a WTF moment brought to you by none other than….
…Mars Hill (Seattle). Now, I’ve been to some churches with songs that have bad theology but this absolutely takes the cake…by far.
ht: bob.blog: Mars Hill Worship: Destructor!
Destructor
“From the first time you flooded the earth
To the last time You burned off the curse
To the way that You hated Your Son
When You hung all the sins of the worldHoly, Holy, Holy, Holy, Holy, Holy, Holy
Heaven will disappear with a roll
The host of God will come to destroy
Sin is a declaration of war
God will have his glory one way or another”
And just in case you think this is an aberrant notion - look at this image from the website promoting a book the pastor of this church is putting out.
…yeah, pretty awesome eh?
Now look, I was part of a movement my whole life that claimed you could confess your way to healing, where people “laugh in the Spirit”, prophecies of “you’ll be a millionaire by next year” are passed out like water, and making animal noises “in the Spirit” is not unheard of. I know wonky when I see it and I know how it feels to LOVE the movement and the people of which you are a part. I do not necessarily fault the people of that church for going there and I certainly don’t lay the sins of one on the many but I also know how it feels to realize you’ve been robbed of a healthy theological perspective. I really only post this to point out that there is a foundation within the Reformed way of thinking (specifically fundamentalist American reformed) that is theologically problematic.
And they don’t get their theology from thin air, these ideas are prevalent throughout the Church today and have evolved from a deep rooted history. This is why I still believe we need “emergence” to happen. An examination of our guiding beliefs is in order..and should be ongoing for the record.
Technorati Tags: destructor, mars hill
Related posts:
- Lent Prayer So here is a prayer from Grace’s Lent Blog Almighty...
- holding allegiances lightly From Ray Ortlund (ht:bob.blog) The Judaizers in Galatia did not...
- ECM as a NSM I think Tony’s spot on here and as usual, is...
- Come, Holy Spirit (ht A Living Alternative) Come, Holy Spirit,bending or not bending...
- this gave me chills it’s so beautiful picture used with permission from imageafter a Maasai Creed...
Related posts brought to you by Yet Another Related Posts Plugin.
- Posted by Mak at 12:42 pm
- Permalink for this entry
- Filed under: scribe
- RSS comments feed of this entry
- TrackBack URI
Yikes! It’s amazing how anyone with half a grip on the Bible could sing that song! I admit to sitting out a fair number of Vineyard worship songs that err on the other side of the spectrum — just a little too much about me and Jesus in a little cocoon for my taste (or sense of what the Kingdom is all about).
I do remember something about being “reformed and always reforming” — perhaps “emergent and always emerging” should be our next watchword?
While I agree that the content of the song is awful (and I can’t imagine singing it let alone leading it) I think there is plenty of Bible to back it up if you take a whole-hearted literalistic view. Only because some of it is put so bluntly here, “…to the way You hated Your Son / when You hung all the sins of the world…” for example, does the typical Christian theology sound so harsh, shocking, outlandish, and maybe eve incredulous.
Not a fan of Driscoll, for the record.
there is “biblical support” for lots of things…it doesn’t make it good theology. This comes down to how we read the Bible and this is UGLY THEOLOGY plain and simple.
I just listened to the song in question and feel obliged to give some serious credit to the musicians playing it. Very nice subtle arranging with plenty of slow building and while I don’t like the lyric, the song is very singable for the community, open feeling, and yet is restrained. Sounds like they have some talented and thoughtful musicians there (a rare combination in the present church music scene) in spite our differences.
Credit where it is due.
just goes to show how we all have different tastes, I think it’s horrible on so many levels…but yes, Mars Hill is HUGE and I imagine they pay their people a pretty penny to put on a good show
Indeed Mak. That makes me wonder how much of our theology really looks ugly after we dress it down a bit from our big themes, arches, and the beautiful sweeping narrative that is the traditional Christian story. This kind of internal conflict is surely uncomfortable though I find it to be unavoidable whatever the result is.
Not really going anywhere with this, just something to think about.
Peace.
oh yes, a lot of our theology is certainly ugly - mine included.
i’m kind of weirded out by people saying, ‘but at least the song rocks musically’… is that really the thing that’s important? baptizing some kick ass music into the church building?
you want good church music.. get outside of the church. you don’t have to wait for it to come inside.
this song makes it sound like god’s hands are tied to this violent overthrow of the world because of his slavery to some system of universals. a violent overthrow that includes hatred, destruction, mass genocide and terror, but that is justified by the ends.
ick.
I agree with your point, MAK. Whether we think of the process as reform, restoration or emergence, in my estimation, continued encounters with God produces growth and change. If all we are doing is trying to repackage the ideas of others so as to have punch and appeal, we get some pretty wonky (I love that word) “products.”
I could write more. But that would be a post and not a comment. Thanks for raising this discussion.
Blessings,
-bill
Maybe this could be Jesus’ theme song when he enters the UFC ring… for his slam down with the Devil… I can just see his muscles rippling as he grunts at the chosen ones and the simpering blonde sisters on his arms who look up adoringly at his well oiled pecs… Oh sorry… been listening to too much Driscoll Christology!
“Worship”, “praise” or “Christian” music is a myth. Church-bodies should opt for early U2 before the latest load of musical crap coming from MercyMe - forget it, just bang two rocks together and save everyone the embarrassment.
The lyrics to Destructor are bizarre indeed. I find it hard to believe that the music production Pastor at Mars Hill Church wouldn’t take this off their roster of songs to play with a closer look. I’m 100% down with the wrath and destruction (ever read Psalm 69) but 100% not down with the idea that God hated his only son. Not sure how the author would justify it being that God is love.
And as far as the controversy over Mars Hill Church using a lighting bolt icon for God - really, that’s what we’re getting upset about now? People know that there’s an AIDS epidemic in Africa, right? The icon follows the art direction of the rest of the series which is a playful tongue-in-cheek approach to communicating what the subject matter is. Trust me, I’m not expecting everyone to understand it - they won’t. At the end of the day design is subjective and it really doesn’t matter; no book should be judged by it’s cover. And I’m now laughing that I’ve actually found a use for that old adage. Enjoy the meaningless controversy.
It’s so easy to point at Mars Hill Church as a whole over these things, isn’t it? Right, because we never screw anything up in our perfect lives. Gosh, they are such babes in Christ (wink).
I’m off to watch UFC and piss standing up.
actually, looking at the song they sing, the violent nature of the book cover and everything else that I’ve heard from MD and MH, I think there is a faulty theological trend going on. As for meaningless controversy, considering that it took me about 2 minutes to write the post and 1 minute to respond to comments I think I’m ok, thanks for the concern
And it’s not about Mars Hill, it’s about the theology they espouse. It’s dangerous, it’s the kind of crap that gave me nightmares as a child, it’s not innocuous.
What’s this theology you speak of, Christ crucified? Hell yes it’s dangerous and damn right it’s not innocuous. Believe it.
And don’t sit there and pretend that the wrath and damnation stuff is all they preach. You know they don’t believe that’s the only side to it - knock it off.
Christians are scared of defending the gospel in the same way that men get caught up in adultery - it’s easy. It takes work to cultivate a wife by loving her, defending her and enjoying intimacy together as it should be.
I’m not concerned with masculinity as much as I’m concerned with lazy Christians who are too afraid to flip some tables every once in a while (physically if they have to) and defend what they believe is right.
of course that’s not all they preach, I never said that. And I will not tolerate being told to “knock it off”, I wouldn’t allow it in real life, not from a friend, a stranger or my own husband, I’d walk away, and I won’t allow it here, I’ll ban you.
As for the rest of your comments, I have no idea what they have to do with anything mentioned here.
As for flipping tables - that’s what I’m doing
I’m flipping the tables on which this song and the theology it comes from sits. So thank you for the permission and encouragement to do so 
I also want to repeat the last part of my post - this isn’t about mars hill, this is about a deeply rooted theological emphasis, almost at the exclusion of all else, on God’s wrath … I brought it up because I happened to see it on Bob’s blog and referenced the church only because I thought the song must have been satire, it wasn’t, and I thought it was good to validate the existence of the song in actuality.
The “rest of my comments” were in reference to the theology that Mars Hill Church espouses - am I wrong in assuming that the consensus among those who oppose them is because they’re against their strong defense of the gospel and who the Jesus is who brought it? It seems to be the culmination of everything I’ve read concerning his opposition.
And it also seems to have a direct correlation of the controversy over lightning bolt imagery and lyrics of wrath and damnation, does it not? If not, then please correct me. Tell me of this mystery theology that they espouse that you’re so afraid of.
I stand by what I’ve said. You’re certainly free to ban me if you’d like. I have no care about the matter because you’re making an effort to create a mockery out of a whole part of the body of Christ. I either offend you by defending them or I offend God by not and I’ll choose the former every time.
You’re not flipping tables, you’re shouting in the square and trying to induce a riot. Go inside the temple; a letter addressed specifically to their music production Pastor would better serve them.
I’ll respectfully stop commenting on this post as to not disturb you anymore. I’ve said what I think you needed to hear and I believe we can agree to disagree on this one.
People are getting their panties in a bunch over something that isn’t really that big of a deal. Mars Hill is a very public and easy target for others to criticize and nitpick.
“Now, I’ve been to some churches with songs that have bad theology but this absolutely takes the cake…by far.”
This is just being overly dramatic.
one thing I’ve never been called is overly dramatic so I guess this is a first
Justin - agree to disagree - fair enough
A few notes.
1. To David: I was just trying to be fair to the musicians who arranged and played the song by commenting on what I see as talent and excellence (even if it isn’t to one’s taste) in that area while I still found the content of the song to be hard to swallow. If we can’t step back a little and comment on that sort of thing in our discussion, I think we are being unfair. I hope we can agree that criticism can be loving and also contain encouragement as well. Maybe the songwriter has great gifts that have just been misplaced in this song. BTW Mak, I think your blog post was just fine.
Also, it wasn’t a comment really about how “worshipful” or congregationally-friendly it may or may not be. I can’t judge either for their community.
2. Justin, I agree that banging some rocks together can work wonderfully for worship. A few months back at Inner Metro Green at our old location on the 4th floor I led the group for part of worship in rendition of an old worship song with clapping and stomping which all participated in which was preceded by extended period of silent worship. It was lovely and I recommend changing the forms. People are/get addicted to the forms and feeling. We all do. I DO!
3. In these sorts of discussions I think we owe it to each other to ASK the participants if they meant something rather than accusing them of it and then continue to rattle on with an assumption that might just be wrong. Let us follow the golden rule and assume the best if we are going to assume at all. Let’s be followers of Christ :). Novel idea that we need reminded of now and then.
Blessings all.
P.S. As far as rough (even if biblical) theology in a song, I agree this song does “take the cake” from what I’ve heard. Then again, I haven’t heard any Westboro Baptist songs.
I guess I don’t understand the fuss. The New Testament is rife with wrath and destruction, particularly against religious leaders. The book of Jude spends quite a bit of time warning believers against the wickedness from within, and addresses the coming judgment.
I think there’s an appropriate way to address God’s wrath… and as my brother-in-law attended Mars Hill and served as a deacon there for a while, I think that some of the criticism towards the theology might be done errenously. I think that it’s very difficult for a strong believer in Calvinism (Driscoll) to actually use wrath as a manipulation device when he doesn’t even believe that people can be manipulated into Christianity, and speaks out against that very notion. Like the previously mentioned passage in Psalms, the use of wrath is meant to bring comfort to believer — the idea that someday, God will clean up this mess of a world. God will destroy the enemy.
You don’t have to agree with Driscoll’s position on the nature of salvation, but I think that he is being mischaracterized here.
and I disagree
I’ve listened to a lot of MD’s stuff and read enough of it to know what he teaches.
Post some links to some particularly problematic things he’s posted. I’d like to try to understand your perspective on this.
I’ll leave that up to you to research. I don’t keep his stuff and I don’t want to put the time into it - it’s not that important to me.
Well, what I meant was that having both of us look at a text or audio bit and talk about how we perceive it is what will create shared understanding. I’m always fascinated by the way you view the stuff you post and often try to get to the bottom of how you came to your conclusions, so when it comes to issues with which we may disagree, pouring over a text can be useful.
:: shrug ::
yeah, I just don’t have the emotional energy or desire to engage that right now. The bottom line is this - I think hard penal substitution which MD espouses is not only something I disagree with because I have a different opinion but I believe it lacks substantial scriptural support in a “whole narrative” sense. He would say that not only do we disagree but that I’m wrong on a scriptural basis. We both think the other’s views are dangerous to the Body. We’re not going to get around that. I have no desire to use rationale to prove mark wrong or get people to join my side. I’m not into apologetics, it’s not my style and I’m certainly not going to use it on MD - good lord, that man gets enough of my time when I write a post that took me 60 seconds.
I imagine some day I will address the why’s of my beliefs about penal substitution but I’m not in that head space right now.
Fair enough. Incidentally, I did just now run across some of his controversial highlights, and I think I’ve got a pretty quick idea of why you might disagree with much of what he says, particularly on gender issues and on his warrior-approach to the gospel (in contrast to the gardener approach in your other post). The penal substitution piece is interesting. I think I’ve got an idea of where you’re coming from on that, based on other things you’ve written.
Anyhow, thanks for at least replying as much as you have.
i’m a little late on this. sorry.
i found this web page while trying to find the lyrics for this song so that i can learn how to play and sing it, because it is my latest favorite worship song.
i don’t see what the big deal is. if God is a God of perfect love, he MUST hate sin, otherwise he’s not the God of LOVE.
if you want painful worship songs, try going to a church where they only sing from the psalms. at my first and last visit to a church like that, we sang psalm 58, which includes lines like:
10 The righteous will be glad when they are avenged,
when they bathe their feet in the blood of the wicked
Apologies about the late post.
An facet of worship in the modern church that is often overlooked is the teaching aspect. Worship is a tool to teach us. It seems to me that this song provides ample oppurtunity to teach about sin, the atonement, God’s hatred of sin, etc. No doubt, it is a provocative song, but within the right context i believe this song could be sung to the glory of God in a theologically correct manner.
And why has nobody posted the second verse:
“In reverance we’ll come to Your throne,
indebted to Your holy Son.
The vine of the earth will be crushed,
and Your light will shine over the world…”