Why Are We Embracing Accusation?

The following is a letter written by my friend Geoff Ashley. I am so thankful to the Lord to walk with this man everyday, and to know him as a brother in Christ.

An Open Response to Recent Criticism
of The Village Church’s Use of“Embracing Accusation”
On the weekend of September 15th and 16th, 2007, Michael Bleecker, Worship Pastor at The Village Church, introduced the song, “Embracing Accusation,” originally written by Shane Barnard and recorded by Shane and Shane. After giving a brief overview of the Biblical context of the song, Michael asked the congregation to be seated and allow the worship team to sing it over them.

The following week Michael in particular received some intensely negative feedback regarding the song. Not only did the discouragement include questions of the validity of the message, but even questioned Michael’s maturity and theological prowess in choosing such a song.

The lyrics to the song are as follows:

Father of lies, coming to steal kill and destroy
All my hopes of being good enough
I hear him saying, “cursed are the ones who can’t abide”
He’s right, halleluia, he’s right
The devil is preaching the song of the redeemed
That I am cursed and gone astray
I cannot gain salvation
Embracing accusation
Could the father of lies be telling the truth of
God to me tonight?
That if the penalty of sin is death, then death is mine
I hear him saying, “cursed are the ones who can’t abide”
The devil’s singing over me an age old song
That I am cursed and gone astray
Singing the first verse so conveniently over me
He’s forgotten the refrain.
JESUS SAVES!!!

As a friend and co-worker of Michael’s I thought I would offer up the following defense, though I am quite sure it is unnecessary. The following are simply my thoughts as to the validity of singing such an apparently controversial song.

1. The message is Biblically-accurate
2. The method is Biblically-established
3. The minister is Biblically-faithful


1. The message is Biblically-accurate

The song is derived from Galatians 3:10-13 which reads:

For as many as are of the works of the Law are under a curse; for it is written, "CURSED IS EVERYONE WHO DOES NOT ABIDE BY ALL THINGS WRITTEN IN THE BOOK OF THE LAW, TO PERFORM THEM." Now that no one is justified by the Law before God is evident; for, "THE RIGHTEOUS MAN SHALL LIVE BY FAITH." However, the Law is not of faith; on the contrary, "HE WHO PRACTICES THEM SHALL LIVE BY THEM." Christ redeemed us from the curse of the Law, having become a curse for us--for it is written, "CURSED IS EVERYONE WHO HANGS ON A TREE"

Satan is indeed the father of lies (John 8:44), who has come to steal, kill and destroy (John 10:10). No man will ever be good enough and so all such hope is no hope at all (Romans 3:20).

Does Satan literally sing and preach accusation over us? No, but it is a song and that involves poetry and symbolism. We do know that Satan is the accuser (being the Hebrew term for it) and even that he is said to constantly make accusation against the brethren day and night (Revelation 12:10).

The fact is the law brings forth a curse and that all who rely upon this law are therefore under the curse. Since none of us are able to stand up to the law’s demands, we are worthy of the curse and unworthy of life. If that is the accusation leveled against us by Satan, then he is right. We are not worthy of anything but wrath!

Just because he is the father of lies, that doesn’t mean that everything he says is a complete falsehood. Rather, he masquerades as an angel of light (2 Corinthians 11:14) and perverts and corrupts the truth to suit his malicious purposes (see Genesis 3). He twists and bends the truth just enough.

The song tells a truth. All truth is God’s truth. Truth is good.

2. The method is Biblically-established

Some complaints hinted that a song which focuses so much of the text upon Satan is therefore a song chiefly concerned with Satan. However, the fact that we sing about something doesn’t mean that we are praising the thing about which we are singing. Furthermore, don’t a vast number of Psalms direct a great many words toward speaking of the unrighteous and the enemies of the Psalmist? Would singing that Psalm therefore indicate a perverse praise of such enemies? Hardly! The Scriptures are replete with examples of a similar method of using the enemies of God to contrast the righteous and using examples of sin to establish the faithfulness of Christ’s triumph over it.

One expressed concern involved the fact that Jesus was not explicitly mentioned until the end of the song. However, such concern is unwarranted for a couple of reasons. First, the gospel is founded on the inability of man to fulfill the law. Without the bad news, there is no good news. We must start with a problem before a solution makes sense. Second, the nature of biblical revelation is explicitly progressive. The Bible starts with the goodness of Eden, but it takes some thousands of pages until we again get to perfection. It takes an entire Old Testament before we explicitly meet the Son of God and an entire gospel before we find its heart, the slaughter and resurrection of Christ. The Bible utilizes the literary method of suspense to dramatize the uniqueness and power of salvation. The song should not be faulted for doing a similar work.

3. The minister is Biblically-faithful

Some complaints, as mentioned, questioned the maturity or wisdom of Michael in choosing such a song, concerned that there is no process by which songs are filtered for theological content. As to this concern that Michael acts as a Lone Ranger in choosing songs, with no oversight whatsoever, there should be no apprehension. A number of times, I and other pastors have received phone calls and/or e-mails from Michael as to the theological content of the songs which are sung. I have hardly heard a single new song introduced which has not been adequately thought through by various pastors.

In addition, Michael is a true student of the word. So passionate is he for teaching God’s truth that he leads his team in regular meetings in which he works through the doctrines presented in Grudem’s, Systematic Theology. Not normal fare for a worship pastor, I am sure.

To be perfectly honest, I have yet to meet another worship pastor (not that there are none out there) with an equaled passion for doctrinal purity and for using the media of song to teach the beautiful truths of Christ to the church. I am ever thankful that I can rest easy in trusting that Michael will not lead the hearts or minds of the flock away from the Shepherd.

Conclusion:

I certainly understand that some people did not enjoy the song, but my hope is that we will all recognize that dislike alone should not open the door for criticism. Hopefully all who have concerns will recognize that the issue is not one of wisdom, but personal preference. True, the song is not inerrant (not much is), but it did not violate Scripture. Furthermore, the congregation wasn’t even led to participate in singing the song. Rather, truth, in a creative manner, was sung over the audience. We were told to listen and absorb. We must keep in mind that not all share our preferences and desires.

Lastly, I thought I would mention the fact that a number of congregants were deeply touched by the message. Tuesday morning I received an e-mail from a friend speaking of the depth of worship he experienced in having woken up the night before with the words of the song in his mind. As he pondered the words over and over, he realized not only the validity of the message, but also his own frailty in having bitten the bait so often. Just this very evening I came home to find one of my roommates listening to the song. When I asked him his thoughts on it, he shared that he had been meditating on the message for the past couple of days. Over and over he listened to the song while praying that he might remember the refrain. The gospel demands that we not only remember that Jesus saves, but that we remember from what it is that we are saved (notice all the commands to remember throughout Scripture).

The truth is that we all have our own feelings and preferences. Some people were ambivalent toward the song, some people were frustrated, but others were broken, encouraged, edified and taught by it. It is painfully clear that no person, no church, no church service and no song can please everyone. We are all different and God has wired and gifted us in different ways. These distinctions should be embraced.

Let us not fall victim to judging people or things by a yoke which is not justified. The fact is that Michael chose a song which violated neither Scriptural truths nor principles. Let us remember the lies and, ultimately, the truth which sets us free – Jesus saves!

Amen.

-Geoff Ashley