I’m not a huge fan of the methodology, arguments, and thinking of some of Rachel Held Evans. She is provocative and raises important issues, but I find her arguments sometimes less than compelling. She should still be read by anyone interested in issues related to gender, evangelicalism, progressive Christianity, etc.
That being said…
I’m confused about something. Apparently LifeWay will not be carrying her new book, A Year of Biblical Womanhood (Rachel explains the situation here). It’s not confusing that a Southern Baptist connected book store chain would choose to not sell Evans’ book. That makes perfect sense, given that there are some different hermeneutical methods between the two.
What doesn’t make sense is that their bookstores sell works that I would describe as being in the stream of “Word of Faith.” I’m pretty sure I’ve seen books by Joel Osteen and T. D. Jakes on their shelves.
Does anyone know why a denominational bookstore that is known for having generally conservative evangelical theology would turn the eye on those types of books but not sell Evans’? I hope beyond hope that it is not because she is a woman (they sell Kay Arthur and Beth Moore for crying out loud!). And yes, that was a joke. I’m not trying to stir the pot here; I generally enjoy the books I find in LifeWay stores! But it seems a little confusing.
Thoughts?
Luke is a pastor-theologian living in northern California, serving as a co-lead pastor with his life, Dawn, at the Red Bluff Vineyard. Father of five amazing kids, when Luke isn’t hanging with his family, reading or writing theology, he moonlights as a fly fishing guide for Confluence Outfitters. He blogs regularly at LukeGeraty.com and regularly contributes to his YouTube channel.
Luke
Did you happen to hear her on The Today Show?
She believes that the Bible is not inerrant and that her hermeneutic is to allow Jesus’ teachings to inform the rest of the Bible.
Um, could those be the reasons?
http://www.dennyburk.com/rachel-held-evans-on-the-today-show-2/
Judd
Judd,
My point wasn’t regarding why or why wouldn’t LifeWay carry Rachel Evans’ new book. My point is that if they are going to choose to keep her book out of their stores, shouldn’t they also choose to keep folks like Joel Osteen and T. D. Jakes out too? It seems a bit inconsistent.
Hopefully we aren’t judging people’s salvation on the basis of whether or not they affirm inerrancy!
As you’ll note, I didn’t suggest that Rachel’s hermeneutics are remotely close to being where I am at. The point is that Joel Osteen does not bring good theology to the table and it is much more problematic than Evans’ thinking on gender roles.
I am not there with gender roles. I am a card carrying Complementarian but you knew that 🙂
As a fellow card-carrying Complementarian, I still think there are bigger problems with Prosperity Theology than evangelical egalitarianism. Big differences… Do you disagree?
To some degree I disagree
Outside the solas, I think biblical manhood and womanhood are the most crucial thing we are facing
Prosperity nuts get sick and end up dead like the rest of us…they are seen in the press as disreputable and we all agree…evangelical egalitarianism (if you can say that – see all the ha-bub a TGC) is en vogue and more appealing and as destructive to men and women and families…
I used to believe that too. Yet even after reading all of the stuff at TGC and T4G, I can’t see it being the necessary option. It seems to me to be an antithetical fallacy. Surely there’s more options than just “Egalitarianism is the evangelical position” or “Egalitarianism is not an evangelical position.” If you read any of the scholarly literature on the subject, you’ll find a wide variety of types of Egalitarians.
Some disturb me. When people say things like, “I just think the apostle Paul was wrong in his teachings,” I’m concerned. That’s why I find Evans’ statements about her issues with Paul as somewhat revealing. I’m not a fan.
Yet when I read folks like Fee, Keener, Wright, Witherington, and even Webb, I see radically different methodologies at work. As far as I can tell, they utilize the historical-grammatical hermeneutic starting point. They believe in the authority of Scripture. They do exegesis. Surely there is a difference between these scholars and folks like John Shelby Spong and others who hold to a less than conservative approach to Scripture!
I understand that there are practical concerns about how a certain position can be destructive to families. What’s interesting is that Egalitarians say many of the exact same things as Complementarians do regarding the health and well-being of families and marriages. In honesty though, I have yet to see any of the Egalitarian marriages or families that I am aware of serve as examples of the concerns that some of the talking points that Complementarians have. In my mind, it seems like all of those talking points are fine and dandy, but do nothing for me to prove a point.
For you and I both, exegesis and hermeneutical method is the main issue. That’s where I want to keep these discussions.
Again, for full disclosure, I share the same opinion about the role of men and women that I think you do. I believe that Strauch is correct when he says, “equal but different.” I have been unable to be convinced that the church and family have different ways of approaching the issue of gender roles, as some Egalitarians suggest. But I also recognize that Complementarianism does not have a slam dunk case against Egalitarianism.
I just have no problem referring to Fee, Witherington, I. Howard Marshall, Keener, Don Williams, or Wright as within the Evangelical tradition.
Also, having seen how Prosperity Theology is affecting Third World countries, I would counter that I see it as far more destructive than maybe you’ve experienced. As someone who swims in Charismatic circles, the influence of the Word of Faith junk is more than you may realize… and it’s not good. I’d take an Egalitarian Evangelical (there, I qualified what type of Egalitarian) over a Word of Faith person any day of the week 🙂
Hey bro,
I have read Fee and some of those guys on the issue. I by God’s grace and in all humility disagree with them.
I agree with you that it is not as black and white (kind of like Old Earth Young Earth).
But at the end of the day, feminism is what drives some of the interpretations. Even the best and brightest can catch the fever by the cultural sickness. In fact, I sympathize and see the value Trueman’s comments on the issue.
Here’s the big question and goes back to a DIsqus from a few posts ago, when and where do we draw the line in hermeneutics and say, “It says what it says.” I know, I know you can point me to all sorts of problem passages (we wrestled with one last night) but we cannot continue to say, “Well that’s not what it means…” RHE does not like Paul because Paul/Holy Spirit = God says she can and cannot do certain things.
Again, I think we should let some complemantarian women comment so that they can defend themselves. LIke I texted you, my wife is embarrassed for her and insulted by her comments. Why? Because in essence she down plays the wonderful role God has given women. The we sooner we all embrace God’s different design the more we’ll have impact in the culture. The evangelical infighting is not helping. And silly comments from Calvinists (do they even understand our position) isn’t helping.
But I think scholars can be swayed by culture.
Have a great rest of the week, hob nobbing with systematic theolgicans and reading all your books (WOW! – readers of this, if you are reading this, have him send you pictures)
See, I can agree with this ^ 🙂
I think the issue is where we go from humbly and by God’s grace disagreeing with people we respect (folks like Fee) to calling for them to turn in their evangelical membership cards (not that you’ve done that, but others have).
I like wrestling with Scripture… and I want to be honest about that. I’m not happy with either full complementarianism or egalitarianism but my radically-western-philosophical-influenced mind has a hard time with paradox and tension.
I appreciate your thoughts though… they are helping me wrestle through the issues!
Thanks for the charitable hand. I too am sometimes quite bothered by Evans’ approach. If egals are going to have a popular representative, I’d prefer him/her to be someone who isn’t loosey-goosey, although I’m finding she often brings a needful voice and that in many of her posts I’m more similar than dissimilar. I was really disappointed when I first saw the project behind this book a year or so ago, as trying to do a little of everything the Bible appeared to commend for women is, of course, a poor hermeneutic and so seemed like a laughably poor way to challenge prevailing opinions. I thought she was going to give the options that either you have to take everything literally, or you might as well pick and choose. But now I see she was just sort of doing the project to start the ball rolling on deconstructing our hermeneutics in order that they might be built up again critically. That is a potentially clever and useful attention-getter. Of course, I wish she followed my hermeneutic, but alas. I may still pick up her book b/c of what a conversation-starter she has been. I’m hearing good things from friends.
While Lifeway banned the book for “vagina,” I’m guessing (or hoping) that their rather large selection of books for parents to give girls who are becoming women utilizes that word. Surely? Do you talk with euphemisms about “unmentionanables” in those books too? I’ve flipped through many but have not read them, so I cannot say. I’m guessing at the bottom line they just don’t carry her because it’s egal. All the girl or women oriented stuff I’ve found there is overtly comp. (And fwiw, the various materials for girls on becoming women and teen devotionals make me want to barf even w/ a flip through; I’m incredibly sad that these are the options for my nieces. I think I should just stay out of the girls’ and women’s sections in the future.)
By the way, I’m not sure I’d disagree with Jesus’ teachings informing our hermeneutic. I just disagree with how she frames that whole issue, by and large 😉
I disagree with the way she is using it (contra Paul).
Yeah, so you agree with my statement about the problems of her methodology. 🙂 See, we’re still on the same page.
The misunderstanding about Osteen’s books at LifeWay is common. The truth is LifeWay does not carry Osteen’s books. I think they stock a couple of Jakes’ books. But, the fact they don’t stock all of Jakes’ books indicates some kind of theological review.
Like any bookstore LifeWay will order what a customer requests. If Sue orders Osteen then refuses to pick it up, that copy may go on the shelf. This is much different from “carrying” the books.
Ahhh. Gotcha. I was gonna say that I know I’ve seen Osteen books in LifeWay stores because it always shocked me. But that makes sense. So people can ORDER that type of stuff, but can’t find it regularly stocked.
Thanks for clarifying, Jerry! I appreciate it.
I’m still not sure why they carry any of that stuff, but that’s a step in the right direction, I guess.
Although I’m not sure about not carrying things as being the answer sometimes… I find that engaging it and explaining the biblical/theological problems with it is often times more effective… but there obviously are times to draw pretty thick lines in the sand.