A Response

To Mitch, Tyler, Shane, and Aaron

Thoughtful and theologically correct, your open letter fails to be relevant to the topic at hand because your main point unfairly characterizes the song’s lyrics and intent.

Your misstep originates in the grammatical syntax of the phrase “someone worth dying for.” In your letter, you define worth as “excellence of character or quality as commanding esteem.” If this were the proper definition for the phrase, then the letter would be fine. I agree with the theological content as presented. Sadly, you have defined worth as a noun -- a person of worth -- and that is incorrect. Worth is acting as a preposition, which incontestably alters the word’s, phrase’s, and song’s meaning. As a preposition, worth is defined as “important enough to justify (what is specified)” (Dictionary.com) The proper definition alters what you perceived to be the songs “misguided” theology to the point where your criticisms have little validity.

Worth, in the phrase “someone worth dying for,” signifies that the one who died found us important or valuable enough to die for. It is important to understand that this has no relation to our worth, before or after salvation. It has nothing to do with our being able to command esteem or how holy we are. It simply signifies that he found dying for us to be a justifiable act. If you disagree that Christ found it justifiable to die for us, then you must question whether he would have come at all, and you should inevitably come to the answer no. For an omniscient and perfect God could not do something he could not justify. He would be forced to be the opposite of himself, and then he would be no God at all.

I may be worthless and totally depraved, but God decided it was “worth dying for” me, and you, and everyone else. I cannot answer why, but in his grace he did. This is the song’s boast, grace and grace alone, not what you have written into it.

With this in mind, your arguments are more “misguided” than the song’s doctrine. What you argue for is exactly what the song is proclaiming. It is a proclamation of God’s love and the consolation that we should take in the fact he bent to help us. You are shadow boxing a monster of your own creation. Your final point is also muted by the “worth(’s)” grammatical function, which you erroneously claim points inwardly. As a preposition though it puts emphasis on the one who is dying and his choice. The song can best be summed up with your own words, “ We feel more loved when we see that Christ loves us despite our extreme wickedness.”

As I said I am not disagreeing with your theology, just with how you applied it to the song. You should be more careful when you define words, because words are power. Of course the song may have a number of theological discrepancies, but you did not point any of them out. Its a great discussion, and I would love to hear back from you all.

Pax Christi
Mike Medeiros
Edited by Garrett Furnari

6/22/2011

Obama speaks people listen
Our men in uniform return
Yet Taliban guns still glisten
The Afghan people do we spurn?


Drugs still flow across the border
Hillary promises more aid
Money cannot remake order
Better to have housewife Bill spayed


In Africa Ghaddafi yells
That NATO simply plays unfair-
But to his, he is many hells
Libyans laugh- utter despair

Rhymes are my vicodin of choice

Against the news - couplets have voice news - couplets have voice