This article is the third in a three-part blog series on beauty. Click here to read the first article, Beauty and the Beholder. Click here to read the second article, Discovering the Standard of Beauty.
The first two articles in this series focused on the perception and value of aesthetic beauty. In the first article, Beauty and the Beholder, I explained why the phrase “beauty lies in the eye of the beholder” is wrong. In the second, Discovering the Standard of Beauty, I showed how God’s creation helps us realize how limited our view of beauty is. But throughout this series I’ve ignored a serious issue: the relationship between beauty and body image
When I first started this series, I did a little research to find out what other people thought of the phrase “beauty lies in the eye of the beholder.” The overwhelming majority thought the phrase was true because of the relationship between beauty and body image. Their reasoning went something like this:
This article is the second in a three-part series on beauty. Click here to read the first article, Beauty and the Beholder
In my previous article, “Beauty and the Beholder,” I said that the phrase “beauty is in the eye of the beholder” is not only wrong—it’s dangerous. The phrase devalues beauty and erroneously views beauty as subjective. To counter these wrong claims, I explained how beauty is extremely valuable and how God is not only the objective judge of beauty—He is the perfect standard of beauty.
But to say that God is the perfect standard of beauty seems a bit odd. After all, God is a spirit. Forget about judging any of His aesthetic qualities—you can’t even see him. How does God epitomize beauty even though He’s invisible? In order to answer this question, we first have to address another one: what is beauty?
This article is the first in a three-part series on beauty. Click here to read the second article, Discovering the Standard of Beauty.
“Beauty is in the eye of the beholder” is a popular phrase that is widely held as being true. It’s used to defend one’s artistic choices, combat negative body image, and critique works of art. You’ve probably used it yourself at least once in your life. But despite its popularity, I believe the phrase is not only wrong—it’s dangerous.
First, what does the saying even mean? This saying claims that beauty is a subjective issue. Since everybody is entitled to their own opinion, you should agree to disagree. We shouldn’t put down another person’s view of beauty, because the judgment of beauty is subjective—not objective. It’s a polite way to avoid an argument.
So far, it all seems good. We are avoiding conflict and building up one another’s views. However, there are two reasons why this phrase is actually far more insidious than you think.
The Importance of Beauty
What does “beauty is in the eye of the beholder” actually communicate? Though you may avoid an intense argument through it, this phrase actually implies that the aesthetics of whatever you’re arguing about are on the same level as each other. It conveys that nothing is more beautiful than something else. That is a very bad position to be in. This view downgrades the importance of beauty. If everything is equally beautiful, then nothing is. Once aesthetics becomes an unimportant factor, the value of beauty is lost. And beauty is important.
Many would argue that beauty isn’t as important as, say, truth or morality. I believe we could all see how, even with a nihilistic worldview, truth gives us stability and morality gives us order (although both truth and morality go much farther than that). How truth and morality contribute to our lives gives a good indication to how important it is.
Let’s apply that to beauty. How does beauty contribute to our lives? Well, without it life would be dull and bland. However, beauty gives life more than vibrancy and color. Beauty gives us pleasure. And even though one could say we, as human beings, all want pleasure, the word “pleasure” still seems trite compared to how marvelous beauty can be. At its finest, beauty is breathtaking and awe-inspiring, full of grandeur and magnificence. Beauty gives us a sense of some divine order. Who can say beauty isn’t valuable?
So, in a sense, we should embrace that inevitable argument about what is more beautiful. Intelligent discussions about beauty are essential to keeping the issue of aesthetics alive. Because whenever you take a stand, you’re communicating that what you believe is important. And when you debate about the beauty of art or music or whatever it may be, you’re saying, “I believe beauty is a valuable thing.”
Is Beauty Subjective?
Devaluing beauty is a serious error, and the phrase “beauty is in the eye of the beholder” implies that beauty doesn’t matter. However, I believe the entire statement is wrong—not just its implications. I believe beauty itself is not subjective.
First of all, nobody believes beauty is totally subjective. Claiming “Twinkle, Twinkle Little Star” is grander than Beethoven’s Ninth Symphony is absurd. Arguing for the Mona Lisa to be taken away and replaced with a five-year-old’s scribbles is a ridiculous request. Replacing a gorgeous skyline with a stinking trash heap won’t go over well at all.
However, just that has happened in the art world. Because of adopting the viewpoint that “beauty is in the eye of the beholder,” examples of modern works of “art” include a single line of white across a blue canvas, splotches of randomly tossed paint, and a white square over a white background. Even worse is the acceptance of performance art in which people perform bizarre acts to make an audacious statement. When looking at what is now deemed art, you cannot help but say that one’s concept of beauty has been distorted.
The examples above are dealing with the far ends of the spectrum. But even if two works of art are close in quality, we still shouldn’t resort to a relativistic point of view. Striving to discern which one is better will help maintain a standard of excellence. We, as a society, will not lose our ability to create and appreciate the beautiful. But there is also a greater reason for defending the objectivity of beauty.
The Purpose of Beauty
When you use a secular worldview, beauty should still be judged objectively because our standard of beauty will regress if viewed subjectively. The only thing at risk is society’s criteria for what is beautiful and what isn’t. This is still an honorable goal. We should aim for objectivity when judging beauty, because we need that objective standard.
However, for the Christian, this battle is even more important, because beauty isn’t just something that makes us happy and fills us with awe. It makes us aware of the divine. Beauty in this world points us to the beauty of God. When we gaze upon the splendor of nature, we marvel at God. Even the works of man should lead us to glorify the ultimate Creator. Beauty grabs our attention and turns our faces toward something greater than ourselves.
With this point in mind, how can we claim that beauty is subjective? If God deems something ugly and we see it as beautiful, how can we argue against him? If beauty is meant to reflect God’s beauty, then we should be willing to let God declare what is beautiful—not us. He is the only objective judge, and He is the perfect standard of beauty. Beauty is not in the eye of the beholder. Beauty is in the eye of the one and only Beholder.
This article is the first in a three-part series on beauty. Click here to read the second article, Discovering the Standard of Beauty.
There’s a lot of evil in this world. I don’t need to list any examples. You’re probably already making a list in your own mind. And that list can go on and on and on.
With that list in your mind, answer this question: How do you respond to these evils? Let’s make it a bit broader. How do most Christians respond to the evils of the world?
Well, if you’re part of Westboro Baptist Church, you protest . . . like crazy. But keep in mind that protesting isn’t limited to actual picketing. You can protest through social media or when you’re in a public discussion. Taking this into account, Christians seem to be protesting more and more. Whether you like it or not, this surge in protesters has created an impact you cannot deny.
But brazen outspokenness isn’t the only response. Some Christians tend to take a more spiritual approach: prayer. This method is also powerful. Scripture speaks of the power of prayer. Perhaps the best known quotation is “the effectual fervent prayer of a righteous man availeth much.” You cannot deny Bible truth. Prayer is a powerful approach.
Still, some see prayer as empty words. They say, “Sure, you can pray all you want, but you should put feet to your prayers. God wants Christians to act.” So they do. Donating large amounts of money to aid charitable causes. Volunteering to help the poor and needy. Anything to make their prayers a reality. This approach is also biblical for God commanded His people to help those in need. The sad truth is many Christians do not follow this command.
Taking these three general responses together, we can see that Christians have an overriding desire for one thing: to change the world. And that’s a good thing. Christians should be fighting the evils of this world head on whether it be through protesting, prayer, or actively helping. All Christians should have a desire to change the world. To put it in melodramatic terms, we should want to save the world.
Wait. Save the world? Hasn’t that already happened?
As a matter of fact, it has. And that’s why we have been wrong this whole time.
John 3:17 For God sent not his Son into the world to condemn the world; but that the world through him might be saved
God sent Jesus Christ to save the world. And He did. Jesus died and rose again to save the whole world. But many Christians, myself included, sometimes act like he didn’t come to save the world.
We want to repel the world’s evils through protesting or prayer or actively helping. But that won’t make a true difference, for only the gospel can repel the world’s evils. For only Jesus can save the world.
That’s not to say that any of our initial responses are bad. I don’t see a problem with prayer or volunteering or protesting (in moderation). But should Christians really be primarily known as prayer warriors or great volunteers or annoying protesters? Shouldn’t we be known as messengers of the Gospel?
Next time you get worried about the progressing evils of the world or you’re really pumped up to change the world, don’t let your mind go directly to something like protesting. Remember that Jesus has already saved the world.
So share the good news with others. Never forget that the gospel—the whole gospel from original sin to final restoration—is the power of God. We Christians have a divine weapon to use against the evils of the world, for the gospel truly is quick and powerful. But we have to use it. Share the gospel just as Christ commanded, and who knows? We just might change the world.
Matthew 28:18-20 And Jesus came and spake unto them, saying, All power is given unto me in heaven and in earth. Go ye therefore, and teach all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost: teaching them to observe all things whatsoever I have commanded you: and, lo, I am with you alway, even unto the end of the world. Amen
Biohax, a Swedish company, has invented a revolutionary new technology. A chip inserted under your skin can act as a key, credit card, and health monitor—basically the ultimate ID.
This is a sign of the end times, for the Antichrist will utilize this technology for the Mark of the Beast
North Korea has reportedly completed the hardest part in the creation of an Inter-Continental Ballistic Missile: making a bomb light enough to fit on a missile without weighing it down too much. This new development has produced a standoff between North Korea and the US and its allies of Japan and South Korea setting up a modern-day Cold War.
This is also a sign of the end times, for Jesus Christ said that in the end there would be wars and rumors of wars.
The symbol of Christianity is the cross. It’s everywhere. It stands tall on the roofs of churches, overlooks congregations in sanctuaries, and dangles from the necklaces of many ardent believers. Christians everywhere want to be reminded of the cross, and for good reason. For on the cross, Jesus suffered and died paying the penalty for the sins of the whole world. The whole of Christianity is dependent on the cross for it represents Christ’s death. Christians acknowledge Christ as their only hope for salvation, because only He could completely pay the penalty for our sins.
But if we look at Scripture, we see that Christ’s death is not the only event Christianity depends on. I Corinthians 15:17 says, “And if Christ has not been raised, your faith is futile and you are still in your sins.” If Christ’s resurrection didn’t happen, then all of Christianity is futile. Why?
When I came upon this question, I didn’t have a straight answer which made me realize I didn’t fully understand my own beliefs! I was sidelining an essential part of Christianity. It makes me wonder if, in our focus on the cross, we’re relegating the resurrection. I believe many Christians are doing just that, not out of spite, but because they don’t understand the necessity of the resurrection. So let’s find out why the resurrection is so necessary to Christianity.
There are many reasons for the resurrection of Jesus Christ, but, from what I’ve seen, there are only two reasons why the resurrection is necessary to Christianity. Two reasons why the resurrection is necessary for our salvation.
It was late Sunday night. I had just sent out my first blog newsletter, and I was proofreading it (because I always forget to proofread before I publish). At the time, my biggest concern was whether or not my grammar and spelling was correct. That changed in an instant when I received the news: my grandfather was dead. He had passed away peaceably in the night.
Naturally, I was sad. I will never be able to see him again. Never see him talk sports in his excited, anticipative way. Or see the way he brightened up when he saw his children or grandchildren. He was someone I’d loved for he was family. And even though he’d been declining for a while, there was a part of me that half-expected him to always be there. To always be alive.
But I am also glad, sort of. He had experienced much hardship and pain in his last years. His kidneys had failed, and he’d had to receive dialysis three times a week. His weakened state had restricted him from much travel. Just a few days before his death, he was released from the rehabilitation center where he had been recovering from a minor stroke. So his death was a release from all the suffering he’d been through, and for that, I am glad.
These opposing feelings filled my mind when I first received the news, and they are still present, even now. This leads me to the question: how is one supposed to cope with death? I just described how I responded to death, but is that the right way—the biblical way to respond? Is there even a right way? Surely, there must be. And to understand it, we must first understand what we are trying to cope with: death.
Well, this is awkward. I didn't really mean to do a Valentine's Day article. But here I am writing one. So this is raw writing. Stream of consciousness. No editing. At all.
I’m sorry. I truly am. And I totally understand what you’re going through, because it’s happened to me too. Waking up on January 1st with a glimmer of hope in my eye. Slogging through the cycle of failure and resolve for twenty-something days. Finally deciding on February 1st that it’s not worth it all. I’ve done that more times than I can count. It’s pitiful. Really.
At least you’re not alone. According to business author Stephen Shapiro, about 73% of Americans almost never succeed in keeping their New Year’s resolutions. He says that about 8% of the population is always successful. StatisticBrain has similar findings, reporting that only 9.2% felt they were successful in keeping their resolutions. Such a small achievement rate has led to 42% of those polled admitting that they absolutely never make New Year’s resolutions.
This certainly seems like the right approach. I mean, if only one out of four people sometimes finish their New Year’s resolutions then why even bother? What’s the point of going through the same failures every year? Why build up hope just so you can fail? Why do we even make resolutions at the beginning of the year?
Yesterday, on January 20, 2017, a business man and former reality TV star became president of the United States of America. Nobody saw it coming. Ever since Donald J. Trump announced his candidacy on June 16, 2015, the USA, and especially the GOP, has experienced many conflicting feelings. When he announced his candidacy, most thought it was a publicity stunt. Throughout the primaries and even when he became the Republican nominee, he was constantly derided. As November 8 came closer, the GOP slowly began accepting him despite many incriminating allegations. By the time he won the election, two contrasting reactions swept over the nation. Democrat protesters gathered around Trump Tower in an act of defiance. Republican supporters cheered still not believing they won.