Disappointment Sunday...
Over the years, I've heard people rant and rave about this book called "Wild at Heart" by John Eldridge. So over the weekend, I decided I would give it a shot. I'm saddened to say that I was unimpressed. And to a degree, shocked that some people endorse some of the things said in that book. If you'll allow me, I'd like to offer my opinions. If you don't want to hear them, don't read on.
He contends in his book that all men "...have a battle to fight, an adventure to live, and a beauty to fight for." Well, I feel that I, being a man, have a right to contest that view. In many of the chapters he almost paints a picture of men being violent, danger seeking psychopaths bent on destruction and anarchy. This is probably a good description of the man who lives solely for himself free of the social boundaries or missing the love of God completely, but certainly not Christian men. An example of this would be in one of his chapters where he re-tells the story of his son being sullen at home after being beaten up by a bully at school. He tells his son to fight back, and of course he predicts that I will argue with him, so he tells us that the passage about turning the other cheek has been misquoted. He does not however, tell us how to properly interpret it. N.T. Wright offered a historical context for what the passage means in his book, 'The Original Jesus' and explained that you turn the other cheek so that whoever hit you would be forced to hit you open handed, and in doing so, recognize that you were an equal and worthy of respect. Maybe I remember that incorrectly, but nevertheless, I don't think that fighting back would have helped. First off, he probably would have gotten whipped pretty good and that helps nothing, and if he fights back and wins, then violence is now glorified in this kids life as a means of conflict resolution. There's a difference between letting someone know that you do not fear them, and fighting back.
This idea that all mean seek danger is, at least I believe, a bit misplaced. I don't believe men desire danger at all, I believe they desire freedom. That sometimes leads us to dangerous things, but that is not the root of it. Why do young boys want to jump off things and climb all over stuff? It's because mom and dad said they couldn't. Children desire to be unfettered and free, and the more constraints we put on children, the more they wish to be rid of them. Of course that's why children, especially boys don't like school. It's a giant prison. We all know, as adults, the benefits of schooling. But to children, it can only been seen as such.
Our founding fathers were keenly aware of this desire when they wrote that all men "...are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable rights, that among these are life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness." (Declaration of Independence) Liberty from oppressive governments was, I believe, the object of their meaning in this particular case. But it speaks to a natural desire in all men to be free. I don't have much of a desire for danger, and it's not because I'm scared, it's because danger usually results in injury. They're probably labeled dangerous because other men have already fallen victim. I've broken enough bones in my life to know that being laid up for months with restricted mobility (or a lack of freedom if you see it my way) is no fun at all. Take what Wayne Cordeiro said to us last week in his message for the One Prayer series. He talked about wisdom and in the beginning he used the illustration of slamming into a wall and breaking our nose. We only have to do that once to know we should avoid that. Me abstaining from dangerous activities comes not from a spirit of timidity or fear, but it comes from wisdom. That's probably why I don't play dodgeball anymore. (inside joke)
I could go on about this but I will leave it here. Please remember that this is all opinion, as was most of his book I believe, so we're probably both nuts. But in summation I will say this. He would probably have been better off to leave the desires of man at "Life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness."
He contends in his book that all men "...have a battle to fight, an adventure to live, and a beauty to fight for." Well, I feel that I, being a man, have a right to contest that view. In many of the chapters he almost paints a picture of men being violent, danger seeking psychopaths bent on destruction and anarchy. This is probably a good description of the man who lives solely for himself free of the social boundaries or missing the love of God completely, but certainly not Christian men. An example of this would be in one of his chapters where he re-tells the story of his son being sullen at home after being beaten up by a bully at school. He tells his son to fight back, and of course he predicts that I will argue with him, so he tells us that the passage about turning the other cheek has been misquoted. He does not however, tell us how to properly interpret it. N.T. Wright offered a historical context for what the passage means in his book, 'The Original Jesus' and explained that you turn the other cheek so that whoever hit you would be forced to hit you open handed, and in doing so, recognize that you were an equal and worthy of respect. Maybe I remember that incorrectly, but nevertheless, I don't think that fighting back would have helped. First off, he probably would have gotten whipped pretty good and that helps nothing, and if he fights back and wins, then violence is now glorified in this kids life as a means of conflict resolution. There's a difference between letting someone know that you do not fear them, and fighting back.
This idea that all mean seek danger is, at least I believe, a bit misplaced. I don't believe men desire danger at all, I believe they desire freedom. That sometimes leads us to dangerous things, but that is not the root of it. Why do young boys want to jump off things and climb all over stuff? It's because mom and dad said they couldn't. Children desire to be unfettered and free, and the more constraints we put on children, the more they wish to be rid of them. Of course that's why children, especially boys don't like school. It's a giant prison. We all know, as adults, the benefits of schooling. But to children, it can only been seen as such.
Our founding fathers were keenly aware of this desire when they wrote that all men "...are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable rights, that among these are life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness." (Declaration of Independence) Liberty from oppressive governments was, I believe, the object of their meaning in this particular case. But it speaks to a natural desire in all men to be free. I don't have much of a desire for danger, and it's not because I'm scared, it's because danger usually results in injury. They're probably labeled dangerous because other men have already fallen victim. I've broken enough bones in my life to know that being laid up for months with restricted mobility (or a lack of freedom if you see it my way) is no fun at all. Take what Wayne Cordeiro said to us last week in his message for the One Prayer series. He talked about wisdom and in the beginning he used the illustration of slamming into a wall and breaking our nose. We only have to do that once to know we should avoid that. Me abstaining from dangerous activities comes not from a spirit of timidity or fear, but it comes from wisdom. That's probably why I don't play dodgeball anymore. (inside joke)
I could go on about this but I will leave it here. Please remember that this is all opinion, as was most of his book I believe, so we're probably both nuts. But in summation I will say this. He would probably have been better off to leave the desires of man at "Life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness."
4 Comments:
I like the point you made, but I also liked the book.
Hope your quick trip home was fun.
i agree with you compeletly. I feel like this books gives men permission to be bone heads. While my husband and I are raising three daughters and a son, we expect the same out of each one of them. To be good people, to love the lord, the respect authority, and to always do the next right thing. There is no "boys will be boys" mantra in our house. Boys should not be excused from bad behavior based on their gender. We feel like bring all our children up in a respectful christ filled home is what God really intends!
Cool to see someone else that agrees with my husband! He was completely frustrated by the book, too. We're hoping to have you and Allison over for a visit sometime, and you guys can complain about it together . . . : )
Jeff - Way to go! It has went unspoken by a man for far too long. Yet, I kept finding that there are a lot of men who agree with you. Because the believers in the book are pretty strong and vocal about it as "the way" for all men, I think most guys didn't want to hassle with it. At the same time, it really seems to connect with a lot of guys, and so that's all cool if it helps them move forward. I'm really grateful for your courage to post this perspective. Thanks!
Post a Comment
<< Home