Featured image: Elevation Worship
Famed Reformer and firebrand preacher Martin Luther once said, “Beautiful music is the art of the prophets that can calm the agitations of the soul; it is one of the most magnificent and delightful presents God has given us.”
Music has a supernatural power to it; it can motivate an individual during an intense workout, it can sooth a restless infant, and it can move listeners to tears. Because of music’s inherent powerful nature, it can be wielded in manipulative ways; marketers carefully select music that contributes and complements the message they are trying to convey in their advertising; composers craft symphonies for movie soundtracks that are meant to amplify the emotional atmosphere of a particular scene; even preachers—in some Christian denominations—use music during a sermon to inspire their congregations.
Music is also easily accessible in our digital age; almost anyone with an Internet connection and an electronic device can stream music for free from services such as Spotify, Pandora, and YouTube Music. Spotify has more than 678 million users, Pandora had around 46 million users in 2023, and YouTube Music hit 125 million subscribers in March 2025. It is an undeniable fact that the powerful force that is music has a vast reach on the world population.
Contemporary Christian Music (CCM) has risen in popularity in relevant recent years; it is traditionally thought to have had its official kickstart with the Jesus Movement in the late 1960’s and early 1970’s. Bands such as Love Song and Petra sprung from the revival surrounding the Jesus Movement in America and a new type of music began to grow in popularity: Christian Contemporary Music (CCM)—simply put, music with Christ-centered lyrics. As years went by, more bands like DC Talk and Newsboys were founded, expanding CCM into harder rock while still retaining the Gospel-centric messaging that defined the genre.
By the early 2000’s, music became more accessible; portable music players became more advanced in their capabilities, and devices like iPods gained popularity. As these advancements aided in the faster distribution and the easier consumption of music, the CCM genre thrived. Bands like Casting Crowns, MercyMe, and artists like Michael W. Smith and Chris Tomlin rose in popularity through the early 2000’s, as the genre became further diversified into almost every sub-genre of music imaginable.
Perhaps the largest successes in the rising genre of CCM through the 2010’s, though, were modern worship bands. Recordings of worship songs from the praise team of churches such as Elevation, Bethel, and Hillsong topped (and, indeed, still top) charts within the genre; almost any Christian would be able to identify the songs “O Come to the Altar,” “Goodness of God,” and “What a Beautiful Name.” With simple but memorable melodies and Christ-centered lyrics, these praise and worship ballads skyrocketed in popularity among Christians who wanted wholesome and heartfelt songs to sing in worship of God.
Of course, however, the larger the spread of a popular movement, the larger the margin for controversy. Aside from the individual controversies of Elevation Church, Bethel Church, and Hillsong Church (which I may explore in a future article series), individual songs and their lyrics have come under fire for undermining the integrity of the Christian belief and compromising the Gospel message. In this article, I will be looking at two different songs that have been criticized for their apparent lack of theological depth, but first, let me present the rhetorical question that all Christians should ponder before criticizing music within the CCM realm: Am I following the crowd or am I critically examining the lyrics with discernment? The latter should be our approach, and “discernment” is the key word that I always keep in mind when evaluating song lyrics. So, without further ado, let’s take a look at the first song that many Christians have criticized: “Reckless Love” by Cory Asbury, who is associated with Bethel Music.
“Reckless Love” is one of the most hotly debated songs within the CCM community. Perhaps in a future article I will explore the controversies surrounding Cory Asbury himself, but for now, let’s focus on the song. The song’s primary focus is on God’s constant pursuit of His people, and the song does draw heavily on Scripture in its lyrics, such as in its first verse:
Before I took a breath / You were singing over me
(Jeremiah 1:5a, “Before I formed you in the womb I knew you” [New American Standard Bible, 2022])
and in its chorus
I couldn’t earn it / I don’t deserve it / Still, You gave Your life away
(Romans 5:8, “But God demonstrates His own love toward us, in that while we were still sinners, Christ died for us.”)
So where is the controversy? The song appears solid and Scripture-based, and its main theme is one of penitence and gratitude that God would save us mere humans even though we deserve nothing. In the chorus, this theme is amplified, but this is where the “controversy” stems from:
Oh, the overwhelming, never-ending
Reckless love of God
Oh, it chases me down, fights ’til I’m found
Leaves the ninety-nine
I couldn’t earn it, I don’t deserve it
Still, You gave Your life away
Oh, the overwhelming, never-ending
Reckless love of God
Wait, God’s love is “reckless”? Is that really the best descriptor? The Merriam-Webster dictionary defines “reckless” as 1) “marked by lack of proper caution : careless of consequences,” and 2) “irresponsible.” At first glance, these lyrics appear to border on heresy, but if they are critically examined, there is less reason for alarm.
Something that is seen over and over again throughout the Bible is the sovereignty of God and His ability to fulfill His plans through means that appear unorthodox to humans. Take, for example, God’s command to Abraham in Genesis 22 to sacrifice Abraham’s only son, Isaac. Outwardly, this would appear to be a tragically cruel command from God, but it is later revealed that the circumstance was meant to test Abraham’s faith, and Isaac was spared. Another instance of God’s seemingly “reckless” behavior can be seen in John 11: Jesus received word that His friend Lazarus was dying, yet Jesus delayed going to Lazarus until He knew Lazarus was dead. This likely appeared counterintuitive to Jesus’ disciples, but they later realized that Jesus intended to bring more people to faith through His public raising of Lazarus from the dead.
Although God’s approaches to problems throughout the Bible sometimes appear silly initially, His larger plan is always revealed to be greater than human imagination; His sovereignty overrules human expectation. The parable that Cory Asbury alludes to in “Reckless Love” is found in Matthew 18:12-14 and Luke 15:4-7, and it describes a shepherd who leaves his flock of 99 sheep to find one that strayed (drawing a comparison to God’s pursuit of individual sinners). Although this parable does not cite the shepherd’s actions as “reckless,” many people can figure through common sense that it is not a good idea to leave 99 helpless animals alone to find one that strayed. Yet, as the prophet Isaiah said:
“‘For My thoughts are not your thoughts,
Nor are your ways My ways,” declares the Lord.
9 “For as the heavens are higher than the earth,
So are My ways higher than your ways
And My thoughts than your thoughts.’”Isaiah 55:8-9
God does not need our intellect or our critical thinking skills to inform Him as to what strategies He should take to pursue lost sinners; He is all-powerful, and if it were not for His pursuit of the Christian individuals who criticize the lyrics of “Reckless Love,” they would still be lost.
I realize that Cory Asbury is not a prophet or apostle; his words are not divinely inspired, and they should not be taken as Scripture. However, what I do know is that Christians should use their discernment to identify when Scripture is being used and whether or not it is being properly contextualized. After critically evaluating the lyrics of “Reckless Love,” I have come to the conclusion that it is not as controversial as many Christians posit, and it is also important to realize that the song is not portraying God Himself as reckless; His love—by human standards—appears reckless. It doesn’t play by our rules or our expectations. That point is supported by Scripture, and it is indeed a wonderful reality that Christians should be secure in knowing. Now, to move on to the second CCM song whose controversy I will be covering in this article: “So Will I (100 Billion X)” by Hillsong UNITED.
While “Reckless Love”‘s controversy is probably the most well-known within the Christian community (part of the reason being that the apparent controversy is featured in the song title), knowledge of the controversy within “So Will I (100 Billion X)” is not as widespread. Again, like with Cory Asbury, Hillsong UNITED has attracted some negative attention as a band that I may cover in the future, but in this article, I will just be examining the song itself.
“So Will I (100 Billion X)” is a song full of rich and dramatic imagery, most taken from the story of creation. It praises God’s creativity and, as the song progresses, transitions into repeated statements of obedience to God (such as, “If the wind goes where You send it so will I”). Each progressive chorus contains different lyrics, which express love and thankfulness to God in a manner reminiscent of the biblical Psalms. However, the second chorus is where some Christians find fault:
And as You speak
A hundred billion creatures catch Your breath
Evolving in pursuit of what You said
If it all reveals Your nature so will I
I can see Your heart in ev’rything You say
Ev’ry painted sky a canvas of Your grace
If creation still obeys You so will I
So will I
So will I
Evolution in a Christian song? Not something you see every day, and certainly not something you find in a song popular in churches. Is evolution compatible with the greater message of the song? Let’s look at this critically.
Evolution (with an uppercase “e”) is different than evolution (with a lowercase “e”). The former is a belief system that holds that all lifeforms evolved from lower substances, while the latter is a branch of science that deals with the mutation and adaptation of lifeforms. The lyric in question affirms that creatures evolved “in pursuit of what [God] said,” which could simply mean lifeforms coming into being in obedience to God’s divine voice. Genesis 1:24 says, “Then God said, ‘Let the earth produce living creatures according to their kind.’” However, for true evolution to have its effect, death must exist so that weaker lifeforms are “weeded out” and stronger, more mutated lifeforms survive. Since we gather from Genesis that the Fall in chapter three was what ushered sin and death into the world, it would be foolish to simultaneously hold this view and also affirm that creatures evolved in the manner of Evolution (with an uppercase “e”).
So, what is being implied in this lyric? Is Evolution or evolution being promoted? When asked about this controversy on X (at the time, Twitter) in 2018, Joel Houston—worship leader and son of Hillsong Church’s founders—clarified that he meant the lyric to be reflective of God’s nature and the way He creates, not as an affirmation of evolution being the source of life. Houston later returned to the discussion with his definition of evolution as featured in the song: “Context—things evolve, they change and adapt, I DON’T believe in evolution as a theory of SOURCE, I believe it’s merely a pattern of nature.”
The Merriam-Webster dictionary has several definitions for “evolving,” including simply “developing,” which is not a very controversial synonym. Ultimately, the argument regarding the lyrics in this song comes down to semantics and personal interpretation of what “evolving” means in the context of the chorus.
Both “Reckless Love” and “So Will I (100 Billion X)” have come under fire within the Christian community for supposedly making God look bad and promoting the Evolutionary process. When these song lyrics are critically evaluated, however, it becomes clear that they are actually not as problematic as they are made out to be. Yes, I am aware that some people are just comfortable with replacing “reckless” in “Reckless Love” with “relentless,” or replacing “evolving” in “So Will I (100 Billion X)” with another verb, and this is a matter of personal preference. I do not think the songs should be downright boycotted, though.
There is truth within “Reckless Love” that, even though we don’t earn or deserve God’s love, He still gives it to us, which appears reckless to us but is perfectly within God’s plan. Likewise, there is truth within the lyrics of “So Will I (100 Billion X)” that God created the world and all that fills it, and He spoke creatures into being. Whether you choose to believe that God instantly made fully formed creatures or that He chose to develop creatures through a development/evolutionary process is up to you.
The “controversy” surrounding “Reckless Love” and “So Will I (100 Billion X)” largely depends on personal interpretation. Discernment and willingness to examine lyrics within both the song’s context and Scripture’s context is key to uncovering the central themes and ideas of songs.
Leave a Reply