Relevant

Great articles. Broad range of topics covered. This is my all time favorite magazine. It's a "christian" magazine, but not overly preachy. Relevant articles that reach to a variety of people - no pun intended.

uber liberal american churchie garbage. visually it's beautiful and the graphic designers and photogs are on point. Page layouts are clean. But it seems that's where the quality ends. content is not their focus nor is trying to represent a Biblical view of the world or the arts. pretty sure they want to rubber stamp anyone who even touches a Christian subject as a stalwart follower of Christ. The over eagerness of Christian people to come off as cool is so strange. Why feature John Legend(ha) Snoop Dogg(what), Aubrey whatshername from Parks and Rec (seriously)? What's the point of this? Christians have one celebrity. The apostle Paul poo-pooed on this cultish, demagoguery a long time back in 1Corinthians. yuck. Christians are cool when they stand outside of culture (think John the Baptist or even like a hipster) and obeying Christ not when they are running so hard after the cool kids in the hopes they will finally get invited to the party.

I see a lot of interesting reviews, so I'll add mine. When I was a teenager, I was afraid to embrace culture because of how it might look to the rest of the Christian community. Relevant Mag was symbolic of the world's culture (to me at that time). I avoided it like the plague.Needless to say, I've come to realize that much of what we Christians have in our culture is unnecessary for the Gospel message. Seriously--in the 19th century, for example, the Church wasn't the only one singing "hymn music". Old drinking songs are in the same musical style and can be just as boring! It was simply the culture that chose to sing that way.On the content...RELEVANT IS DEFINITELY A LIFESTYLE MAGAZINE. If you don't identify with the lifestyle projected by Relevant, that's totally ok--but you probably won't like the magazine.Let me be very clear about this. Relevant magazine caters to people ages 18 to 35, for starters.The magazine assumes you are concerned with social justice, lean on the political left, have attended (or are attending) college, and have money to blow on cultural goodies. (In all honesty, it can be downright depressing to read whenever you're trying to save money. All that stuff about "simple living" isn't echoed in the advertising and reviews of products).My big criticism of Relevant is this last characteristic. It feels "Relevant" now, but what happens if I lose my job? Relevant forgets that most of us have to think about paying the rent and buying groceries before we can spend $30 on a t-shirt to help save the rainforest.

Obsessed. The podcast. The magazine. Fun, informative, all the things.

This magazine provides good reading and interesting perspective.

Liberal clap-trap. Save your money and don't bother with this vapid millennial-focused entertainment magazine with just the mere hint of Christianity tossed in occasionally. Would give it zero stars but the photography is nice and the actual paper has a high quality feel. That, and the fact that my Gen-Xer mind can't figure out how to rate it at zero stars.

Admittedly, I am slightly older than the "Relevant" demographic. But I'm not 40 yet! So there are a number of things here that do have some appeal to me. And I applaud the magazine for attempting to address culturally important issues.Still, the magazine suffers from it's unrelenting fawning over the whole post-modern vibe and it's own sense of self-importance as a beacon for charismatic hipness. ("Hey, look out, world! We Jesus Freaks have iPods too!") Usually, the more something or someone sweats to proclaim their own relevance, the more danger there is that they can become irrelevant.So, like it's spiritual cousin "Charisma," this magazine suffers from a somewhat shallow perspective on life and culture. It trumpets its ability to ask "the tough questions," even as it follows a relatively safe, politically correct post-mod/charismatic/hipster wannabe party line.I mean, their idea of being cutting edge was to put Bono on the cover. If you want to be cutting edge, put the libertine Adam Clayton on the cover and ask him about Bono's faith. Now, I would read that article! (I am a major U2 and Bono fan. I'm not knocking him; just the lack of imagination at "Relevant".)There's also way too much emulation of the world's perspective on generational heritage. "Hey, we're young, and we're smart, and we don't need to do anything the way our geezer parents did it." I guess having a little gray hair or wrinkles doesn't cut it in today's Paris Hilton culture, but I'd like to think that it might be a little different in a culture shaped by biblical values. Actually, "Relevant" seems to be a little afraid to say what "biblical values" are (beyond the obvious politically expedient ones); it all seems amorphous here.I've never been a fan of the whole "what's hot/what's not" ethos. And, I'd like to give a little more respect to today's Christian young people to think they could handle something that didn't fall into that same faddish trap.I am hopeful that they may get it right yet with "Relevant". At times, they seem tantilizingly close. But it takes more than a slick hairdo, male earrings, chin stubble, idolization of youth, culture icon quotations, and psycobabble "cool dude" theological lingo to make one relevant.