One week ago, i was in the middle of worship at InterVarsity, enjoying myself, praising like i do. And then we sang a song that made me sit down and totally lose my vibe.
No way? Yah-weh.
It wasn't until we got to the chorus of Chris Tomlin's latest big hit, "Our God," that i realized which song we were singing. i thought, "oh, this is that song i heard on the radio that made me really uncomfortable," and then of course i was uncomfortable at IV as well.
For those of you who haven't heard it, the chorus and bridge read:
"Our God, Our God
Our God is greater, our God is stronger
God You are higher than any other
Our God is Healer, awesome in power
Our God, Our God
And if Our God is for us, then who could ever stop us
And if our God is with us, then what can stand against?
And if Our God is for us, then who could ever stop us
And if our God is with us, then what can stand against?
What can stand against?"
And as is typical of praise&worship music, these mantras are repeated over and over and over again.
i wonder just what Tomlin could have been thinking when he requests that the Body of Christ sing about itself as an unstoppable force. When he took a verse from Paul and completely adapts the meaning and context of it for the purpose of a catchy tune, did he mean to create a dangerous, almost aggressive subtext? Surely not, but i fear he may have done just that.
Let's just start by taking a look at the shoddy song-writing. "Our God is greater, our God is stronger." Tomlin here describes God with comparative adjectives. He then fails to draw any comparison. Greater than what? Stronger than who? Tomlin does not complete the thought implied by comparative adjectives, which essentially leaves the task up to us, the worshipers, sometimes more aptly described as the audience. This is an exceptionally dangerous open end. One member of the congregation might be thinking, "Our God is greater than the sin and temptation i experience." Totally valid, right? But what if someone is thinking, "Our God is stronger than Allah and all the Muslims?" i don't claim i think that is a particularly rampant notion in our humble IV chapter, but the ambiguity of this chorus cannot possibly be 100% healthy for various congregations to be singing, especially considering that racism and anti-Muslim ideologies can be prominent among conservative Christian communities. And who knows what other words people might be using to fill in the blanks left by Tomlin?
i do not mean to indicate that i personally don't think that factually, yes, our god is stronger and greater than just about anything you put after Him, but this song is less a testament to his greatness and strength than it seems to be an emphasis on the fact that he is ours and not yours or theirs. The follow-though seems to indicate that because our God is greater than x, y, or z, that we are greater by association. In case you disagree with that idea, let us continue to the next set of lyrics.
Next is the part that some people might refer to as the bridge. What a tremendous irony that is, for something called a "bridge" to involve such dialog-halting sentiments. "Who can ever stop us?...Who can stand against?" (Yes, of course, we might also consider this a "Chorus II" but work with me.) Here Tomlin is paraphrasing Paul's line in Romans 8:31, "If God is for us, who can be against us?" (ESV). But by lifting this half of a verse, he fails to consider the fuller context of what Paul is saying.
Paul wrote his epistle to the Romans probably around the mid to late 50s CE, when Christianity in it's fullest form was hardly 20 years old. The Roman Empire almost didn't even notice it, but when it did, it wasn't friendly about it. Christianity, for 300 years, was the subject of persecution - not necessarily the violence and martyrdom that we emphasize at times, but at the very least a sense of condescension and nonacceptance was directed by the pagan (or Jewish, depending) majorities. He writes of the Christians' sufferings compared to the glory of Christ's return. He writes of dedication and perseverance in the face of persecution. It is to embolden when he asks rhetorically, "Who can be against us?"
But this context is enormously different from the situation of American Christianity today. Perhaps there is not quite the same conservative political force present as there once was with institutions like the Moral Majority, but surely no one would claim that Christianity is under any systemic attack in our nation. To sing a song declaring that no one can stop us because God is with us rings with an almost aggressive subtext. (This is supported by the music swelling to its forte climax, drums banging loudly in simple eighth-note marching rhythm.) It is not a message of perseverance in the face of persecution; instead it becomes a song celebrating our own correctness and validating our own efforts against other people. Everyone believes God is on their side - it's the best way to add strength to their argument. Nazi soldiers wore belt buckles inscribed Gott mit uns - "God with us." Both armies in the American Civil War believed the causes they fought for were justified by God. Modern Ugandan politicians believe God is on their side when they argue for a death penalty for homosexuals. White people as recently as one hundred fifty years (and, sadly, more recently) continued to believe that God supported their oppression and enslavement of black people - policies which bled over in spirit into British imperialism in Asia and other regions less than one hundred years ago!
Another problem with Tomlin's lyrics is his adaptation of the text from Romans. Romans asks, "who can be against us?" Essentially, this creates a passive form of an other. To "be against" something is not an active state, it could be a simple as disagreeing or objecting to a position, being unfamiliar with it, or not understanding it (as was certainly the case for the majority of the Roman Empire given the newness of Christianity). But by changing this question to, "who could ever stop us?...what can stand against?" we have assigned our others with actions like stopping and standing against which have very different connotations from the basic passive differences established by Paul. We are now in a mindset of an enemy who is actively opposing us which allows us to believe ourselves victims, when this is not the case.
To use Romans 8:31 in modern settings is almost a cop-out from seeking true, logical reasoning to support one's arguments and positions on matters of great importance. The most important word in the verse is that big fat "IF" right at the beginning. We claim God is for us because we want him to be, but that claim may many times be false - not intentionally perhaps, but false nonetheless. We project our own sense of righteousness onto God's identity and use this verse to rationalize it. Sometimes God is for us, and no one can stand against, but in those instances we get it wrong, we might never know because songs like Tomlin's pervade our Christian atmospheres with a sentiment that tells us to charge forth regardless.
Now i know that many people might read this incredulously, claim that i am overreacting and reading too far into the matter. This might be true. But i object to the notion that we should be above taking a critical eye to the music we sing when praising our great, strong God because it's easier to gloss over the nuances, and i absolutely object to the notion that we should be singing music in our worship services that are too simple to even merit that analysis. We must challenge ourselves and other members in our community to do better, to constantly be pursuing the best ways in which we can observe God's wishes and praise Him with the honor he deserves, instead of lazily repeating a single verse or two repeatedly for five minutes when that verse may not even apply well to our circumstances.
Perhaps best of all, Chris Tomlin's upcoming CD is entitled, "And If Our God Is For Us..."
i take it that the ellipsis means the possibilities for us when we are with God are endless. Let's hope it does not also imply that the potential for our distortion of His message for us is endless as well.
