# Is God "romantic" !?



## cris (Aug 15, 2010)

I heard this from Tommy Nelson, in a sermon about Song of Solomon.
Overall, I think he is sound in his teaching, but I am really uncomfortable with this idea of God being "romantic".
I think this is walking on very thin ice, to say something like that.
His reasoning goes like this: we have to be romantic, because God is, too. 
Some go the other way around: "since we are romantic, then God is, too" (beacuse we are created in His image). John Eldredge is one of them. 
I claim that just because we are created in God's image and we are romantic, it is not proof that God is. If God were, a verse showing that would be in the Bible (like we have for all of the other attributes of God)
What do you think?
Thank you very much for your thoughts.
Cristian


----------



## AThornquist (Aug 15, 2010)

"God is romantic." What does that even _mean_?


----------



## cris (Aug 15, 2010)

I don't think I could explain it, actually.
I guess, he means similar to ours being romantic.
In any case, after talking to the Tommy Nelson fans, it looks like arguments like "ok, a man can be romantic in regards to his wife, but how can that apply to God!?" are not working. They hold that "we are made in His image", so that proves Nelson's point.


----------



## toddpedlar (Aug 15, 2010)

Seems to me this is simply hogwash, pandering to what's popular for men to be like, and a gigantic waste of time. One ought to simply teach the word (in-depth and detail), preach the gospel of sovereign grace, and stop trifling with idiotic pap like "God is romantic - now, men, go be romantic!".


----------



## cris (Aug 15, 2010)

Ok, Todd, I agree with you, but what do you think would be a good argument against this kind of reasoning?
This was actually my question, but I guess I didn't make it clear enough.


----------



## TaylorOtwell (Aug 15, 2010)

cris said:


> Ok, Todd, I agree with you, but what do you think would be a good argument against this kind of reasoning?
> This was actually my question, but I guess I didn't make it clear enough.



I'm not Todd (obviously), but a good argument would probably be that the Bible doesn't state that God is romantic. It states that our Lord is loving, just, holy, righteous, jealous, good, and merciful, but it never speaks of Him as _romantic_.

Todd's right. Preach law and gospel from the Scriptures and you won't need to talk about God being "romantic".


----------



## toddpedlar (Aug 15, 2010)

cris said:


> Ok, Todd, I agree with you, but what do you think would be a good argument against this kind of reasoning?
> This was actually my question, but I guess I didn't make it clear enough.


 
Well, reasoning from man's character to God's is right out. Eldredge is off the deep end with that reasoning, and I think it shamefully ignorant at best. 

Where do we get any notion whatsoever that "God is romantic"? It can only come from observation about man... it most certainly can NOT come from Scripture - as 
Taylor has already said, there is not a microgram of evidence from Scripture that God is in any sense of the word "romantic". To argue that God is "romantic" I suspect
strongly goes hand in hand with folks who believe "God woos humans", rather than we who are Reformed, who know that God saves His own by working faith in them and
uniting them to Christ. There's no room in Reformed Christianity for a "beckoning God who is romantically pursuing us" (which is where Eldredge and his ilk go, which
leads to heretical pictures of God). 

The short answer is I cannot see any Biblical justification whatsoever for a God who is "romantic" as we understand the term "romantic". I really think those who
argue thusly are arguing from man to God, and not from Scripture, which is our perfect revelation of who God is. I'm not sure the discussion about this need go
anywhere else except to have the claim denied on the basis of zero Scriptural evidence for those who argue that God is "romantic".


----------



## BJClark (Aug 15, 2010)

I guess it really depends on what a person deems 'romantic', men and women tend to think of 'romance' in light of different things.

God sent His Son Jesus to the Cross to save us from our sin; could be seen in a man's actions to rescue and protect a woman or child..it could be seen as where the knight in shining armour came from...not the other way around..

Greater love has no one than this, that someone lay down his life for his friends.

Would a husband lay down his life for his wife and children? That would/could be viewed as romantic..

It could be looked at a gesture done out of love for another..and God has certainly shown many gestures of love towards his children, and Christ His Bride..

To some women, romance is not about flowers and such things, it's about showing your love in various ways, and God shows His love towards us in many ways..


----------



## TaylorOtwell (Aug 15, 2010)

toddpedlar said:


> cris said:
> 
> 
> > Ok, Todd, I agree with you, but what do you think would be a good argument against this kind of reasoning?
> ...



Good point. I didn't initially make the connection with the "wooing" theology that seems to be present these days.


----------



## ClayPot (Aug 15, 2010)

cris said:


> Ok, Todd, I agree with you, but what do you think would be a good argument against this kind of reasoning?
> This was actually my question, but I guess I didn't make it clear enough.


 
A few thoughts. Their argument is either one of two things:

1. God is romantic. Since we are created in his image, we ought to be romantic.

First, the premise has to b proven for the conclusion to follow (even though it doesn't follow then). They are claiming that God is romantic. Have them show you a single passage of Scripture where God is portrayed to be romantic.

2. If was have a characteristic that it must be true of God since we are created in his image.

This is absurd. We are sinners. Since we are created in God's image, God must be a sinner too! Obviously, this line of reasoning is false.


----------



## cris (Aug 15, 2010)

Joshua, thanks for your reply (and everyone else who did as well)
I tried the "show me a verse in the Bible" but they wouldn't "buy" it.
The worship/sinners argument is very good.
I will try that.


----------



## CharlieJ (Aug 15, 2010)

I think, when properly clarified, and with attention to the analogical nature of predication concerning God, this statement is true. In Hosea, God is presented as a husband wooing his unfaithful wife. God initiates, He pursues, He entreats, He speaks gently. Much of this imagery is found in Isaiah as well.

Wherever we see real love among humans, it is an analogical reflection of the love which has always existed in the Trinity. If pure marital love is romantic, then that romance is an analogical reflection of God's. It is a mystery out of which we can generate rich meditation. Of course, to attempt to make a 1-to-1 correlation between human romance and divine romance (or between human anything and divine anything) is foolish. However, it is absolutely true to say that our romance is possible because God is love and love comes from God and our love images God's love. 

I do see some danger in simply making the statement "God is romantic" without qualification. Many people's concept of romance may not be in line with Scriptural love.


----------



## Jack K (Aug 15, 2010)

It's more than just Hosea, of course. God uses husband imagery to describe himself in many places. He is the "jealous" God whose name is Jealous. We are his "bride."

So... I agree with the posts that object to the loose, lovey-dovey view of God-as-romantic. And I agree we must not see him as some desperate suitor hoping we will throw a little attention his way. But I do think we _can_ rightly describe God as romantic in some senses of the word. I would not reject the "romantic" description out of hand just because it's become fashionable for some lightweight teachers to use it in a lightweight way. The husband imagery (and romance is part of that) is actually deep, powerful and biblical.

So my answer is that it depends on what you mean by "romantic."


----------



## Peairtach (Aug 31, 2010)

Some of us - like the Lord Jesus Christ and the Apostle Paul- don't have the opportunity to be romantic. It is not an essential attribute of Man, although it was clearly created by God to be a pointer to something greater i.e. God's - and God in Christ's - relationship to the Church.

*Quote from Jack*


> We are his "bride."



The Church can also become Babylon the Whore.


----------



## SolaScriptura (Aug 31, 2010)

What is romance? What does it mean to be romantic?


----------

