Music Mondays - Manufacturing Controversy, it's Reckless.

Over the past several months, the worship song Reckless Love has climbed to the top of the charts and become a staple in the sets of many contemporary worship services.

The questions, criticisms, and controversy wasn't "manufactured" unnecessarily. People questioned whether the idea of God being reckless was a biblical idea. That's a legitimate question to ask on it's face. Analyzing the lyrics of the songs we sing is not a bad thing or a waste of time. 

The reason I'm featuring it in this ongoing series of "manufactured controversies" is that the answers were there the whole time. Relevant Magazine did a good job of running through the various issues of controversy and theology. The song itself defines it's meaning. Cory Asbury, the musician who penned this song, also gave a thoughtful and biblically-based explanation of the idea behind the song. I mean, why not go to the source if you have a problem with it? 

For some personal context here, I was triggered a bit by a blog that was shared on my Facebook timeline regarding this song. I can no longer find it, but it was authored by someone taking their task way too seriously (probably a lot like myself). It ended up using 800-1,000 words dissecting the song and the related biblical issues...all to conclude that the song was ok and it's good to take into consideration how an author/musician defines words and concepts. 

And in my mind I was like, "why?". Let's let art be art and give some creative license to faithful artists. I know that opens up for the possibility of heresy popping up. But the thing about our modern world is, we got plenty of heresy hunters that will sound the alarm plenty early before it's endangering the Church. Let's give more freedom to our creatives and let them (biblically) expand our imaginations about who God is and what He's done and doing for us.

Music Mondays - Manufacturing Controversy Over a Terrible Thing Called "Joy"

"Joy to the World" is a song full of bad theology!!! 

Or so I was told.

I will admit, this one is a bit of a stretch and may only pertain to my experience. I grew up in a conservative non-denominational Christian church that embraced Dispensationalism. Specifically the idea that Christ wouBut it wasn't at church where I was warned about this popular Christian hymn. It was actually in college.

I went to a small Christian college (and seminary) that similarly held to Dispensationalism. And while there have been many developments in this particular theological system, there were enough "old-school" traditionalists still around in the early 2000's who more than once criticized this song.

The charges against were that Isaac Watts was an a-millenialist, or was it post-millenialist? I honestly don't remember. But you could read the lyrics and discover his erroneous theology in this beloved Christmas hymn. See one strong tenant of Dispensatoinalism is the premillenialism understanding that Christ will reign on earth for (a literal?) 1000 years before God establishes the final new heavens and new earth of Revelation 21-22. And any suggestion that the world would get better and better until Christ returned, or that he's reigning as King now - well that was close to heresy.

You can google those alternative millennial views and the various debates around them. What you will discover is that there are a lot of differing viewpoints each claiming significant biblical evidence for their view. And as a Progressive Dispensationalist, I see those old anti-Joy arguments to be needlessly nitpicky.

I see this song as anticipating Christ's second coming and describing the glory of His Kingdom as the Scripture that inspired it - Psalm 98 - does. The one thing about it is, somehow we've married it to the Christmas season when it is clearly pointing to the end times.

Again, maybe it's just me, but I've come to resolve this manufactured controversy for myself.