they with me.”

The TNIV’s them/they, though grammatically plural, are semantically singular, referring to the singular anyone. This form of grammar may not be everyone’s English, but it is certainly many people’s English, including that of James Dobson, who made the statement about the baby.

Scott Munger International Bible Society Colorado Springs, Colorado

You ask, “Why so much anger against the TNIV?” World magazine’s “Twisted Sister” slap is over the top, but where is this “so much anger”?

Your language has the effect of reducing those who doubt the wisdom of the TNIV to merely angry people. Is J.I. Packer an angry crank? I don’t think so. He and others who share his views cannot be dismissed with an implied ad hominem fallacy.

You get right to the point in asking, “Why not just … let the text speak for itself?” This is precisely the question energizing objections to gender-neutral Bibles. Every thoughtful person will enjoy dynamic equivalence. But if, in the exercise of dynamic equivalent translation, the biblical text suffers material loss—for example, the effacing of singulars with plurals—then the translation has become nonequivalent, however dynamic.

Raymond C. Ortlund Jr. Senior Pastor, First Presbyterian Church Augusta, Georgia

Why They Hate Us

Philip Yancey is one of the best Christian writers we have today, but he is overlooking some critical truths in his analysis of the September 11 attacks and the reasons Muslims hate us.

He asks, “How differently would the world view us if it associated the U.S. with Jesus rather than with Baywatch?” He misses the point of what Jesus said: The world will hate you because they first hated me. Do Muslims really hate Baywatch? Why is it so popular in Muslim countries?

Why do the majority rush to watch it, and worse shows, and buy our raunchy music? Why would so many risk jail and death to smuggle American movies into countries where they are illegal? Anyone who has lived in Muslim countries, as I have, will know that the only Muslims who really hate U.S. culture are a very small group of mullahs. Most Muslims love American culture but disagree with our friendship toward Israel.

The question of why a majority of Europeans, most of the Third World, and all of China hate us was beyond the scope of Yancey’s article. I have spent many years researching this issue, though, and suggest that he look into the strong influence Marxism still has on these areas, and the lies that Marxists preach about capitalism. The Marxism/capitalism debate is at the bottom of the books and articles written by those who hate the United States.

Roger D. McKinney Broken Arrow, Oklahoma

Homosexuality and Identity

As one who left homosexual behavior after experiencing significant healing, I admire tremendously men who have not experienced such healing yet out of their love for God and their wives resist acting out their homosexual urges.

Such is my feeling toward the anonymous author of “No Easy Victory” [March 11], but I cannot help believing that on a couple of counts he is making his problem worse than it might be.

First, he writes, “God has given me the power to live a fulfilling heterosexual life, together with the grace to live with the fact that I am still homosexual.”

He is allowing this condition to be his identity, and surely this compounds his problem. How many of your heterosexual readers might not be able to write, “God has given me the power to live a life of fulfilling heterosexual fidelity, together with the fact that I am still sexually attracted to other women”?

Second, he laments that he has had to carry his burden on his own, “without the support of friends or a caring Christian community.” How could his Christian community support him if they had no idea of what he is going through?

About five years after I had left active homosexuality, I started to carefully open up to other believers about my homosexual past. Some showed some discomfort, and a few backed off altogether, but the great majority offered nothing but Christian love and acceptance. Gradually, I broadened this circle, and today I don’t care who knows. That’s true freedom.

Alan Medinger Founder, Regeneration Past President and Executive Director Exodus North America Towson, Maryland

Copyright © 2002 Christianity Today. Click for reprint information.