Photo by Bryan Goff
Hillsong UNITED is a household name. Originating from Hillsong Church, which is located in Sydney, Australia, they are a powerhouse in Contemporary Christian Music. “Hillsong UNITED” is one of four major bands concocted from Hillsong Church. The other three are Hillsong Worship, Hillsong Young and Free, and Hillsong Kids.
My last review of What a Beautiful Name was very positive. With such a strong presence in Christian music, and a glowing first review, I have high hopes for their song So Will I (100 Billion X).
Note to new users: This is a different kind of review site! Read About the Berean Test and Evaluation Criteria prior to reading this review. I strongly encourage you to consider the potential blessings and dangers of this artistâs theology by visiting Resources.
1. What message does the song communicate?
God, the self-existent One, the Creator of our universe, does not speak in vain. The Word of God is so powerful, when He speaks, things happen. His Creation reveals His nature. He sacrificed His life so that though it, we could find forgiveness of sins, despite our failure and shame. He rose again and still lives today!
I will worship, sing praises to, obey, bow in reverence to, and roar greatness of God. I will go where He sends me, cry out in silence, will surrender my life to Him, and will leave the grave behind (speaking of the final resurrection).
It contains one error within the song’s outro, that Christ would sacrifice Himself over and over again. While a sentimental statement of Christ’s love for us, it implies that Jesus’ sacrifice was not “once and for all” as Scripture teaches (see section 2).
Score: 8/10
2. How much of the lyrics line up with Scripture?
Almost all of it! However, there is an implication within Outro that is unbiblical.
Lyrics posted with permission.*
[Verse 1]
God of creation
God/Jesus is responsible for creating the universe (Genesis 1:1, Nehemiah 9:6, Psalm 8:3-8, Psalm 33:6, Psalm 96:5, Proverbs 3:19, Isaiah 37:16, Isaiah 42:5, Isaiah 45:18, Isaiah 66:1-2, John 1:1-3, Ephesians 3:9, Colossians 1:16, and Revelation 4:11.
There at the start, before the beginning of time
Jesus existed before Abraham (John 8:58) and for all eternity (2 Timothy 1:9).
With no point of reference
You spoke to the dark and fleshed out the wonder of light
See Genesis 1:2-3.
[Chorus 1]
And as You speak
A hundred billion galaxies are born
In the vapour of Your breath the planets form
God spoke the universe into existence (Genesis 1 and Psalm 33:6-9).
If the stars were made to worship, so will I
The entire earth will worship God (Psalm 66:4), so we should as well (Psalm 13:6, Psalm 18:49, Psalm 21:13, Psalm 27:6, Psalm 28:7, Psalm 51:14, Psalm 47:7, Psalm 59:16, Psalm 63:7, Psalm 66:4, Psalm 69:30, Psalm 89:1, Psalm 101:1,Psalm 104:33, Romans 15:9, and 1 Corinthians 14:5).
I can see Your heart in everything You’ve made
Every burning star, a signal fire of grace
The universe points to God’s existence (Psalm 19:1-4) and we are all without excuse (Romans 1:20). Refers to the doctrine of common grace.
If creation sings Your praises, so will I
Repeat idea of line 4, above.
[Verse 2]
God of Your promise
Far too many Scripture passages to refer to the promises of God and the prophecies that have come to fruition. See pages on God’s promises and fulfilled prophecies concerning the Messiah.
You don’t speak in vain, no syllable empty or void
References Isaiah 55:11.
For once You have spoken
All nature and science, follow the sound of Your voice
When God speaks, creation happens. See Genesis 1:3, Genesis 1:6-7, Genesis 1:9, Genesis 1:14-15, Genesis 1:20-21, Genesis 1:24 and Genesis 1:26-27. There are far too many Bible passages to exhaustively include every instance of God’s Word coming to fruition.
[Chorus 2]
And as You speak
A hundred billion creatures catch Your breath
See Genesis 1:20-21, Genesis 1:24 and Genesis 1:26-27.
Evolving in pursuit of what You said
This is very controversial. It all depends on the songwriterâs definition of evolution. Is it change over time? Microevolution? Macroevolution? Nonetheless, it is clear that God is given credit as responsible for creation given other lines. For this reason, I choose not to deduct points.
NOTE: For those who have reservations leading worship with this song due to this line, consider substituting the word “unfolding” to avoid controversy. I found out recently that my church did just that.
If it all reveals Your nature, so will I
Concept repeated elsewhere.
I can see Your heart in everything You say
Every painted sky, a canvas of Your grace
See Chorus 1, lines 5-6.
If creation still obeys You, so will I
So will I, so will I
Too many Bible verses than I have time to list. This includes the Creation account (Genesis 1), all the miracles, natural disasters, diseases, and other natural phenomena. Once again, the idea of “so will I” is repeated elsewhere.
[Bridge]
If the stars were made to worship, so will I
If the mountains bow in reverence, so will I
If the oceans roar Your greatness, so will I
For if everything exists to lift You high, so will I
And if the wind goes where You send it, so will I
If the rocks cry out in silence, so will I
If the sum of all our praises still falls shy
Then we’ll sing again a hundred billion times!
Piggybacks on other prior references in Genesis 1, Psalm 19:1-4, Romans 1:20, and other places. Line 6 specifically references a statement by Jesus in Luke 19:39-40.
[Verse 3]
God of salvation
You chased down my heart through all of my failure and pride
Indeed, and those who are His cannot be snatched from His hand (John 10:28-29). Our failures were paid on the cross. See Isaiah 53:1-12, Matthew 27:32-56, Mark 15:21-41, Luke 23:26-43, John 19:17-37, Romans 5:6-8, Acts 2:36, 1 Corinthians 15:3, Colossians 2:13-14, and Hebrews 9:22.
On a hill You created
That is, calvary, also known as Golgotha, The Skull or The Place of the Skull (Matthew 27:33, Mark 15:22, Luke 23:33 and John 19:17). Since Jesus was responsible for creating all things, He would have also created this hill.
The light of the world abandoned in darkness to die
Line 4 likely contains an oversight in capitalization. Jesus declares Himself as the light of the world in John 8:12. This is possible excessive nitpicking on my part. Also, the âlight of the worldâ is in Matthew 5:14-16, which refers to the church; the body of believers; Christ-followers. The church is the light of the world because of Jesus.
In addition, it says in Line 4 that Jesus was âabandoned in darkness to dieâ. There is some dispute on this. When Jesus quotes from Psalm 22:1, it seems that He is expressing His feeling at the time, not making a theological fact. When one reads all of Psalm 22, it becomes clear starting in Psalm 22:19 that the Lord is not far off!
However, it also says in Habakkuk 1:13 that God is too pure to look at evil. Would that include His own Son, who bore our sins (1 Peter 2:24)? It is certainly possible. We know the Father was pleased to crush Jesus (Isaiah 53:10) not because He enjoyed it, but because through Jesusâ death (His Servant), âit will justify the many, and He will bear their iniquitiesâ (Isaiah 53:11).
[Chorus 3]
And as You speak
A hundred billion failures disappear
Where You lost Your life so I could find it here
The “great exchange” in which we as Christ-followers receive the righteousness of Christ and Christ receives the punishment for the sinfulness of mankind. See Psalm 103:10-14, Proverbs 28:13, Isaiah 1:18, Isaiah 53:5, Matthew 6:12, Matthew 26:28, John 3:16, Acts 2:38, Romans 6:23, Romans 8:1, 1 Corinthians 10:13, Ephesians 1:7-8, 1 John 1:9, and 1 John 2:1-2.
If You left the grave behind You, so will I
Jesus rose from the dead proving that He defeated death. See Matthew 28, Mark 16, Luke 24, John 20, Acts 1:3, Acts 3:15, Acts 4:33, and 1 Corinthians 15:3-8.
We too will leave the grave behind in the final resurrection (Luke 20:34-38, Acts 24:15-16, Romans 6:1-5, Romans 8:11-13, 1 Corinthians 15:20-26, 1 Corinthians 15:50-56, 2 Corinthians 4:13-14, and 1 Thessalonians 4:13-18).
I can see Your heart in everything You’ve done
Derivative of Verse 1 and Chorus 1, which touches on Godâs creation.
Every part designed in a work of art called love
If You gladly chose surrender, so will I
God showed us how much He loves us through the death, burial, and resurrection of Jesus. See John 3:16, John 13:34, John 15:13, Romans 5:6-8, Romans 8:37-39, Galatians 2:20, Ephesians 2:4-5, Ephesians 5:25, 1 John 4:8, and 1 John 4:16-19.
I can see in Your heart, eight billion different ways
Every precious one, a child You died to save
If You gave Your life to love them, so will I
Refers to the 8 billion or so people image-bearers (Genesis 1:27) who currently live on earth. Christ died to save us (2 Corinthians 5:15, Ephesians 5:2, Ephesians 5:25-27, Philippians 2:8, and 1 Thessalonians 5:10).
[Outro]
Like You would again a hundred billion times
While I understand Hillsong’s sentiment, that given the chance and given a precedent of a legal requirement for multiple sacrifices, Christ’s love for us compels Him to go through with it (John 3:16 and Romans 5:6-8), it is an exercise of futility. Scripture tells us that Christ’s sacrifice was once and for all (Romans 6:10, Hebrews 7:27, Hebrews 9:12, Hebrews 9:26, and Hebrews 10:10). It is a throwaway line that should have been thrown away!
But what measure could amount to Your desire?
That is, to show us His Grace towards us (Ephesians 2:6-7).
You’re the One who never leaves the one behind
References the parable of the lost sheep in Luke 15:1-7 and Matthew 18:12-14.
Score: 8/10
3. How would an outsider interpret the song?
It will be obvious to anyone who is not a Christ-follower that this song claims God is the Creator, that nature worships and obeys Him, and speaks on the death and resurrection of Jesus.
Score: 10/10
4. What does this song glorify?
The majesty and wonder of God and His great love for us; However, it is blunted only by Hillsong’s throwaway line: that Christ’s desire for compels Him to re-sacrifice Himself despite Scripture’s “once and for all” statements.
Score: 8/10
Closing Comments
Hillsong UNITED’s “So Will I” celebrates the creative power of God. Its major flaw lies within Outro, stating that Jesus’ desire for us is so strong, He’d go through crucifixion multiple times, in contradiction to a “once and for all” sacrifice. Yet, through His word, God calls us to worship, surrender to, and obey God. It is theologically thick, loaded with Scripture, and glorifies God’s grandeur and His sacrificial love for us.
Given the controversy over evolution and the error within Outro, this makes it difficult to recommend for corporate worship.
Final score: 8.5/10
Artist Info
Track: So Will I (100 Billion X) (listen to the song)
Artist: Hillsong UNITED
Album: Wonder
Genre:Â Contemporary Christian Music (CCM)
Release Year: 2017
Duration: 6:51
Agree? Disagree? Don’t be shy or have a cow! Calmly and politely state your case in a comment, below.
*Copyright Š 2017 Hillsong Music Publishing (APRA) (adm. in the US and Canada at CapitolCMGPublishing.com) All rights reserved. Used by permission.
Updates:
02/08/2023 – To remain consistent with the artist’s actual name, I capitalized the word “United”.
05/07/2021 – Per Artist Theology announcement, I expanded the red text to encourage others to study Hillsong’s theology.
05/16/2020 – In light of prayerfully considering Neal Cruco’s analysis of the 99 as angelic beings in his commentary to Reckless Love and commentary from Gary, I took the following actions:
- Restored my commentary on the song’s end.
- Added a second reference to the Parable of the Lost Sheep to the end of section 2.
- Added commentary to address Outro’s first line, “Like You would again a hundred billion times” in sections 1, 2, 4, and Conclusion.
- Fixed several spelling/grammar errors.
These combined efforts decreased its score from 9.5/10 to 8.5/10.
01/18/2020 – This review became inconsistent upon updating my review of Reckless Love based on my rejection of the Parable of the Lost Sheep in connection with God. I reflected that change here also. I’ve slightly lowered the score from 10/10 to 9.5/10. Thank you Daniel Namkung for pointing this out!
Comments
dtfoursite
Great song.
What about that last chorus line:
I can see in Your heart, eight billion different ways
Every precious one, a child You died to save…
Eight billion would refer to “everyone in the world”, but wouldn’t John 1:12 only consider those who receive Christ as “Children” of God? Curious to see what others think. Thanks!
Vince Wright
dtfoursite,
Great question!
There’s two primary camps to this. The first would say that God only died for the elect, that those He died to save are only those whom He predestined would be saved. The second would say that God died for everyone, but its application is for only those who receive it. I happen to fall in the latter category.
-Vince Wright
Jolee
Jesus died for everyone. not just those who receive christ.
Gary
Hi Vince,
Could you point to a verse in the Bible that speaks of this desire if circumstances require of Him? I just don’t want to ascribe to God my own thinking or emotions. I also do not want to create a “God” in my own head that’s not found in the Bible. I much prefer the truth that He has revealed in the scriptures. My God given conscience prevents me from singing this song unless you could help remedy but only with scriptures. Thank you.
-G
p.s. I accept 2.
Vince Wright
Gary,
Great question! If I were to name one verse that spoke of God’s desire, it would be John 3:16. Had the Law required Jesus to be re-sacrificed over and over again, would Jesus have gone through it? I think so. But, therein lies the problem. Why would Jesus need to go through it again and again if He did it “once and for all” as Hebrews 10 teaches? What is the point in contemplating if Christ “would again a hundred billion times” if He sacrificed Himself “once and for all”? I see your conclusion.
Therefore, in light of this commentary, I must update this review.
-Vince Wright
MrPete
In this case, I step back and ask this question: Is it heresy, evil, or even bad to **consider** something (anything) that is not-real?
As I look at John 3:16, particularly the greek verb tense — a tense that allows for truly INFINITE love for all… I am humbled. I honestly cannot fathom that love.
Many have questioned my own assertions of the fact that God loves even those who hate Him.
To me, this is a perfectly valid “thought experiment” toward comprehending just how awesome is God’s love.
– I have no sense that God can’t handle such imagining. It is not something vain, not something that limits God, not something claiming a different reality.
What is the point in such contemplations? It begins to scratch the surface of what “infinite” love might possibly look like.
Vince Wright
MrPete,
Great question!
The answer to your initial question is of course no. Jesus’ parables are full of stories that are not real. They illustrate a point. Yet, I don’t recall any of them contemplating a scenario that is contrary to Scripture! Contrary to 1st Century Jewish culture perhaps, but not God’s inspired Word.
Some of Jesus’ parables are thought experiments. The dead giveaway is the word “suppose” that starts the parable, and Jesus asks a question. Luke 7:40-50 is a great example, where Jesus laid out a scenario and asked for Simon’s opinion. Again, this is perfectly fine.
I recall that the Apostle Paul contemplated at least one thing that wasn’t real. Namely, if Jesus had not risen from the dead. You’re probably familiar with it, in 1 Corinthians 15:14-23. Paul’s conclusion is that our faith would be in vain. But, then he goes on to say that Christ indeed rose!
However, this song presents something a bit different. It’s neither a parable nor a thought experiment. It makes a claim about the depths of God’s desire by making a claim. Namely, that God loves us so much that if He had to, He would die for us 100 billion times. The claim happens to run contrary to the “once and for all” statements in Scripture.
-Vince Wright
Gary
I cried and cried to this song in the beginning of my walk with Christ. It was just so beautiful and awe inspiring. However, when we worship God, we must worship Him in spirit and in truth. Where the Bible is silent, we should be silent. Where the Bible proclaims the truth, we should nail our emotions and thinking to the cross and conform to the truth, even for 100 billion painful times. There is a verse that clears up if Jesus would have died 100 billion times:
For it is impossible for those who were once enlightened, and have tasted the heavenly gift, and have become partakers of the Holy Spirit, and have tasted the good word of God and the powers of the age to come, if they fall away, to renew them again to repentance, since they crucify again for themselves the Son of God, and put Him to an open shame. -Hebrews 6:4-6
The word of God equates Jesus being crucified again to putting him to open shame. This plan of salvation is predetermined prior to the foundation of the world. God does not make mistakes. There is not would’ve could’ve or should’ves. Jesus’ price is of infinite worth (worthy is the Lamb of God!). To suggest otherwise is to cheapen Christ. To cheapen Christ is to make Him less than who He is: Your Lord God and Savior. That’s idolatry, because His words are very clear cut, like a two edged sword. The crucifixion is the focal point of God’s story of wrath toward sins and mercy toward sinners. This event was planned by God to bring Himself infinite glory. We need to be careful when we approach the word of God. He did create a sun that would consume our naked eyes if we stare too long, and He created trillions of stars like it. How should we approach this almighty God, who is a Consuming Fire? Ask yourself, do you care about God’s word more, or your itchy ears more?
Besides, only 100 billion failures disappeared? I know this is supposed to be poetic: to describe the many many sins that are forgiven due to the work on the cross. However, there are 7.6 billion people on Earth right now. Not counting people who lived prior to this generation, His work is only able to wipe out 13.15 sins per person? Even disappearing 100 billion failures for myself seems not enough! But He died once, and now I am white as snow. That’s way more powerful than dying 100 billion times for us.
Vince Wright
Gary,
Thank you for your comment! I have two comments to offer in consideration:
1) The line âLike You would again a hundred billion timesâ speaks of desire, not of reality. Would Jesus have died 100 billion more times to save us? I think so, if thatâs what it took to save us. I agree, that itâs not required and Scripture bears this out with its âonce and for allâ statements; However, Hillsongâs expression of Christâs desire does not negate this truth nor does it cheapen grace.
2) The line â100 billion failures disappearedâ, if taken literally, would indeed result in 13.16 sins per person (rounded up); However, it is also true that if we took Jesus âSeventy times sevenâ statement in Matthew 18:21-22 literally, then after the 491st time that such an individual shall no longer be forgiven! Of course, Jesus is not literally giving us a set limit on forgiveness. He is saying âunlimitedâ in poetic fashion. Hillsong does the same with its â100 billion failuresâ here.
-Vince Wright
hughjomlet
“However, it is also true that if we took Jesus âSeventy times sevenâ statement in Matthew 18:21-22 literally, then after the 491st time that such an individual shall no longer be forgiven!”
Not trying to be a picky authority or anything, but wouldn’t the correct interpretation of “seventy time seven” be 77, as in seventy times and seven? That is how they would have spoken and meant it in the original language, not a translation based on an English slang for “multiplied by”.
Again, thank you for your thoughtful review, and I know this doesn’t matter in actuality for our faith, I just think we should be cautious to interpret things in their historic context.
Vince Wright
hughjomlet,
Thank you for your correction!
In the future, I could say “71st, or 78th, or even 491st time” to cover all the variants/possibilities that are interpreted.
-Vince Wright
victor
Hola Vince: Entonces Hillsong sabe que el deseo de Cristo es ser aplastado por su padre otra vez de ser necesario? lo veo sin ningĂşn sentido. Meternos en el pensamiento de Dios, cuando sus pensamientos son mas altos que los nuestros. Esta linea es algo muy motivacional pero sigue siendo una herejĂa.
Sobre el punto 2.- 70 veces 7 es 70 elevado a la 7 osea= 770 = 1435036016 0986843428 5603076356 6710717400 7738373924 6066639249 es decir infinito…
Edited by Vince Wright:
Google Translate: Hi Vince: So Hillsong knows that Christ’s desire is to be crushed by his father again if necessary? I see it without any sense. Get into the thought of God, when his thoughts are higher than ours. This line is something very motivational but it is still heresy.
On the point 2.- 70 times 7 is 70 raised to 7 bone = 770 = 1435036016 0986843428 5603076356 6710717400 7738373924 6066639249 that is to say infinite …
Vince Wright
Victor,
Thank you for your comments! I understand your reservations as they are similar to Gary’s.
This is the second time you’ve used the word “heresy” today, so allow me to clear the air. This word is not something to be used lightly and is a serious accusation. It refers to doctrine taught that is contrary to foundational teachings (in this case, of Christianity). For example, teaching that Jesus is not God is heresy, but teaching that drinking is a sin is error but not heresy (it’s drunkenness, not drinking). I don’t see any major Christian theological doctrine violated by these statements by Hillsong.
-Vince Wright
Victor
Hola Vince… Entiendo tu punto. Pero es doctrina bĂĄsica y fundamental el sacrificio Ăşnico y suficiente de Cristo por toda la humanidad. JESĂS muriĂł por los pecados de toda la humanidad, pecados presentes, pasados y futuros, para acceder a ese perdĂłn, solamente debemos creer en El
Sugerir algo diferente por supuesto que es herejĂa… Y claro que es una acusaciĂłn grave. Lo que no puedo asegurar es que lo hicieran adrede.. Pero si yo dijera por ejemplo que JesĂşs no es Dios lo. Puedo hacer en ignorancia pero sigue siendo una herejĂa. Lo que no entiendo es que simplemente se tome como una frase “desafortunada” cuando va contra todo lo que significa el cristianismo.
A ver, imagina que yo dijera “si JesĂşs hubiese sabido que no iba a resucitar, aĂşn asĂ hubiese muerto por mi, porque nos ama”… Te das cuenta de la gravedad de esta frase “bien intencionada”, pues el cristiano que compone mĂşsica para Dios es: primero cristiano antres que artista y debe someterse a la escritura antes que a emociones.
Saludos
Edited by Vince Wright:
Google Translate: Hi Vince⌠I understand your point. But the single and sufficient sacrifice of Christ for all humanity is a basic and fundamental doctrine. JESUS ââdied for the sins of all humanity, present, past and future sins, to access that forgiveness, we only have to believe in Him
Suggesting something different of course is heresy … And of course it is a serious accusation. What I can not assure is that they did it on purpose .. But if I said for example that Jesus is not God. I can do in ignorance but it is still heresy. What I don’t understand is that it is simply taken as an âunfortunateâ phrase when it goes against everything Christianity means.
Let’s see, imagine that I said “if Jesus had known that he was not going to rise again, he would still have died for me, because he loves us” … You realize the gravity of this phrase “well intentioned”, because the Christian who composes music for God it is: first Christian before artist and must submit to writing rather than emotions.
Cheers
C. Moe
“You donât speak in vain, no syllable empty or void.” My mind jumped to Isaiah 55:11
“So shall my word be that goes forth from my mouth; it shall not return to me void, but will accomplish what I desire and achieve the purpose for which I sent it.”
Thank you for the wonderful reviews, research and references! This site is truly a blessing đ
Vince Wright
C Moe,
Thanks, I appreciate that!
-Vince Wright
Jon
Thanks for your analysis. I greatly appreciate and am able to worship with the majority of this song.
However the last verse and chorus are a problem for me, when they state:
“If You gave Your life to love them so will I
Like You would again a hundred billion times”
It mainly revolves around the word “would”…would Jesus die a hundred billion times for our sins? No.
Jesus gave His life once for all, and will never again sacrifice His life again.
From Romans 6: “We know that Christ, being raised from the dead, will never die again; death no longer has dominion over him. For the death he died he died to sin, once for all, but the life he lives he lives to God.”
From Hebrews 7: “The former priests were many in number, because they were prevented by death from continuing in office, but he holds his priesthood permanently, because he continues forever. Consequently, he is able to save to the uttermost those who draw near to God through him, since he always lives to make intercession for them. For it was indeed fitting that we should have such a high priest, holy, innocent, unstained, separated from sinners, and exalted above the heavens. He has no need, like those high priests, to offer sacrifices daily, first for his own sins and then for those of the people, since he did this once for all when he offered up himself.”
From Hebrews 10: “But when Christ had offered for all time a single sacrifice for sins, he sat down at the right hand of God, waiting from that time until his enemies should be made a footstool for his feet. For by a single offering he has perfected for all time those who are being sanctified.”
I can’t in good conscious state that Jesus “would” if we know He will not, and to me that statement cheapens His perfect sacrifice.
Or does the word “would” imply that God is the same yesterday, today, and forever, and that He “would” choose to sacrifice His life if presented the same situation repeatedly (in a nonexistent existence where God is bound by time)? Maybe I am overthinking it.
What do you think?
tastywallet
Jon,
Thank you for your thoughts! My understanding is that Hillsong is expressing how much Jesus loves us, that He would go through it again over and over if that is what was required of Him. I do not believe Hillsong is suggesting that Jesus must go through it more than once. If they were, then I agree with you: that is unbiblical. However, it might be possible that I am giving Hillsong too much credit by ignoring this possible criticism.
-TastyWallet
Neal Cruco
I don’t think you’re giving Hillsong too much credit. If Jesus had to die 100 billion times for our salvation, He would. The fact that He didn’t doesn’t change that.
Adam
I love this song. Not going to let one lyric ruin it. But that line about Jesus would do it again 100 billion times is pretty speculative and not very reverent. God has show us exactly how much he loves us. More than we could have imagined on our own…he gave us His Son. That was very very costly to him. For us to say Father, we actually think you love us enough to see your son die 100 billion times for us strikes me as a bad attitude even if it is true. That is, even if it is true, we shouldn’t say it or assume it.
Neal Cruco
God has been quite clear about His love for us. Do you think there is a limit to it? In other words, do you think there’s a point at which God would say, “Sorry, saving you would cost too much. You’ll get what you deserve”? I don’t. God sent His only Son to die a horrible death, just so that we could be redeemed. I see no reason to believe that He wouldn’t have done more if necessary.
victor
creo q estas muy errado. al ser su sacrifico , unico y suficiente, esta supuesta posibilidad es una herejĂa,, la Biblia dice que el que no acepta el sacrificio de JESUS, QUEDA BAJO LA IRA DE DIOS. Esta frase es un total desacierto..o muestra lo lejos que estĂĄ Hillsong de una sana doctrina cristiana para componer sus canciones .
Edited by Vince Wright:
Google Translate: I think you are very wrong. Being his sacrifice, unique and sufficient, this supposed possibility is heresy, the Bible says that whoever does not accept the sacrifice of JESUS, IS UNDER THE WRATH OF GOD. This phrase is a total mistake … or shows how far Hillsong is from sound Christian doctrine to compose their songs.
Vince Wright
Victor,
Thank you for your comment!
I must side with Neal on this point. God’s love is indeed unconditional. His love for us is not conditioned upon whether or not we receive Him. God’s condition comes into play in terms of relationship. When I married my wife, I love her no matter what she does; However, if we are to remain married, then I have some demands of her. For example, she must remain faithful to me, love and cherish me, till death does us part. Similarly, she makes the same demands of me, that I do the same. If I don’t meet those expectations, then we won’t be married long!
The same is true with God. While His love for us is unconditional, when we enter into a personal relationship with Him, He will make demands on our lives. He expects us to be holy like Him. He demands that we remain faithful to Him. Yes, He will forgive if we screw up, but our heart and our goal ought to be obedience. That’s what a good husband does, sacrificially gives to his bride. That’s what Jesus did. I ought to do the same.
To summarize, yes, God’s love for us is unconditional. This isn’t heresy. But, our relationship with Him has conditions.
-Vince Wright
Jennifer Morrow
I took this to mean that Jesusâ sacrifice was very intentional and not by chance. If that situation happened 100 billion different times, he would make the same choice each time. Unlike flipping a coin, where you would not get the same result if you flipped a coin 100 billion times. He chose us over himself and would again and again.
Levi Uzodike
The answer is given by Joel Houston in this video https://youtu.be/CFVYfVp1cP4 from 6:19-6:43. Basically, the original excerpt in question:
âIf You gave Your life to love them so will I
Like You would again a hundred billion timesâ
needs the following line to be correctly interpreted as the author intended it:
“But what measure could amount to Your desire?”
If I understand Joel, correctly, he’s saying that You would do it more if 100 billion or any number could amount to Your desire, but it doesn’t, so You didn’t do it multiple times. So I don’t think it’s a throwaway line. This sentiment addresses any concerns that people have about the actual number 100 billion limiting God. The author is clearly stating here that 100 billion doesn’t measure up to God’s sacrifice, love, forgiveness, creation or God’s anything. It is just a number used to represent something like infinity throughout the song.
Jonathan Dixon
When will you change your review in light of comments that prove your view is contrary to God’s word?
tastywallet
Jonathan,
Thank you for your comment! Unfortunately, the way that you asked this question come dangerously close to committing the loaded question fallacy, but I think I understand what you are asking.
I’ve already addressed the comments that are not a repeat of something I’ve already responded to. If you feel that I missed a comment that you believe is contrary to the Bible, please let me know so that I can address it.
Sorry about the spam message! I need to work on tweaking the spam filter. A lot of legit comments are going into the “spam” folder.
-TastyWallet
John Demola
I agree with many here. I believe the basic premise of this song is way off. The “if then” argument is contrary to scripture. How “If” God loved us “Then” we love Him. Not because a rock cried out. And please correct me if I am wrong but I don’t see that the stars were “made” to worship God. No,no we were made…..
John Demola
I meant to say “How About”
Sarah
My biggest issue with this song is: “If the rocks cry out in silence so will I.” The example given in scripture is that the rocks would cry out if people were not praising so I don’t see how this line makes sense. Or, it seems to be indicating that no one is praising God except ME and the rocks! It bothers be because I feel like that, along with the other “so will I” statements, seem to indicate a confidence in MY faithfulness to praise God, rather than His faithfulness to me.
Debo
This is a blessing. God bless you for doing this
tastywallet
Debo,
My pleasure!
-TastyWallet
Nicolas Thomas
âOn a hill you created/the light of the world/abandoned in darkness to die.”
Very helpful to add the “obliques” (//). So now we can reorder the sentence like this:
âthe light of the world was abandoned to die in darkness on a hill you created”.
In other words, this whole scenario was set up (created) by God himself. In Christ, God gave himself at great cost for the salvation of the world.
tastywallet
Nicholas,
Thank you for reordering the lyrics in a cohesive manner! Perhaps this is more clear than my own explanation.
-TastyWallet
Mrricko
âOn a hill You createdâ Jesus was not created but begotten.
tastywallet
Mrricko,
I’m not quite sure I understand. How does “On a hill You created” have any relevance to Jesus’ creation or lack thereof?
-TastyWallet
Marlon
Tastywallet, the line that Mrrricko referenced is actually the reason I came to this comment section. It seems to indicate that Jesus was created on a hill. The line actually reads, “On a hill you created/the light of the world/abandoned in darkness to die. Jesus was not created, but that’s what the song seems to be saying.
tastywallet
Marlon,
I appreciate your commentary, but I still do not see it that way. I did notice that I did not provide commentary on this specific line, so I added it. Here is a summary of how I break it down:
On a hill You created – The place that Jesus created, a hill called Calvary, or Golgotha, or the Place of the Skull.
The Light of the world – Refers to Jesus.
Abandoned in darkness to die – Refers to the crucifixion.
Does that clarify my position?
-TastyWallet
Marlon
Mrrricko,
Your comment is the same thing I was thinking when I heard that line in the song. I listened multiple times to ensure I heard what I thought I did. That line, if it means what I think the author is saying, is definitely unbiblical. Hopefully, he means something else and comes out and clarifies the statement.
loganobaynegurl
The hill was created by God.
Christian
Bro, the song doesn’t imply that Jesus was created, it implies that the hill that Jesus died on was created by Him. He died on a hill that He created.
Shannon Proffitt
Originally I loved this song. But recently I stumbled on a video by “answers in genesis” discussing the controversy over the line “all nature and science follow the sound of your voice”…my initial reaction was to think they were just nit picking and trying too hard to read between the lines….obviously if God created every then scientific evidence aligns with His creation and there is no war between God and Science….BUT then I wa watched an interview with the song writer who openly talks about his belief in evolution as in God got the ball rolling and then evolution took it from there; I at one time might have shared that opinion…maybe not exactely that same opinion but more along the idea of I dont understand how it all went down but know God had a hand in it..I recently was digging into to creation and of it was a literal 6 day and we count a day or 1000’s of years and the term day is not the same 24 hours. In all of the reading I did I was struck by a question/argument raised…(paraphrasing very loosely) if we start questioning if God really mean a day when inspired the scriptures what else didn’t he really mean…why is it ok to leave room personal interpretation within the creation account but not in other areas of scripture….did God really mean then that Jesus was the only way to heaven?…so as I dug deeper and deeper into that….I started to worry if the song writer openly believes in differing accounts of the creation story outside of what genesis stated….then they are intentionally is promoting the God created the big bang 1,000 of years point of view the lyric choice was not an oversight. I am certainly NOT a biblical scholar and O think it’s a beautiful song! But the bible warns us that the enemy comes as a wolf in sheeps clothing and in Jude it refers to shepard’s who feed only themselves…I worry that these small almost undetectable twist to what scripture teaches allows the enemy a foothold creating tiny hints of doubt like the serpent in the garden whispering….did God really say that? Did God really mean that. Just my two cents. I have enjoyed your website and appreciate the work that you have put into this ministry.
tastywallet
Shannon,
Thank you for taking the time to read my review and responding to it! Personally, I do not believe that there is a war between science and Scripture. They answer two very different questions about the universe. While science answers the question “how does the universe go?”, the Bible answers the question “Who was responsible for the universe?”
One could attempt to choose between two different explanations for, say, why a pot of water boils. One explanation is that molecules expand when heated up, causing the water to boil. Another explanation is that I wanted a cup of tea. Which is correct? Well, they both are! One is a scientific explanation; the other is an agency explanation. One is a “how” explanation and the other is a “who” explanation. They do not contradict one another because they approach the same question differently. The same is true when it comes to science and the Bible.
Now, you should understand that both science and the Bible have been highly politicized, pretty much since the beginning. This taints the way we see both of them, making objective inquiry more difficult. Recently, it has been over evolution, abortion, and LGBT. Our views on these issues change how we approach Scripture and science.
This particular line brings us back to the God of creation, the Creator of our universe. It is Him who is responsible for all the science that we can perform, discovering the universe on a mechanical level. Yes, some of the statements of scientists are sometimes politically motivated; However, we should not confuse the statements of scientists with the discipline of science. It is the latter that “follows the sound of [God’s] voice”.
While I understand the author’s intent, namely his view of theistic evolution that drives this line, they do make a valid point regarding the discipline of science. We may not always come to the right scientific conclusion, but the objective truth that science discovers was put there by God. This is true, regardless of one’s own personal view of Genesis 1, whether it be literal days or billions of years.
I appreciate your compliment, thanks!
-TastyWallet
John Demola
The writer also believes that the big bang lines up with God’s creation. Oh how mixed up people can get when they try to be poets instead of trusting the Ultimate Poet. The stars came first in the big bang. God created the earth first. Stick to the bible Joel.
MrPete
The Big Bang DOES line up with God’s creation.,, better than most can imagine.
Oh how mixed up people can get when they try to be wise about areas outside of their understanding.
You might want to take a look at sixdayscience dot com
victor
HOLA…No entendĂ tu comentario referente a esto “Recientemente, se ha pasado por la evoluciĂłn, el aborto y LGBT.”. Que yo sepa la visiĂłn de la iglesia siempre ha sido BĂblica referente a estos termas. No entiendo como podrĂa nuestros puntos de vista cambiar referente a que es pecado.? Crees tal vez que se nace siendo LGTB?
Edited by Vince Wright:
Google Translate: HELLO⌠I did not understand your comment regarding this âRecently, there has been evolution, abortion and LGBT.â. As far as I know the vision of the church has always been Biblical regarding these hot springs. I don’t understand how our views could change regarding what is sin? Do you think perhaps that you are born being LGTB?
Vince Wright
Victor,
Great question! Just do that you are aware, TastyWallet was my handle before I “came out” with my real name.
My comment is poorly worded. Allow me to explain. What I meant is that if we allow our personal feelings and polarization of evolution, abortion, and LGBT to dictate our lives, then our feelings become the standard by which we view the Bible as well as science. If we understand the limitations of science and examine these issues through the lens of Scripture, then this will help us see these issues objectively, through God’s eyes.
-Vince Wright
Nicolas Thomas
I guess I took it as poetic language which should have a degree of legitimate “poetic licence”. If it’s the case that creation worships God (points to God’s glory) then that is another thing that inspires us to worship God. It’s another refreshing insight, but not to the exclusion of God’s greatest revelation through Jesus Christ.
In fact, what Jesus did is beautifully presented in these words near the end:
The light of the world abandoned in darkness to die
[Chorus 3]
And as You speak
A hundred billion failures disappear
Where You lost Your life so I could find it here
If You left the grave behind You, so will I
(If it’s true that you left the grave [AND IT IS TRUE!],
then I truly trust that I will too — because I’ve put my trust in you.)
tastywallet
Nicolas,
I agree, there is some poetic license, much like most of Christian music. We do have to be careful not to compromise the Bible, taking things out of context for more creativity. I did not see that here of course, but something to consider when examining lyrics.
-TastyWallet.
Katie Ellis
I’m not so worried about the “evolving” lyric as I am with the “if, then” statements of this song. I actually love the song in its entirety, but how do justify a conditional statement, where it seems like, “well if they do it, I guess I will too”. How would you tie that in according to scripture?
tastywallet
Great question! My initial thought was Hebrews 11, given its plethora of examples of those who had faith and serve as an example for us to carry forth in our own faith (or contextually, to the audience of this letter); However, the context is about promises we receive vs. the faithful of old, so that won’t work.
In fact, 1 Peter 2:20-22 is a great passage that supports this idea. It tells us that Christ gave us an example to follow, that we should imitate His behavior and lived like He did. There are other supporting passages also, including 1 Corinthians 11:1, Ephesians 5:1-2, and 1 John 2:6.
That works for Chorus 3, but what about the rest of it? Psalm 19:1-4 is the best supporting passage I could find, under the same vein as imitating Christ. We ought to worship and obey God as nature does.
Bobbie
I agree with the concern over the thought that if creation worships “so will I” .
I tried not to let it bother me at first because – it’s such a pretty song, right? Then my teen daughter was baptized yesterday and on her Instagram post with the pic she put “If creation was made to worship so will I”.
And I was like – that’s not right, true or biblical. In all the answers you’ve given – even Hebrews 11, no one worships BECAUSE creation worships. We worship because he is the great I AM. We worship because of what Christ did.
I am now wondering why we are letting these little slips sink into our hearts because it’s a “great song”.
tastywallet
Bobbie,
I appreciate your willingness to express your concerns! Take a look at my reply to Katie Ellis and tell me what you think?
-TastyWallet
Bobbie
Yes – be imitators of Christ, absolutely. Yes, have faith as those in Hebrews 11. Yes – the heavens tell of his glory! All fantastic. But – does it say anywhere that we are to worship the Creator because these things worship Him? I know – it’s a small line in a beautiful song we are discussing. But – here’s the problem: People who don’t know the Word will think we worship because creation worships – and totally miss out on the reason why we worship. Again – I would not mind it but, this line,
“If the stars are made to worship so will I” is so popular that my daughter just ordered a shirt with those words on it!:) (At least it could get conversations going at school for sure!) But – again, I am just missing out on the biblical support of this very popular and pretty line. Thanks for testing all against scripture!
tastywallet
Bobbie,
Understood, thanks for the exchange of ideas!
-TastyWallet
Ronnia
I always thought of it in the sense that everything in creation obeys God except man. We are the only ones on open rebellion. Everything else He made does exactly what it was created to do. The wind is obedient, animals are obedient, the universe does and operates exactly as God designed it to and therefore for gives Him glory. But humans are born into sin and Jesus paid the price so that we could be reconciled back to the Father and now we too can do as all of creation does. Worship and be obedient. Hence the repeating phrase if creation was made to worship so will I. I never looked at it as oh we’re doing this just because they do but more like because of Jesus sacrifice we can now do what we were all created to do and that’s worship the one true God. Ofcourse we must be willing but you get the point. Sorry for the lengthy response I just had to respond because I think they’re so many ways of looking at this. But I do see your point that a non-believer may get the wrong idea, but then again kinda feel like this song was written for believers and we should know better.
victor
HOLA , solo un comentario , la biblia dice que las plantas y sus frutos fueron hechos para alimentar a los animales, entonces si un animal mata a otro para alimentarse, no creo que estĂŠ adorando a Dios, la Biblia dice que la creaciĂłn tambiĂŠn fue corrompida por causa del pecado del hombre y toda la tierra serĂĄ pasada por fuego y serĂĄ una nueva tierra .
Edited by Vince Wright:
Google Translate: HELLO, just a comment, the bible says that plants and their fruits were made to feed animals, so if one animal kills another for food, I don’t think it is worshiping God, the bible says that creation was also corrupted because of man’s sin and the whole earth will be passed through fire and will be a new earth.
Suzanne Rood
Bobbie, This is intriguing, so I got out my Bible and concordance to do some searching for a verse that supports worship God BECAUSE creation worships Him. Take a look at Psalm 148 and see what you think. It comes pretty close. The psalmist commands the heavens to praise him – including the stars. He commands the sea and the mountains, wind, and wild animals to praise the Lord, and then concludes by simply telling us to also Praise the Lord. It’s not a blatant “if-then” statement, but it carries the idea.
Bobbie
I suppose we should ask if it matters if it’s an inaccurate statement or a misunderstood sentiment, but at least gets people thinking. My daughter just explained it as – if the stars made by God are to worship, and God also made us, then we should worship too. But not because he made us, but because it’s something we are designed to do. I get that.
Juanita
Katie Ellis and Bobbie, I agree with you about the “if”s in the song and there are many. If you look at each ‘if’ statement, well, as they say: “There are no ifs, ands, or buts about it!” Whenever one uses the word ‘if’ it’s referring to something that is not a done deal: ‘if’ this, then ‘that’…with the implication that things could easily go the other way. All the ‘if’ statements in this song make weak, wishy-washy, inexact statements about God, especially “IF You left the grave behind You”! From an artist’s viewpoint, this is okay, because we create what we are feeling, thinking, wondering about. But for worship, these words are not a good idea. We can’t just worship God how we think He should be worshiped…He is very specific in how He wants to be worshiped; for starters He wants to be worshiped in spirit and in truth. Here’s an article that says it much better than I am saying it: https://www.desiringgod.org/articles/not-a-hillsong-to-die-on#for-leaders
Joseph
To Juanita and Bobbie
I think that the heart behind the ‘if then’ statements shouldn’t be taken to be a reflecting of a ’cause and effect’ relationship from the creation to Believers… But rather, it is distinguished reminder that creation is worshipping the Lord for who He is, and so we too should be worshipping him for who He is.
It is no different than the biblical calling for us to lovingly check our brothers who walk in sin and lead them out of it. Would you say that those people who we assist are worshipping God because of us? I think not. And to be even more specific, God saw it fit and necessary to reveal to us in His word that we should be worshipping Him for who He is. Without that specific revelation in our broken state, would we be Worshipping him?
In the end, I see the revelation of Creation pointing to and worshipping a Creator because he is creator as a healthy reminder that we too should be worshipping a Creator because he is creator. If the corporate worshipper still doesn’t feel like the song communicates that, a song’s words in question never, in the end, should hinder us from singing them correctly
Vince Wright
Joseph,
Thank you for your comment!
In logic (and programming), the term “if” is a conditional statement. “If” such and such condition(s) are met, “then” this thing occurs. This applies to causes and effects. “If” such and such cause occurs, “then” it will (usually) produce an effect. If I drop my computer off a cliff, then it will drop like a rock.
There is another usage of how “if” and “then” are used, namely, inspiration. “If” the animals worship God, “then” I am inspired to do the same.
Hillsong utilizes the inspirational usage of “if” and “then”, not cause/effect.
-Vince Wright
Denis
I tend to agree to point about creation not worshipping God but it does reaveal Him and we know that if we did not call out His name the stones of earth will . Hard to imagine but that’s what Jesus himself said . My reservation is about the word evolve and there are many good suggested replacements ,but it’s Joel Houston’s theistic evolutionary response of more concern . If you don’t accept 6 day creation then how much else are you going to question about scripture? JESUS accepted the authority of it , so should we . Joel tends to be a fence sitters, go read his views, still a great song and some of the old traditional hymns we sing are not strictly correct either. Do lets not throw out the baby with the bathwater. Regards Denis Wickman
Patrick Warren
Amen!
Patrick Warren
I completely agree with you! Thank you for sharing this concise response to why we should not accept these “little slips”. Just a trickle will eventually erode a mountain.
Deji Williams
The “if” before each of these statements started to bother me too – and that’s what got me here on this page!
I really think it’s a great song – minus the “if”s (and if it bothers you, “evolving”).
1.The problem with “if” is that it assumes there are alternatives to the statement – to which I don’t believe there is, in this case.
“If You gave Your life to love them” – could be misconstrued to mean Jesus did not die or give His life; or “If creation sings Your praises” – could be flipped over to say that maybe creation does not sing God’s praise…
2. “So will I” after each phrase sounds like, “If they do, I will do. But if I find out they don’t, then I’m out!”
Maybe I’m overthinking it.. anyway, I love the concept and the depth of the lyrics. I just believe it could be edited properly – unless the author intended it so.
Vince Wright
Deji,
Thank you for your comments!
The Bible is also full of “If” statements. For example, consider the following:
1) If you love me, keep My commandments. (John 14:15)
2) If the Son sets you free, you are free indeed. (John 8:36)
3) If you are eager to do good, who will harm you? (1 Peter 3:13)
4) If you seek Him, He is found. (2 Chronicles 15:2)
5) If faith is without action, it is dead. (James 2:17)
6) If your heart is wise, then you will be glad. (Proverbs 23:15)
7) If God is for us, who is against us? (Romans 8:31)
There are many others as well. What makes these “if” statements different than Hillsong’s “if” statements? Should we remove them from Scripture because they assume an alternative that could be misunderstood?
-Vince Wright
Mr Pete
Vince, your #7 here is VERY important. It demonstrates that “If” can also mean “Because.”
I’m not enough of a grammarian to specify those word forms, but clearly there is nothing wrong with Rom 8:31… and NOBODY is questioning whether God is for us đ
Levi Uzodike
To all the “if” complaints, make sure you read Ronnia’s comment. I don’t see anybody rebutting her, so maybe you missed it. I wish I could like it or upvote or something. Short summary: If creation worships, so will I because I am creation! To quote the song, “If everything exists to lift You high, so will I”. I am not merely copying everything, I am a part of everything, so I’ll do what You made me “exist” to do. I worship because that was what I was made to do. I just was born into sin, but now because of Jesus, I get to do what all of creation that couldn’t sin has already been doing.
Lanie
I agree with you! I really love this song and use to sing it with without really focusing on the lyrics in too much detail. But then that started bothering me.
We shouldn’t decide to also worship God ‘because they do’, we worship Him because we’ve placed our ultimate value unto Him. Because we view Him, then respond in worship… because we can’t NOT!
This being said, I know their hearts are to glorify God and worship Him. đ
But the reason for my worship shouldn’t be ‘because they do’.
F L A M I N G S P A R R O W
Remember, Jesus Christ telling the crowd ‘,,,if you don’t worship me the stones e,t,c ,,,as for the line that implies ‘He would die again and again’ to me it’s in reference to the God’s love to mankind that If it was not enough, He would do it again and again to ensure complete redemption, His sole plan from the time man fell into sin
Nicolas Thomas
Genesis Chapter 1 tells us that after God created the universe, he let it make itself.
Let the earth put forth vegetation (1:6)
Let the waters bring forth swarms of living creatures (1:20)
Let the earth bring forth living creatures (1:24)
Be fruitful and multiply, and fill the earth (1:28)
Yes, all this was still under Godâs supervision, but it is the start of what science calls evolution. It saddens me that we needlessly cause friction over this.
Nicolas Thomas
Lee
Wonderful comment, was thinking the very same thing. I’d like to believe God drives everything including science and evolution which is the message I think was being conveyed in the part of the song.
Nate
In biology, evolution is the change in the characteristics of a species over several generations and relies on the process of natural selection. The theory of evolution is based on the idea that all species? are related and gradually change over time.
God made all things perfectly and at no point did He say go for and evolve, He said multiply. Man is made to multiply and so is creation.
I think removing the word evolving is the way forward.
Neal Cruco
Nate,
While “evolving” is a strange word to use in that line, it is not inherently unbiblical. God created the fish, birds, and animals with the ability to adapt themselves to their environment- not just in behavior, but in appearance as well. Charles Darwin got his theory of evolution from studying GalĂĄpagos finches- each species of finch had adapted its beak to better fit its main source of food. From there Darwin theorized that one species of finch had diverged into many due to different groups living in different places and eating different foods. That was all sound scientific practice.
The problem came when Darwin took a mammoth-sized leap of logic (that was completely unsupported by his observations) and extended this concept to all life on earth- a single-cell organism somehow being the ancestor of all life, eons ago. Now he had leapt from relatively minor adaptations of existing structures (the beaks of his finches) to something that defies description as “adaptation”- so that everything from humans to octopi to giraffes to oaks came from a blobby single-cell organism. For decades, most scientists have been telling themselves and everyone else that scientific observations support this- but they haven’t, they don’t, and they won’t.
So, when discussing how evolution fits with the Bible, we must distinguish microevolution (sometimes known as speciation) from macroevolution (the idea that all forms of life could be created from nothing by compounding the minor adjustments made by microevolution). Believe it or not, humans have microevolved since the Garden of Eden – skin color is an excellent example of this.
victor
ES QUE EVOLUCION creo que no es la palabra..evolucion definitivamente te lleva a finalmente terminar por ser otra especie mientras que la adaptacion o especializaciĂłn no. Es mas me atreverĂa a decir que la evoluciĂłn tiene que ver con la ascencion supuesta del hombre hasta llegar a ser como dioses..en definitiva una palabra muy mal escogida y peor aĂşn analizada.
Edited by Vince Wright:
Google Translate: IT IS THAT EVOLUTION I think that is not the word .. evolution definitely leads you to finally end up being another species while adaptation or specialization does not. Moreover, I would dare to say that evolution has to do with the supposed ascent of man to become like gods … in short, a very poorly chosen word and even worse analyzed.
Harold Geern
I don’t think evolution is an appropriate word to use, especially with the connotation it now has. Natural selection and adaptation and both true and both happen, but they obviously don’t support Darwinism. I feel like using those words define what we as Christians believe better than saying evolution, due simply to the fact that when people think of evolution they think of Darwin’s evolution.
John
Nicholas, cherry picking bible verses is never a good idea.
The beasts created themselves in Gen 1:24?
Read the next verse.
Nicolas Thomas
Hi John — no one is saying âthe beasts created themselvesâ. In verse 24 God says âlet the earth bring forth living creatures âŚâŚâ
You then point to verse 25 which goes on to say âGod made the beasts of the earth âŚâ. So do you think this cancels out verse 24? Do you think that God didnât mean for the earth to bring forth living creatures?
Do you think God just went ahead and made the beasts himself (on the spot) and didnât let the earth bring them forth after all?
As a check, look at verse 11. There, God says âLet the earth put forth vegetation âŚâ and the following verse 12 simply restates that âthe earth brought forth vegetation âŚâ
In other words, after creating life, Godâs way of âmakingâ life develop is to let the world make itself. Hope that avoids the cherry picking!
John
I’m sorry but nowhere does it say God “supervised”. It is Clear that anything that has breath God-made it. Verse 21 verse 25 verse 27.
Imo
Thank you Nicolas for your comment. Creation has evolved over time all in obedience to God’s Word spoken at “The Creation”
Suzanne Rood
Or better yet… “thriving” in pursuit of what you said.
Suzanne Rood
How about “existing” in pursuit of what you said?
Or “increasing” in pursuit…? I love the idea that as the creatures multiplied in Genesis and throughout the next millenia, they continued to praise and live for the one who created them. I don’t want to lose that thought.
tastywallet
Perhaps “constructed” would be the best fit. It ties in the creation account in Genesis 1 and the ideas you mentioned, about the continuation of that creation, bringing Job 31:15, Psalm 139:13, Psalm 119:73, Isaiah 44:2, and Jeremiah 1:5 into the fold.
Tammy
I see a tree frog change it’s color depending on where it’s sitting or a seed that evolves into a beautiful tree or flower. Evolving in pursuit of what God said, they are following His designed plan. Just read the words and not phsychoanalyze. But I also would agree for the sake of others, that unfolding would work well, like watching a fast forward video of a plant evolving/unfolding before your eyes. Continuing in action.
Arhbee
My thoughts exactly. Thank you for this.
The line says “Evolving in pursuit of what you said”
I interpret it to mean we’re constantly growing and changing as we walk with Him, to become that which He has made us to be.
James
Love the analysis! We changed “evolving” to “all moving” for the sake of the congregation and to keep from distracting from the point of the song.
tastywallet
Thanks for the compliment and Good move! There is just so much controversy over evolution that justifies the slight alteration.
Mark
First thanks for the site. I come here often to check the lyrics of a song so as not to be swayed by the emotional impact of the music, a big danger for me as for all of us.
Ref this song, for a song correctly stating God’s word to be so powerful that no “syllable is empty or void”, a shame that there should be words in here for believers to sing that are not true. Especially one that is the biggest lie of all time. And the temptation is for congregations to think ‘o it’s just one word’ when all the rest is so good, the music so powerful’.
Evolving suggests a process not an event. For example the resurrection of Jesus was an instant event, not a process. So any word suggesting a process, ‘unfolding’ is flawed. Perhaps substitute ‘living to pursue’ for ‘evolving in pursuit’? So many other beautiful lyrics in here that can totally mask the core deception that then gets subconsciously reinforced every time it is sung. So a very good example of why your site is important and how subtley dangerous lies can slip in.
Dennis Taylor
I think a better word to convey the idea of what happened in creation and would fit better lyrically, would be the word “embarking” in pursuit of what God said.
tastywallet
I see where you’re going with it. Below is the full range of definitions from Merriam-webster. Only the second, intransitive verb would fit.
Definition of embark
embarked; embarking; embarks
intransitive verb
1: to go on board a vehicle for transportation – the troops embarked at noon
2: to make a start – embarked on a new career
transitive verb
1: to cause to go on board (a boat, an airplane, etc.)
2: to engage, enlist, or invest in an enterprise
In contrast, unfolding has nothing that resembles God’s creation. So, I do think you have a point!
A
I’d replace it with ‘becoming in pursuit…’?
Chad
All great suggestions. Personally, I like “They continue in pursuit”
racefangurl
My church doesn’t tweak it, as of last time we sang it, but maybe the singers just weren’t able to think of a word to replace it that fits either lyrically or in meaning. Or maybe they just don’t care. We’re not extremely seeker sensitive*, but discipleship and outreach, along with power ministry and also missions, are important to the current pastor as I type this. It’s a coffee in the lobby type church and we had a cocoa outreach in December. *However, I don’t see us having some of the over the top stuff seeker sensitive churches have done, like turning the front of the church into a lake or a car showroom (as seen in a video).
Craig Hurner
Who am i to say whats what! But in my opinion, even reading your reviews of this song i am touched. This is a moving song. I especialy like the version by Torri Kelly
tastywallet
Thanks for your compliment, much appreciated!
Doug Fritz
One of the other big problems with this song is the word âif.â
It is repeatedly used, so it has to be considered as more than one-off artistic license â which I believe there is no room for in worship lyrics anyway.
When a song says âif,â it implies a question of whether the event happened:
âIf you gave your lifeâŚâ
âIf you left the grave âŚâ
âIf creation still obeys you âŚâ
These are taking statements of fact:
âJesus died for usâ
âJesus rose from the graveâ
âGod is in controlâ
and putting a question mark on them, or at least opening the door for them to be considered less than 100-percent fact.
One might dive into the if-since exegesis of Scripture, but that wouldnât apply here. Why? Because of the pronoun âyouâ throughout the song. This song is clearly being sung to God, which is the first word of the song. So why, in corporate worship, should we gather together and use the word âifâ when signing to God? (Especially when the word could be removed and solve the problem without creating an awkward fit for the music â or the word âandâ could be substituted in each pre-âso will Iâ instance).
Also the song states, if Jesus did this, so will I, which â because of the word âifâ â implies Christians are taking a chance as followers, based on the possibility of something being true â as opposed to Biblical assurance.
And the lyric that states:
âWhere You lost Your life so I could find it here âŚâ seems to be in opposition to John 10:18. Jesus didnât âloseâ his lifeâŚ.
John 10:18
âNo one takes it from me, but I lay it down of my own accord. I have authority to lay it down, and I have authority to take it up again. This charge I have received from my Father.â
Given all of these problems, plus the honestly bad âevolutionâ reference, I donât believe this song is appropriate for corporate worship.
Vince Wright
Doug,
Thank you for your comments!
I don’t agree with you that the word “if” is implied doubt. Chiefly, because in the world of logic, there is a concept called “if then arguments” (see https://open.lib.umn.edu/goodreasoning/chapter/if-then-arguments/). In its most basic form, an argument of this type is constructed that assumes some premise (p) is true and the conclusion (q) follows from the truthfulness of p.
This form of logic is all over the place in this song. Although the word “then” is not explicitly stated, it is understood that “then” represents our response to the truthfulness of these “if” statements. For example:
“If You give Your life to love them [then] so will I.”
This assumes that “You gave your life to love them” is true. What follows from that is that “so will I”. In other words, if it is true that He gave His life to love them, then I will too.
Finally, there are several Scriptures that present statements in this form, including 2 Chronicles 7:14, Matthew 17:20, and Mark 11:25-26. You should easily see the “then’s” in these passages, even if the word “then” is not present. There is also a negative version of this form in 1 Corinthians 15:14 (if NOT / then).
If Scripture uses if-then arguments to present truth, [then] so can this song (see what I did there?)
-Vince Wright
Paul
The argument you have put forward would make sense if the content were true. We do not worship because creation was made to worship. We also donât worship because we were created to, because each has turned his own way and worshiped creation rather than the creator. So instead, because he rescued us from death to life – then we worship. If he gives us eyes to see, then we see and worship. The difference is subtle but very significant. The âif this, then thatâ logic makes sense if we do not leave God out of the picture.
Christian
Paul, we, and all of creation, were made to worship. Jesus rescued us from slavery to sin and death, and gave us new life so that we could be RESTORED to the purpose we were created for, but which we rejected in the Garden of Eden.
Christian
Yes, we were created to worship. Jesus died for us and rose again so that we could be RESTORED to our created purpose which we rejected in the Garden, and we have continued to reject throughout our history because we inherited the nature and tendency to do so from our ancestor Adam. Jesus’s death and resurrection destroys our inheritance of sin and death, and gives to all who have repented and put their faith in Him, a new inheritance as sons of God, who worship Him again. Just because “…each has turned his own way and worshiped creation rather than the creator…” doe not mean that we weren’t CREATED to worship God.
LaRita Armour
I love the message in this song. All of creation was meant to obey and worship Him. I was too, but I’ve been given the choice and I choose to do what my creator created me to do.