Mighty to Save – the unhelpfulness of vagueness
February 6, 2010
i recently shot an email off to a fellow worker in music ministry about the helpfulness of the song “Mighty to Save”, and thought it’d be worth sharing:
My concern with the song “Mighty to Save” by Reuben Morgan isn’t so much that it’s dodgy as it is that it just doesn’t say much, and what it does say is pretty vague. In my opinion, despite really liking a lot of the Hillsong stuff musically, their biggest (songwriting) failure is how vague their lyrics are. The person singing it could be thinking any number of things about what the song actually means, and it’s never really clarified. I’m happy to go into more detail if you like, but here’s a key example from the chorus of ‘mighty to save’:
Saviour
He can move the mountains
For my God is mighty to save
He is mighty to save
Now what’re we singing about here? That Jesus can move mountains? A real mountain? or ‘metaphorical mountains’ in my life? or the mountain Jerusalem sits on? or just that, in general, he’s powerful enough to move any mountain, so that means he must be pretty powerful?
Most people with a biblical background would be thinking of Jesus saying to his disciples, ‘If you have enough faith, you can even say to this mountain, “go throw yourself into the sea”, and it’ll be done…’ from the Gospel of Mark. Problem with that is, Jesus wasn’t actually telling the disciples he’d move a mountain if they asked for it, or even that he’s powerful enough to do it, or that it’s about ‘how much faith’ they have that will move the mountain so they ‘need more faith’. Jesus was saying it because he was referring to the awesome prophecy in Zechariah 14 about the ‘coming Day of the Lord’ – judgment Day – the Day of God’s wrath and justice – when, in the words of 14:4 – “On that day his feet shall stand on the Mount of Olives that lies before Jerusalem on the east, and the Mount of Olives shall be split in two from east to west by a very wide valley… On that Day living waters shall flow out from Jerusalem, half of them to the eastern sea and half of them to the western sea… And on that Day the Lord will be King over all the earth.” Jesus tells the disciples the ‘if you have enough faith, you can say to this mountain’ story as he’s walking by the mount of olives on the way to the cross – in other words, he’s saying, ‘if you trust me, you’ll see the judgment day come TODAY – when judgment will come on the Mount of Olives and Jerusalem and it’ll be covered in the sea of God’s wrath… – he’s talking about dying on the cross for our sins.
That’s a LONG way from what most people are thinking about when they sing “Saviour, you can move a mountain”. It’s just vague, and likely to help people to think the wrong thing, if they’re thinking anything at all.
That’s one example. You might disagree and think that’s a bit wanky, but i think it’s important to choose songs that are crystal clear in how they explain God’s word, and that focus us on the truth about the cross. I think Remain (by Ben Cantelon) does that much better, and also represents the theme “Mighty to Save” more helpfully. You might decide to still sing Mighty to Save – and that’d be ok. But it’d be good to clarify the vagueness somehow, which i assume is probably the fruit of vague Bible teaching and leadership.
Hey Peter.
People do love this song. Seems sacrilege to criticise it. But I will.
In my opinion, Hillsong write a great chorus. I think this song is no exception. Yes, the mountains image is a little vague, but I think that’s okay. It’s the job of the verses to shine light on the chorus and show us how to understand it. But they don’t. Not as we would like them to, anyway.
Everyone needs compassion,
Love that’s never failing;
Let mercy fall on me.
Everyone needs forgiveness,
The kindness of a Saviour;
The Hope of nations.
The parallels between lines 1 and 2 of each sub-verse are nice. Satisfying. Logical connection with lines 3 a tiny bit tenuous… But the vibe is good.
The next verses are vaguer.
So take me as You find me,
All my fears and failures,
Fill my life again.
I give my life to follow
Everything I believe in,
Now I surrender.
What are you following? Everything I believe in? Or is this what’s being surrendered?
The real problem is that they don’t really tell us much about the ‘mighty to save’ idea. Saved from what? Fear and failure? Probably not, he takes us as he finds us…
I think the big idea of the song is that Jesus is big and powerful and strong. He is kind and can save us. Evangelicals like to sing it because we sing it with the cross in our minds and think it’s about Jesus saving us from sin. Penties love to sing it too. They sub in whatever it is that they want to be saved from. Debt, illness, bondage… Whatever.
I really agree with your first paragraph. It’s vague and that’s the problem. We shouldn’t expect tight atonement theology from hillsong because that’s not what they are into. Jesus’ death is not the center of their faith.
Short term, I think evangelicals can sing it without harm. Some will find it a bit vacuous. The danger is that if this is what we are generally singing, the cross image will fade from our minds and we’ll start subbing in other things.
i’ve never wanted to add such a hearty “AMEN” to a comment on my blog before – AMEN Simone, and thanks.
I agree, if evangelicals are singing it with the cross in their mind, then sure, it’s an alright song to sing. but they won’t be helped to have the cross in their mind from the song. even in the context of a cross-centred church, with cross-centred preaching (and cross-centred everything else!), singing ‘Mighty to Save’ is bypassing so many other richer songs about God saving us by the power of the cross.
Having said that, i was speaking to two key youth leaders here in Lismore this week who expressed their frustration that ‘mighty to save’ is so much catchier and memorable than a lot of the cross-centred songs are. it’d be good to do something about that…
a little bit wanky imho (to use the author’s terminology), but that’s just me. i’ve grown a bit tired of songs that are like theological treatise and afraid of getting personal with God. they’re songs damnit! (not lectures) that of course, is a caricature and i know you are not suggesting our songs be like that either.
just a thought i’ve been having lately but i reckon we evangelicals, so often think we’re communicating the gospel/bible/theology clearly because we use a lot of words and dot the i’s and and cross the t’s. however, i wonder if our metacommunication actually undermines our message and perhaps we’re really not all we’re cracked up to be. and i wonder (on the flipside) if sometimes these churches that dont always have all their theology spot on actually preach the gospel more loudly and profoundly through their metacommunication.
i’m not saying we should then dispense with good theology but i would suggest we need to get over our extreme phobia of anything with the slight sniff of incorrect theology or in this case, “vagueness” (if that’s a word) In the case of ‘Mighty to Save’, this song expresses a love for the Lord Jesus and really has nothing theologically wrong with it and has been a great encouragement to millions of believers across the globe. If you want an example of vagueness (I’m sticking with that word), you could look at a number of hymns sung in evangelical circles that feature outdated language no one but the most bookish of people comprehend.
i often ponder why we evangelicals (in general) arent more passionate about telling people about Jesus and I wonder if maybe we are so afraid of getting anything wrong or looking slightly different or out of place in church that all our passion is sucked away? are we caught up in caring more what other people think about us (ie the people in our churches) than God himself? I mean it can be a really confronting thing when someone is overtly passionate about Jesus, could we be afraid to show that in church and instead hide behind our books and words? i don’t know the answer there; just raising ideas.
i personally dont think there should be this dichotomy between ‘loving God’ and ‘good theology’. I mean if we really love God, we will want to know him better and we will want to know his word inside and out. I just hope we arent making the mistake of knowing about God, rather than knowing God.
i recall a talk you did a couple years back in lismore. it was an absolute cracker, where you talked about this problem and basically said, “we don’t love Jesus like we should.” I think you are right. and one of my greatest fears is that i might be a little bit like the pharisees in that i care a lot about getting things wrong and right but i don’t love God with my heart and soul and strength and mind. all i know is that on the face of it, hillsong are doing a far better job at bringing people to Jesus than just about any church I’ve been to. (Of course that will lead to questions as to whether these people are trusting in the true Jesus… my opinion, as far as I can tell, in the most part, I believe they are. Of course, only God knows the heart and there are some unhelpful things said at hillsong that lead people to trust in promises God hasnt made. BUT they love Jesus, their Lord and Saviour who died and rose again in their place to take their sins away. In most of their recent songs, the atonement is prominent, such as this exaple. it’s a few snippets from a song to be released on their next live album:
you were near
though i was distant
disillusioned i was
lost and insecure
still mercy fought
for my my attention
you were waiting at the door
then i let you in…
trading your life
for my offenses
for my redemption
you carried all the blame
breaking the curse
of our condition
perfection took our place
when only love
could make a way
you gave your life
in a beautiful exchange…
woah this turned out a lot longer than originally intended. i was really just going to say, “yeah that’s a bit wanky” and leave it at that, but i got carried away on my soap box. i’ve been doing lots of reflecting lately so good to get some thoughts out. lot’s more that i’d like to say but i’ll leave it for later. love to hear if you think i’m going off the rails or not.
love ya bro. keep looking to the King, I know that you love him more than anything.
“Evangelicals like to sing it because we sing it with the cross in our minds and think it’s about Jesus saving us from sin. Penties love to sing it too. They sub in whatever it is that they want to be saved from. Debt, illness, bondage… Whatever.”
i totally agree with this. and so i ask is there a problem with that? Given the context of the church it is being sung in and how the bible is taught and treated? I’m not sure on this one??
Wade – it’s always a pleasure when you ‘get carried away on your soapbox’, because you’re clearly much more well-thought-out on these issues than i am, and i’ve got a heck of a lot to learn. i feel pleasantly rebuked by your words, and felt the same when i got an email recently from another key (Christian) music guy in sydney who encouraged me in a similar way.
i reckon you’re right on the money – we Aussie-Bible-believers are very good at ‘sticking to the truth’ while simultaneously failing to love Jesus, and failing to love & accept each other. we’re good at rejoicing in a well-organised ministry, but not so good at rejoicing together in Christ. personally, i’m very good at slagging the crap out of Christian music while not doing a whole to improve the situation (have i ever told you my fat-dad illustration? i seem to be telling it a bit lately…) for example i know there are many people who’d like to be more expressive during the singing at scpc than what they currently are – if they weren’t so afraid of what others would think of them – a culture of fear created, of course, by the people around them… not least the guy leading the music team… i’ve got plenty of room to Grow here.
but i do still hold to my concerns about shallow/vague lyrics. it might be the case that we worry about the truthfulness a little too much (making us “pit-bulls for Jesus”) – but SURELY there’s something in between the two extremes: Surely there’s faithful lyrics that aren’t like reading out of a Bible dictionary! Surely there’s faithful lyrics that’re simple, and not cliches, but still rich! singing songs together at church is a way for God’s word to sink into our hearts and minds that can’t happen by preaching – it’s not ‘better’, it’s just different – and i think that, since the Scripture-soaked words of songs can be the very voice of God to us (!) while we sing – that’s worth being awfully careful about the words we use, and the clarity of what’s sung.
On the flipside of those thoughts though – congregational singing is THREE-dimensional word ministry – and being TAUGHT God’s word through songs is only ONE of the dimensions (it’s the ‘God-to-us’ dimension). The other two dimensions are ‘us-to-God’ (prayer, praise, thanks, confession, rejoicing etc), and ‘us-to-each-other’ (as we praise God & listen to God and encourage each other with God’s word etc TOGETHER). And I think that’s a big part of evangelical music’s downfall: we see Congregational Songs as an opportunity for us to HEAR God’s word (‘God-to-us’), and our songs are full of theology (often very over-done). But there isn’t nearly as much emphasis on the ‘us-to-God’ or the ‘us-to-each-other’ dimension. Brother i reckon it’s always a good thing to be careful about the words we sing – but the bigger problem is that we’re neglecting PRAISE and ENCOURAGING EACH OTHER with our songs.
But then, maybe i’ve just reverted back to being a ‘pit-bull for Jesus’ – so feel entirely free to disregard.
For the record: we’re singing quite a few lifetone songs this term, and it’s been great! I sincerely hope you keep writing and i’ll be hanging out to hear your stuff. ‘Now My Eyes Have Seen You’ is still one of my favourite Christian songs ever (and not just because of the cool vibe when we recorded it!). thanks heaps from the encouragement and it’s a real bummer we can’t chew the fat about this in the flesh more often – i reckon there’s a lot i could learn from you.
Les – “is there a problem with that?” it depends on whether or not you actually see singing as an opportunity to teach us God’s word or not – whether you see it as an actual part of the Bible teaching, and not just a side-show to the sermon (see the above comment) – but Simone might want to respond to you herself…
Hi Les.
I guess my answer to your question is probably the same as what I wrote above- short term, its probably not a problem. In a decent church, where people have the cross image in their minds, the song will be interpreted in a helpful light. But long term, if everything you are singing is fuzzy, the cross will get fuzzier too. Any why fill you service with fuzzy songs if you could have something solid?
Hi Wade. [Are you a Wade I know?]
“i’ve grown a bit tired of songs that are like a theological treatise and afraid of getting personal with God.”
Any song that sings like a theological treatise is probably just a bad song. But I’d love to know what songs you put in this category. We sing stuff that is quite meaty… but also engaging and moving. I don’t think I’d want particular songs on my church playlist if they had the emotional impact of a text book. But maybe we are all different on this, and songs that I experience as moving leave my sister in the next pew cold.
The other question I have is about ‘getting personal with God’. What do you mean by this? Is it through confession of sin, telling God how much you love him, hearing about and feeling moved by God’s love for you, or something else? I don’t have a problem with any of these things – it is just worth exploring what it is that you want a congregational singing experience to give you. I was chatting with a friend the other day and realised that what she wanted from congregational singing was a feeling of nearness to God that could be achieved without the drudgery of daily bible reading and prayer and patience with her children. And I want this too. I’m human so the song that builds for the first 3/4 and then climaxes before finishing with a string of whispered sweet nothings appeals to me. There’s buzz in that. Is that what you mean by getting personal with God?
I agree that a lot of hymns are unclear in their meaning. Stupidly so. Let’s never sing them again.
Good to talk about.
simone
Amen to “get rid of fuzziness” however I can think of much worse songs…”You said” for instance which, as well as being fuzzy is also theologically unsound because it takes bits of scripture completely out of context, taking the “nice” verses (or bits of verses) and neglecting the harder edged context.
You said
pray and I’ll hear from heaven
and I’ll heal your land.
This is actually a reference to 2 Chronicles 7:14 but cheerfully ignores the IF-THEN proviso of:
IF my people, who are called by my name, will humble themselves and pray and seek my face and turn from their wicked ways, THEN will I hear from heaven and will forgive their sin and will heal their land. (emphasis added)
Wade – Just read Peter’s comment which confirmed you are the Wade I thought you were. Hi. Has been a while. Sounds like you’re going well.
Hey brother,
Thanks for your comments and encouragement, although I’m not so sure I’m all that well thought out just yet. However, I’ve certainly had the chance to do some reflecting and growing as I’ve been exposed to different things over the past year.
I’m very grateful for my experience and training in Sydney-evangelical type churches. I’ve learnt a lot through them and have many fantastic brothers and sisters in Christ in these churches. But as blessed as we are, there are things we need to work on. In the last year or so, I’ve begun to notice certain things.
One of these is that there are often a lot of petty theological arguments/discussion that really don’t mean a whole lot in the scheme of things. When there are so many lost people in this land, we really need to get on with putting the gospel out there. We suspect that there is a sleeping heretic giant under every rock, when I really think we should be more prudent with our battles. Sometimes our discussions are self-indulgent and hinder our gospel proclamation..
There is a lot of emphasis on our particular brand of Christianity – I wonder what we are trying to convert people to. Is it to the Lordship of Jesus or is it to our brand of evangelicalism?
I also feel that not a lot of effort goes into contextualising the gospel. We aren’t really reaching our culture and we should be examining both our content and the methodology of our message.
In saying these things, don’t think that I have these things together. I certainly squander gospel opportunity after gospel opportunity on an allmost daily basis. But I’m getting more passionate about these things and we really need to get on with the mission.
Don’t hear me saying the words we sing aren’t important. I first started writing congregational songs because I saw the influence that church songs had over people’s understanding of God. There are abysmal songs out there and it we should avoid them. There have also been so many great songs written in the last number of years. I reckon that our brand of churches have certainly done a lot to improve in this area in the last decade or so too.
It certainly would be good to chew the fat more bro. There’s nothing wrong with being a pitbull over the main thing (the gospel) but maybe we don’t need to bite the head off every chihuaha that comes along.
It’s great to be able to discuss these sorts of things brother. We have (if it’s God’s plan) many years of ministry ahead of us brother and we need to be spurring each other on more and more. These sorts of chats can only sharpen us both up. Hopefully none of my criticisms have come across as overly harsh; I guess what I’m really just trying to say is let’s do what ever we can to stick to the main thing: Christ crucified and risen to bring us into the Kingdom of God… and let’s do whatever we can to keep that main thing clear and get it out there to the people who need to hear it.
Love ya bro – when you’re down in Sydney next we’ll sit down for a beverage.
Hey Simone,
Yep I certainly know you, good to hear from you. Yeah I’m going pretty well thanks, the last year was kinda tough at times but God is always good.
That comment about theological treatise was probably harsh and a bit sweeping as far as statements go, but you probably know the sort of songs I’m talking about. They may be full of truth but the way they are written both lyrically and musically makes them sound like the truth is bland and unaffecting (kinda like elevator music). I don’t want to be too specific as judging songs is often a subjective and fairly personal experience (you could press me for examples in a private email if you like). Also, I know as a song writer that congregational song writing is a difficult art (in my opinion, probably the most difficult form of song writing). I certainly wouldn’t really appreciate people being too harsh on my songs in such a public forum (unless it’s warranted of course).
As to being afraid of getting personal with God, I guess I mean songs that write about God in a failry distant way. I reckon our churches have rallied too hard about songs that use the first person. There are songs out there that are self-focussed and full of navel-gazing but I also think that it’s a mistake to write about God in a way that leaves us feeling like distant observers.
The best hymns are all very God focussed but at the same time, very personal. eg. When I survey, May the mind of Christ MY Saviour, When Peace Like a River, How Great Thou Art. They all use the first person without getting fluffy about things. I don’t think I’m looking for a feeling of nearness but a notion in the song that God in his incomprehensible mercy includes “us” and “me” in his amazing plans (yes even sinful, selfish, little me).
That’ll do my writing for the night. I wish I was quicker at this sort of thing. Just as a quick aside, I really appreciate the songs you’ve had a hand in writing (especially Never Alone). Be encouraged to keep writing.
You’ll have to blame Simone for a random stranger appearing here!
However, I can’t let this one slide. Regardless of the vagueness issue (hear, hear!), Mighty to Save has a far bigger problem. One which I think kills the song by expressing a fairly serious untruth.
So take me as You find me,
All my fears and failures,
Fill my life again.
I give my life to follow
Everything I believe in,
Now I surrender.
The first time I came across this song, I was appalled by these lines. Part of the problem was that they had been stripped of punctuation, and the line breaks were different, which exacerbated the vagueness. However, even without this, this is meant to say what about repentance??! God, you’ll just have to take me like I am, it’s my final offer, I can’t be bothered to work up even a little bit of regret. I know you’re a pushover, so I don’t really have to even care, you’ll still let me off the hook.
Maybe if the second trio of lines were clear instead of completely vague (I’m a big believer in self-centredness, I think I’ll surrender to it, for example) it would help. But as they stand, I think this teaches a horrifying disregard for God’s holiness.
Yes, I know, it’s because I’m reading line 1, then lines 2 and 3 together, and if you read it line 1 and 2 together, then line 3, it’s not _so_ bad. But I think you lose me at line 1.
Anthony – maybe that’s the vagueness issue again. I get that songs can’t just have good theology. The purpose of a song is a heart’s expression of response to the truth. Much like the Psalms not only teach theology but are actually the heartfelt response of the faithful Israelite (and ultimately of our Lord) to the knowledge of God’s dealing swith them. Wade, I get you’re point but I don’t think that’s what Pete was saying. We don’t need to put Calvin’s institutes to music, but our songs need to be rich, emotive, poetic expressions of the gospel and our response to the gospel. But if our songs are rich emotive poetic expressions of something pseudo-gospel, something vague, then we will hurt people. there should be an alternative to eitherr dry theological treatise songs and emotional gospel-fuzz. We can be faithful without being dry and we need to be. Anyway hope that makes sense I didn’t sleep at all last night so we’ll see. Funny thing, sometime after 1 some guy drove through a traffic light outside my place, taking it out. No injuries by the looks, than goodness. Anyway if you ask me, just listen to Keith Green – no he’s a bit outdated. But he could in some ways model a good vision for Christian musicians, just to more contemporary tunes. Cheers
I’m not sure how clear I’ve been so far, but hopefully you’ve gathered that I’m not in favour of the treatise or the fuzz.
What my rants have been trying to get across is that we evangelicals need humility. We shouldn’t assume that we have the monopoly on the gospel or the arrogance to think that we know and understand all of the scriptures in their entirity. We also should be able to show a bond with believers from other churches with whom we will be sharing eternity.
I would argue that in this examination of ‘Mighty to Save’; it’s all been rather nitpicky. This song is not hurtful, it is in fact a great celebration of our incredible Saviour and has been a great encouragement to me and countless others.
My plea is to evangelicals like yourselves that we should put the sharp cuttlery back in the drawers(especially in regards to one certain church).
“God, you’ll just have to take me like I am, it’s my final offer, I can’t be bothered to work up even a little bit of regret. I know you’re a pushover, so I don’t really have to even care, you’ll still let me off the hook.”
Anthony, I dont know how you arrived at the conclusion that this is the tone of the song. Surely the songwriter has admitted he’s a mess of fears and failures. He has just sung about how he needs mercy, compassion and the kindness of a Saviour. He then expresses his absolute confidence in the Saviour who is mighty to save. Surely we are able to come to God confidently, surely we don’t need to grovel in penance because we know we are perfectly accepted failures in Christ Jesus. I thought we evanglicals prided ourself in salvation by grace and not human merit.
Are we really in a position where we can judge the sincerity of a person’s repentence? Or is this a case of having it in for a particular church again, so that nothing good can ever come out of it.
All the words we’ve written in this discussion would maybe be worthwhile if there was something dodgy about the song. Going back to Pete’s original post; Is this song supposed to include a full exposition of the prophecies of Zechariah before we can use the phrase “move the mountains”? Does every song have to mention the word cross to express the gospel?
We must remember the limits of one song to express the inexhaustible limits of God. We too need to be humble and remember the limits that the human mind and human language has in expressing his incomprehensible nature. But despite the limits of language, God in his great mercy has condescended to us and communicated to us through human language in a way that is truthful and accurate. We must also do what we can to echo that truth in our songs, but we must we must realise that all our efforts in praising God and expressing anything to Him are meagre and are only acceptable to God through the work of Jesus who alone is the “one true worshipper”.
Let’s not be so full of our confidence in our own understanding that we become a little like the Pharisee who prayed in the temple thanking God that he was not like the person from hillsong (or was it a tax collector, i can’t remember? – tongue is in cheek at this point).
I think I’ll leave it in your court for now. As for me, I’m going to keep singing ‘Mighty to Save’. Keep looking to Jesus.
@ Wade – I’m not arguing for grovelling, or wanting to insert any works stuff here. I simply can’t see a whiff of repentance in what the lyrics say.
As for the impact of the song’s origin on my opinion: I first sang it at a wedding, and the printed lyrics broke across the page. The copyright details were over the page, and I knew I hated it before I even got there and saw who composed it. I should add that it was not a wedding where I expected any Hillsongs material.
I don’t think it’s impossible to improve on the clarity without turning the song into a treatise.
And I’m sorry, I do think there’s something dodgy about the song. If it’s teaching a false view of repentance, then it’s teaching people a false view of what it means to have faith in Christ. I’d call that a serious problem.
He might admit that he fails; he might confess Jesus as a mighty saviour; but he at no point in the lyrics repents of his sin, as far as I can tell. And the more the lyrics dance around the issue of sin without expressing repentance, the greater the damage.
Wade – so true about the grace and humility. If we think we’re defending the gospel of grace but discard the grace at the heart of the gospel while doing it, we’ve missed it all. This is an area of my life God is really convicting me of and I hope and pray I grow in it. For my part, I apologise if anything I said came across judgemental. I wish blogs had tone of voice capabilities for clarity. Anyway, I do however think the discussion is worth having and I will ponder your thoughts more. I agree with some and desire clarity on others. I don’t think the discussion was originally set up to attack a particular church, however it may have begun to turn that way (and I think at times thre has been judgement), but to try and think through how we can best use music to do what we’re all agreed on – getting on with the mission. For my part, I spent years in a church where the gospel/bible were taught under a fog and I came close to losing my faith and have felt the darkness and despair of that. So while judgement might be a problem it’s not I think the only issue behind a discussion like this. I don’t want to jump up and down red in the face and pointing fingers. I’m not better than anyone. You’re right. if I sneer down at even anyone, how am I better than a Pharisee? But there’s the issue of helping people who are struggling. I’ve been there.
For my part, I find Brooke Fraser’s (or Litgerwood’s) music from Hillsong some of the most beautiful and encouraging and strengthening Christian music I’ve ever heard. I have felt love and desire for Christ renewed, and strength in hope and peace in the gospel. They are faithful, poetic and musically beautiful. And I really had that in mind when I was commenting earlier.
Anyway, it’s late, i’m tired, i’m rambling, I’ve agonised over this to make sure I’m clear and know without doubt I will fail. When you begin to learn ancient Greek you realise how vague and dumb the English language is, and wonder how any of us get through a day without us all killing each other from miscommunication. Augh.
Speak grace with grace. I love you all. goodnight.
I hear what you’re saying Ryan. It’s a difficult art this blogging/commenting thing because the written word is so much more lasting and hard to communicate tone. My rants really weren’t directed at anyone in particular. They were directed at evangelicalism as a whole and in particular our breed of the beast. Pete’s post was just a trigger for me to let a lot of the thoughts out which had been simmering away in my mind. So, I’m sorry if I blew some things out of proportion but I do feel pretty strongly about the things I said. As you say brother, speak grace with grace. Love it. I should get back to bed. God is good.
I trust I’m not the only one noticing the irony – in a discussion of song lyrics we’re getting a parallel discussion of blog ‘lyrics’!
(Please, nobody start singing these comments
just a quicky on this one Wade – i certainly don’t think every song should have ‘a full exposition of the prophecies of Zechariah’ before we use the phrase ‘move the mountains’ – but when i asked a handful of people who’d been singing ‘mighty to save’ and asked them what they thought those lines meant, i got quite a few different answers – some of them ripper, some unbiblical, and some of them a bit of a stretch. that’s what got me concerned about it. some more comments below…
Amen on the Brooke Ligertwood stuff…
boy, it’s enough to make you feel famous when you come back after a few days and find all these people still commenting… and Gday Anthony and Laetitia – nice to have you drop in.
i definitely feel ‘sharpened’ by a lot of the words above – not least the call to be gracious and non-judgmental of other churches and songwriters. i find myself wondering whether some of the above discussion falls into the category that Paul wrote to Timothy about when he told him to teach his church “…not to quarrel about words, which does no good, but only ruins the hearer…” (2 Tim 2:14)
Wade, i’d just like to add a whole-hearted AMEN to the fact that we shouldn’t be busy fighting the chihuahua battles – but busy becoming all things to all men, that by any means possible we might win some. the best way forward isn’t for me to throw mud at songs (or songwriters) i don’t think are all that crash hot – the way forward’s to write some stuff that IS what i think the church needs – or at least to encourage others who’re more gifted in songwriting to do so (i think [and hope!] that the latter will be more my role in the future).
i still think that it’s alright for Bible-believing Christians to sing ‘mighty to save’, but that if they do they’re probably missing out on some far richer stuff they could be singing. but – and this breaks my heart – musically, i can’t find hardly any songs about God being ‘mighty to save’ that are as culturally accessible and have richer words.
We evangelicals need to get busy supporting and encouraging culturally switched on songwriters to use their gifts to build up the church.
[...] 9, 2010 in light of recent discussions about evangelical song lyrics, i thought i’d share a great song we’ll be introducing at SCPC soon – Remain, by [...]
Great thoughts Pete. I do feel bad for you. In a lot of ways all my writing really was the culmunation of my frustration at listening to too many theological police for too many years. And the thing is, I was just as much a part of that too… but in the last few years I’ve been encouraged by a diversity of different Christians (and when I look back to my pre-college days there were many there too), I’ve had to do some repenting too. It’s the first time I’ve really expressed a lot of those thoughts, so you copped the full brunt. Sorry mate. Sometimes I get on a roll with an argument and I find it hard to slow down.
Yeah its funny I’ve been thinking about that 2 Tim 2:14 verse too. I really don’t know what the situation Paul was talking about but it seems to fit the bill. In the verses before, Paul really drives home to Timothy the things we should be on about.
I really think you’re right on the way forward too brother. I’d like to think that maybe through these more constructive way we might actually create opportunities to encourage believers in other churches to handle Scripture more carefully and they in turn may sharpen us in other ways.
By the way, I havent written a song in over a year, maybe we should colaberate on one. I’ve never co-written before. Whatya reckon?
like i said bro – i feel ‘sharpened’ – and thankful for it. i’d love to keep hearing your thoughts.
co-writing – i’d love to give it a shot! i’ve committed to writing a song for Safari this year on Galations – potentially on Freedom. it’ll be the first crack i’ve made at writing a youth song, so i could do with all the help i can get!
sounds good brother, maybe send me through some ideas when you’ve got some and i’ll see if i’ve got anything to contribute.
I know im a bit late… I think the discussion has come to a good, healthy place now.
I was also thinking it’s probably good to “avoid foolish controversies” cos they are “unprofitable and useless” as Paul says to Titus in chapter 3.
So it’s probably great that you have resolved to work hard to write some good stuff Peter. I am praying for you in this brother cos i think it would be a real blessing to our churches.
thanks mitch. as above, i’m not so sure my own songwriting will be the key to the way forward – but i do hope to get alongside more gifted (and perhaps younger) songwriters, and help them to see the value (ie. the Word ministry) in writing congregational songs.
i’d be interested to hear what the music’s like at your church in WA – don’t think i’ve asked you that before.
Yeah ok, sorry, misread that late in the night. Love your humble attitude in that brother.
I wouldnt say music at our church is always spectacular. Sometimes the lyrics to songs can be ‘vague’ as you say, and sometimes it’s the flipside as well. I remember thinking a few weeks ago that a couple of the songs we sang were great lyrically but awkward to sing.
However… I LOVE our music at church. Songs are USUALLY sung with a deep desire to express praise, gratitude and love for God… enjoying who he is and what he has done… which is a real encouragement to hear the people around me sing like this.
Of course we all want both clear, faithful biblical lyrics to a song that is ‘catchy’, ‘memorable’ and not ‘out dated’ (to use your terms). But lately, I’ve been thinking about which is more damaging or destructive; some vague lyrics or a painfully musically awkward song. Perhaps, particularly in churches where the Truth is taught clearly, singing songs with people around me who seem bored and awkward and not engaged with the very faithful and truthful lyrics that they are perhaps mouthing along to could be more damaging and destructive than some vague lyrics. To say it in the positive… Perhaps, in churches where the Truth is taught well, singing songs that have some vague lyrics but really inspire a church to have a deep and passionate love for God will be more helpful and edifying than perfectly correct lyrics but painful music.
It seems to me that in churches such as ours, (Evangelical churches with strong faithful biblical teaching), singing songs that are hard to sing develop a complacency about the incredible truths we’re singing about (or mouthing cos its’s too hard to sing). It’s very hard to engage with the truth in the lyrics when you are struggling to hit the note or know where the tune is going, or if you are struggling not to yawn.
Don’t think I’m saying we should compromise on the Truth in any way. We’re not talking about heretical songs here, just some occasionally vague lines among generally great songs.
Of course, ideally we want both clear truthful lyrics to a song that is ‘catchy’, ‘memorable’ and not ‘out dated’ (to use your terms). And I’m excited about your desire and plan, God willing, to nurture some songwriters in this.
I guess I ponder and pose the question… Which is more damaging to OUR evangelical Churches; some vague lyrics or the awkward outdated music?
What is most honouring to God (not men)… mouthing correct truths or passionately singing God’s praises and occasionally being vague (NOT untruthful) about it?
it’s hard to choose really – i don’t want either vague lyrics or awkward lyrics! But if i had to i’d choose faithful lyrics over vague ones, no matter how awkward. Congregational singing is a Bible teaching ministry – whether recognised as one or not.
i see what you’re saying though. and i do listen to a fair bit of Christian music that i wouldn’t want to sing in church – like you say, singing/listening along with ‘the truth as it’s faithfully taught’ in the brain.
it’s real annoying to have to make the choice though, isn’t it? it shouldn’t be so hard to find faithful Christian music that we enjoy listening to and singing. it’s criminal.
yes, yes it is… get amongst it Peter! May God raise up those songwriters!
I hear and agree with the fact that Congregational singing is (among other things) a bible teaching ministry. But when we sing the awkward songs… i wonder what is actually being taught at that point… although the lyrics are perfectly faithful, (well, atleast according to OUR understanding of God’s word) is that what is being taught through the ‘metacommunication’ (to use Wade’s word) happenning at that point. I wonder if sometimes, during those awkward songs if people are being taught any truths from the bible at all, even though the lyrics are soaked in scripture.
Hi Mitch
It’s tough when an utter stranger addresses you out of the ether, but I thought it worth a shot. I know you don’t mean this, but it’s possible to rephrase your conclusion to be something like:
‘Which is more honouring to God…singing the truth, or having music that accords with worldly fashions, even if it says nothing?’
I really don’t like the idea that we might chase worldly ‘musical’ wisdom!
To continue being a narky stick-in-the-mud…I wouldn’t be so hasty to label the song used as an example as just ‘vague lines among generally great songs’ but not ‘heretical’. Nobody’s really persuaded me that this one doesn’t teach a false doctrine of repentance. And I’m not alone in thinking it.
However, turning back to the sunny side: there are brilliant songs being written by godly people that make sure that the words are clear, biblical, and yes, lyrical…and then they keep finding great tunes. I do think this is something that is many times better than it was even a decade ago. So I’m confident that those who make the words their priority can still serve us perfectly well.
Or, in short, compromise is not required. Hurrah!
Hey Anthony, I appreciate your engagement and welcome the discussion.
I gather from your first post that you have a problem with how the doctrine of repentence is taught in this song by the verse;
So take me as You find me,
All my fears and failures,
Fill my life again.
Wouldn’t you agree that by acknowledging his ‘fears and failures’ and asking God to fill his life again, he is acknowledging his sin before God and his need for God to fill his life. He seems to be acknowledging his brokeness and his inability to bring anything to God besides a life full of mess. And it’s true, God does accept us in messy state. So while this verse is not a full academic thesis on the doctrine of repentance, it certainly promotes a healthy theology of our utter depravity as he pleads for God to be meciful and accept him in his brokeness.
I have a problem with how you “rephrased” my conclusion when you even acknowledged yourself that this is not what i meant… so pretty much, you have manipulated my words to say something I didn’t mean. Cheers.
You said that you were “being a narky stick-in-the-mud”. Be careful with that… Jesus had some pretty harsh words to say to some people in his day who were being narky stick-in-the-mud’s.
Can you please circulate some of those brilliant songs that you mentioned… I’d love to promote them in our church and I’m guessing from other people’s posts they would too! I’d rather not compromise either! Thanks brother.
Odd. Can’t seem to reply to you directly in the thread Mitch. I’ll have to hope you’re subscribing to all the comments, I guess.
Happy to respond!
First, I have a problem with your premise ‘Wouldn’t you agree that…’ It can’t be taken for granted that he is asking God to fill his life again. The hopeless punctuation leaves it ambiguous (is it God, the implied addressee of line 1, or his fears and failures, the explicit subject of line 2, that fill his life again?). Grammatically, the lines should be taken as implying simply a recognition that his life is full of fears and failures – the last mentioned (grammatical) subject. If the lines had been better written, the problem goes. Or if the line breaks were better (ie put line 1 and 2 on same line).
But the bigger problem, I think, is the first line. ‘Take me as you find me’, in every context I’ve ever seen it, has been part of a larger unit: ‘you’ll have to take me as you find me’, a kind of social shrug to say you won’t brush your hair/tidy the house/put on clean clothes or whatever. I doubt the writer meant this, but I think he’s chosen his words poorly. Even allowing his intent, it’s still a pretty poor way of repenting; I note in your defence of the triplet, you didn’t use line 1.
If that isn’t persuasive for you, I don’t think I can really clarify my reading of things any better. We’ll have to disagree. However, given that I have spoken to others about this lyric who have the same issue I do, I think there’s a problem. You can’t guarantee that somebody won’t misunderstand your lyrics – someone will always get it wrong – but you can at least try to ensure that you don’t have a number of believers, who charitably are happy to sing others of your songs, struggling past the rules of English grammar to construe the intended meaning. (It certainly means I can’t use the song effectively, myself, to praise God. Too busy doing verbal gymnastics in my head to avoid singing it falsely!)
—————
As for my rephrasing: I’m sorry if you’re offended. I wasn’t trying to put words in your mouth, so much as pointing out a direction in which your argument was headed. These things are on a spectrum, I guess, and I thought you were getting too close to the wrong side. YMMV; if you’ve heard and rejected what I said, then that’s fine with me. You’re on guard against what I’d sought to guard you from.
As for the brilliant songs – I doubt there will be any revelations here – I have found that Emu’s latest releases have consistently had good songs on them; Sovereign Grace are also worth a look; Michael Morrow’s album was brilliant. But the thing I’m most excited about is the trajectory: these guys are getting better and better at their craft.
Hey Yocky. Just wanted to THANK YOU for this blog… and to hear the far-flung voices of Wade, Mitch & Ryan in the mix, well, it’s very heart-warming. We had a ‘music launch night’ at Creek Rd last night so I have been again thinking hard in this zone. I really GET the point Wade is making and have been thinking much about that. The thing I am thinking hardest about is how preaching and song selections work together. As it happens, we’re singing “Mighty to Save” after the talk on Sunday. And in the context of gospel proclamation, I think it will help us rejoice in God’s salvation. So earlier comments about context I think are significant in how we weigh up song selections.
Hey it’s The Parson!
Good to hear from you brother. Hope they’re not treating you too hard up there in the motherland. Thanks for the feedback.
But onto Mitch’s question:
“What is most honouring to God (not men)… mouthing correct truths or passionately singing God’s praises and occasionally being vague (NOT untruthful) about it?”
Real passion speaks louder than words. I guess that’s what I was trying to say when i was talking about metacommunication (a word i picked up from The Parson himself); we communicate through a lot more than our words and, sometimes even communicate something quite contrary to our words.
So when I visit Hillsong (which i tend to do a couple times a month), what do I see? I see a huge group of people serving gladly – often doing really menial and thankless tasks like ushering, directing traffic, making coffee and bbqs and all doing their jobs really well. I see they work really hard at caring for our kids and keeping them safe and secure.
I see people excited to hear from God’s word; (which surprises me since unfortunately it can be quite haphazard at times) i see a lot of people taking notes, i hear people clapping in appreciation for the word that has been presented. I feared before going there that people were only there for a rock concert entertainment experience.
What else fo I see? I see the service leaders and song leaders not afraid to pray like God is listening and he is powerful and able to respond.
And of course I see lots of people excitedly singing about God and to God.
I hear a very clear call every week that you need to get right with God and that TONIGHT is the night you should do it. And i see a lot of people going forward each week and i see stacks of people being baptised at the end of a service (like 50 or more people every few weeks).
There’s a part of me that wants to be critical about some of these things (we all know our pet criticisms of such churches: emotionalism, manipulation and the rest), but I’m not going to be. Because almost every week I go, I leave encouraged. I leave with a sense that this is ALL ABOUT JESUS. Even though the preaching might have been hit and miss and may have strayed into Anthony Robbins territory from time to time, I see that the preacher is unashamed in his passion for Jesus. I see that he only wants good for his listeners. I see that he wants to see people get on with living a life for God, a life that makes a difference in this world. I get a real sense from most people in this church, that Jesus is alive and kicking and he is without doubt the best thing that has ever happened to them.
But what about our churches? we all know the good things about our churches so i’ll stick to the negatives
(and please note these are generalisations).
What do we communicate when we look bored when we sing about Jesus or when hear a talk from God’s word? I suspect it that Jesus isn’t all he’s cracked up to be and maybe dry and stodgy.
What do we communicate when we are nitpicky in our preaching and are quick to stomp on any Christian who disagrees over the little things? I suspect we communicate a kind of legalism. It certainly doesn’t feel like freedom which Christ brought us through his gospel.
Maybe we even communicate an attitude that you can’t come to Jesus unless you’ve got a big brain or you get all the little details sorted first.
And while our churches appeal to certain types of people, I reckon we are missing most of the people we are trying to reach out in the community.
For this reason, I reckon delivery (how we communicate) is as important as the message. I haven’t preached for a while (due to a change of jobs) but I know if I had another opportunity, I would try to do it quite differently . I for one would put a lot more effort into my preparation both in content and delivery (for one I wouldn’t read from a script as that rarely looks real and I would know my talk inside and out). Good communication of the gospel is of utmost importance and I know I could have done it better in the past.
We who get upfront in our churches need to be real in the way we communicate Jesus. By this i dont mean you need to have a gift of the gab or have to jump around a stage like a madman. simple people can communicate powerful things when they have a passion; when they really love Jesus and aren’t ashamed about it, it speaks volumes. When Jesus is the first priority in a person’s life (and not possessions or sport or sex or whatever), it shows. It shows whether you are quiet and shy or loud and extroverted.
I know this has wandered away from the original topic somewhat but how it relates is that how we sing is as important as what we sing. dont just think because we’re singing lots of words and “good meaty theology” that we’re actually singing like we should be. we may just be partaking in an intellectual exercise that detracts from the gospel message.
I think for the outsider, our singing often does more harm than good and, if I was in charge, I would opt for less or no singing unless our church could sing in a way that made the gospel attractive.
And Anthony, I suspect we’re just going to have to agree to disagree because you’re going to keep riding that hobbyhorse all the way into the sunset
.
But you know what (to quote our PM), I think is the most challenging line in ‘mighty to save’ it’s that phrase, “Now I surrender”.
That word “surrender” really is the perfect word to describe repentance. If repentance really is a change of mindset, a turning around, a change of thought and action then “surrender” encompasses all that.
It means that to follow Christ means to lay down every part of our lives to his purposes. It means saying goodbye to every selfish dream, every worldly desire, every plan, thought and deed that is contrary to his will. It means that every part of our life now belongs to Him and to Him alone.
It’s almost scary to sing that line, “Now I surrender,” because if that’s what it means to follow Jesus, its a whole lot more than feeling a bit gloomy about a few of our more obvious indiscretions.
We don’t use that word “surrender”, a whole lot to describe our response to Jesus, but it would do us good to reflect upon it. Because I think the key to making sure our “life metacommunication” lines up with our speaking, preaching and singing about Jesus is to consider his act of surrender. We need to realise that Jesus surrendered his all to his Father and surrendered his all for our redemption.
When we get a true appreciation of how Jesus gave his all to bring glory to His Father and for our salvation then maybe we will realise we need to give our all to Him; physically, mentally and emotionally. And for us who are used to being a little emotionally stunted when it comes to expressing our love for Jesus, this could take some getting used to. But we need to, for the clarity of the gospel. May we be a people who learn what it is to surrender to our King.
Thanks Steve and Wade – it’s really helpful to keep hearing your thoughts. “Sharpened” is definitely the word i’m experiencing through this discussion – thanks for being blades.
Wade – firstly, and most importantly – Qld was never, isn’t now, and never will be the ‘motherland’. i hope God will bring you to deep and profound repentance.
Secondly, and far less importantly, it’s good to hear about all your great impressions of Hillsong. My own impressions were that they did an excellent job at almost everything, and we evangelicals have HEAPS to learn from our brothers and sisters in Christ who are doing so much good that we’re failing to do in our own churches. We have a LOT to learn from Hillsong. But then there was the one – but massive – exception: the preaching was abysmal. But it sounds like it isn’t as bad every week as it was when i visited on only one occasion. I confess i’ve never been impressed by the Bible teaching in the many Brian Houston mp3s i’ve downloaded and listened to (so i wouldn’t encourage someone to make Hillsong their church) – but from your trustworthy words i think there’s more to be seen than what i witnessed.
But most importantly (even more than the Qld comments) – for all of us – i think there’s something to take away from all of this. Wade’s encouraged us to think of how we can be rebuked and encouraged by the example of our brothers and sisters in Christ at Hillsong who’re doing many things better than we are. His description of their culture is amazing, really. We could continue to throw mud at what they DON’T do well – or we could do the right thing, and respond in a more godly way, by pointing the finger back at ourselves and asking some hard questions about how we need to change so we can be more devoted to our own church families, and to help our church families be more devoted to the lost around us:
- am i willing to learn from the example of Hillsong even if i don’t agree with everything they do?
- am i more eager to correct wrong doctrine or talk about the goodness of Jesus?
- would other people describe me as someone who understands the Bible or someone who’s passionate about Jesus?
- how can we generate a culture of humble and heart-felt service without resentment or grumbling?
- what songs can we write (or use) to better serve our churches today?
- how can we make the most of our time singing together (and how to we encourage our congregation to do the same)?
- and for those of us on the music team, how can we be more devoted to helping our church be passionate for Jesus by our music ministry?
- how can we, as individuals and as churches, become all things to all people that by any means possible, we might save some?
The questions could go on and on really. But they’re damn well worth asking, and dwelling on…
PS if anyone hasn’t already read my impressions of the visit to Hillsong mentioned above (as well as a visit to Emu Music’s Twist Conference and Resolved Church in Newtown), see here: http://sorrowintojoy.wordpress.com/2009/11/24/hello-world/
Hey again Pete,
You’re a funny man. ‘Motherland’ probably shouldnt be thought of too seriously as its certainly a word you’d expect to hear in Avatar, but I do love my Qld and nothing will change that.
Don’t hear me saying everything about Hillsong is rosy. I think if that was my only church I may end up being “stunted” in other ways. Maybe their biggest need is to understand how the Bible fits together. They really need biblical theology. And also, I need to add that I have been (and continue to be) profoundly encouraged by the evangelical churches I have been and am now a part of.
I guess I wanted to paint the picture brighter on one side and darker on the other, so we could consider what is the experience of the newcomer to OUR churches… and maybe what we are inadvertently communicating.
You raise good questions brother.