Lee Ann Womack – “There Is A God”
Songwriters: Christopher DuBois & Ashley Gorley.
Exactly one year ago, Lee Ann Womack released a collection of whiskey-and-heartbreak laced neo-traditional country music that included songs about bars, dying relationships and domestic abuse. That collection, titled Call Me Crazy, was masterfully sung, beautifully recorded, splendidly arranged, wonderfully written, and, of course, a complete commercial failure.
Maybe a major label country artist who chooses to record and release an album comprised of mostly down-beat (mostly traditional) country music deserves to be called crazy. It was, after all, a miracle that “Last Call” managed to wiggle its way to hit status (thanks for that hook, Johnnie Walker Red), and there was scant hope for anything else from the disc to find a home alongside Jimmy Wayne and Billy Currington.
Fortunately, Nashville is a town where a songwriter is always waiting in the wings with a musical Prozac, and Womack’s new single (from an as-yet undefined project) is proof positive that the medicine works; Womack’s syrupy delivery is more than a few personalities removed from the sultry and smoky vocals on Call Me Crazy, with her rendering of this song’s idyllic world layered in pastel rather than neon.
In fact, if “There Is A God” was any more warm and fuzzy, it would be a bunny. A big, fat Easter Bunny with a basket full of clichés instead of candy.
“There Is A God” amounts to a slideshow of inspirational lifescapes—from running horses to flocking birds to sprouting seeds—all of which are offered as proof that “there is a God.” Of course, there are some fireflies, some babies and some abating cancer thrown into to mix…what inspirational country song would be complete without that trifecta?
Country music has a long history of incorporating Christian and gospel themes into both its mainstream and its ancillary branches, and even some of the genre’s most hardened outlaws have turned their musical eyes towards heaven. Here, however, Womack offers what is less a profession or discussion of faith and more a rejection of reason and logic. After going through a laundry-list of beautiful things (like a raindrop falling onto your tongue), the songs asks, “how much proof do you need,” eventually winding into the bridge and, thus, the pervading theme that binds all of these disjointed lyrics together: “Science says it’s all just circumstance/Like this whole world’s just an accident/If you wanna shoot that theory down/Just look around.”
While the overriding message of the song is that we can see God’s existence in everything around us, the writing errs when it ventures into a debate about the merits of logic and science (and the relation of those things to spirituality). The proclamation that “there is a God” does not need to also undermine and misrepresent what are almost universally accepted explanations for various scientific processes, and the fact that the song is willing to attack science makes the lyric come off as more political than it needs to.
After all, there’s a pretty famous song that makes essentially the same points without going down that road:
Everytime I hear a new born baby cry,
Or touch a leaf, or see the sky
Then I know why I believe
That song, “I Believe,” is a personal, specific declaration of faith. “There Is A God” is a pandering declaration of ideology masquerading as abstract inspirationalism–and a disappointing entry from a woman who has produced some of the most compelling country music of her generation.
Popular Stuff
Sponsor
Is Dave Haywood going solo? This and many other of country music's most pressing questions answered in the September edition of The 9513's world famous Mailbag!
Caroline Herring likes to sing songs about life in the South. No, not exactly like Justin Moore and Jason Aldean...
The 9513's resident historian Paul W. Dennis sits down for a chat with country music legend Gene Watson.
As much as we love girl singers, we love songs about girl singers even more. Here's just a few of the many tribute songs out there.
Step away from the river and up to a jukebox, because heartbreak is only temporary, but a good song about drowning yourself—like a diamond—lasts forever.
What do you think about music labels "testing the waters" with a single before providing access to an artist's entire album? 
What country artist, young or old, would you recommend as a must-listen artist to a newcomer on his/her journey through country music, and what would your essential song picks be?Tagged In This Article
Current Discussion
- Rick: I was trying to figure out why Madison Violet seemed familiar and remembered I had purchased a CD titled "Caravan" ...
- justbeyourself: So, Matt I'll actually thank you.
- justbeyourself: @Rick well thank you for this statement. And not more "manly", just herself. Just wondering... would he say ...
- Matt B.: Maybe his brother did talk him into it but what's to say he hasn't 'always loved' and 'wanted' to do ...
- joe: critics suck get a real job, this song is awsome to me, maybe not to you but she give it her ...
- Razor X: I honestly don’t think Josh Kelley is being crass about it at all. I suspect it’s more inline with ...
- Stormy: Gabrielle: "When I say no I mean maybe or maybe I mean yes." No. When I say no, I ...
- gabrielle: Fancy was another song that should get people mad either whats wrong with ppeople these days people getting mad for ...
- gabrielle: Holly Dunn's maybe i mean Yes had nuttin to do with rape or anything people mistook this song these ...
- Kelly: oh yeah...
1 Trackbacks/Pings
Trackback URI for this postNovember 7, 2009
[...] a different note, Jim reviewed Lee Ann Womack’s new single “There is a God” this week, which some readers disliked not for its content, but its presentation. Commenter Noeller [...]
93 Comments
RSS for comments on this post | Trackback URI for this post
November 2, 2009 at 3:40 pm Permalink
That bridge is where I start yelling at the radio. What a classic straw-man argument.
November 2, 2009 at 3:50 pm Permalink
You go Lee Ann! Your song is simply beautiful. I wouldn’t pay any attention to the negative parts of this review. I would buy this song in a minute and I don’t often say that. Well done!!
November 2, 2009 at 3:51 pm Permalink
come on the song I believe to me is a boring , song, it is awful and the on ly reason it got so much attention is beacuase brooks and dunn sung it, this song by leeann is great, why can’t peolpe just take it as what it is a SONG and not ananlyze it to death , it is people’s choice as to whether or not they believe in God, to me this is a beautiful song , nothing more
so get over analyzing it , if carrie or taylro had recorde it , it would already be #1 and getting all kind of attention
November 2, 2009 at 3:55 pm Permalink
How would you like your beliefs to be completely misrepresented in a song? Science most certainly does not say “it’s all just circumstance/Like this whole world’s just an accident.”
November 2, 2009 at 4:04 pm Permalink
Ugh, what a big step backwards for her. The song seems like shameless pandering to a certain demographic that would outlaw the teaching of evolution and hold the world again in a intellectual dark age.
November 2, 2009 at 4:07 pm Permalink
Being a Christian myself, I am actually not a big fan of the lyrics of the song. Rarely does “proof” and “faith” intersect, especially since a person who doesnt believe in God think that “God” is the reason that rain falls, the sun shines or whatever else is listed in the song. I also see where Chris N is coming from as well, and I wouldnt like it if a singer were to conveniently ,and perhaps ignorantly, condense my beliefs into simple little cliches that make for catchy lyrical content.
November 2, 2009 at 4:08 pm Permalink
JM: “Womack offers what is less a profession or discussion of faith and more a rejection of reason and logic”
Is that not the definition of any religion??
As for this song, I didn’t particularly like it the first time, when George Strait did it and called it “I Saw God Today”.
November 2, 2009 at 4:10 pm Permalink
Exactly! I had no problem with “I Saw God Today,” because it didn’t trample roughshod over other people’s convictions to make its point.
November 2, 2009 at 4:23 pm Permalink
Noeller: “Is that not the definition of any religion??”
Nope.
November 2, 2009 at 4:47 pm Permalink
Faith isn’t supposed to refute reason, it’s supposed to transcend it. At the end of the day, that’s why religious belief and a scientific approach can (and do) co-exist; they operate in different realms. To the extent that the song rejects that fact, it’s ultimately ineffectual – though personally, I can find a lot more things to yell about than this. But I do find the correlation in several reviews between the writer’s distaste for the lyric content and the characterization of Womack’s performance as unsatisfactory to be suspect; I think she sings it just fine.
November 2, 2009 at 4:54 pm Permalink
Of course she sings it just fine, she’s Lee Ann damn Womack.
November 2, 2009 at 4:55 pm Permalink
I’m a sucker for Christian themed country – I did make “The Rock” my staff pick for June after all – but these lyrics are painful to listen to. There’s a right way and a wrong way to touch on those themes, and this is the wrong way.
November 2, 2009 at 5:00 pm Permalink
My beef with that chorus is that the field of science per se does not state unequivocally that the earth as it exists is all just circumstance and an accident. It is certain scientists themselves who don’t believe in God who use science as a tool to attempt to prove their point of view, evolution being a perfect example. If the chorus were to begin “Some (Obamavoter Type) Scientists say it’s all just circumstance” I’d agree with it! (lol)
The Moody Science Institute back in the 1960’s put out films on how science could be used to support biblical claims. Its all a matter of where the scientist is coming from in a religious sense.
PS – I’d rather hear a song sung by Lee Ann than any of the other reigning Top 40 female country artists who frequent the Top 20 chart positions.
November 2, 2009 at 5:07 pm Permalink
“Of course she sings it just fine, she’s Lee Ann damn Womack.”
Well, yeah. But I was struck by the fact that Jim calls her singing “syrupy” here and Kevin Coyne called it “tepid” over on Country Universe, and I bet that if they’d like the song, they’d have been singing a different tune.
November 2, 2009 at 5:09 pm Permalink
The Moody Science Institute is a hoax, a creation of the Moody Bible Institute, which tells you all you need to know of its mission. No reputable PhD would be caught within 1000 miles of it.
November 2, 2009 at 5:09 pm Permalink
I always like her voice, but rarely like her songs.
November 2, 2009 at 5:15 pm Permalink
Yep – as much as I love Country music, I can’t stand the Christian overtones in a lot of it, and this song really really rubs me the wrong way. It’s just too preachy and too “in my face”. I’m sure there’s a lot of people who will eat it up, but I just can’t see it getting a lot of spin up north of the 49th.
Definitely, gimme “Call Me Crazy” anytime. I absolutely love this lady – smokin’ hot, and one of the best vocals in the business.
November 2, 2009 at 5:28 pm Permalink
Evolution is, actually, the percise opposite of circumstance and accident. It is based on millenia of trial and error where certain traits expand to fit certain niches.
November 2, 2009 at 5:33 pm Permalink
I like her vocal fine. But I’m in the camp that cringes thinking of all the people who will nod in vigorous agreement with the song’s bridge.
November 2, 2009 at 5:46 pm Permalink
@rick “Its all a matter of where the scientist is coming from in a religious sense.”
Nope, that’s wrong.
@stormy “Evolution is, actually, the percise opposite of circumstance and accident. It is based on millenia of trial and error where certain traits expand to fit certain niches.”
That’s wrong, too.
Sheesh.
November 2, 2009 at 5:52 pm Permalink
This will be my last comment here due to a combination of work, education, and growing out of the whole internet commenting thing.
I assume it’s safe to say this song wasn’t designed to go against anybody that believes in an alternate story of the creation of the world. Part of Christianity involves accepting everybody. There are Christians that believe in evolution, so don’t get too upset about it.
I don’t think “cosmic explosion which creates a universe” is as good of a lyric as “circumstance” personally. Since a circumstance is an event that influences something (for example, an event), how does that not describe the big bang theory? What has been misrepresented? Lee Ann Womack does not have the time to write a 45 minute song to first describe the big bang theory.
Chris, Christian beliefs are misrepresented all the time, and you’re worried about a song by Lee Ann Womack? I question the validity of your argument – you ask how you’d like “your beliefs” to be misrepresented in a song. These are not “your beliefs” and nobody claims them to be, these are Lee Ann Womack’s beliefs. I sat through science classes involving both the big bang theory and evolution multiple times, yet somehow I was never offended. Taking everything personally can drive a person crazy, don’t let it eat at you.
DISCLAIMER:
Anybody that’s offended by this song shouldn’t go to a Trace Adkins concert, shouldn’t go see Larry The Cable Guy, and for heaven’s sakes – NEVER watch Billy Cosby. Oh… and Toby Keith, Tracy Lawrence… I don’t have the time to type the rest. Fair warning.
November 2, 2009 at 5:57 pm Permalink
I really respected the country music community (and their fans) when I thought they were the one segment of the music business that still was conservative in their beliefs about God and country. Listening to you guys I realize that this is not so anymore. It really makes me sad, because I’ve noticed that some of the popular country artists today are not very conservative. The ones that are open about their Christian beliefs aren’t as plentiful as they were even 6 or 7 years ago. When I do hear someone openly talk about God, it at least gives me hope.
November 2, 2009 at 6:06 pm Permalink
Is this the same “There Is A God” Trent Willmon cut? My computers being hard to get along with. If it is, I am kind of “Eh” about it, just because I think the idea could have been written better. I love the sentiment of the song, just not the way it was executed.
November 2, 2009 at 6:10 pm Permalink
This is the exactly the same Trent Willmon cut. I actually enjoy Trent’s version a little bit more, but it is hard to compete with Lee Anne’s vocals. I usually hate songs similar to these, but I actually enjoy this one.
November 2, 2009 at 6:12 pm Permalink
Yeah, not a fan either. Then again I have never been a big fan of religious country songs anyway.
That being said, if cutting stuff like this means Lee Ann maintains a record deal and can keep cutting albums that at least has half the tracks of stuff from Call Me Crazy, then so be it. Those 6 tracks or whatever will still be some of the best songs of the year.
November 2, 2009 at 6:25 pm Permalink
Evie,
Just because people don’t like this particular religiously themed song, it does not mean that they’re against all religious songs. I think you’re generalizing a lot to try to make a dramatic point. I don’t like this song, but I have a lot of religious songs on my iPod and believe me, I’m selective about what makes it on to the iPod due to limited space.
November 2, 2009 at 6:33 pm Permalink
I don’t think this song makes a very convincing case for God’s existence, and the bridge is really troublesome for me. There are so many better religious songs than this.
Some posters above mention Christianity. But is the song in anyway Christian? It says “there is a God” which is compatible with Christianity, but also with other religions. And while the lyric “a God” might be read to mean there is one and only one God, it might also be read to mean there is at least one God (but possibly many more).
At a minimum, if you take the song to be good evidence that there is a God, I’m not sure that the song offers evidence that the God is the God portrayed in Christianity.
November 2, 2009 at 7:14 pm Permalink
I have no problem with someone singing gospel hymns. Since I am not Protestant I might not get moved by them, but I have no problem with them. Its when religion is used as a justification of the continuance of ignorance I get offended.
November 2, 2009 at 7:42 pm Permalink
Ah, fireworks – my favorite kind of works. Fun to read.
I agree with this review. I’m not sure she expected to make a hit out of this song. I wouldn’t bet on it even hitting the top 20, but that’s just me. I personally like syrup and gravy, but there’s nothing under that here – no meat, no biscuits or pancakes even. And plain syrup or plain gravy is just no good.
November 2, 2009 at 8:00 pm Permalink
I don’t claim to be any denomination of Christianity and I see some of the lyrics of this song to be there for the sake of the song rather than the lyric but the fact that it’s Lee Ann Womack singing the song makes it work for me. Guess I can be that simple.
November 2, 2009 at 9:19 pm Permalink
Some radio stations are taking to this song as evidenced by the Mediabase Most Added Singles charts for the week: (From AllAboutCountry.com)
This Week’s Mediabase Most-Added:
1) Toby Keith/Cryin’ For Me (Wayman’s Song) (22 Adds)
2) Blake Shelton+Trace Adkins/Hillbilly Bone (19)
3) Randy Houser/Whilstlin’ Dixie (16)
4) George Strait/Twang (11)
5) Jason Aldean/The Truth (11)
6) Justin Moore/Backwoods (11)
7) Lee Ann Womack/There Is A God (11)
8) Steel Magnolia/Keep On Lovin’ You (10)
I would guess most of the Lee Ann adds are coming from reporting stations in the “Bible Belt” that don’t get queasy playing songs with a Christian message, even strident ones! (lol)
November 2, 2009 at 9:31 pm Permalink
I could never judge this song fairly, so I’m going to just not listen to it, despite it coming from one of my very favorite artists.
November 2, 2009 at 9:43 pm Permalink
Just because people don’t like this particular religiously themed song, it does not mean that they’re against all religious songs. I think you’re generalizing a lot to try to make a dramatic point. I don’t like this song, but I have a lot of religious songs on my iPod and believe me, I’m selective about what makes it on to the iPod due to limited space.
LeeAnn, drama has nothing to do with it. And whether you like this song or not has nothing to do with it. Some of the people commenting seemed genuinely offended by these lyrics showing faith in God, and that was what shocked me.
November 2, 2009 at 9:54 pm Permalink
I don’t think these comments show that people are offended by faith in God. They just seem to be expressing that they are offended by the way the lyrics present faith in God. It’s not a black and white issue. Because people don’t appreciate the way in which these lyrics present God’s existence, you say “I really respected the country music community (and their fans) when I thought they were the one segment of the music business that still was conservative in their beliefs about God and country. Listening to you guys I realize that this is not so anymore.”
To me, that’s unfairly overgeneralizing.
November 2, 2009 at 10:12 pm Permalink
The song’s not bad, but I love LAW so its a little disappointing
I’m not sure this is a good song to release to radio… although I noticed it was receiving a lot of adds this past week according to Country Aircheck, so we’ll see =)
November 3, 2009 at 8:13 am Permalink
Jon: Evolution is the opposite of circumstance. And, ironically, when you look at virtually everything in this song–from the horses, to the plants, to the baby–you are looking at proof of evolution.
November 3, 2009 at 8:49 am Permalink
@stormy The mechanism of evolution is natural selection, not “trial and error.”
November 3, 2009 at 9:03 am Permalink
Jon: But natural selection is a kind of trial and error that leads one species to go off in several directions depending on what traits best work for what locale (IE: Humans and Monkeys and traits that don’t adapt to any locale to die out. I was not using trial and error as a scientific term, but rather as an explination.
November 3, 2009 at 9:12 am Permalink
@stormy No, natural selection is not trial and error, so calling the former the latter doesn’t explin anything; it confuses rather than clarifies. And the same goes for gibberish like “evolution is the opposite of circumstance.”
November 3, 2009 at 9:40 am Permalink
Everybody stand clear: It turns out Jon is not only the final authority on music but on evolution as well.
November 3, 2009 at 9:47 am Permalink
How is evolution not the opposite of circumstance?
November 3, 2009 at 10:45 am Permalink
@chris n. not the final authority, but I have some idea of what I’m talking about here.
@stormy the terms of the question are still gibberish.
Evolution is the product of the interaction between organisms and their environments – in other words, circumstance. It is not “trial and error” because it is not purposeful; it just happens. In that respect, the song’s assertion isn’t wholly wrong; where it goes wrong is in claiming that “science” says it’s “all just” circumstance, that the world’s “just” an accident. Science says that the evidence doesn’t support the idea that all species were simultaneously (or nearly simultaneously) created, and it doesn’t support the idea of “intelligent design” (which is what logically ultimately underlies your notion of “trial and error”). But that still leaves a lot of territory – notably with respect to purpose, meaning, etc. – unaddressed. Those are matters of faith, and they are ultimately addressed outside of science, which is why the two can and do coexist.
November 3, 2009 at 10:54 am Permalink
Actually, science provides many instances pointing to the existance of God; scientists just don’t want people to know those instances.
But I’m in agreement with the majority. The song is horrible. I liked it better when it was “I Saw God Today.” Apparently the norm in Nashville is, that once a song with a certain subject matter goes #1, you ride those coattails and discuss the same subject.
November 3, 2009 at 12:10 pm Permalink
Rick, I am personally acquainted with conservatives who would rather cut their hands off than vote for a Democrat but who are completely comfortable accepting evolution as the explanation for how humans got to be human. I just don’t know what your strawDemocrats have to do with the question.
Also, folks like Dr. No need to be careful about using science to “prove” religion. The God of the Gaps is going to disappear as the gaps in scientific knowledge shrink. The idea that there are two sets of questions to be asked, which are answered by two different forms of human investigation, is going to leave you with a much more solid basis for religious belief.
November 3, 2009 at 12:21 pm Permalink
BTW, why is “Obamavoter” an insult? Just because you made “Obama voter” into a compound word is it supposed to be more odious?
November 5, 2009 at 2:07 pm Permalink
It is nothing new that a song about the “Creator God” divides and offends people. But why is that? Because the God of the bible is either the Creator and Lord of all, or the biggest liar there ever was, and a song that proclaims His deity is a reminder to each of us that we have a decision to make about Him and that we will face Him one day. Depending on where we are in making that decision determines our reaction to the claim of His deity. I love the song and the lyrics. They are so logical and scientific to those who have ears to hear. Remember, whether or not I believe in the law of gravity or not, my beliefs have nothing to do with what actually is….. as I will quickly find out when I leap off the cliff.
November 5, 2009 at 2:09 pm Permalink
Oh, don’t start. I like plenty of songs about God, just not so much this one.
November 5, 2009 at 2:43 pm Permalink
“Because the God of the bible is either the Creator and Lord of all, or the biggest liar there ever was.”
How exactly does that work, Allen? How does someone not believing in God make him a liar?
November 5, 2009 at 2:48 pm Permalink
Yeah, what Chris N. said. Hell, I’ve even written a few myself. Umm, make that “heck.”
November 5, 2009 at 4:21 pm Permalink
Jim: Because if God doesn’t exist then obviously she is lying.
November 5, 2009 at 4:59 pm Permalink
That’s a very special version of logic that Allen is relying on.
November 5, 2009 at 5:38 pm Permalink
Since God didn’t write the bible, how could He be a liar?
November 5, 2009 at 8:24 pm Permalink
Lord this is stupid, don’t like the song or disagree with it, but don’t..DON”T TAKE IT PERSONAL!
November 5, 2009 at 8:29 pm Permalink
AMEN TO THIS REVIEW!
“There Is a God’, as expected with any single that makes overt, repetitive religious references and is released into the mainstream market, may ruffle a few feathers of country fans who are agnostic or believe that religion and science can peacefully coexist. But aside from subject matter, Womack delivers a vocal over the simple and organic tune that is similar to Alison Krauss’ unique, laid-back style and is sweet, sensitive and pleasant.”
November 5, 2009 at 9:51 pm Permalink
I didn’t see too many people in the posts above “taking it personal,” Jesse.
As for me, I don’t like the song and I think the lyrics are poorly thought out. I do think there are thoughtful, well presented arguments in favor of God’s existence. But this song is not one of them.
I think the 2-sentence review that you quote is not helpful, either. The first sentence states the obvious: agnostics will not like the song. Of course, the song asks “what more proof do you need” and seems to be trying to convince people that God exists. As such, the admission that the song won’t win over agnostics seems to be an admission that the song will fail to achieve one of its apparent goals. That hardly seems like praise of the song. The second sentence tells us that Womack has a nice vocal, which is useful information, though I already knew Womack is a great singer.
I realize that writing a 2 sentence review is extremely difficult and I admire any writer who can do it well. But that review doesn’t seem too helpful to me.
November 6, 2009 at 10:24 am Permalink
I agree with what the review is saying, but I’m pretty biased and still enjoy the song quite a bit. Lee Ann is one of the top female vocalists ever in my opinion, I just love pretty much everything she does.
November 6, 2009 at 11:46 am Permalink
Come on, all these comments have been personal or been driven personally.
And that is not a two sentence review, it is a cut and copy of the review that I agreed with…nice try though!
November 6, 2009 at 1:31 pm Permalink
Jesse, You really should give a link or at least acknowledge where a review is coming from in order to avoid copyright infringement and so we can read the cut and paste in its original context.
November 6, 2009 at 2:15 pm Permalink
Oh, that’s fair use. You should always offer a link, though.
November 6, 2009 at 2:25 pm Permalink
Of course comments have been personal. Religion is a personal subject.
November 6, 2009 at 2:47 pm Permalink
This is the same song the Trent Wilmon released. I liked his version, and I assume I will like Lee Ann’s version, because I like her voice and the little tibit I heard here.
Granted, some of the lyrics and “proof” are a little illogical, but I like the melody. I believe in the hook, “There is a God”.
I also wish we would her more of LAW on the radio!!
November 6, 2009 at 2:58 pm Permalink
Jesse – regardless of whether the two sentences you quoted in your post above are the entire review or just part of the review, they aren’t particularly helpful. My main point is unchanged. If there is more to this review, it would be helpful to post a link or to attribute the source.
Steve — the from fact that religion is a personal subject, it does not follow that the comments are “personal.” Most of the comments are not about religion itself, but the manner the song presents its points.
November 6, 2009 at 3:13 pm Permalink
This is a song that panders to one portion of its potential audience while flipping off another portion. That makes it inherently difficult for the either portion to judge it objectively.
November 6, 2009 at 3:15 pm Permalink
I mean, this song tells me I’m stupid for not believing in God. How am I supposed to feel about that?
November 6, 2009 at 3:30 pm Permalink
I mean, this song tells me I’m stupid for not believing in God. How am I supposed to feel about that?
Indifferent, perhaps? Why does it bother you so much?
November 6, 2009 at 4:06 pm Permalink
What I meant by personal was my objection to the song attempting to ram down the throat of its listerners that science was bad, religion good.
November 6, 2009 at 4:24 pm Permalink
I don’t think indifference is a good response to a song like this. Condemnation is appropriate. The song is simultaneously ignorant about both science and religion, extremely simplistic, pandering to some and insulting to others. Pandering and insulting bring out some of the less fortunate traits in humanity. And the song is illogical at points, too. I cannot bring myself to be indifferent about those sorts of things.
November 6, 2009 at 4:41 pm Permalink
It doesn’t bother me particularly, I just like griping about stuff on the internet.
November 6, 2009 at 5:34 pm Permalink
Well, you came to the right place.
November 6, 2009 at 5:57 pm Permalink
Griping in real life is fun, and it makes me feel warm and fuzzy inside. But griping on the Internet is even better.
November 6, 2009 at 8:06 pm Permalink
It doesn’t bother me particularly, I just like griping about stuff on the internet.
I can dig that.
November 6, 2009 at 8:13 pm Permalink
Ok, I had to laugh on how this turned into the pleasures of griping.
November 6, 2009 at 8:38 pm Permalink
Incidentally, Trent Willmon released this song as a single a couple of years ago.
November 7, 2009 at 3:22 pm Permalink
This song is not condemning at all, what in the world…listen to how she sings it!
Some one answer this question..Is science made up of one theory?
No need I will answer it…NO science consists of a variety of theories, and one of those theories is that this world is here by accident, DO NOT try and make it out that science does not suggest this! Just like religion does not consist of one belief…so many are out there…all this song is doing is stated what the writers and singers believe to be true. I put belief in my Lord and Savior, putting faith in science is like a person stranded in the desert that is dehydrated. You see so many things but its hard to see reality from what we want to see. You could say that about God, but I chose GOD. Argue with me if you must, oh well who cares!
November 7, 2009 at 3:55 pm Permalink
Jesse – lets take on your own terms that science claims that the world is here by accident. But its hard to see how the song “shoots that theory down” because all the song does is says there are many beautiful, mysterious, unexplainable things in the world. But the song offers no evidence that these things can only exist if there is a god or that these things could not have occurred by accident. So it can’t “shoot that theory down.” The theory can stand even if we accept that there is a god, too. There are some interpretations of God that would be consistent with the theory Womack allegedly believes is wrong, so even stating that God exists is not enough to disprove these theories.
Its good that you have faith in God. I believe in God too. But I don’t believe in the logic of this song.
I agree that Womack’s tone is not one of condemnation, though the lyrics can be read to suggest that anyone who doesnt agree with her can’t see the obvious, and that could be seen by some as a condemnation.
November 8, 2009 at 7:03 pm Permalink
I don’t care for this song.
November 8, 2009 at 8:57 pm Permalink
haha @God, that’s hilarious
November 9, 2009 at 7:36 pm Permalink
Just enjoy the song and don’t analyze it to death. I heard it for the first time yesterday (ironically) on the way to church. I liked the melody and thought the lyrics were simple. I’m just going to enjoy it without beating her up for it. Geez, does everything have to be complicated?
November 9, 2009 at 8:15 pm Permalink
How can people just enjoy a song that they don’t enjoy?
November 9, 2009 at 9:15 pm Permalink
Like she said do not analyze it too death.. I still don’t see where you are coming from, but thats not me!
If we analyze every single that comes out of the mouths of everyone around us, we would all be contradicting! Though still don’t believe this song is doing that, but what ever who cares!
“all the song does is says there are many beautiful, mysterious, unexplainable things in the world.”
True, but it don’t need evidence…the evidence is in the mystery.
November 9, 2009 at 10:01 pm Permalink
well i think the song is great, i don’t care what other people say about it but i love it. It’s great because i can relate to the song cause i’m a Christian myself and i can say “there is a God” because i had cancer once and when the doctors did a second test and there was no more cancer and of coure i thanked God. Leann thanks for the song i really appreciate it.
November 9, 2009 at 10:04 pm Permalink
Jesse: Many of the things the song lists is easy explainable–by science via Evolution.
November 9, 2009 at 10:17 pm Permalink
Lucas hit the nail on the head. Lighten up gripers!
November 15, 2009 at 11:14 pm Permalink
This song was originally sung by Trent Willmon. LeeAnn Womack didn’t even write it. It’s a beautiful song, and she sung it beautifully. I can’t believe this song is being overanalyzed this much. If it offends you, change the radio station, don’t download it…whatever. All I know is that when I first heard it, it brought tears to my eyes. I just had a daughter in May and it was an awesome reminder to me from God of the miracle that she is. Any song that can make me appreciate what I have and make me cry is a winner in my book. I can’t believe that a 4 minute song about one person’s beliefs is sparking this much debate!
November 16, 2009 at 12:14 am Permalink
Chesney – I would be more concerned if a song of this nature didn’t spark debate than that it does. Religion is exactly the sort of thing we should be thinking about, should be analyzing. Its too important not to.
November 17, 2009 at 10:35 pm Permalink
Anything that goes agaisnt the Bible, GOD’s WRITEN WORD, is wrong..period!
This song does not do that, it encourages it!
I like this review….http://cmlchart.wordpress.com/2009/11/14/lee-ann-womack-%E2%80%9Cthere-is-a-god%E2%80%9D/#comments
Lee Ann recently stated…(try to get as close as I can) “Singers, tend to sing what they believe”
November 17, 2009 at 10:56 pm Permalink
The Bible says “make a JOYOUS noise unto the Lord.” Not “make an obnoxious noise unto the Lord.”
In The Christian Culture Survival Guide, Matthew Paul Turner writes about how so many people are turned off of Christian Entertainment products not because people don’t like the message but because the products themselves are not good.
November 17, 2009 at 11:05 pm Permalink
When I listen to this song she is joyous in what God created, not obnoxious…don’t take scripture out of contexted to manipulate it to satisfy your arguement, God or the Bible is not a crutch to use when you want or when you need it!
November 17, 2009 at 11:43 pm Permalink
I would say that Womack is simultaneously joyous and obnoxious in this song. Yes, she is joyous about the wonderful world around her and about God’s existence. But she is obnoxious in her hasty remarks about science (either she is totally ignorant or deliberately pandering to those she believes too ignorant to notice)
Anyhow, the song isn’t just obnoxious from a scientific perspective. It’s obnoxious from a religious perspective. This is in an utter trivialization of religion, its Hallmark Style Theology. Religious people and religion deserve far better than this simple minded, simplistic and lowest common denominator fare.
November 17, 2009 at 11:48 pm Permalink
“The Bible says “make a JOYOUS noise unto the Lord.” Not “make an obnoxious noise unto the Lord.”
So I guess you know what God wants huh?
November 17, 2009 at 11:52 pm Permalink
Jesse says that this song encourages “GOD’S WRITEN WORD.”
Actually I see nowhere that the song does that. The song says nothing about a written word, nor does it suggest or imply that God has written anything. Nor does the song suggest we should follow and such word that might exist.
The song says nothing about a specific God. It says “there is a God,” but says almost nothing about the identity of that God (though it implies that the God has something to do with the existence of nature and with curing diseases). In fact, the song doesn’t rule out the possibility of multiple Gods.
Because Womack is a Christian she is presumably discussing a Christian God. But the lyrics of the song do not make that clear. Presumably a Jewish person or a Muslim person or a person of a different religion might hear this song and think it confirmation of their religious beliefs.
November 18, 2009 at 12:18 pm Permalink
Sam (Sam) how you come up with those conclusions I do not know! Your putting words and intentions that are not relevant with this song and its meaning!
Tell me what statement in this song is false!
Go read God’s word, you will find God takes pleasure in the little things, read how he created this world, read how he cares for the sparrows and how much more he cares for us.
You took my statement and analyzed it to death, again, like you did with the song.
November 20, 2009 at 1:13 am Permalink
WOW!!!!! This song is beautiful, my family and friends of our family love this song!!! Beautiful Voice, Beautiful Woman, Beautiful lyrics!!!! I’ll pray for all of those of your that are having hard time with the representation of everything!!!!
God is Love,
Jodi in Montana!!!!!
Leave a Comment