7
Apr
2009
Andrew Peterson Resurrection Letters Volume II
You can listen to all the songs on Andrew Peterson’s newest album once on the player below. I think my favorite is #3 “All You’ll Ever Need.” This is a good example of allegory and typology. I think the first and third verses are examples of illegitimate allegorizing, while the second is sound typology of cleansing water as a type of the blood of Christ. Even though the first and third are probably not sound expositions of Scripture, I don’t really care because of the substance of the song. Sometimes the analogy of faith is more important than sound hermeneutics!
About Post Author
It’s too bad that the “teaching” presented by lyrics of songs we use in worship services can’t be given the same level of scrutiny that would be used for preaching.
Would you use this song (unmodified) in a formal worship service?
Thanks.
“Even though the first and third are probably not sound expositions of Scripture, I don’t really care because of the substance of the song. Sometimes the analogy of faith is more important than sound hermeneutics!”
Bob,
I think the highest level of scrutiny should be used for songs used in worship as well as for preaching. I am not sure that I would be comfortable using this song in corporate worship. But, in the same way that I will not be overly critical of Spurgeon’s preaching because of his Christ-centeredness, I will not be in regard to this song either. I suppose that is what I meant when I said that the analogy of faith is often weightier than exegetical preciseness.
At the same time, I agree with Dabney who once said that we need to be careful of attributing to the Holy Spirit meaning that He did not inspire.
So, I guess I am saying that if we are edified because of the truth of doctrine taught from the wrong texts, I am less concerned than if we are teaching all the grammatical-historical accuracies and missing Christ. I know that someone will say, “We should be concerned about both,” and I am. But I still find this song to be extremely edifying, though loose on hermeneutical accuracy.
One may be off on his exegesis and yet be orthodox in his doctrine, and someone may be off on his exegesis and unorthodox in his doctrine. The former is certainly less of a problem than the later.
Any thoughts?
And, I retract my final statement on the initial post that “sometimes the analogy of faith is more important than sound hermeneutics.” I should have said, “Sometimes the analogy of faith safeguards for edification regardless of unsound hermeneutics.”
I think we need to allow for a proper and legitimate use of simile and metaphor in worship music. While I doubt the songwriter is claiming his similes are legitimate biblical types, I think he is making true statements that actually do arise from Biblical truth. The widow’s oil is like Jesus’ blood in that it pays for all we “need.” I think the standards applied to preaching don’t necessarily apply to worship music per se. The music is not an exposition of a text and does not carry the authority that the preached word through God’s ordained minister does.
Of course we need to have standards. We should not allow false similes and metaphors to be included in worship. However, lyric writing is a poetic endeavor that takes advantage of simile and metaphor as an art form. Writing a sermon is not a poetic activity (unless you’re Jesse Jackson).
Nick,
Thanks for your thoughtful clarification.
Camden,
Thank you too. It might be interesting to hear voices from the past on this topic. Allowing non-literal propositions via figures of speech is one thing, but allowing ideas contradictory to scripture is another.