About six years ago, while I was still actively involved at Mosaic, I was introduced to the book Wild at Heart by John Eldredge. There was just something about that book that resonated with me, drawing me in to its adventure and romance. At that point, I began a journey through the mind of John Eldredge in which I read Wild at Heart several times, journaled through it, led Wild at Heart men’s groups, and participated in other Wild at Heart men’s groups. Only after I left Mosaic and began growing again in the word of God did I become aware of many unbiblical premises on which Eldredge builds his theology.
Before beginning this review, let me say it is not my intention to diss Eldredge, only to examine his theology and exercise spiritual discernment. The word of God is a mighty sword that separates truth from error, and we are called to wield that sword. Most of the books in the New Testament were written for that very reason – to counter some false teaching that had arisen in local churches. If you examine the NT, you will see that heresy, i.e. false teachings, were popping up very quickly in the 1st century. Jesus warned about them repeatedly, and by the time Paul, Peter, Jude and John wrote their epistles, they were there (Mat 7:15; Mat 24:11; 2 Tim 1:3-7; 1 John 4:1-6; 2 Pet 2:1-3; Jude (all of it)). And what was to be the chief weapon the Christian was to wield against these false teachings? The sword of the Spirit, the Word of God (Eph 6:17; Heb 4:12).
Eldredge is a Proponent of Open Theism
Eldredge says right out that he is not an Open Theist, but the preponderance of his writings do not support this statement. (Open theism, or the Openness of God, is the unbiblical theological position that God does not and cannot know the future.) Eldredge, in describing God, says that though He does not know the future, He is very quick on His feet because He’s so smart and because He has a vast amount of experience, having been around for so long. So when Adam and Eve sinned in the garden, God, being quick on His feet, came up with Plan B, what we call the history of redemption. Since then, He still had no way of knowing how people would respond. God was so angry when they built that golden calf that He almost wiped Israel out, but He changed His mind and forgave them.
Eldredge says that there is something wild about the heart of God that makes Him take those kinds of risks. But by saying this, he is implying that God is ignorant of the definite outcomes of man’s choices. Whether he intends this or not, Eldredge theology is an affront to the sovereignty and omniscience of God.
To make his point, Eldredge keeps restating that man is made in God’s image, concluding from this is that we discover the nature of God’s heart by looking at man’s. Eldredge’s is a classic case of man making God in his image. Let me explain. Even if we remove man’s fallen nature from the equation, the Bible is still clear that man has been and always will be inferior to God, even though made in His likeness. For instance, God created Adam and Eve. Who created God? God commanded Adam and Eve. But who commands God? God is infinitely eternal, having no beginning or end. Man is only everlasting, having a beginning but no end. God is all-knowing, including all events past, present and future (Isa. 46:9-10), but mankind, even before the Fall is clearly ignorant of certain things (Gen. 3:5). Though we are created in God’s image, He is so far above and beyond us. The bearing of God’s image distinguishes us from all the rest of God’s creation, but it in no way makes us equal to God. In fact, it is dangerous to misuse scripture in this way to say we are even like God. That was, in fact, Satan’s great sin of rebellion (Isa. 14:14) and the very temptation with which the serpent enticed Eve (Gen. 3:5).
According to Eldredge, God has no knowledge of what “could” go wrong, or right for that matter, because “could” implies possibility, which also implies uncertainty. For instance, “It could rain tomorrow,” means it just as likely could not. However, God already knows the outcome of tomorrow’s weather, whether it will rain or not. There is no “could” with Him. It either is or it isn’t, will or won’t, etc.
Eldredge says that when God placed Adam in the garden, He trusted him. Where is his biblical support for this? On the contrary, Jesus clearly did not entrust himself to other men “because he knew what was in the heart of a man” (John 2:24-25) God knew what was in Adam’s heart, that Adam and Eve would fall into sin before He even created them. Eph 1:11 says that “God works all things according to the counsel of His will.” Before time began, God ordained according to His infinite wisdom to create the very world He knew would fall into sin. And God would orchestrate all of human history for the purpose of glorifying His Son and purify for Himself a people for His own possession who are zealous for good works (Titus 2:14). In a nutshell, God had Calvary planned before Eden ever existed. God predestined all things according to the purpose of His will, both for us who are His children and for those who reject Christ (Rom 8:29-30; Acts 4:27-28).
Eldredge’s main point in all of this is that men should take risks. As Christians, there are times we are called to great risk. (Though I would rather use the word faith rather than risk when referring to a Christian’s action(s) born out of belief in God’s faithfulness, righteousness and goodness. But I am content to say that risk is rooted, for the Christian, in the grace of God, in trust in God’s very character/heart.) However, Eldredge makes a huge leap by saying that God Himself is a risk-taker. God may work in a way completely beyond our understanding, even in way that causes us to suffer. That, therefore, must be the reason that we rely not on our own understanding but in God’s wisdom and goodness, for we know that God works all things for our good according to His purposes (Rom. 8:28). With God, there is never risk because there is never uncertainty. God knows all. God knows "the end from the beginning (Isa 46:9-11)." Eldredge's leap from man as risk-taker to God as risk-taker is a non sequitur extraordinaire. Risk simply does not describe God.
Eldredge’s Theology is Based Primarily on Movies
I don’t need to tell you that Hollywood and the Bible are antithetical in their moral and philosophical presuppositions. Yet Eldredge has high praise for several blockbuster movies and several questionable characters. He praises Tristan, Brad Pitt’s character in the movie Legends of the Fall. This character is an ungodly, primal, carnal, self-absorbed pagan who ends up destroying every other character in the movie. Yet Eldredge sets him up as a role model for what a man is really supposed to be, a man’s man! Other characters Eldredge touts are William Wallace (Mel Gibson’s highly fictionalized Braveheart character), Maximus (Gladiator), and John McClain (Bruce Willis’s Die Hard character).
Wild at Heart has been a catalyst for removing the Bible from Bible studies and replacing them with DVD/VCR players. Men’s groups no longer spend time reading and “digging” into the word of God. No, men now watch clips from Braveheart and discuss how William Wallace is what a real Christian should look like - rugged, outdoorsy, adventurous.
What this boils down to is a lack of trust in the sufficiency of scripture. 2 Timothy 3:16-17 says, “All Scripture is breathed out by God and profitable for teaching, for reproof, for correction, and for training in righteousness, that the man of God may be competent, equipped for every good work.” What equips us for every good work? Scripture. It is the source for training in righteousness, correction and teaching. But that’s not enough for Eldredge. Men “need” William Wallace, Tristan and John McClain to inspire them, and they do a great deal of digging into these characters to the neglect of Scripture.
What is perhaps most striking is Eldredge’s outlandish call to men to throw off the shackles of “religion.” Now I am in agreement that a religion without a relationship with God working itself out in love and righteous fruit-bearing is both worthless and useless. But heaven forbid I be a faithful churchman who loves God and serves Him as an usher, a deacon or even janitor. No, according to Eldredge, I am not fulfilling my destiny. I was made for something more – the great outdoors.
Eldredge’s View of Sin and Redemption
Eldredge boils sin down to a personal, relational, social issue of being wounded (usually by your father) and, therefore, being damaged. I don’t recall him ever referring to sin as rebellion against God or a violation of His holiness, a falling short of His glory. No, sin is a wound inflicted upon us by someone else. Our objective personal guilt before our thrice-holy God is supplanted by a subjective emotional scar. Therefore, in order to be freed from sin, we must journey into our wound to do some introspection, some forgiving, and some healing, so that we can unveil the manly man deep inside – a man destined for adventure, battle and a beautiful woman. Remarkably absent from all this is the mention of God’s holiness, our guilt, and the need for repentance; only a call to adventure.
The Bible portrays sin quite differently. In Knowing God, J.I. Packer writes:
Before beginning this review, let me say it is not my intention to diss Eldredge, only to examine his theology and exercise spiritual discernment. The word of God is a mighty sword that separates truth from error, and we are called to wield that sword. Most of the books in the New Testament were written for that very reason – to counter some false teaching that had arisen in local churches. If you examine the NT, you will see that heresy, i.e. false teachings, were popping up very quickly in the 1st century. Jesus warned about them repeatedly, and by the time Paul, Peter, Jude and John wrote their epistles, they were there (Mat 7:15; Mat 24:11; 2 Tim 1:3-7; 1 John 4:1-6; 2 Pet 2:1-3; Jude (all of it)). And what was to be the chief weapon the Christian was to wield against these false teachings? The sword of the Spirit, the Word of God (Eph 6:17; Heb 4:12).
Eldredge is a Proponent of Open Theism
Eldredge says right out that he is not an Open Theist, but the preponderance of his writings do not support this statement. (Open theism, or the Openness of God, is the unbiblical theological position that God does not and cannot know the future.) Eldredge, in describing God, says that though He does not know the future, He is very quick on His feet because He’s so smart and because He has a vast amount of experience, having been around for so long. So when Adam and Eve sinned in the garden, God, being quick on His feet, came up with Plan B, what we call the history of redemption. Since then, He still had no way of knowing how people would respond. God was so angry when they built that golden calf that He almost wiped Israel out, but He changed His mind and forgave them.
Eldredge says that there is something wild about the heart of God that makes Him take those kinds of risks. But by saying this, he is implying that God is ignorant of the definite outcomes of man’s choices. Whether he intends this or not, Eldredge theology is an affront to the sovereignty and omniscience of God.
To make his point, Eldredge keeps restating that man is made in God’s image, concluding from this is that we discover the nature of God’s heart by looking at man’s. Eldredge’s is a classic case of man making God in his image. Let me explain. Even if we remove man’s fallen nature from the equation, the Bible is still clear that man has been and always will be inferior to God, even though made in His likeness. For instance, God created Adam and Eve. Who created God? God commanded Adam and Eve. But who commands God? God is infinitely eternal, having no beginning or end. Man is only everlasting, having a beginning but no end. God is all-knowing, including all events past, present and future (Isa. 46:9-10), but mankind, even before the Fall is clearly ignorant of certain things (Gen. 3:5). Though we are created in God’s image, He is so far above and beyond us. The bearing of God’s image distinguishes us from all the rest of God’s creation, but it in no way makes us equal to God. In fact, it is dangerous to misuse scripture in this way to say we are even like God. That was, in fact, Satan’s great sin of rebellion (Isa. 14:14) and the very temptation with which the serpent enticed Eve (Gen. 3:5).
According to Eldredge, God has no knowledge of what “could” go wrong, or right for that matter, because “could” implies possibility, which also implies uncertainty. For instance, “It could rain tomorrow,” means it just as likely could not. However, God already knows the outcome of tomorrow’s weather, whether it will rain or not. There is no “could” with Him. It either is or it isn’t, will or won’t, etc.
Eldredge says that when God placed Adam in the garden, He trusted him. Where is his biblical support for this? On the contrary, Jesus clearly did not entrust himself to other men “because he knew what was in the heart of a man” (John 2:24-25) God knew what was in Adam’s heart, that Adam and Eve would fall into sin before He even created them. Eph 1:11 says that “God works all things according to the counsel of His will.” Before time began, God ordained according to His infinite wisdom to create the very world He knew would fall into sin. And God would orchestrate all of human history for the purpose of glorifying His Son and purify for Himself a people for His own possession who are zealous for good works (Titus 2:14). In a nutshell, God had Calvary planned before Eden ever existed. God predestined all things according to the purpose of His will, both for us who are His children and for those who reject Christ (Rom 8:29-30; Acts 4:27-28).
Eldredge’s main point in all of this is that men should take risks. As Christians, there are times we are called to great risk. (Though I would rather use the word faith rather than risk when referring to a Christian’s action(s) born out of belief in God’s faithfulness, righteousness and goodness. But I am content to say that risk is rooted, for the Christian, in the grace of God, in trust in God’s very character/heart.) However, Eldredge makes a huge leap by saying that God Himself is a risk-taker. God may work in a way completely beyond our understanding, even in way that causes us to suffer. That, therefore, must be the reason that we rely not on our own understanding but in God’s wisdom and goodness, for we know that God works all things for our good according to His purposes (Rom. 8:28). With God, there is never risk because there is never uncertainty. God knows all. God knows "the end from the beginning (Isa 46:9-11)." Eldredge's leap from man as risk-taker to God as risk-taker is a non sequitur extraordinaire. Risk simply does not describe God.
Eldredge’s Theology is Based Primarily on Movies
I don’t need to tell you that Hollywood and the Bible are antithetical in their moral and philosophical presuppositions. Yet Eldredge has high praise for several blockbuster movies and several questionable characters. He praises Tristan, Brad Pitt’s character in the movie Legends of the Fall. This character is an ungodly, primal, carnal, self-absorbed pagan who ends up destroying every other character in the movie. Yet Eldredge sets him up as a role model for what a man is really supposed to be, a man’s man! Other characters Eldredge touts are William Wallace (Mel Gibson’s highly fictionalized Braveheart character), Maximus (Gladiator), and John McClain (Bruce Willis’s Die Hard character).
Wild at Heart has been a catalyst for removing the Bible from Bible studies and replacing them with DVD/VCR players. Men’s groups no longer spend time reading and “digging” into the word of God. No, men now watch clips from Braveheart and discuss how William Wallace is what a real Christian should look like - rugged, outdoorsy, adventurous.
What this boils down to is a lack of trust in the sufficiency of scripture. 2 Timothy 3:16-17 says, “All Scripture is breathed out by God and profitable for teaching, for reproof, for correction, and for training in righteousness, that the man of God may be competent, equipped for every good work.” What equips us for every good work? Scripture. It is the source for training in righteousness, correction and teaching. But that’s not enough for Eldredge. Men “need” William Wallace, Tristan and John McClain to inspire them, and they do a great deal of digging into these characters to the neglect of Scripture.
What is perhaps most striking is Eldredge’s outlandish call to men to throw off the shackles of “religion.” Now I am in agreement that a religion without a relationship with God working itself out in love and righteous fruit-bearing is both worthless and useless. But heaven forbid I be a faithful churchman who loves God and serves Him as an usher, a deacon or even janitor. No, according to Eldredge, I am not fulfilling my destiny. I was made for something more – the great outdoors.
Eldredge’s View of Sin and Redemption
Eldredge boils sin down to a personal, relational, social issue of being wounded (usually by your father) and, therefore, being damaged. I don’t recall him ever referring to sin as rebellion against God or a violation of His holiness, a falling short of His glory. No, sin is a wound inflicted upon us by someone else. Our objective personal guilt before our thrice-holy God is supplanted by a subjective emotional scar. Therefore, in order to be freed from sin, we must journey into our wound to do some introspection, some forgiving, and some healing, so that we can unveil the manly man deep inside – a man destined for adventure, battle and a beautiful woman. Remarkably absent from all this is the mention of God’s holiness, our guilt, and the need for repentance; only a call to adventure.
The Bible portrays sin quite differently. In Knowing God, J.I. Packer writes:
By sin the New Testament means…rebellion against, defiance of, retreat from, and consequent guilt before, God the Creator; and sin, says the New Testament, is the basic evil from which we need deliverance, and from which Christ died to save us (1973:171).
Sin is spiritual death (Rom. 5:12ff; Eph 2:1-2). Sin is rebellion against God, even making oneself out to be God (Isa. 14:13-14). Sin is falling short of the glory of God (Rom. 3:23). Sin incurs the wrath of God in increasing measure (Rom. 1). Sin, not “the wound,” is a man’s core problem. Sure there are wounds, and many of them are inflicted on us by others we trusted at one time. But the root of it all is sin, and sin is primarily rebellion against an infinitely holy God who is indignant with our sin (Ps 7:11). Packer goes on:
All that has gone wrong in human life between man and man is ultimately due to sin, and our present state of being in the wrong with our selves and our fellows cannot be cured as long as we remain in the wrong with God.
The problem with fallen, unregenerate mankind is that they are, as we once were, enemies of God (Eph 2:1-2). God was our enemy once until Christ reconciled us to God (Rom 5:10). This is why Jesus came into the world, to be the propitiation for our sins. Jesus endured the wrath of God for all those who would believe and receive Him (Rom 3:25). Propitiation is a biblical word that means Jesus was put forth in our place to absorb the full brunt of God’s objective wrath against us. Therefore, when we stand before God, we stand righteous not because of anything we have done or will do. We stand righteous because we were credited with righteousness through the blood-atoning work of Jesus Christ. That work was completed on the cross and fully applied to us when we received Christ through faith. Our problem, the curse of sin, was solved. God’s wrath was abated. We were reconciled to God! Sin is now our relentless enemy and will be as long as we draw breath, but we have been delivered from its dominion forever. This is the meaning of biblical redemption.
Conclusion
Christ’s work of redemption is fairly straight forward New Testament theology. Yet it is strangely absent from Wild at Heart, along with other pop-Christian books, that actually present a distorted and false gospel laced with pop-psychology or a man-centered or self-esteem gospel that is leading thousands of people away from sound biblical truth.
Conclusion
Christ’s work of redemption is fairly straight forward New Testament theology. Yet it is strangely absent from Wild at Heart, along with other pop-Christian books, that actually present a distorted and false gospel laced with pop-psychology or a man-centered or self-esteem gospel that is leading thousands of people away from sound biblical truth.
Furthermore, I cannot subscribe to the defense given for books like Wild at Heart, that God uses these books in spite of their theological flaws. I find it hard to believe that God would use something that robs Him of His glory and gives it to men, something that diminishes God’s name for the sake of man, something that directly and blatantly contradicts His written word. Books like Wild at Heart might “help” people with their psychological issues, emotional problems and “wounds.” But true spiritual healing comes from God’s prescribed means of grace that are outlined in His word. Anything outside this is highly suspect. This, along with the previously mentioned reasons, makes Wild at Heart irreconciliable with the truths of Scripture.
___________________________________________________________
For further study, here are three suggested reviews of Wild at Heart:
2 comments:
Thank you for sharpening me. Prov 27-
I too have seen that Eldridge has sometimes said things that go pretty much against the Word. For Example, the thing about him telling his son to seek revenge on a bully. I think self defense is one thing and revenge a total other.
Anyway, Thank you for pointing out the rolemodels, and the difference between faith and risk taking. I appreciate this article.
David in Arkansas
Thanks David. Please help me out by spreading the word. So many people are deceived by false teachings. Help me to "contend for the faith once for all delivered to the saints" (Jude 3).
Soli deo gloria,
Ron Foster
Post a Comment