Book Review - The Sacred Romance
The heart is deceitful above all things, and desperately wicked
The Sacred Romance, by Brent Curtis and John Eldredge, claims that it will �invite us to see what God is doing behind the scenes of our lives to woo us to Himself. A glimpse of His wild beauty arouses our desire and puts us on a journey to capture or be captured by love. It calls us to recognize our heart�s deepest longing and invites us on a journey toward fulfillment.� If that is not clear, it is a book about Christian living and becoming more like Christ.
After being published in 1997, the book gained great acclaim in the Christian world and has spawned several sequels following the same theme (though the sequels are written only by Eldredge as Curtis died since the publication of this first book). The book is written in the flowery, verbose prose so loved by mystics. Stories fill almost as many pages as teachings, and popular movies and books are analyzed in great detail. I will provide first a synopsis of the teachings of the book and then an analysis of it.
Synopsis
The basis of the book is that God calls every human to join in a Sacred Romance with Him. Every human has the longing to form such a relationship with God. Our hearts tell us that we need such a relationship, but we constantly suppress the need and desire, opting instead to do life on our own. The authors �hope to help you discover your soul�s deepest longing and invite you to embrace it as the most important part of your life� (page 10). It is their aim to help us guide our hearts. Every experience we have, every longing for romance or love, every fragment of chivalry and beauty is really us seeking this Sacred Romance.
The authors spend a lot of the book discussing what they call the �Message of the Arrows� (chapter 3). This term describes the experiences of our pasts that have pulled us from God and have kept us from seeing, understanding or believing that God wants to romance us. By looking back at the stories of our lives we should be able to see how every story is really about God teaching us to join in His romance.
In order to understand the world we need to see history as a play � a play where God is not only the author but also the main character. The play goes like this:
- Act I � His Eternal Heart - The story begins with God as Trinity, already experiencing love and intimacy.
- Act II � His Heart Betrayal - God created angels but they betrayed God�s heart by rebelling against Him. This called God�s heart and His intentions into question. How would God react to this and what would that say about His character?
- Act III � His Heart on Trial - God created a beautiful world in order to woo humans to Himself. Because true love can only exist where there is freedom to choose between love and rejection, God took a great risk in creating humans, in that He gave them free will to love Him or reject Him. God was surprised when Adam and Eve rejected Him. He was dismayed when humans continued to reject Him and the authors say that in the 400-year period between the Old and New Testaments �you can almost imagine [God] nursing his wounds, wondering where it all went wrong� (page 80). Fortunately, God sent His son to die and rescue us. God now pursues us as a Lover, trying to woo us to Himself (page 81).
The authors then introduce the role of Satan in this great drama. Satan, being unable to defeat God, decided to wound Him by stealing the love of His beloved ones through seduction. Satan�s strategy is to disconnect us from our hearts. When we are disconnected from our hearts, the heart becomes deceitful and desperately wicked.
The role of each human, then, is to embark on a journey. It is a journey where we can learn to see that God is looking for a Sacred Romance with each of us, or a journey where we can reject Him. We can learn that God does not want our obedience, sacrifice, adherence or busyness, but wants us, our hearts and very beings. The process of this journey rests on our ability to see life from the basis of the question of �what does God have to do with the experiences of my life?�
Analysis
This book is full of error, especially when viewed from a Reformed viewpoint. It is indicative of the sorry state of the Christian world that such a book can gain so great a following. The authors misuse the Bible, equate experience with Scripture, and make God into something He is not. They are mystics, relying on their own thoughts more prominently than Scripture. They rely heavily on other mystics, mainly Catholic, such as C.S. Lewis, St John of the Cross, G.K. Chesterton and Phillip Yancey.
The authors have two grave misunderstandings that pollute the entire book. First, they have no understanding of human depravity. Where the Bible says that the heart is deceitful and full of wickedness, the authors believe it to be essentially good as long as we understand the importance of a Sacred Romance. Where the Bible teaches that no one seeks after God, the authors teach that all of us seek after God. They quote G.K. Chesterton who said, �every man who knocks on the door of a brothel is looking for God.� In their view, all we do, whether good or bad, is really a search for God. We all seek after Him, whether we know it or not. Inside of each of us is the desire to know and experience goodness. The second great misunderstanding is in God�s omniscience � His ability to see everything, whether past, present or future. They teach a form of �open theism� which says that God can only see certain things in the future, but is unable to see what decisions or choices humans will make. Hence God was surprised when humans rejected Him and did not know that Adam and Eve would sin. Of course this contradicts the Bible which says that God knew who would love Him before the world was even created.
There are literally hundreds of errors in this book but I will focus only on some of the major ones.
- The book is based on the importance of the heart, yet the authors never identify what the heart is. It seems that in their view it represents only good. This blatantly ignores what the Bible teaches about the heart being deceitful and wicked. They teach that it is only wicked when we are outside of the Sacred Romance with God.
- The authors paint God as being sad and heartbroken, hoping against hope that we will choose to love Him. It smacks of Arminian theology taken to its fullest extent and reduces God almost to the extent of making Him sound like a whining child.
- The teaching that is based on the Bible is often dubious or plain wrong. The authors often quote from The Message, relying on that poor paraphrase when it suits their purposes and when the proper translations do not. This shows especially in Ephesians 1 which they use to say God created the world for our purposes, not God�s. The authors use The Message to teach that Job lost faith in God when a better translation shows he clearly did not. They also say that in Matthew 24 Jesus tells us that in the Last Days people will have lost the Sacred Romance. This is a ridiculous misinterpretation of this chapter.
- The book paints God and our relationship with Him in sexual terms. This far exceeds what we read in Song of Solomon and other places in the Bible. The portray God as One who seeks to have an almost sexual relationship with us. He �desires from us � an intimacy much more sensuous, more exotic than sex itself� (page 161)
- The authors say that �God�s love is not based on what we�ve done, but who we are� (page 98) Of course God�s love for us is based on who He is, not who we are!
- �God is not after obedience, sacrifice or adherence � He is after us� (page 91) Teaching like this downplays the importance of following God�s decrees for us. This, of course, is a necessary symptom of teaching that does not follow the Bible. When we rely on our minds more than the Bible this type of teaching is inevitable.
- The authors rely heavily on the teachings of others as well as books and songs, much more so than they do on the Bible. For example, several pages are dedicated to showing how Lieutenant Jim from Forrest Gump was actually discovering the Sacred Romance through drugs, alcohol and sex with prostitutes.
- There is almost no importance placed on studying the Bible or praying. The tools God gives us to be transformed into His image are ignored in favor of just understanding our hearts and God�s heart. This is a book dedicated to sanctification � the process of living as God desires us to live � that ignores what God Himself teaches about this.
- There is no mention of Jesus coming to atone for our sins. The authors seem to say that Jesus had to come to seeks us out and find us � not to save us from hell and take our punishment upon Himself.
- A knowledge of God, in the view of the authors, is less important then feeling, experiencing and romanticizing Him. The book bears this out as there is little within it to increase the reader�s knowledge of God. Yet classic Christianity teaches that we can best learn God�s will for us by having knowledge of Him and what He commands of us.
One major annoyance I found with the book was that the authors quoted many sources without citations. This is usually a sign that an author has quoted inaccurately or far out of context. Even many Bible passages are quoted without citations.
In the end analysis, the authors have created an inaccurate metaphor for God�s relationship towards us, have attempted to prove it with the Bible and being unable to do so have had to rely on poor paraphrases and mysticism (which can be defined as �trying to know God outside of the Bible�). Their teaching bears only a vague resemblance to the Christianity of the Bible and should be avoided at all costs!
Comments (19) »
1. Kendall
January 21, 2004
7:59 AM
Thank you for the review. I need to read Sacred Romance for myself so that I can dialog with others on the critical aspects that you have raised.
God bless…..
2. Earl
February 2, 2004
5:27 PM
Inspite of your review, God used The Sacred Romance to minister to me and deal with some issues of my heart. I had reached a place of hardness of heart and some anger towards God. I was’t reading the Bible much prior to reading Sacred Romance, however I’m now back on God’s path for my life and back in the Bible. I don’t go running to people like you to determine whether I should read a book. I discern for myself. Personally I think you are rather arrogant and `puffed-up.’
3. curt
February 8, 2004
9:01 AM
If being ‘puffed up’ is thinking critically and using the Bible as your source then we should all be puffed up. Your critique was accurate. I give these men more credit than they deserve. I think they are typical of the eduation one receives from most xyz Bible colleges and seminaries-and most typically what comes down from the average pulpit each week. Thanks for you analysis. I look forward to more reviews.
4. R.E. Downer
February 16, 2004
5:23 PM
They rely heavily on other mystics, mainly Catholic, such as C.S. Lewis, St John of the Cross, G.K. Chesterton and Phillip Yancey.
Reply;..c.s. lewis was anglican not catholic infact he abhored papists. Yancey is Presbyterian. Iam not reformed, praise God. Your own guru Gerstner is in grave error when he flipantly says”calvinism is just another word for christianity” muck your own stable before you throw stones.
5. Chris Schasse
May 14, 2004
2:53 AM
Well I appreciate that you looked at this book from a theological perspective, and took into critical consideration the aspect of the bible, but i would like to get some clarity on a few of your points…
You said for your first point that the bible says that the heart is “deceitful and wicked,” but what about the bible saying we are created in God’s image? Wouldn’t that be saying, then, that we have corrupted hearts, wicked from our influences and envirenments, but apart from the twisted corruptness, we do have “good” and perfect hearts, after God’s own image?
In your second point you write that God is reduced to a “whiny child” in this book, because he is viewed at as “sad and heartbroken,” but, at least in my experience, sad and heartbroken does not mean weak and “whiny.” Take, for example, your view of a perfect father, and what he is like. Do you not see him weeping over his children, who are walking closer and closer every day into a deathtrap? When you see a father crying unselfishly becuase of his son’s and daughtors, do you depict him as a “whiny child”? If you look at Jesus’s life (who was actually God coming down within the limits of a man), you will see time and time agian him going off by himself in immense sorrow. “My soul is overwhelmed with sorrow to the point of death.” (Mark 14:34) Jesus wasen’t a man of only joyfulness and contentness. Through a man’s empathy and compassion does his true colors show, and in expressing that it does not make him “a whiny child.” God’s love for us is shown in the fact that every heart of ours is his.
Your third point could use some concrete examples, and refrences to the actual verses you got the evidence from. And also, how would you translate Matthew 24?
in your fourth point, you point out that the book views our relationship with God to be “sexual” (which, if taken literally, is of course an absurd claim). But i do not think that this was meant to be taken in any way literally. In many other places, we are compared to as God’s bride, or lover, or aldulturer. In one place specifically, Jeremiah, God’s people were compared to many times as “aldultresses” or “prostitutes” because they had turned away from God, and where “sleeping” with other gods. This analogy is used to show the deepness of God’s love for us, how he loves us more then a bridegroom loves his bride.
on your sixth point you point out how we should not downplay the importance of following God’s decrees for us, and i agree entirely with that. God’s law is important for our lives and our growth, and following it entirely is exactly what God wants us to do. What i think the book is trying to say is that that is not God’s singular focus. His singular focus is on us, and the laws were made for us, not him. “The sabbath was made for man, not man for the sabbath” (Jesus). He does not need us, like we need him, and our obediance gives him nothing but the joy of seeing us grow. We are made for God’s pleasure, not for his need.
In your last point, I would agree that the knowledge of God is important and definately key to finding who he is. But i’d like to make an analogy out of this. Think of when you’re first learning how to drive. You sit through a course with a teaching telling you all the basic fundementals of driving, where to put your hands on the steering wheel, how to turn the wheel, how to use the clutch and the handbrake and everything else, but in no way after a few months of class are you ready to truly drive. The real practice comes from actually driving, actually “experiencing” the turning the wheel, and using the clutch. The things you learned in class are just mere guidlines to go by while you drive, but until you actually get in a car and start driving, you won’t be able to know how to drive at all. The same is with God. We can read the bible and learn all we need to know about Him, but until we actually experience Him and His love, we’re just basically echoeing things we have heard. We won’t truly know him, but only know what he’s like, as in when an admirer of a celebrity will read and know more about that celebrity then one of the celebrities close friends, but the close friend will truly know that celebrity, for he has experienced his presence. The same goes with God. Until we have not experienced God’s love, we don’t know God.
I hope you will be able to answer some of the questions i had on here, and maybe clear up of few of the points that seemed to not be totally concrete. You have driven me to actually look into this book and read it. I hope to hear back from you. God Bless
-schasse
6. Chris Schasse
May 14, 2004
2:53 AM
Well I appreciate that you looked at this book from a theological perspective, and took into critical consideration the aspect of the bible, but i would like to get some clarity on a few of your points…
You said for your first point that the bible says that the heart is “deceitful and wicked,” but what about the bible saying we are created in God’s image? Wouldn’t that be saying, then, that we have corrupted hearts, wicked from our influences and envirenments, but apart from the twisted corruptness, we do have “good” and perfect hearts, after God’s own image?
In your second point you write that God is reduced to a “whiny child” in this book, because he is viewed at as “sad and heartbroken,” but, at least in my experience, sad and heartbroken does not mean weak and “whiny.” Take, for example, your view of a perfect father, and what he is like. Do you not see him weeping over his children, who are walking closer and closer every day into a deathtrap? When you see a father crying unselfishly becuase of his son’s and daughtors, do you depict him as a “whiny child”? If you look at Jesus’s life (who was actually God coming down within the limits of a man), you will see time and time agian him going off by himself in immense sorrow. “My soul is overwhelmed with sorrow to the point of death.” (Mark 14:34) Jesus wasen’t a man of only joyfulness and contentness. Through a man’s empathy and compassion does his true colors show, and in expressing that it does not make him “a whiny child.” God’s love for us is shown in the fact that every heart of ours is his.
Your third point could use some concrete examples, and refrences to the actual verses you got the evidence from. And also, how would you translate Matthew 24?
in your fourth point, you point out that the book views our relationship with God to be “sexual” (which, if taken literally, is of course an absurd claim). But i do not think that this was meant to be taken in any way literally. In many other places, we are compared to as God’s bride, or lover, or aldulturer. In one place specifically, Jeremiah, God’s people were compared to many times as “aldultresses” or “prostitutes” because they had turned away from God, and where “sleeping” with other gods. This analogy is used to show the deepness of God’s love for us, how he loves us more then a bridegroom loves his bride.
on your sixth point you point out how we should not downplay the importance of following God’s decrees for us, and i agree entirely with that. God’s law is important for our lives and our growth, and following it entirely is exactly what God wants us to do. What i think the book is trying to say is that that is not God’s singular focus. His singular focus is on us, and the laws were made for us, not him. “The sabbath was made for man, not man for the sabbath” (Jesus). He does not need us, like we need him, and our obediance gives him nothing but the joy of seeing us grow. We are made for God’s pleasure, not for his need.
In your last point, I would agree that the knowledge of God is important and definately key to finding who he is. But i’d like to make an analogy out of this. Think of when you’re first learning how to drive. You sit through a course with a teaching telling you all the basic fundementals of driving, where to put your hands on the steering wheel, how to turn the wheel, how to use the clutch and the handbrake and everything else, but in no way after a few months of class are you ready to truly drive. The real practice comes from actually driving, actually “experiencing” the turning the wheel, and using the clutch. The things you learned in class are just mere guidlines to go by while you drive, but until you actually get in a car and start driving, you won’t be able to know how to drive at all. The same is with God. We can read the bible and learn all we need to know about Him, but until we actually experience Him and His love, we’re just basically echoeing things we have heard. We won’t truly know him, but only know what he’s like, as in when an admirer of a celebrity will read and know more about that celebrity then one of the celebrities close friends, but the close friend will truly know that celebrity, for he has experienced his presence. The same goes with God. Until we have not experienced God’s love, we don’t know God.
I hope you will be able to answer some of the questions i had on here, and maybe clear up of few of the points that seemed to not be totally concrete. You have driven me to actually look into this book and read it. I hope to hear back from you. God Bless
-schasse
7. Chris Schasse
May 14, 2004
2:53 AM
Well I appreciate that you looked at this book from a theological perspective, and took into critical consideration the aspect of the bible, but i would like to get some clarity on a few of your points…
You said for your first point that the bible says that the heart is “deceitful and wicked,” but what about the bible saying we are created in God’s image? Wouldn’t that be saying, then, that we have corrupted hearts, wicked from our influences and envirenments, but apart from the twisted corruptness, we do have “good” and perfect hearts, after God’s own image?
In your second point you write that God is reduced to a “whiny child” in this book, because he is viewed at as “sad and heartbroken,” but, at least in my experience, sad and heartbroken does not mean weak and “whiny.” Take, for example, your view of a perfect father, and what he is like. Do you not see him weeping over his children, who are walking closer and closer every day into a deathtrap? When you see a father crying unselfishly becuase of his son’s and daughtors, do you depict him as a “whiny child”? If you look at Jesus’s life (who was actually God coming down within the limits of a man), you will see time and time agian him going off by himself in immense sorrow. “My soul is overwhelmed with sorrow to the point of death.” (Mark 14:34) Jesus wasen’t a man of only joyfulness and contentness. Through a man’s empathy and compassion does his true colors show, and in expressing that it does not make him “a whiny child.” God’s love for us is shown in the fact that every heart of ours is his.
Your third point could use some concrete examples, and refrences to the actual verses you got the evidence from. And also, how would you translate Matthew 24?
in your fourth point, you point out that the book views our relationship with God to be “sexual” (which, if taken literally, is of course an absurd claim). But i do not think that this was meant to be taken in any way literally. In many other places, we are compared to as God’s bride, or lover, or aldulturer. In one place specifically, Jeremiah, God’s people were compared to many times as “aldultresses” or “prostitutes” because they had turned away from God, and where “sleeping” with other gods. This analogy is used to show the deepness of God’s love for us, how he loves us more then a bridegroom loves his bride.
on your sixth point you point out how we should not downplay the importance of following God’s decrees for us, and i agree entirely with that. God’s law is important for our lives and our growth, and following it entirely is exactly what God wants us to do. What i think the book is trying to say is that that is not God’s singular focus. His singular focus is on us, and the laws were made for us, not him. “The sabbath was made for man, not man for the sabbath” (Jesus). He does not need us, like we need him, and our obediance gives him nothing but the joy of seeing us grow. We are made for God’s pleasure, not for his need.
In your last point, I would agree that the knowledge of God is important and definately key to finding who he is. But i’d like to make an analogy out of this. Think of when you’re first learning how to drive. You sit through a course with a teaching telling you all the basic fundementals of driving, where to put your hands on the steering wheel, how to turn the wheel, how to use the clutch and the handbrake and everything else, but in no way after a few months of class are you ready to truly drive. The real practice comes from actually driving, actually “experiencing” the turning the wheel, and using the clutch. The things you learned in class are just mere guidlines to go by while you drive, but until you actually get in a car and start driving, you won’t be able to know how to drive at all. The same is with God. We can read the bible and learn all we need to know about Him, but until we actually experience Him and His love, we’re just basically echoeing things we have heard. We won’t truly know him, but only know what he’s like, as in when an admirer of a celebrity will read and know more about that celebrity then one of the celebrities close friends, but the close friend will truly know that celebrity, for he has experienced his presence. The same goes with God. Until we have not experienced God’s love, we don’t know God.
I hope you will be able to answer some of the questions i had on here, and maybe clear up of few of the points that seemed to not be totally concrete. You have driven me to actually look into this book and read it. I hope to hear back from you. God Bless
-schasse
8. Tim
May 15, 2004
3:48 PM
Chris - You’ll have to give me some time. I read the book a long time ago and would have to do some refreshing to be able to answer all those questions. I would suggest perhaps we could talk more accurately once you have read the book.
9. Kevin Symonds
September 18, 2004
10:42 AM
I wanted to say thank you for posting up your review of Eldredge’s book. I am an M.A. Theology student at a prominent Catholic University and even I think Eldredge is leading people astray. His remarks on not going to Church and reading the Bible absolutely abhor me.
While it pains me to see the derisive comments on Catholics, I am glad to see that more people are getting “out there” and critiquing Eldredge. I myself have written an Essay which can be viewed at http://www.kevinsymonds.homestead.com/eld.html. I hope you can take a look at it.
By the way, yes, C.S. Lewis was not a Catholic (unfortunately).
Peace! -Kevin J. Symonds
10. Kacy
January 11, 2006
5:27 PM
I am appalled by your reviews. You have no idea what you are talking about. Maybe if you were more in tune with your soul and the heart God gave you instead of your religious rules, you would get it. You are obviously a modern day pharisee. I would rather be whore than a white washed tomb.
11. Tim
January 11, 2006
5:30 PM
“I would rather be whore than a white washed tomb.”
OK then…
12. kacy
January 11, 2006
5:35 PM
You are a fool. You are arrogant. My guess is that you use legalism or some form of being all “churchy” to fill your needs. Nice addiction.
13. Professor Rogers
January 24, 2006
10:14 AM
if i had a prize for silly reviews i would definitely send it to you. i really hope you are trying harder and harder to be silly. you could become an expert.
14. John Mark Trent
March 17, 2006
2:15 PM
Wow, after reading both the book and this review I am so glad that God loves me just as He loves Jesus Christ (John 17:23b) and loves my brother who wrote this review as He loves Jesus Christ…
Also, if being a mystic means that I know there is a greater reality than this physical world, mark me down as a mystic…
If being a mystic means that my experiences supercede God’s revealed truth in His Word, then I am not…
God bless…may you know “…the love of God is broader than the measure of the mind. And the heart of the eternal is most wonderfully kind.”
John Mark Trent, PhD
15. Mark
April 30, 2006
8:57 PM
I have been reading 2 other Eldredge books, Wild at Heart, and Waking the Dead. I am NOT a theologin by any means, but right off found many many errors in Johns teaching. I documented them with scripture and presented them to our pastor and our teacher in our mens group. They have been totally rejected and they have rallied behind John’s teachings and put Gods word on the shelf! I am now in the process of writing to all the members of the mens group explaining my leaving the group. Still not sure if i’m staying at our church yet either. (been there 16 years!)
Its really a shame with un-educated writers piece together a book with some half truths and mis-quotes of scripture and become overnight sensations like John Eldredge has done. “As for me and my house, we will serve the Lord.” and not John.
Our church as a whole has been reading “Sacred Romance”, but I have not kept up with it. I’ll say that probably 75% of those that started it have quit. Glad I did not keep up with it. If its a poorly done as the 2 books for our mens group, I’m glad I missed it.
Mark
16. Robin Jackson
June 10, 2006
7:40 AM
I will only address the first bullet point. Yes, the heart of unredeemed fallen man is desperately wicked and deceitful. Jesus didn’t die on the cross for nothing! He died on the cross because our hearts were overrun with sin and wounded badly by the sin of others and by our own sin. but after we lay hold of Christ and more importantly after he lays hold of us. After he was bruised for our iniquities and wounded for our transgressions, and we invite him to be our Lord and Savior, we are changed. We are reborn. and a redeemed heart, a heart that has been forever changed by the unmerited favor and mercy of the cross of Christ and the blood of Christ, that heart is a very good thing. Let me say that again. A redeemed heart, a heart that has been forever changed by the the propitiation of the precious blood of Jesus, a heart that has been forever changed by the mercy of the cross and the shed blood of Christ, that heart is a very good thing. That’s the gospel! Mercy and lasting change that none of us deserve! Do we still struggle with the sin nature? absolutely. Paul described that struggle in Romans.
Romans 7:14-25 14 For we know that the law is spiritual; but I am of the flesh, sold into slavery under sin. F28 15 I do not understand my own actions. For I do not do what I want, but I do the very thing I hate. 16 Now if I do what I do not want, I agree that the law is good. 17 But in fact it is no longer I that do it, but sin that dwells within me. 18 For I know that nothing good dwells within me, that is, in my flesh. I can will what is right, but I cannot do it. 19 For I do not do the good I want, but the evil I do not want is what I do. 20 Now if I do what I do not want, it is no longer I that do it, but sin that dwells within me. 21 So I find it to be a law that when I want to do what is good, evil lies close at hand. 22 For I delight in the law of God in my inmost self, 23 but I see in my members another law at war with the law of my mind, making me captive to the law of sin that dwells in my members. 24 Wretched man that I am! Who will rescue me from this body of death? 25 Thanks be to God through Jesus Christ our Lord! So then, with my mind I am a slave to the law of God, but with my flesh I am a slave to the law of sin.
In verses 17-18 I see the sin nature still trying to take over. Paul actually says it’s no longer I that sins but sin that lives in me. In verse 22, I see that in my inmost self, in what Eldredge calls my heart, I delight in the law of God. So, until Jesus comes back or until I die and go to Heaven, I will be duking it out daily between sin nature and between my inmost heart that delights in God. The Sacred Romance didn’t give me a holy fear of the Lord. I had that already. Many other books have that as their mission and it’s a good mission. The Sacred Romance gave me an out of the box way to draw strength from Jesus to love him more and allow his amazing too-much generous love to empower me to choose him over sin one day at a time. He is the vine and we are the branches. I was one thirsty branch and now I am drinking the sap of the love of God more daily than I did before I read this book. My husband and children will tell you, when I try to make fruit on my own, when I try to live a godly life on my own steam, without dwelling in the Vine and soaking in the love of God, it ain’t pretty.
17. Michael T
July 31, 2006
4:48 AM
I appreciate both sides of this arguement very much, personally I feel that a well informed position is best. So, first off, thank you very much to all who commented.
Its my opinion that the most prominent description of God in the Bible is love, I believe that this is where our personal walks with God must start. If, and when, love is central to our relationship with God and the Holy Spirit resides within us(it does (Eph. 1:13)) then obediance and all other “fruit of the spirit” will bloom quite naturally on there own. not to say that its easy by any means but if it doesn’t come from an earnest loving heart then our efforts will be no more than good intentions. we would be a “resounding gong”/”clanging symbol”/”nothing” (1 Cor. 13: 1-3).
I think the authors would agree and i think they were on the right track despite their technical errors. I would not recommend The Sacred Romance to anyone who isn’t as “schrewd as a serpent” but I would recommend it. forgive me for flippintly quoting scripture but I think you understand what I want to communicate.
Mike
18. Angela
August 9, 2006
3:36 PM
I appreciated your review. Thank you! Lately I have read several critical reviews of Eldredge’s work (such as the one on Wild at Heart, “God in Man’s Image,” written by Rut Etheridge III, posted on the website of Church of the Good Shepherd (Fishers, IN)) that have made me realize that I did not read his books with a great deal of discernment. I very much appreciate your commitment to the truth!
With regard to some of the comments I have read on this message board, I found myself shocked and saddened that people who call themselves (I presume) followers of Christ would speak to a brother in those ways, especially since “they will know we are Christians by our love.” If unbelievers are reading this dialogue, what a poor image of Christians some of these comments will present to them. We are supposed to be a sweet-smelling aroma of humility, grace, and self-sacrificial love in this world, not an odor of spite and dissension at the least and hatred at the worst, which is what some of these comments convey. I hope that future contributors will consider their words carefully before inflicting such hurtful animosity on the author of this review and the readers of this dialogue.
19. Flawedcricket
August 9, 2006
5:43 PM
Kacy and Professor Rogers - nice mature responses. You have exhibited faulty reasoning by attacking the person rather than the argument. It’s called Ad Hominem.
Do either of you have anything of substance to add to the discussion? Do you have anything other than your experience to refute Tim’s thorough and thoughtful review?
I wish I had seen your comments when you posted them in the spring. You probably lobbed and ran.
Tim - you are right on! I’ve read each of Eldredge’s books and they are all just as bad. Movies, new names, God telling him to do this and do that, open theism, anthropology terribly disguised as theology.
Why is it that those who actually think, are articulate, have opinions and show a little discernment are often called names?