Bad worship songs: Son of Suffering, by David Funk, Aaron Moses, Matt Redman, and Nate Moore.

From time to to we examine the lyrics of worship songs. Our desire is not to mock or humiliate, but rather to honestly examine content with a view to calling forth a better worship expression.

With the great volume and variety of worship music available, none of us should have to settle for bad worship songs. We should be able to select hundreds or even thousands of top notch songs very easily.

What makes a song a worship song? Is it enough to contain words like God or holy? How about vaguely spiritual sounding phrases? Should Jesus be mentioned?

We think an excellent worship song should contain the following elements:

• A direct expression of adoration (God, you are...)
• A progression of ideas that culminates in a coherent story
• A focus on God, not us
• Lyrics that do not create uncertainty or cause confusion
• A certain amount of profundity
• A singable, interesting melody
• Allusions to Scripture
• Doctrinal soundness
• Not excessively metaphorical
• Not excessively repetitive
• Jesus is not your boyfriend

It's worth noting the most worship songs contain at least something good. That is, there might be a musical idea or a lyric that has merit. Such is the case with this song, Son of Suffering.

Video here.

Lyrics

Verse 1

Oh, the perfect Son of God
In all His innocence
Here walking in the dirt with you and me
He knows what living is
He's acquainted with our grief
A man of sorrows, Son of suffering

Chorus

Oh, blood and tears
How can it be?
That there's a God who weeps
There's a God who bleeds
Oh, praise the One
Who would reach for me
Hallelujah to the Son of suffering

Verse 2

Some imagine You
Are distant and removed
But You chased us down in merciful pursuit
To the sinner, You were grace
And the broken You embraced
And in the end the proof is in Your wounds
Yes, in the end the proof is in Your wounds

Bridge

Your cross, my freedom
Your stripes, my healing
All praise King Jesus
Glory to God in Heaven
Your blood still speaking
Your love still reaching
All praise King Jesus
Glory to God forever

Overview

This is a typical contemporary Christian worship song. That is, it pushes all the right buttons. Simple melody. Basic chords. Repetitive. Live worship video. Swaying crowds and enraptured band members.

And unfortunately, biblically questionable if not heretical lyrics.

The song's theme is Isaiah 53:3:

He was despised and rejected by men, a man of sorrows, and familiar with suffering...

While an important biblical theme, we think that most of the focus on Jesus' suffering is rooted in Catholic theology. Jesus is depicted as still on the cross in Catholic churches. In fact, His suffering itself is represented as part the effectual remedy for sin. Even some Protestants think that His suffering is in some fashion part of salvation. We think this is false. The Lamb of God shed His blood as the perfect sacrifice, and this death of the innocent one is sufficient for salvation. Nothing else is needed.

Happily, the video has no indigo lighting or flashing strobes. It's refreshingly stark and basic, aside from the out-of-focus shaky cam. We despise this video technique. 

But the band we're watching is not the band we're hearing. We see three acoustic guitars, two electrics, a bass, a drummer, two keys, a violin and a cello, plus some background singers:

Although we do hear many of these instruments sporadically throughout the video, at those moments the sound we hear is not what the musician is playing. And some of the instruments and vocalists are never heard at all. So, what we are actually hearing is a studio recording, post-produced, edited, pitch corrected, and re-recorded.

Add in the sound of an audience, and viola, "live" worship.

The Music

The song is easily playable with no surprises. Any worship band should be able to handle it. The vocal range, however, is somewhat challenging in the bridge. In order to properly build the intensity the melody starts low and jumps up an octave later in the song. Oddly, the lyrics "Glory to God forever" is lower at the start of the bridge, then only it goes up an octave as the song builds. Then when the bridge later recapitulates, the whole bridge is up an octave. That makes the first part of the bridge extremely high.

Verse chords: I - Vsus - I/6 - IV - Vsus (repeat)

Chorus chords: IVmaj9 - I - Vsus - vi - IVmaj9 - vi -Vsus - IV2

Bridge chords: Initially the bridge holds the I chord, but as the repeats develop the chords are I - IV6 - I6 - IV. However, the progression doesn't stay this way, it morphs as it repeats.

The audio production on the video is relatively clear until the high points in the bridges, where we hear lead vocal, vague crowd singing, drums, and bass. The rest of the mix consists of irritating synth pads droning in the background. No guitars, no piano, no vocal harmonies. 

Ugh.

The Lyrics

Verse one is directed to the audience as the voice of instruction/exhortation. The chorus continues to address the audience. Verse two changes to address God Himself, and the bridge continues to address God directly. Ordinarily, we don't have a problem changing the target of the lyrics, but definitionally it is not worship when someone else besides God is sung to.

There are several lyrical problems, some severe. Matt Redman should know better, since he's been writing quality worship songs for nearly 30 years. 

In verse one we find this:

Here walking in the dirt with you and me

There is no reason to embellish the Gospel with abiblical information. especially if the word choices obscure or misrepresent the Gospel message. The way the songwriters use the word "dirt" suggests that Jesus did not lift us out of the mire (Psalms 40:2) but joined us there. Now certainly it is true that he humbled himself to walk the earth as a man (Phil. 2:8), but His purpose was not to join us in the filth but to deliver us out of it.

In addition, He is not walking in the dirt with us, He did that in the first century. He is now exalted to the right hand of the Father (Ac. 2:33) and He sent us the Holy Spirit (John 16:7). The Holy Spirit is with us and in us, but we must walk with Him (Gal. 5:25).

Is this a minor problem? Perhaps. But the fact that we're forced to discuss it means the song's lyric has yanked us out of worship. That should not happen.

In the chorus there are two problems. Let's quote the lyrics:

That there's a God who weeps
There's a God who bleeds
Oh, praise the One
Who would reach for me
Hallelujah to the Son of suffering

Again we have word choices that confuse rather than clarify. While Jesus the Son did indeed weep and bleed, and He is God in the flesh, the Father is a separate person from the Son and from the Holy Spirit. Therefore, it is not true the Father wept and bled. This is a heretical idea known as patripassianism. The doctrine of the Trinity acknowledges the deity of the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit, but does not teach that the Father or the Holy Spirit suffered or died.

This means these lyrics tip towards heresy.

The second problem in the chorus is "the Son of suffering." This is an abiblical title that again leads us toward heresy. Remember we discussed the Catholic Jesus as still on the cross, and that even some Protestants think that His suffering plays some salvific role. Thus the suffering itself is elevated in importance. However, we think the proper response to Jesus' suffering is to remember it, acknowledge it as fulfilled prophecy and thus necessary, but not to celebrate it. 

Ok, on to verse two. Two problems. First, we read:

But You chased us down in merciful pursuit

We are willing to grant the songwriters with some artistic liberty, but we still must exercise some discernment. This theme of God chasing us is currently in vogue in Christian music, but it is not a strictly biblical idea. Certainly God moves toward us in His grace (2 Cor. 4:15) and draws us toward Him (John 12:32), but don't find the idea of God chasing us in Scripture.

Second problem in verse 2:

And in the end the proof is in Your wounds

We suspect this error derives from Thomas' doubt, where Jesus offered His wounds as proof He rose from the dead (John 20:25, 27). But of course, Jesus was not proving His pursuit of the sinner here, He was proving to Thomas His identity as the Risen One. 

The proof for us is the cross and the resurrection.

Again and again our complaint is that these "clever" lyrics yank us out of worship in order to examine them. Worship songs should not do this.

Happily, the bridge lyrics are a litany of correct and simple statements about the truth of Jesus' sacrifice. Why couldn't the whole song have been crafted this way?

Conclusion

This is an unremarkable song with problematic lyrics. We cannot recommend it.