I Don't Need A Boyfriend

Isn’t it the case that whenever God is pictured as a lover, his beloved is a collective group. I am not the Bride of Christ, I’m part of the Bride of Christ. So, personally I relate to God as to a father and to Jesus as to an older brother, but collectively, with other believers, I relate to Jesus as to a husband and to God as a father (in-law?).

Does that sound right?

I agree with the other three posters.

I don’t want a boyfriend either. However, the Bible does seem to present Jesus as a husband and the Church as a collective bride.

Interpreters of Song of Solomon have interpreted the book as (at least in part) an allegory for God’s love for the people of God throughout the centuries.

Whether this interpretation is correct may be a question. However, what does not seem to be in question is that God is a lover.

God certainly is portrayed as our Father, but that does not seem to be the only way that he is portrayed.

Now, let me say that I agree with you in my distaste for Eldredge’s books and his weird portrayal of God’s love. Simply because a teenage girl longs for her boyfriend to end her a letter in the shape of a heart does not mean that God has instilled this desire in us after his own heart. I think Eldredge steps beyond the bounds of Scripture continuously.

All of that being said, I’m ready to let Tim explain what he meant more fully. I’m prepared to admit that I’ve read Tim wrongly in this post if he can clarify what exactly he was getting at.

I agree with Eric, The Bible uses the metaphors of marrage to groups (Israel, Church), not individauls. I cannot call to mind any passages that call for me to seek to have a romantic relationship with God.

There is just something that turns my stomach to the idea that I need to be cooed and cuddled by Jesus.

In a sad and ironic twist, it is God’s bride, the Church, that is more or less responsible for the proliferation of ‘Jesus is my boyfriend’ worship songs and the accompanying pseudo-theology coming out of many Christian publishing houses these days.

In exalting the individual experience of ‘receiving God’s love personally’ over and above truthful biblical propositions that make it plain as day that God does love us, we have mistakenly shifted our primary attention from God’s fatherhood to lesser emphases, many of which are not even scriptural (wow, run-on sentence).

I don’t know about anyone else, but I for one have not exhausted the multiple facets of God as Father. Sinclair Ferguson’s book ‘Children of the Living God’ is a book that jumps to mind.

Certainly, God loves us. Certainly, he is the lover of our souls. Certainly, he loves us in far greater measure than we could ever love him. But instead of exploring what Tim rightly calls “strange, romantic, pseudo-sexual qualities” which are obviously extra-scriptural, let’s exploit the wealth of relational imagery found in the pages of Scripture. It is sufficient!

this reminds me of Mark Driscoll’s talk at the Desiring God conference this year. He stuck pretty hard to the notion of Jesus being a “featherer-haired” “wimpy” “pseudo-gay” savior. for someone who gets pretty intense about his kids not getting bullied around and ignoring the commands of Christ so as to not “emasculate him for life” or “stripping him of [his strength]”, Eldridge sure is ready to put God in a role which tends toward those ends.

It just totally bewilders me how Edlridge leaves no room for the tenderness of man (human man) in Wild at Heart and makes God out to be mainly tender.

If God starts sending me rocks, I hope they’re perfectly round like Agee’s. Those are hard to come by. I had a couple when I was a kid but I lost all my marbles some time ago.

I’m a bit troubled and the trend of the posts. I think it is quite a leap to say that since the bride is portrayed as the corporate body of believers, that the metaphor has absolutely no relevance for the individuals that make up that body.

Christ does not just love the idea / the concept of the church. He loves the individuals that makeup the church. If the metaphors for the relationship of Christ and the Church are to have any meaning, it must have some implication for the individual believers.

I don’t think that this means that we take it to extreme points like Mr. Eldredge. However, I don’t think we need to swing to the other extreme and pretend like it has absolutely no implication for the individual either.

Just my thoughts,mike

“God has many such gifts for you, particular to you, and now that you have this stage of the Lover to watch for, eyes to look for the Romance, you’ll begin to see them, too.”

Joanna or anyone else who sees some merit in this:

Where in Scripture do we find this “stage of the Lover to watch for?”

Wasn’t his (eldredges) book wild at heart about God being the father figure you never had and how God woos us to him as the father?

I can’t remember, I’m trying to forget his crap that I’ve read.

Also… why in the heck would a WILD MAN that eldredge talk about in the first book want a boyfriend? I’m confused.

God seems more human then God, with this man’s theology, to me.

“As a father pities his children,So the LORD pities those who fear Him.For He knows our frame;He remembers that we are dust. …

But the mercy of the LORD is from everlasting to everlastingOn those who fear Him,And His righteousness to children’s children.To such as keep His covenant,And to those who remember His commandments to do them.” Psalm 103:13,17-18

God is holy. God demands. And yes God loves. We need to remember, and fear our Holy Lord and Savior.

Personally, I am overwhelmed by His love for me. I see the Cross, and I am in awe of His love!

The problem I see with Eldridge’s description of God as a lover is that his God is a bathetic lover. The sort of husband that brings flowers home for his wife every day, cause he just loves her so much!

And there is a Protestant history of describing God as a lover “Jesus lover of my soul” “Come my beloved haste away make short the hours of thy delay fly like a youthful heart or roe over the hills where spices grow” from a Newton hymn etc.

And at least in Corinthians Christ is described as a lover of individuals. “Know ye not that your bodies are the members of Christ? shall I then take the members of Christ, and make them the members of an harlot? God forbid. What? know ye not that he which is joined to an harlot is one body? for two, saith he, shall be one flesh. But he that is joined unto the Lord is one Spirit.” Isn’t there a parallel between “member of Christ” and “member of a prostitute” and “One flesh” and “One in Spirit.”

Yes I don’t want a lover giving me silly little hearts all the time. I don’t want a girlfriend that would do that. But I do want a lover. I do want a husband. Otherwise shall I find all my delight in a father? or shall there be delights in heaven aside from Christ?

Amen Tim. Amen. (Wierd, stomach turning…and just downright freaky.)

Amazing, absolutely amazing. Tim, I once respected your intellect and simply disagreed with you. Although you criticised a book that changed my Walk and saved my family, I respected the tone of your review, if not the content. Your comments above are nothing but disguised mud slinging. You should be ashamed of yourself.

You take one statement out of a book, then miss the entire point of the book. The point of adventure, as described by Eldredge is preparation for the Critical adventures of life. Those critical adventures are selfless sacrifice for the lives and souls with whom God has brought into our lives. Your fixation on the casual adventures is interesting, to say the least.

The fact that you have taken the great Creator of the universe and decided that He can only communicate by your own standard is a shame.

You have already reviewed this book and found it wanting. Your comments here serve no legitimate purpose. Whether you disagree or not, John Eldredge is a brother of yours. An intellectually cute, [vulgarity deleted -Moderator] commentary like the one above may appeal to those who wait for your reviews to justify their biases, but it does nothing to advance the Kingdom. The family can certainly disagree, but belittling a family member serves no purpose. Eldredge would not waste his time belittling you.

Perhaps you should examine why this book bothers you so much. There may be a message in that irritation you feel. Maybe you need a casual adventure and some time alone examining your own heart.

Let me clarify-you ask an open question about those who read Eldredge’s books…by way of explanation..

The trips out into creation are a key element in inviting God into the life of a man. He is alone, in many cases that is a humbling experience, in a place where new things will be asked of him. He is only part of Creation out there. It is a place where distractions are minimized, where a man, if he takes the time, will see the beauty of Creation, the creativity of the Father, and the danger of taking things too lightly.

Too many critics stop at casual adventure. Casual adventure is important in the development of a boy as he moves to manhood. They require things of him that will be required no where else. Although those trips to the quiet of creation are important, they are preparation for the crucial adventures he will face as a man. As a man moves from casual (climbing, hunting, kayaking, etc.) he is prepared for critical and then crucial ones. The crucial ones are where he steps into his calling as a man. They are selfless, and because he has answered the challenges (sometimes failed, by the way) that were casual and then critical., he can confidently face them. He has learned to walk with his Father and is ready to step into his calling. He is indeed a warrior for the hearts of those the Father has placed in his care. He may enjoy those casual adventures, they may bring him into closer fellowship to his Saviour, but they are not the keys to his manhood any longer.

The message from God you question is part of the overall message from W@H. God is a Father who delights in His children. He is fully capable of communicating any way He chooses. He is omnicient and omnipresent, and interested in our individual souls. He can indeed communicate by placing a heart shaped rock in a stream. He is after all the artist who created the beauty that is that stream, and the untamed wildness of the deep wilderness. He created it to bring pleasure and life to His favored creation. The knowledge that He communicates in a caring way changes the view of Him for many men, by the way. I have seen men who have been poorly fathered refuse to see God as Father. I have seen those same men fall into the arms of a loving Savior who cares enough about them to send them a note of love and reassurance in the forest.

My comments above may have been impulsive, and for that I should apologize. There is an element in these posts of uninformed criticism, simply piling on out of ignorance. This book brought me back to God, and to the church. It made a new husband and father of me when I saw God as John introduced Him to me. Many of you take this too lightly, you should be careful. Your attitude, theological pride, and flippancy will keep men like me outside on the sidewalk, going back to work instead of being in your pews with their families. Generations will be effected by the writings of John Eldredge. I have no quarrel with intellectual and theological sparring. Uninformed opinion, and name calling are quite another matter. This format is not secular. The lives and souls of men women and children may be changed by our words-for good or evil.

I stand by my chief concern. To disagree with JE is one thing. To give one’s informed critical opinion is a necessary element to discernment. Belittling a fellow believer, and branding him a near heretic, as seems to be the intent of many of these posts, reveals an element of evil. That evil may be disguised as piety, and it may be unnoticed by the offender, but in my opinion it needs to be checked at the door. It appears many of those who post have no understanding of JE’s work, they simply delight in spiritual name calling. That is dangerous.

Tim, if you are serious about your question, try a walk in the woods alone for a few hours, and some of that contemplative prayer that seems to concern so many of your bretheren. You may find you see your Father God differently enough to understand that heart shaped rock.

Do you not find it strange/disturbing that he seems to prefer to find hearts on rocks and clouds shaped like hearts as messages of love from God more than he prefers looking to the suffering Christ on the cross?

I don’t mean to downplay the glory of the resurrection. I’m just thinking of God’s expressions of grace and love to us in Scripture and attempting to put them over against rocks, clouds, and gardens. Wouldn’t you agree that the greatest expression of His love is the suffering and death of His Son to redeem His people? I don’t think hearts on rocks are superior to Christ on the cross when searching for messages of God’s affection for me.

It seems like JE looks to the cross, but then looks for other clues as well, and seems to treasure them more. He certainly writes about them more. Why does he desire these reminders, as he calls them? (Please don’t read this with an accusatory tone, but as a genuine question).

All of this causes me to ask one more question that w44h might like to answer. What would JE or yourself say to one who is struggling and wondering why he or she doesn’t receive messages from God in other things? Is she not spiritual enough? Does God show favoritism? Not every believer experiences God in this way, nor does every believer desire to. However, His love displayed on the cross is for all to see. Is it right and God-honoring to look beyond that point in history for more personal messages?

…and now that you have this stage of the Lover to watch for, eyes to look for the Romance, you’ll begin to see them, too.

When I am hungry I have eyes to look for food. In particular if I look hard enough I begin to see food everywhere. Clouds look like hotdogs, and rocks look like popcorn. If you love food you will start to see the same as I do. =-)

DLE, What you are describing is something entirely different from God’s wooing and sending love messages.

Tim:This is a very good post—thank you.

This has been precisely my concern over the state of CCM for many years now and the great need for Reformation in music ministry as well as in literature and the pulpit. Too many “God is my girlfriend songs” (as I refer to them); I.e. “I want to fall in love with You” by Jars of Clay. I like many of Jars songs, but that one really sums up much of evangelicalism’s romantic, sentimental views of our relationship with the Lord Jesus Christ.

This has even impacted worship music as well.

Keep on dear brother… excellent thoughts you expressed here.

Grace and peace to you,SteveCol. 1:9-14

It seems to me that discussions like these are largely unhelpful. Those who have a serious problem with Eldridge should let him know, including you Tim. I think this post goes beyond an objective critique of a book into a more personal emotional response. You haven’t backed up your emotional response with Scripture here as far as I can tell. It seems to me that most Christian men have a serious problem with their understanding of God ( and probably others in their lives) in the area of intimate experience. I have sympathies on both sides of the debate, but no patience for insulting other members of the body of Christ.

All that being said, I normally very much enjoy your blog and appreciate your hard work, even when I disagree. It’s certainly always interesting!

“Through frequent apparitions, she enjoyed a wonderful companionship with her Guardian Angel, St. Catherine of Siena and the Virgin Mother of God, and she was privileged to hear Christ say these words, “Rose of My heart, be My bride.” ”

http://web2.airmail.net/~carlsch/MaterDei/Saints/roselima.htm

This confirms the story of a catholic friend of mine who disliked the fact -to my surprise- that Rose of Lima to regard herself as Christ’s bride…

Now, I don’t know if Eldredge’s readers may come up claiming weird ‘privileged sayings’ as a result of reading them…but who knows!

I think what some of you don’t realize is that the Paternal figure is a very romantic image in itself. When it comes down to it, the only difference between the way a man pursues his wife and the way he pursues his sons and daughters is the physical aspect he shares with the wife. Any father would (read: should) die to protect his children, chase them when they reject him, comfort them when they’re broken, and all the other images associated with “Romance”.

Did your fathers never hug you? Kiss you? Cuddle up close to you when you were younger? That’s part of an on-going relational process called “wooing”.

“Now there was leaning on Jesus’ bosom one of His disciples, whom Jesus loved.” John 13:23

“That which was from the begining, which we have heard, which we have seen with our eyes, which we have looked upon, and our hands handled, concerning the Word of life” 1 John 1:1

“And when I saw Him, I fell at His feet as dead. But He laid His right hand on me, saying to me, ‘Do not be afraid’”. Rev. 1:17

The Apostle surely had a most wonderful relationship with our Lord. And we too can glean from these verses.But how about falling dead. Doesn’t seem like that is very popular today.The Apostle John fell as dead.

I pray that I would fear the Lord in a more genuine way. And that my love for Him, would be manifested in trusting and obeying His Word. Amen.

Thanks Tim for a topic that is defintely worth exploring. I too have my problems with John Eldredge (I had a huge blog discussion with a person on this subject). And I also feel as though the concept of “God as lover” is one that is often taken overboard. I can understand that Scripture does give us some pictures of this relationship, but it is when this picture tries to taken on a physical image, that I think people push this way further than the Lord intended it to be.

Take for instance David Ruis, a Vineyard songwriter. I actually heard him at a Worship Together Conference (along with Tim Hughes and Chris Tomlin). Well, he wrote this very disturbing song called “True Love,”

Jesus I need to know true loveDeeper than the love found on earthTake me into the King’s chambersCause my love to mature

Let me know the kisses of Your mouthLet me feel Your embraceLet me smell the fragrance of Your touchLet me see Your lovely face

Take me away with YouEven so, Lord, comeI love You LordI love You more than life

My heart, my flesh yearn for You, LordTo love You is all I can doYou have become my sole passionCause my love to be true

I think this just typifies why this whole thing is out of control.