Photo by Kane Reinholdtsen
Delirious? began their career in 1992 as the band The Cutting Edge, performing their first youth outreach event “Cutting Edge” in Littlehampton, West Sussex attempting to become fishers of men. Cutting Edge events played throughout England for three years to increasingly larger crowds, eventually reaching over 4,000 strong. They later broke up in 2009.
The Cutting Edge became Delirious? in 1997, choosing a band name that wreaks havoc on spellcheckers, releasing their first album King of Fools, peaking at #13 in the UK album chart and eventually finding prominence in the United States. They released seven other albums and four EP’s, including:
- Cutting Edge 1 (1993, EP)
- Cutting Edge 2 (1994, EP)
- Cutting Edge 3 (Red Tape) (1995, EP)
- Cutting Edge Fore (1995, EP)
- Mezzamorphis (1999)
- Glo (2000)
- Audio Lessonover? (2001)
- Touch (2002)
- World Service (2003)
- The Mission Bell (2005)
- Kingdom of Comfort (2008)
They did not receive any prestigious awards for their work except for a Dove nomination in 2007 for The Mission Bell.
Also, check out my review of Did You Feel the Mountains Tremble?.
Note to new users: This is a different kind of review site! Read About the Berean Test and Evaluation Criteria prior to reading this review.
1. What message does the song communicate?
Delirious? decides to follow “You” and receives “Your” love that flows within them. Overjoyed with the truth they received, they offer daily devotion through praise, now and for all eternity. Their celebration may seem stupid to the world until the world chooses to follow “You”.
Who is the identity of “You”? There are a few hints that point us to Jesus and away from a boyfriend:
- Daily lifting hands
- “Your” love came down
- That the world and “we” would dance when seeing the light
Side Note: To those sensitive to massive repetition, the phrase “I could sing of Your love forever” repeats six to eight times on three occasions, with a fourth Chorus containing the phrase 21 times, plus another without “forever”.
Score: 10/10
2. How much of the lyrics line up with Scripture?
All the lyrics are in agreement with God’s inspired Word.
Lyrics posted with permission.*
[Verse]
Over the mountains and the sea
Your river runs with love for me
This is imagery used to describe God’s love that washes over Delirious?. It is the promised living water that Jesus gives to His followers, referring to the Holy Spirit (Jeremiah 17:13, Zechariah 14:8-9, John 4:7-26, John 7:37-39, Acts 2:1-13, Revelation 6:9-11, Revelation 7:13-17, Revelation 21:6-7, and Revelation 22:1-5).
And I will open up my heart
And let the Healer set me free
Delirious? follows Jesus, who frees them from the bondage of sin (Romans 6:1-11, Romans 7:4-6, Galatians 2:19-20, 2 Timothy 2:11, and 1 Peter 2:24).
I’m happy to be in the truth
Happy is he who trusts in the Lord (Psalm 34:8 and Proverbs 16:20), who is the Truth (John 14:6).
And I will daily lift my hands
For I will always sing of when
Your love came down
Delirious? offers daily praise (Psalm 145:2) because Jesus demonstrated His love for them by paying for their sins (John 3:16 and Romans 5:6-8).
[Chorus]
I could sing of Your love forever
That is, Delirious? could praise God for all eternity (Nehemiah 9:5, Psalm 30:12, Psalm 52:9, Psalm 86:12, Psalm 89:1, Psalm 115:18, Psalm 145:1-2, Psalm 145:21, and Revelation 5:9-13).
I could sing of Your love forever
I could sing of Your love forever
I could sing of Your love forever
I could sing of Your love forever
I could sing of Your love forever
I could sing of Your love forever
I could sing of Your love forever
Repeats line 1.
[Bridge]
Oh, I feel like dancing
It’s foolishness I know
Much like King David in 2 Samuel 6:14-22, who celebrated the return of the Ark of the Covenant, Delirious?’ joyful expression seems foolish to those around them.
When the world has seen the light
They will dance with joy like we’re dancing now
When unbelievers decide to follow Jesus, they will join in the celebration!
Score: 10/10
3. How would an outsider interpret the song?
Delirious? uses everyday language to communicate their message. While there are no proper names that points directly to Christianity (e.g.; Jesus, Lord, God, etc.), the aforementioned three pointers in section 1 helps unbelievers to interpret this song as Jesus descending and saving us, causing believers to eternally worship Him.
Score: 10/10
4. What does this song glorify?
It brings Him glory when we praise Jesus eternally, praising Him for intervening and saving us from our deserved fate.
Score: 10/10
Closing Comments
Delirious?’ I Could Sing of Your Love Forever is very good. It provides enough pointers for believers and unbelievers alike to think Christians are worshipping Christ, namely, daily praise, that “Your” love descended, and that multiple people dance in response.
I highly recommend this song for corporate worship.
Final Score: 10/10
Artist Info
Track: I Could Sing of Your Love Forever (listen to the song)
Artist: Delirious?
EP: Cutting Edge 2
Genre: Contemporary Christian Music (CCM)
Release Year: 1994
Duration: 6:09
Agree? Disagree? Don’t be shy or have a cow! Calmly and politely state your case in a comment, below.
*Copyright © 1994 Curious? Music UK (PRS) (adm. in the US and Canada at CapitolCMGPublishing.com) All rights reserved. Used by permission.
Updates:
02/17/2022 – Added link to a previous review in Introduction.
07/20/2021 – After prayerfully considering Q’s feedback, I decided that he was correct about “lifting hands” and the plural term “we”, that these point us away from a reasonable boyfriend interpretation. Thus, I raised the song’s score, from 5/10 to 10/10.
03/23/2021 – Updated per repetition announcement. I moved my commentary to a side note and slightly increase section 1’s score. I also increased section 4’s score, to keep it in-line with other reviews. This increased my overall rating from 4/10 to 5/10.
Comments
worshipismorethanmusic
Very interesting. I was in my late teens and Cutting Edge was something I loved.
I love that song particularly.
However, unlike many other songs, I have never really analysed the context like you have.
I have often been frustrated with Christian Artists not using God, Jesus, spirit in songs. Looking at it objectively, this is the same.
As A believer I can discern what it means, but this has made me think. Thanks
When they became Delerious, I would say they were trying to break into main stream secular world.
Cutting Edge, I would say was aimed at the churched or those on the fringes.
My favourite song was ‘This is the message of the cross’ I think that title gives it the Christian link 🙂
Vince Wright
worshipismorethanmusic,
Thank you for your comments!
I don’t find pleasure giving a song that I enjoyed growing up a low rating. I am frustrated too. There’s power in the name of Jesus, so why are so many artists avoiding that name? It makes me wonder…
-Vince Wright
racefangurl
They feel it’s more seeker sensitive? Like if they just say God or Pronouns (capital intended as their pronouns are capitalized), it won’t turn the world off like saying Jesus might.
Richard Towne
As someone who first heard and learned this song in the middle of the Charismatic Renewal in 1996, I’d say that the review simply misses the context and import at the time. No one who sang it had any uncertainty about whose love was being proclaimed. In addition unlike most of the repertoire at that time – coming from mega church Hillsing, or the Vineyard,or Nashville based Integrity, Delirious was a youth band who made good on the strong of their songs and following. The songs are as good today as 25 years ago. Finally, the reviewer leaves out the “Live in the Can” packaging of Cutting Edge 1 and 2. I still have my can.
Vince Wright
Richard,
Thank you for your comment! Any song that is otherwise unclear could certainly be used in a context that is powerful, uplifting, and God-honoring. I said something similar in my evaluation criteria page. Did you have a chance to read it? Of course, just because it has prominence in a time period doesn’t mean it’s clear in what it communicates.
-Vince Wright
cv2
As much as I love this song, It has always bothered me that the singers usually do “sing of his love forever”. What I haven’t noticed until now is how unspecific and vague it is in its lyrics.
Vince Wright
cv2,
Thank you for your comment! I didn’t either until I reviewed it.
-Vince Wright
Tabitha
Remembering our shared dislike of repetition, and combining it with the fact that this song got sung so often in my church circles, long ago I gave this song an alternate title of “I Am Sick of This Song Forever.”
Vince Wright
Tabitha,
Thank you for your comment!
I can sympathize! I had similar thoughts when my old church frequented this song many years ago.
-Vince Wright
Dan
Hello. First time commenting on this site. I love this idea of testing the songs with Scripture.
While I am no longer a fan of these sort of songs anymore, I do think giving it such a low score in many areas mainly because it says “You” instead of God is a little harsh. For two reasons:
1. When you are writing a song addressed to God in 2nd person instead of in the 3rd person, “You” is the logical choice. I agree it’s not rich in theology, but someone who loves the Lord deeply can definitely relate to its words as their own confession.
2. I have never seen anyone to be confused with who this song is referring to, especially since the only place people will even encounter the song will be on Christian radio or at a church service. And “assuming” that unbelievers will be smart enough to figure out that this is about God, this song could show the world sees how much we (those who truly DO love Him) love and adore our God, and it could speak as a witness to them to attract them to the faith. And to quote from the Westminster Confession, “God is most glorified when we are most satisfied in Him.” This song does not say much, but it expresses at least that sense of eternal satisfaction in God’s love.
Just my two cents. Keep up the great work!
Vince Wright
Dan,
Welcome to The Berean Test! Thank you for commenting!
My responses to both points are below.
1. Second-person perspective occurs when the author directly addresses the person who is reading the text. I can see how you might argue that it’s second-person in the context of a church service, that the words we are singing are meant for God to hear, as if God is reading them. However, consider the following. If a Christian who never heard this song heard this at their local Wal-Mart, what would they conclude? Would they think the song is about God or someone else? My guess is that the latter would be more likely, even if they could use it to praise God. I realize that not everyone agrees with my opinion, that for Berean Test reviews, clarity is more important than use. If a song is inherently unclear, it makes it difficult (if not impossible) to rate.
2. Remember that example I talked about earlier, about the Christian at Wal-Mart who never heard this song? I’ve never met them either. But, I try not to rate songs based on anecdotal evidence because they are subjective. I think more from the perspective of someone who’s never heard this song when I review songs, even if I’ve never personally encountered anyone who misinterpreted this song. This helps me to think more objectively about song lyrics.
I don’t know if you read my evaluation criteria page, but I’ve written myself a back door of sorts for discussions such as this. I’ll quote from it.
“On the other hand, a low score does not necessarily mean that we should stop listening to a song. For example, a song may have high marks for its biblical accuracy, but a low score on outsider. This would be a great song to hear personally, but perhaps not one to share outside of Christian circles. Also, God can use anything, despite my own views and opinions on any song.”
If you and your church want to continue to praise and worship with this song, great! I’m happy for you! Praise God that He’s glorified through it! However, I hope this explanation helps you see why I rated it low, even if you disagree with my approach/conclusions.
-Vince Wright
racefangurl
There’s always Christian CDs or Christians with things like Ipods and music playing phones. So if somebody was in a Christian’s house or car and the song was playing due to the above an wasn’t Christian or was a baby Christian and didn’t know this song before, that needs to be considered.
Q
How could ‘Healer’–capitalized–be mistaken for a ‘loving physician’ medical doctor? And have you honestly ever thought of your primary care physician as a ‘loving physician’ that you would lift up your hands in praise to and sing of your love for your primary care doctor forever? How could ‘Your’–capitalized–be mistaken for a ‘boyfriend’?
Consider all the Christian overtones collectively: ‘Over the mountains and the sea, Your river runs with love for me, and I will open up my heart and let the Healer set me free, I’m happy to be in the truth, and I will daily lift my hands, for I will always sing of when Your love came down. I could sing of Your love forever…When the world has seen the light they’ll be dancing then like we’re dancing now…’
How on earth could such lines be ‘interpreted as a boyfriend’ like you claim? They simply can’t. Have you ever seen someone ‘daily lift’ their hands in praise over a boyfriend? If you disagree, then please explain how this could possibly be misconstrued, and also how the bridge fits in with the ‘boyfriend’ theory. Are the ‘we’ who are dancing doing so in jubilation over a collective boyfriend ‘we’ share? Or are ‘we’ dancing in celebration of the first person ‘I’s’ confessed ‘forever’ love for a boyfriend? And is the rest of the world going to see the ‘light’–whatever that means in the context of the ‘boyfriend’ theory–and going to join the rest of us who are dancing in celebration of our collective love for a boyfriend or in celebration of some other person’s love for a boyfriend? And if so, why would one’s love for a boyfriend compel the rest of us, much less unite the entire rest of the world to join in celebratory dancing over this?
Can you truly say with a straight face that someone in Wal-Mart is ‘more likely’ to come away with such a meaning?
If ‘we can ascertain’ that the lowercase ‘you’ in the secular band U2’s song ‘I Still Haven’t Found What I’m Looking For’ is referring to the ‘Christian God’–as you expressly claim in your review of that song (which you gave a 7.5 rating compared to a 5.0 rating here!)–then how could we not ascertain the same here with a capitalized ‘You’ in a Christian worship song with unmistakable Christian overtones?
I genuinely commend your efforts, your passion, and generous, humble love-of-Christ approach that clearly shines through in your comments and critiques. Very few people are willing to publicly acknowledge the errors or change-of-heart they’ve made like I’ve seen you do. I believe that quality is one of the most impressive, upstanding features of your website, and that alone deserves high praise. It is a daunting, difficult task you have undertaken, and that you have invested a tremendous amount of time in, and I don’t want to discourage you from this pursuit. However, you have also requested honest feedback so that is what I will give:
***When a secular band’s non-worship song receives a higher 7.5 rating over this Christian worship song–and many other Christian worship songs, as a perusal of ‘All Reviews’ shows–then I believe this is a sign that there is a fundamental flaw in either your evaluation criteria and/or the consistent application of them. Please prayerfully consider reviewing your entire methodology and its application to ensure that it is achieving what you intend. It seems in need of adjustment. Where precisely, I can’t say or pinpoint. But something seems amiss when a non-worship, secular song earns a higher rating than a Christian worship song on a website meant to ‘rebuke unbiblical content’ while ‘uplifting Godly music’. Perhaps, part of the problem is overemphasis. Sometimes it seems like you overemphasize or disproportionately down rate a worship song if it contains certain features. For example, I notice that you severely down rate any worship song that hints at ‘Word of Faith’ beliefs. Now I am no supporter of ‘Word of Faith’, but something seems amiss when that garners a lower rating than a secular song by a secular band that is not wholly Christian (Adam Clayton has always maintained that he is not a Christian), and that as such (i.e., a secular band) does not profess a collective belief or faith in anything at all (apart from its individual members) (And I like U2, too, so this is nothing against them; there just seems to be an inconsistency in your methodology).
Perhaps, additional refinement of your methodology and evaluative criteria is in order. For example, perhaps you should consider additionally subdividing your evaluation of whether a song lines up with Scripture by further considering if the ‘violation’ of Scripture is a violation of non-essential or essential faith/doctrinal issues (i.e., issues that are a matter of salvation). This might provide improved nuance in your rating system and not disproportionately penalize a song for a violation that is a non-essential, non-salvific/soteriological issue. You could then also further delineate between what you consider ‘more substantial/significant’ violations in the non-essential doctrines category vs. ‘less significant’ errors in non-essential doctrines.
***’As the well-known maxim goes: “In Essentials Unity, In Non-Essentials Liberty, In All Things Charity”
Vince Wright
Q,
Thank you for your feedback and many compliments!
First, I don’t typically pay much attention to capitalization in my reviews because just about everyone I know listens to music and rarely looks up the lyrics. I do my best to put myself in the perspective of the typical Christian (or unbeliever, when it comes to section 3). If what I say is true, then most people wouldn’t see “You” and would just hear “you”. The same would hold true for any other capitalization.
Second, thank you for pointing out the details of “daily lift my hands” and the word “we”. You’re right, these are good indicators that we aren’t talking about a collective boyfriend. I’ll pay closer attention to plural terms for future reviews. Upon closer examination, it also doesn’t make sense to say “Your” love came down. Down from where, Nebraska? The more I think about it, the less sense it makes.
Third, yes, I tend to offer heavy penalties when songs are unclear at the root and when there’s clear teaching of Word of Faith. The former can lead to a myriad of interpretations, muddying the waters on the author’s intent. For the latter, I see what it does to people who experience hardships and are told: “this happened because of your lack of faith”. For many, it’s damaged their relationship with God. I realize that this is a bias on my part, but that’s my reasoning.
Forth, I also tend to offer heavier penalties when essential doctrine is violated.
Fifth, I updated this review. The flaw was my evaluation of this song, which has now earned a higher rating than U2’s song. Without anything to criticize, I have no other choice except to rate the song 10/10.
Sixth, if you see any other inconsistencies, let me know.
-Vince Wright
David M
First, I really appreciate your willingness to publicly re-evaluate your ratings based on user response. This makes me more confident to come here first when evaluating song choices for corporate worship. Also, great response, Q, it was very thoughtful.
Second, this has been a valuable tool that promotes unity in our church; since, as you may be all too aware, music selection can be a critically divisive factor in worship and should not be. It is so much easier to have a healthy conversation with a church member about song choices when we are looking to the Word first and not style. It has not only helped others appreciate a contemporary song where they otherwise would not have, but also has helped me appreciate older, more “traditional style” songs where I would have previously opted for a contemporary version of.
Finally, would you consider a tool that can query songs based on verses referenced?
Vince Wright
David,
Thank you for your compliments!
For this search tool, if you’re on a desktop computer, there is a “Search Site” section on the right navigation pane. Try inputting a Bible verse. It should populate reviews where I’ve included the Verse in question. If you’re using this site with a mobile/tablet device, you’ll have to scroll down to see this section.
Alternatively, if you go to Google and begin your search with “site:thebereantest.com”, then follow it with a space and the Bible verse, it should produce similar results.
This is also useful for keywords.
-Vince Wright
Gabriel Calhoun
As always I really love your reviews. I heard the song today on spotify and I came back to look at the review that you had preivously written and too my surprise saw that you had updated your original score. I do agree with your revision.
Vince Wright
Gabriel,
Thank you for your compliment! Yes, my reviews are living documents, which show others how I’ve grown as a reviewer.
-Vince Wright