Photo by Boris Baldinger
Seattle- based Pop/Rock band Kings Kaleidoscope has been rockin’ it since 2011. With three full albums and eight EP’s under their belt, and placements on the Billboard’s Top US Christian albums, they are a force that cannot be ignored.
Check out my reviews of Felix Culpa, A Prayer, and Safe Retreat.
Lyrics can be found at https://genius.com/Kings-kaleidoscope-defender-lyrics.
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.
1. What message does the song communicate?
Though Kings Kaleidoscope was stepped in darkness, plagued by their sin that kept them from seeking God, they finally cried out to Him and He heard. Christ humbled Himself by becoming a man and became obedient to the cross. His shed blood paid for their lawbreaking, granting them hope.
Jesus is the solid rock that is the foundation of their faith. He is their defense, their shield, their refuge, and their confidence. He is the victor over death, so why should Kings Kaleidoscope continue to cower in fear?
It also describes God’s love as reckless, a controversy that we experienced within the last two years from Cory Asbury’s Reckless Love, though only mentioned as a throwaway line in this song. There are two sides to the debate:
- Reckless is a term that means “(of a person or their actions) without thinking or caring about the consequences of an action”. There was a lot of thought put into it! It was pre-planned (Revelation 13:8), not careless of consequences. More information can be found in Mike Winger’s YouTube video.
- Reckless must be understood in its proper context. Jesus showed His love towards us without regard to His life or the consequences that followed: including the beatings, torture, and his death. More information can be found in John Piper’s response.
Piper said one other thing that applies to both views: “If you’re in a church that’s basically singing sound and helpful lyrics, and along comes a song with questionable words, then either stop singing if your conscience won’t let you sing, or put a meaning on the words that you are able to affirm.”
My conscience tells me to do the former; However, since it’s a passing line and not a main point, I’ll go easy on it.
Score: 9/10
2. How much of the lyrics line up with Scripture?
Almost all of it agrees with the Bible, except for the possible fact that God’s love is not reckless.
Since this song does not follow a Verse/Chorus/Bridge structure, I will add Stanzas to designate each paragraph.
[Stanza 1]
Lines 1 and 2: This is a subtle reference to sin. Those who are influenced by it do not wish to come into the light, lest they become exposed (John 3:20).
Lines 3-6: Despite Kings Kaleidoscope’s darkened state, they cried out to God and were heard. They are covered by the sacrifice of Jesus (Isaiah 53:1-12, Matthew 20:28, Mark 10:45, John 1:29, John 3:16, John 19:30, Acts 4:12, Acts 20:28, Romans 5:6-10, Romans 6:23, 1 Corinthians 1:30, 1 Corinthians 6:20, 2 Corinthians 5:21, Galatians 1:3-4, Galatians 3:13, Ephesians 1:7, Colossians 2:14, 1 Timothy 2:6, Titus 2:14, Hebrews 9:12, Hebrews 9:15, Hebrews 9:22, Hebrews 9:26, 1 Peter 1:17-21, 1 Peter 2:24, 1 Peter 1:18-19, 1 John 1:7, 1 John 2:1-2, and Revelation 5:9). It also references the earthquake that occurred after Jesus died (Matthew 27:51).
[Stanza 2]
Lines 1 and 2: If God is for Kings Kaleidoscope, to what should they be afraid (Psalm 27:1)? Nothing will separate them from God’s love (Romans 8:31-39).
[Stanza 3]
Line 1: Originally stated by David in 2 Samuel 22:32 and Psalm 18:31, combined with line 3, Jesus is described as the rock who is our foundation (Matthew 7:24-27, Matthew 21:42, Acts 4:11, 1 Corinthians 3:10-11, Ephesians 2:20, 2 Timothy 2:19, and 1 Peter 2:6).
Line 2: Once again, this is answered in line 3. Jesus’ shed blood sealed it. We are washed by His blood (Ephesians 1:7, Hebrews 9:22, 1 Peter 1:2, and 1 Peter 1:18-19).
Line 3: Savior and Redeemer are covered in Stanza 1, line 6 and Stanza 3, line 2. Since Jesus is God, we can apply Ruth 2:12, 2 Samuel 22:3-4, Psalm 3:3, Psalm 5:11, Psalm 18:30, Psalm 27:1, Psalm 32:7, Psalm 34:22, Psalm 41:2, Psalm 46:1, Psalm 57:1, Psalm 59:1, Psalm 61:3, Psalm 91:1-16, Psalm 118:8, Psalm 121:7-8, Psalm 138:7, Proverbs 18:10, Proverbs 30:5, Nahum 1:7, 2 Thessalonians 3:3, and 1 John 5:18 for Jesus as our defender.
[Stanza 4]
Line 1: Since Jesus is our defense (see Stanza 3, line 3), we can use the same verses to describe Him as our refuge.
Line 2-5 Our strength is found in Jesus (Nehemiah 8:10, Psalm 22:19, Psalm 28:7-8, Psalm 46:1, Psalm 118:14, Isaiah 12:2, Isaiah 33:2, Isaiah 40:29-31, Habakkuk 3:19, 2 Corinthians 12:9-10, Ephesians 3:16, Ephesians 6:10, and Philippians 4:13), emboldening us to fight against the flesh, the world, and the devil (Genesis 15:1, Deuteronomy 33:29, 2 Samuel 22:3, Psalm 3:3, Psalm 5:11, Psalm 12:5, Psalm 18:2, Psalm 20:1, Psalm 28:7, Proverbs 30:5, Psalm 33:20, Psalm 34:19, Psalm 46:1, Psalm 57:1, Psalms 59:1, Psalm 84:11, Psalm 89:18, Psalm 91:1-16, Psalm 115:9, Psalm 121:1-8, Psalm 140:4, Isaiah 41:10, 1 Corinthians 10:13, and 2 Thessalonians 3:3).
Line 6: Ultimately, the victory belongs to Jesus (John 16:33). He defeated the last enemy, which is death (Isaiah 25:8, Hosea 13:14, Luke 20:35-36, 1 Corinthians 15:24-26, 1 Corinthians 15:55-57, 2 Timothy 1:10, and Hebrews 2:14) and will throw it into the lake of fire (Revelation 20:14).
[Stanza 5]
Lines 1 and 2: Repeats Stanza 2.
[Stanza 6]
Lines 1-3: Repeats Stanza 3.
[Stanza 7]
Line 1: Prostration is a sign of humility. Jesus humbled Himself by becoming one of us, a frail, weak human being compared to His infinite power and glory. He humbled Himself to death on a cross for our sins (Philippians 2:5-11) so that we could be saved (see commentary on Stanza 3).
Lines 2 and 3: Kings Kaleidoscope joins Thomas in declaring Jesus as their Lord and God (John 20:28).
Line 4: See commentary in section 1.
Lines 5 and 6: Repeats lines 2 and 3.
[Stanza 8]
Lines 1-4: Repeats Stanza 3, with the final line repeating line 3 a second time.
Score: 9/10
3. How would an outsider interpret the song?
Those outside the camp of Christ will immediately recognize this as a Christian song given its name-drops of God and Jesus. Its poetic form might cause some to not recognize the cross and Christ crucified; However, this is somewhat overcome with the “blood [that] has sealed our freedom” for those who know something about Christianity; However, His described recklessness might give them the wrong impression, that God does not plan His actions.
As usual, we cannot expect unbelievers to understand the depravity of their sin or their need for a Savior, no matter how well an artist explains it. If they did, they would likely become Christians!
Score: 7/10
4. What does this song glorify?
It glorifies Jesus as it describes mankind’s transformation from darkness to light, Christ as our foundation, and His defeating death. Since reckless is mentioned in passing and might have a correct usage, I’ll give it full credit for this section.
Score: 10/10
Closing Comments
Kings Kaleidoscope’s Defender is a good song. It hints at the cross and Christ crucified, showcasing our misery in sin and hope found by trusting in Jesus as our solid foundation, place of refuge, and our response to declare Him Lord and God, bringing Him glory. However, it also describes God’s love as reckless, a controversial word that, in my humble view, paints God as One who acts without prior planning. Unbelievers will recognize its Christian origins, even if they cannot fully comprehend its significance.
I find it difficult to recommend this song for corporate worship. Perhaps if the word “reckless” is replaced with “sacrificial”, I might change my mind; However, not everyone finds this word problematic.
Final Score: 9/10
Artist Info
Track: Defender (listen to the song)
Artist: Kings Kaleidoscope
Album: Becoming Who We Are
Genre: Rock
Release Year: 2014
Duration: 4:17
Agree? Disagree? Don’t be shy or have a cow! Calmly and politely state your case in a comment, below.
Updates:
03/25/2021 – Updated per repetition announcement.
04/27/2020 – Thanks to feedback from Neal Cruco and JM, I made several changes to this review:
- Added text to represent both sides of the word “reckless”.
- Removed commentary that Kings Kaleidoscope borrowed from Cory Asbury.
- Decreased penalty based on the word “Reckless”, increasing its score from 7.5/10 to 9/10.
Comments
Andrew
Just a very quick note: this song was written well before Asbury’s Reckless Love, so please don’t assume that they borrowed lyrics from that song!
Vince Wright
Andrew,
Thank you for the correction! JM beat you to it, so he gets the credit!
-Vince Wright
JM
I’m totally in agreement with your concerns about the song “Reckless Love”, but I’m not convinced that this song warrents the lower scoring for the use of that phrase.
1) it only occurs once (in passing, not the main point like Asbury’s song)
2) it is not coupled with the idea that God puts his Flock in danger to search for the wayward sinner
3) this song came out years before Asbury’s, so if anyone is borrowing… It’s not kings kaleidoscope
I do wish they used a different word there, but otherwise this would seem to be a great scriptural song. Should we not let it stand on it’s own, without letting it be tainted by Asbury’s song?
Vince Wright
JM,
Thank you for your challenge and correction! I updated my review.
-Vince Wright
Neal Cruco
Regarding the use of “reckless”: I continue to support the use of this phrase to describe God’s love. Matthew 16:23 says, “Jesus turned to Peter and said, ‘Get away from me, Satan! You are a dangerous trap to me. You are seeing things merely from a human point of view, not from God’s.'” It seems to be that we have the opposite problem here: interpreting from a “heavenly” point of view instead of a human perspective.
See, God sent His only Son – perfect, sinless, and dearly loved – to grow up in the family of a poor craftsman and eventually die a gruesome, torturous death for crimes He did not commit- a criminal’s death, a death too undignified for a Roman citizen except in the case of a soldier who deserted. Why did He do this? To save a people who had experienced His blessings, miraculous deliverance, mercy, grace, and provision for thousands of years, but yet had continually spat in His face, either spiritually prostituting themselves to false gods, exploiting loopholes in His law for selfish gain, or straining out a gnat yet swallowing a camel. (Even shortly after being freed from 400 years of slavery and seeing the Red Sea split, they accused God of bringing them out into the wilderness just to starve them to death!) What sense does that make? What would drive God to pay such a high price to ransom such a willfully wicked people? The user “Hubret” said it well when he annotated this line on Genius: “…love that seems bizarre and irrational, but at the same time, extraordinary and amazing.”
Jesus’ sacrifice was not thoughtless or irrational. It was, as you say, planned long in advance. But it seems crazy from a human point of view. Paul said “Now, most people would not be willing to die for an upright person, though someone might perhaps be willing to die for a person who is especially good. But God showed his great love for us by sending Christ to die for us while we were still sinners.” (Romans 5:7-8) In other words, most of us wouldn’t be willing to die for a good person, let alone a wicked one! Yet dying for wicked sinners is exactly what Jesus did! That doesn’t make sense from a human perspective, and so it is accurate to call this love “reckless”. It may mislead unbelievers, so this might not be a good song for them, but it isn’t wrong.
Another possible explanation: Collins English Dictionary defines “reckless” as “having or showing no regard for danger or consequences”. Similarly, Random House Kernerman Webster’s College Dictionary defines it as “utterly unconcerned about consequences”. I could posit that Jesus showed such disregard for the ramifications of His sacrifice. The beating, the mocking, the humiliation, the torture: He knew it was all coming, and He prayed for the Father to take the cup of suffering from Him. But God’s answer was “no”, and from that moment on, Jesus makes no further resistance, either to His Father or to the ones illegally arresting, trying, and executing Him on trumped-up charges. He disregarded the suffering that He knew was coming and went with them quietly. This isn’t my primary justification, but it did come to mind just now. I’ll leave you to decide which argument is stronger and whether either is convincing.
Steve Barhydt
I don’t have a problem with the word “reckless” (in this song or Asbury’s).
I find both of Neil’s arguments equally compelling.
Vince Wright
Neal,
Thank you for your thoughts!
As you probably noticed in my review of Reckless Love, there were alternative definitions offered in response to mine. I understand that others can use these other definitions (as I have done in other reviews); However, in this case, I cannot get over the initial, first definition, and the negative consequences/implications that come with it.
Cory Asbury had a similar argument when he talked about writing his songwriting his song. he said:
“When I used the phrase, ‘the reckless love of God,’ when we say it, we’re not saying that God Himself is reckless, He’s not crazy. We are, however, saying that the way He loves, is in many regards, quite so. But what I mean is this: He’s utterly unconcerned with the consequences of His own actions with regard to His own safety, comfort and well-being. … He doesn’t wonder what He’ll gain or lose by putting Himself on the line, He simply puts Himself out there on the off-chance that you and I might look back at Him and give Him that love in return. His love leaves the ninety nine to find the one every time and to many practical adults that’s a foolish concept. Well, what if He loses the ninety nine in finding the one, right? What if, finding that one lost sheep is and always will be supremely important?”
I’m still uncomfortable with the word in reference to God’s love for us; However, perhaps (and to JP’s credit in a different comment) I was too harsh in my rating. It would also be fair to represent both sides.
I’ve increased its score.
-Vince Wright