- RSS FeedSubscribe
- « Previous PostFriday Ramblings
- Next Post »King for a Week - Historia Ecclesiastica
I Don't Need A Boyfriend
- 10/21/06
- 65
I was talking with my father this morning, and the conversation turned to John Eldredge. I told dad about Eldredge’s newest book (it has, after all, recently hit store shelves and I had just copied my rather negative review to Amazon.), The Way of the Wild Heart and how Eldredge seems to be heading to new heights in his strange theologies. I mentioned that Eldredge is now convinced that God is sending him love notes in the shape of hearts. God apparently woos him by sending him heart-shaped stones and heart-shaped clouds. These are God’s expressions of love given specifically to him.
“How has God been wooing you? What has stirred your heart over the years? God has been bringing hearts to me for a long, long time. It’s one of our intimacies. He gave me a rock in the shape of a heart again yesterday, as a reminder. And as I was praying early this morning, I looked out my window and the cloud before me was in the shape of a heart. 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.”
That quote turns my stomach just a little bit. I don’t want God to romance me. I don’t want God to be my lover. I don’t need a boyfriend. I want God to be a Father—to be my Father. And after all, isn’t this exactly how He reveals Himself in the Bible? Like many an ancient mystical nun, Eldredge seems to find strange, romantic, pseudo-sexual qualities in God’s love. But when I look at the Bible, I just don’t see this. I see God as a Father or as a shepherd. I see God as one who loves gently and patiently, but not romantically. God loves me as my father loves me (though certainly more completely and more perfectly), but I don’t expect either one of them to send me little love notes. If either one did, I don’t quite know how I’d react, but I can only imagine that I’d be distinctly uncomfortable.
What I just cannot figure out is who reads and enjoys this aspect of Eldredge’s books. I’ll admit that there is a lot in his books that appeal to men. There is even a quality to his books that really challenge me to be a better father to my children. He tells his readers to head outdoors and to act like real men, going fly fishing, climbing mountains, shooting things, and so on. He gives hope to those of us who sit endlessly in the city, tapping away at little keyboards. But then when he gets to the wilderness he looks for heart-shaped love notes from God and wants to talk to other men about his feelings. It’s just downright weird. He really seems to want God to be his boyfriend. Or girlfriend. Or something. I don’t understand. And I don’t want anything to do with it.
As I learn more about God from studying the Scripture, I see in greater clarity the paternal qualities of God. And I love to find these. I love to learn more about God as Father, about God as one who loves and who loves completely. And I see little to convince me that God wants to woo me, to romance me, or to act the part of a lover. And I like it this way.
I am a follower of Jesus Christ, a husband to Aileen and a father to three young children. I worship and serve as a pastor at 
Releasing on April 1, The Next
Published in 2008, this book
This is a guide that calls men,
This review of the bestselling
New to the site? You can get
This is a guide written
Comments (65)
Sam,
Yeeesh! After picturing Jesus taking me to the “King’s chambers” so I can “know the kisses of [Jesus’] mouth”… I feel like wretching. Welcome to what passes for theology in Pentecostalism.
The thing is, John Eldredge and his wife Staci wrote the book “Captivating: Unveiling the Mystery of a Woman’s Soul” (see Tim’s excellent review) and it encourages women to do exactly what that Vineyard song encourages! Their book teaches women to put themselves in various chick-flick “romance” scenes (e.g., Jack and Rose on the bow of the Titanic sharing their first passionate kiss) with “yourself in the scene as the Beauty, and Jesus as the Lover.” Between Eldredge’s use of Jack and Rose in Titanic and now this new book, it seems he and his wife are consistently promoting worship as some sort of foreplay with Jesus… just like that Vineyard song. Blech! The thing is, huge portions of the church have set up their entire men’s, women’s and marrieds ministries around Eldredge books — it’s unreal.
Tim deserves credit for taking on one of Evangelicalism’s newest and most savvy archbishops (Warren still reigns as Pope though).
I have a counterpoint at my Xanga
Sounds painful. I hope you can get some help for that.
To the issue of equating God’s relationship with us to something like a boyfriend:
I’m a man. Totally normal in every way. Married with children. And I have no problem with understanding the nature of God’s intimacy with us in the the way that a groom romances his bride. Why do so many men have trouble with this?
Can it go too far? Yes. I’m taken aback by the Ruiz song, too.
But, if you’ve ever had a powerful experience of the Holy Spirit, it’s hard not to equate the feelings in that encounter with those of a romantic relationship. There’s a charge there; it’s very much like that thrilling feeling when you’re head over heels in love with someone and the mere sight of them sets your heart a-quiver.
If you’ve never experienced that personally or in a group worship setting, then it’ll sound foreign. But great Christians all through history have had those types of ecstatic encounters with God, and they tell a similar story. Dwight Moody was walking down the street minding his own business when the Holy Spirit came upon him, and to his dying day he couldn’t find words to describe the experience. Blaise Pascal carried a note reminding him of his taste of Holy Fire; they found that reminder on him when he died. He never wanted to forget that experience with God.
Such is the nature of intimacy with God.
Caleb,The Bible clearly states in many places that The Creation testifies to God. Psalm 8 immediately comes to mind. The world God created speaks to His majesty in a way too many Christians ignore. In the end, missing that testimony (or ignoring altogether) diminishes us.
“Like many an ancient mystical nun, Eldredge seems to find strange, romantic, pseudo-sexual qualities in God’s love. But when I look at the Bible, I just don’t see this.”
“I see God as one who loves gently and patiently, but not romantically. God loves me as my father loves me (though certainly more completely and more perfectly), but I don’t expect either one of them to send me little love notes. If either one did, I don’t quite know how I’d react, but I can only imagine that I’d be distinctly uncomfortable.”
Tim definitely opened my mind to certain aspects I didn’t actively ponder on regarding Eldredge (I really do like many things about Eldredge’s writing), though when reading Wild at Heart, I kind of half-read through much of these types of personifications of God and his encounters with those (there is not much public social value/validity in these personal encounters with God…).
It kind of makes me realize that not only is God Exalted high and mighty, completely autonomous (Rev. 1:12-16, Isa. 6:1-5), he is also just as human (weak, tired, hungry) as you and me (Heb. 4:15, Phi. 2:6-8) through his incarnation. So I guess what I am saying is that God CAN make a rock too big that he can’t pick up and he also can make a rock too big that he can pick up also (excuse my rawness). Because just as powerful and mighty as he is, so he is also able to not be powerful and mighty….at the same time…Perhaps, perhaps…..this gives way to some of these personifications, but I, like Challies, don’t really feel (and pretty much do not agree) with much of the romance stuff.
The only thing I can think of when thinking from scratch of ‘romance’ of God and humans in more of a new covenant thought process is Mary & The Holy Spirit’s impregnation of her. No, I am not saying pure outright sexual intercourse (because that would obviously nullify the virgin birth of our Lord & Savior), but there had to have been some kind of a feeling she felt during this overshadowing of God and her (Lk. 1:35), her being a standard teenage, hormonal, girl-gendered human and all.
While I don’t usually attempt to comment twice on the same blog entry, I will do so, if only for personal reasons.
Firstly, thank you donsands for #10, for elaborating beautifully on the content of my previous post.
Secondly, I would note that while the creation is beautiful and undoubtedly points to its Maker, it is also groaning and decaying (Romans 8) in anticipation of the return of Christ. From my university days I recall studying an English metaphysical poet, Henry Vaughan (1621-1695), who was said to have been in danger of exalting creation above the work of Christ, or at least equating creation with the work of Christ. A dangerous proposition either way.
Thirdly, I would caution that this discussion thread not get hung up on little heart-shaped rocks, which seems to be incidental to the topic of God’s revelation.
Finally, one of the most glorious aspects of being capital “R” Reformed is the openness to the continuing reformation of the heart and soul. In that vein, I confess that my earlier post did not display an adequate scriptural understanding of God as Lover. I believe my thoughts were underdeveloped, and Mark Lauterbach does a wonderful job of articulating them in his October 16th entry on the GospelDrivenLife blog: http://mrlauterbach.typepad.com/gospeldrivenlife/2006/10/gospel_and_cult_5.html#comments
John Eldredge’s conclusions are similarly underdeveloped, I would say. As Mr. Lauterbach says (and I paraphrase), it’s not that my heart is disengaged from God, it’s that my heart is a whore, seeking it’s own pleasure apart from God.
Thank God for his justifying and sanctifying power through Jesus Christ!
Warrior44hearts, I feel your comments hit the mark so exactly : )
Tim, I found your Halloween post wonderful honestly (found you and it through Contemplations Among Chaos) but this one just appauling honestly. Christianity is meant to be an incarnational faith—the sacred is here in the mundane, and God does speak to us outside of the written word (just like He did in times of old, why on earth should it be different now), and in ways suited for each individual person—just like a loving father does for each of His children. Our relationship with God is supposed to be PERSONAL after all.
What a bleak and detached life indeed it would be if there were no special items in nature put in our paths, or meaningful coincidences in our life, where we know God is HERE and speaking. I would want no part in such a detached world—and luckily, this does not seem to be the case. Because God IS here. Speaking to His children even through rocks and clouds…
I was reading 2 Timothy, and this thought came to me.Whenever a teaching comes along, whatever it may be, we need to see if it lines up with the Holy Bible.”For the time will come when they will not accept sound doctrine; but after their own strong longings shall they seek teachers, having itching ears;And they shall turn away their ears from the truth, and shall be turned unto fiction.” 2 Tim. 4:3-4
I know this to be true. It happened to me. God is so gracious, and His Word is a sharp two-edged sword, and it is able to cut us loose.
Hello Tim,
Thank you for again taking us to the heart of an important issue. Many men are properly repulsed by the hints of homosexuality in Eldredge’s language and in some contemporary song lyrics. That said, I find the picture of Christ as our (future) husband to be one of the most powerful and amazing truths in scripture. If I may, I’d like to attempt to sort between the grain and the chaff in this metaphor.
First, the chaff. There is not, nor will there ever be, any component of lust in a proper relationship between God and man (humanity). Nor is it a relationship between equals. Part of the horror of homosexuality is the wrongness of these two aspects of its nature. Finally, when God chooses to relate to human males as masculine to feminine, He is not thereby implying that men themselves should relate to women (or to each other) with anything less than full masculinity.
On the contrary, I believe He is modeling masculinity with a purity that provides the ultimate standard for human husbands. Scripture portrays Him as the consummate suitor. He draws us by the beauty of His strength, by the intensity and constancy of His love. He is the perfect provider and protector, which also define the husband’s role. He is the leader whom we follow and the lord to whom we submit. He is our head, we are His glory (I Corinthians 11).
Your point that God relates to us primarily as Father overlooks, I think, the trinitarian nature of God. In this most unique of relationships there are many interwoven dynamics, of which we have weakened echoes in our human world. We are, men and women, Christ’s brothers, sons of the same Father (Romans 8:29); we are also, men and women, His bride. This does not diminish our own sexual differences, but simply reflects our inability to embrace the full mystery of our relationship with Him.
So we need to be careful not to draw too quickly away from that which we see only in part. Femininity, I believe, incorporates a measure of vulnerability, abandon, trust, and responsiveness that can be especially difficult for men…but these are the very qualities that God requires of all of us in our devotion to Him.
Diane
Heart-shaped clouds - that’s funny.
I’ve always thought people get so focused on the “bride” thing and how our relationship with God is like marriage. Actually our relationship with God will ultimately be better than marriage - it’s just that we need the marriage metaphor to help understand it. God uses both the father and the husband metaphor to help us understand his love for us - ultimately though, his love is greater than any earthly love and too deep for our human minds to understand.
I don’t recall the “heart-shaped stone” metaphor being used in the Bible though - LOL.
I have been researching this since a debate was sparked from this article. When the gospel of John says to “know the father”, it could be defined as a Jewish idiom for sexual intercourse and in David and Jonathan’s relationship, the love they have could be translated as lover. But there are alternate definitions that fit much better in those circumstances (or just much better with our culture). Is it possible that the term “lover” has different connotations then compared to now?Overall, I think if Jesus constantly refers to God as our Father and as having male characteristics, then the idea of God being my lover (by today’s definition) and sending me romantic love notes…well that just doesn’t work for me (or Jesus I think)
Ummm… Not to say that I by any means agree with anything anti-biblical that would expound on God, or his love towards humanity. But how does, what could be interpreted as bashing a fellow believer, fall inline with critical analysis of what is or isn’t biblical. I am by no means the perfect one who never voices opinion about “christian stuff”, but this is a fairly popular page and if i guess correctly several of you are reformed-ish thinkers (meaning you may already be seen as judgmental by association). So maybe the best way to handle Eldridge is to email him and ask him yourselves what he means, and to clarify what seems to be outside of biblical teaching, in y’alls estimation. I dunno, maybe i am totally thinking wrong about the context of all this, I just sure would hate for the measure of my compassion and judgment to be measured back upon me from the the Lord in regards to what it means to understand His Infinate incomprehensible-ness based upon something limited, like writings or myself.
Okay, now I know you know that I do not like John Eldgredge and his heart shaped valentines from God are way beyond what I would consider special revelation. We ought certainly to see God as our heavenly Father and as our Shepherd, but we can’t see Him only in that one dimensional light as He has portrayed Himself in His word as far more multi-dimensional than that.
God is to be the lover of our souls. My husband (and pastor) is bringing us through a study of Hosea in our Christian Education hour. Hosea is an OT picture of the picture we see in the NT of Christ as the bridegroom and the church as His bride.
Hosea paints a beautiful picture (certainly not as Cupid-like as floating heart shaped clouds!) of God’s relentless love for His people. He tells of how the people ran about calling out to “Baal’s (in Hebrew: lord or master - the term women called their husbands) just as Gomer was running to other “lovers” for security, for bread and for clothes. God says, “Call me ‘my husband’” (in Hebrew: ishi - a more affectionate term my husband said was more like “my man” rather than “Baal,” a name that many wanted to use interchangeably for their literal husbands, their false gods and for God himself.) Here God speaks of his tender mercy upon wayward Israel:
From Hosea 2:”14”Therefore, behold, I will allure her,and bring her into the wilderness,and speak tenderly to her.15And there I will give her her vineyardsand make the Valley of Achor[e] a door of hope.And there she shall answer as in the days of her youth,as at the time when she came out of the land of Egypt.16”And in that day, declares the LORD, you will call me ‘My Husband,’ and no longer will you call me ‘My Baal.’ 17For I will remove the names of the Baals from her mouth, and they shall be remembered by name no more. 18And I will make for them a covenant on that day with the beasts of the field, the birds of the heavens, and the creeping things of the ground. And I will abolish[f] the bow, the sword, and war from the land, and I will make you lie down in safety. 19And I will betroth you to me forever. I will betroth you to me in righteousness and in justice, in steadfast love and in mercy. 20I will betroth you to me in faithfulness. And you shall know the LORD.21”And in that day I will answer, declares the LORD,I will answer the heavens,and they shall answer the earth,22and the earth shall answer the grain, the wine, and the oil,and they shall answer Jezreel,[g]23and I will sow her for myself in the land.And I will have mercy on No Mercy,[h]and I will say to Not My People,[i] ‘You are my people’;and he shall say, ‘You are my God.’”
This is what we mean by “effectual calling” and “irresistable grace.” He does woo us. He does make Himself irresistable to us. We cannot deny God’s relentless, dare I say, obsessive love for His bride the church, which is made up of individuals.
I’m not remotely suggesting that God speaks to us in clouds and heart shaped rocks. We could derive all sorts of false messages from Him if these are the types of signs we are looking for. (I too wonder how JE can actually be taken seriously as a “manly man” when he writes some of the sappiest things ever directed towards men.)
What ought to woo us, indeed seduce us, is His irresistable grace, His relentless and unbounded love that was poured out for us on the cross, for His effectual call upon our lives, for His pursuit of us despite our adultery.
May it be true of us that now having met the lover of our souls, we might remember our “other loves” no more.”17For I will remove the names of the Baals from her mouth, and they shall be remembered by name no more.”
Nan
Where to start… Okay give me a sec guys. First of all I dont think that John is talking about sex with God, what he is implying is intimacy with God. When we learn that intimacy is of the heart, not of the body, we will understand relationships like that of King David and Johnathan and John Eldgredge and HIS God. Yea His God is wooing him is a way that is special to him, the same God will try to woo you into a closer more intimate relationship with Him in a way that is special to you. Ecclesiastes 3 says that there is a time for everything under the sun. But it does not say we are all doing these things at the same time. This is where John is now with God, is it fair to criticize him because this is not how God calls us? It may intrest you to know that allowing some to read your writting is akin to standing before them naked, it seems that some are standing fully clothed and pointing and laughing at John. My Bible says in 1 John 4:20 “…he who loves God must love his brothere also” and in 1 Corinthians 13 that “… love is kind, love is not rude, love endures all things…” Meybe its just me but I dont see a lot of love in some of these postings from self procalmed followers of Jesus. Perhaps we should re-examine our opinions of other people and their personal relationships with God, … unless you have all the answers and have never been wrong once in your life? in that case call me I still have lots of questions.Thanks for your time, Bill McKinnis
Bill,
The gospel is not so much an intimate relationship, as it is God saving hell deserving sinners for His glory, and glory of His grace.
We are saved to worship Him in Spirit and truth. We are to bear fruit for His glory.
All that we do, say, and think is for His glory. He is God, and we are His creation, created for His glory.
And yes their surely is the relationship of a Father and His children. Jesus is also our Brother. Jesus is also our Master and we His servants.He is the King of glory, and we the subjects.He is our Friend and Savior as well.
We need to balance all these truths in our hearts and minds.
I see John as being out of balance, and also being unbiblical. I don’t dislike him. I love him in the Lord, as we all must do, as the Lord commanded.
Criticism can be a good thing, that we need to be doing in the body of Christ. The comments here for me have been done for the most part with respect.
Donsands, while I agree with 98% of what you have just said, I must disagree on one point: Our relationship with God is most certainly meant to be of the intimate variety. He knows us intimately. The word “foreknew” is similar to the word “Adam knew his wife.” While it of course is not a sexual intimacy that we know with God it is something deeply personal. We are fully known and fully loved. We are called to seek Him as the bride seeks “the one whom her heart loves” in Song of Solomon, to not rest, to not find satisfaction in anything until that one has been found and known. This seeking can’t end the day that we experience conversion. We must continually seek to know Him and worship Him more deeply, more personally and indeed, more intimately throughout our days.
While on earth we will not be able or allowed to know God’s ways or understand his plans fully, because we see in part “as in a glass dimly” but one day we will see in full. I believe the union that the bride of Christ and Christ Himself, at the Wedding Supper of the Lamb, will be joyfully felt, understood and celebrated not only corporately but also individually because He knows us individually and intimately — he has the hairs on our heads numbered, he foreknew us individually and corporately. He has a plan for us individually and corporately.
We shouldn’t be afraid of this intimacy though indeed it is intimidating to be, in a sense, naked before God and yet unashamed as Adam and Eve once were before sin came into the world. But as we are sanctified and ultimately as we are glorified this intimacy, this knowing and being fully known, this inexplicable and holy love (something I dare say we don’t have a category for because we have never experienced it in full) will not be frightening or shameful at all but will indeed be glorious.
That is glorious and that is all by His grace. That’s what He is all about and how amazing is it that we get to be a part of it!
Nan