A few years ago, I read a book teaching about the Enneagram. It was a popular book then, and is still probably the top book recommended to read to begin to understand and learn about the Enneagram. As I read this book, some red flags went off for me. It seemed very New Age in its implementation and language, but at the time that’s really all I knew about it. I read the book and then put it down and didn’t care to go any further with it. I just didn’t see the need to study something I was not very interested in and I thought seemed “off.”
Fast forward to today and it seems as though most people who are in tune with culture have heard about the Enneagram or have been involved with it in some way, shape, or form. Many use the Enneagram simply as a personality test. They view it as a useful tool for learning more about themselves and how their brain and personality works. Others say they use the Enneagram for “spiritual formation,” and that the Enneagram has served to help them grow spiritually. Still others view most everything through the lens of the Enneagram, looking at Biblical characters and assigning them Enneagram numbers as a way of better understanding the decisions they made and personality flaws the Biblical characters had. If you use the Enneagram, I in no way condemn you. However, I would urge you to consider what I bring up in this post. You should know everything you can about the tool you are using.
When I was first trying to wrap my mind around the Enneagram and what it was, I watched some Youtube videos both favorable and against the Enneagram. This left me quite concerned because those who took issue with using the Enneagram as a tool in the life of a Christian brought up very valid points regarding the origin and possible Occultic nature of the Enneagram.
Recently, while doing a Bible study with some teen-aged girls from my church, this topic was brought up. I was somewhat surprised at how many of them had heard of or taken online Enneagram personality tests. This caused me to realize I really needed to study this out further and come to a firm stance regarding the use of the Enneagram. It is everywhere, even in my small-town church. If it is harmless, ok. No problem! However, I wasn’t quite sure that was the case.
I did a bit of digging and came across a book titled Richard Rohr and the Enneagram Secret written by Don and Joy Veinot and Marcia Montenegro. Yes, the title of the book seems somewhat drab, but many I know of who are theologically sound were recommending it so I picked it up and started learning.
This book is a must-read for any Christian who is concerned about discerning false teaching. If you have been involved in learning about the Enneagram or are simply interested in personality tests, you may wonder why I would even make a statement that implies that the Enneagram is in the category of false teaching.
Marcia Montenegro and Don and Joy Veinot are trustworthy apologists and well versed in the Cults/Occult. Marcia has personal, first-hand experience with the Occult and New Age beliefs. She was a certified, professional astrologer before she became a Christian. I mention this because it can be our tendency to disregard those who are in discernment types of ministries and exposing false teachings as just another person who is sensationalizing a topic for gain. This is not the case for the authors of this book. They have a life-time of experience with the beliefs they are exposing, and as Christians, it would be wise for us to at least consider what they have to say regarding this topic.
One of the main reasons this book was so helpful to me was it created a timeline of the Enneagram and the concepts within it, how it has changed through the years, who the main people were/are promoting it, and many of their personal and spiritual beliefs.
The authors of the book argue that the Enneagram really did not come from ancient sources at all, as is consistently claimed by those who are “experts” in the study of the Enneagram. Richard Rohr and the Enneagram Secret guides the reader through the history of this tool and teaching as we know it today. One will read the history of the Enneagram, from George I. Gurdjieff, Oscar Ichazo, Claudio Naranjo, all the way to Richard Rohr.
Richard Rohr was the main player who introduced the Enneagram into Christianity. His beliefs regarding creation, the Bible, sin, Jesus, the atonement, the resurrection, and salvation completely contradict Biblical teaching. However, he is the mentor of many authors and experts on the Enneagram within the Christian sphere. The authors of two of the most popular Christian Enneagram books, Christopher Heuertz (The Sacred Enneagram), and Susanne Stabile (The Road Back to You) were mentored by Richard Rohr! This should be alarming to any Christian who has read these books and used them as tools to help them in their own spiritual lives.
Although the Enneagram did not start off as a typing system or a way to understand personality, the way we understand the Enneagram today is through nine types. Claudio Naranjo is originator of the typing system we know the Enneagram to be today.
Here is an excerpt from the book:
“…Naranjo, who is credited with revealing the Enneagram’s personality types, adds that he (Naranjo) received most of the information for the types via “automatic writing.” Automatic writing is a form of spirit contact in which one opens up to a channel of communication from a supernatural source by allowing the source to move the hand and/or dictate the words (this can also be done with a typewriter or computer).” (page 68)
If you think all of this seems “out there,” I have inserted a link here in which you can see Naranjo openly admitting he came to understand information about the nine types of the Enneagram though automatic writing. He also says he made up the well circulated myth that the Enneagram is ancient. Also, if you are still skeptical, here are the same statements in their full context.
Christians should seek to stay as far away from Occultic practices as humanly possible. The Enneagram as we know it today is the direct result of the Occult practice of automatic writing, and the source is not God, but demons!
God forbids this kind of practice in Scripture. He says in Deuteronomy 18:9-14 “When you come into the land that the Lord your God is giving you, you shall not learn to follow the abominable practices of those nations. There shall not be found among you anyone who burns his son or his daughter as an offering, anyone who practices divination or tells fortunes or interprets omens, or a sorcerer or a charmer or a medium or a necromancer or one who inquires of the dead, for whoever does these things is an abomination to the Lord. And because of these abominations the Lord your God is driving them out before you. You shall be blameless before the Lord your God, …”
There are many other concerns that could be raised regarding the Enneagram, but the very fact that it came from automatic writing makes it a no-go for me. Although it has evolved and changed over the years, as a Christian, I do not want to involve myself with something that is not of God and that He strictly forbids of His followers. The Enneagram would not exist today had Naranjo not received information through automatic writing. To say that anything that comes from demons can change and morph into something that Christians should now use as a “spiritual tool” seems quite arrogant. The Bible is what equips us for every good work. (2 Tim. 3:17)
We must acknowledge the source of the Enneagram and why that poses such a problem for Christians. If you use the Enneagram and this is new information to you, I strongly encourage you to read the book Richard Rohr and the Enneagram Secret. You will find it valuable as you seek to discern what God would have you to do in regards to the Enneagram. I am not an expert on this topic, yet I do not believe one needs to be an expert in the Enneagram to understand why Christians should not be involved with it.
Also, you can find many helpful videos on Youtube where others interview Marcia Montenegro about her knowledge regarding this topic. She is a trove of really good information. This is a really good interview by Alisa Childers, and I also recommend this interview by Doreen Virtue. Doreen interviews Marcia and is also another woman who was deeply involved with the Enneagram and decided to be obedient to God and give it up. You will be blessed by her story.
I wish you all the best as you seek to follow the Lord in this area.
Jesus and John Wayne is among a plethora of similar books that have been published in the past few years. Although this specific book aims to show that “White Evangelicalism” is a corrupt system and has been a major destructive force in our nation, many others have been published in the vein of gender issues, American history, Christian nationalism, etc. They all seem to have the same goal: show that what we are seeing is nasty to its core, destroy it, and replace it with something different and better. This book is an attempt to demonize an entire subset of American Christians who are determined to hold fast to the Word of God and not change it with the times. It is slanderous. It is biased. It only tells one side of history, demonizing those with whom the author disagrees. Books like this disparage Biblical Christianity, while all the while turning your eyes towards something else. In this case- White Evangelicals.
Ironically, people in Du Mez’s camp often decry the narratives in society that presents a one-sided view of history, although that is exactly what Du Mez presents in this book. The narrative she dispenses is viewed as “acceptable” because it tells the story in a way that demonizes white Christian men, as well as implicates Evangelicals as a whole. This is a full-front assault on the Bible, and Du Mez’s narrative has the effect of undermining Biblical Christianity, based on true stories of those who have abusively and sinfully used their God-given authority. She seeks to show that the system of what she labels “rugged masculinity” (I.e. male leadership) and “Christian nationalism” (I.e. a phrase thrown around today by more liberal Christians to label those who are on a different side politically) is corrupt, and that men and women have used this system under the banner of Biblical Christianity as a means to gain power. Not only this, rugged masculinity and Christian nationalism are, in Du Mez’s view, symptoms of a deeper issue. The stories throughout this book drive a narrative meant to demonstrate that at its core, American Evangelicalism is militant. Men have hidden under the banner of Evangelicalism as a means by which to gain militant political power. They have lumped Jesus and John Wayne together. Du Mez does this without ever appealing to Scripture. She does this through painting a well-crafted narrative, implicating a Christians’ hidden motives and agendas.
What about the Bible?
For a book seeking to show that “white evangelicals have corrupted a faith,” the Bible is strangely missing from this book. Sure, Du Mez makes a few references to the Bible, but just when it fits into the narrative she is trying to tell. She will use Biblical phrases, such as “fight the good fight,” or “run the race” as a way to “prove” her narrative. She does not use Scripture as a means for determining what is right and true, only to show which verse or verses a certain group has used to support their position, whether valid or not.
If Du Mez’s view is that “White Evangelicals Corrupted a Faith,” which it is, then the burden is on Du Mez to show Biblically how these evangelicals have strayed from the truth and have promoted and taught error. The only way to do this is to hold up the beliefs of those whom she disagrees with next to the unchanging text of Scripture. Du Mez does not make any attempt to do such a thing. Instead, she makes broad assumptions about the motives of individuals, giving her the freedom to completely side-step any Biblical issues that they raise. Since she discredits individuals’ Biblical viewpoints by attributing vice to their motives for even raising such a Biblical viewpoint, Du Mez need not even address what the Bible says. Her view is that the Bible has been weaponized systematically in order to prop up militant Christian men.
Du Mez critiques people throughout this book that hold views that are directly in line with Scripture and historic Christianity. To Du Mez, their views are not valid because they have an agenda. However, the vast majority of the people mentioned in this book are solidly Biblical. By discarding their teaching, one must discard the Bible. The reader is guided to question and ultimately throw out these beliefs because they have been corrupted by wicked individuals.
There is no knowledge of the “faith” without the Bible. If one does not use Scripture as the means by which to understand God, Jesus, our own nature, the world around us, and our own personal beliefs, all we are left with is ourselves as the foundation for which to determine truth. Scripture says that those who are in Christ are members of God’s household. We know what it means to be part of God’s household because our faith is “built on the foundation of the apostles and prophets, Christ Jesus being the corner stone.” (Ephesians 2:20). Christian faith is not moldable, changing with the time. It is built upon Christ, who has revealed Himself through the Scriptures by means of the prophets and apostles. Jesus is “the way, the truth, and the life…” (John 14:6), and Jesus Himself affirmed the truthfulness of the Word of God (John 17:17). We find truth in God’s Word. We get to know Jesus through God’s Word. If Scripture is not the standard upon which we measure truth and defend truth then we have formed a faith of our own making. Indeed, we have corrupted a faith. Du Mez does not hold any of the views she despises up to the light of Scripture. She forms conclusions about theology and “harmful” doctrines and beliefs apart from the Bible. Because of this, Du Mez is actually doing the very things she accuses others of. She is corrupting a faith. A faith built upon shifting sands is not the faith handed down by the apostles and prophets. A faith that can be tossed out because of a few bad actors is not a faith with Christ as the cornerstone.
Without holding up peoples’ beliefs and actions to the Word of God and the truth revealed within its pages, Du Mez has no means by which to say that something is corrupt. If she cannot demonstrate faith in its uncorrupted form, then who is Du Mez to say that men and women have “corrupted the faith?”
Du Mez ultimately diminishes the Word of God by elevating human experience over revealed truth. It is the oldest trick in the book, stemming back to Satan’s twist of God’s Word in the garden of Eden. In essence, she uses human experience as a means by which to illustrate that God’s Word really doesn’t mean what it says.
What about all the stories?
Du Mez’s book slanders men, complementarians (a Biblical position that states that men and women’s roles are equal, yet distinct), those with white skin, those who settle under the broad banner of Evangelicalism, those who support any form of patriarchy or male leadership and strength, and the list goes on. Du Mez immediately sets herself up as the morally superior one, and those who hold different views as being power hungry, white supremacist, and dangerously militant. When speaking of a Trump rally that she witnessed, Du Mez says, “I wondered who these people were. I didn’t recognize them.” (pg. 2). She could not identify with these people. She was superior.
How does she do this? What Du Mez does in this book is use stories to drive a narrative. She uses stories to guide the reader to certain conclusions. Du Mez uses stories to demonize and pronounce moral shortcomings upon those with whom she disagrees. Within the pages of this book, you will find that Billy Graham was a horrible person, the organization Promise Keepers was filled with militant, racist men, Elisabeth Elliot was damaging with her widely accepted view of Biblical submission in marriage, James Dobson’s parenting ministry was patriarchal and oppressive, Hobby Lobby reinforces gender stereotypes, and more. You will also read stories concerning Bill Gothard, Mark Driscoll, John Piper, and many, many others who have identified themselves under the banner of Evangelical.
Some of the stories will simply slant the character a certain way, fitting them into the grand narrative she is painting. Other stories relay true and real abuses that have been carried out under the banner of Christianity. The common thread is to implicate the character’s motives. Du Mez lumps all these stories together to form a grand narrative, illuminating how all of these individuals have served to prop up damaging “rugged masculinity” and “Christian nationalism.” They do this because they are rooted in militancy and have used the “faith” to hide their true motives. She pulls all these characters together and uses them to paint with a broad brush, implicating Evangelicalism as a whole. As a result, this does not lead to clear thinking on the issues. Instead, it vilifies.
Stories can help us to better understand the truth. The problem with the narrative that Du Mez paints throughout this book, however, is that her view is that those who are holding Biblical positions are actually damaging others because of those Biblical positions. Their behavior is evidence of the system they have propped up as a means by which to help others, such as President Ronald Reagan, gain militant political power. This is all displayed in her clever use of storytelling.
Do we as Christians embrace doctrine based on narratives, or do we embrace doctrine based upon what the Bible says? If it’s anything other than Scripture, including the failures of Christians (perceived or real), we will construct a Christianity without Christ as the head. We become the source for truth. This is not Christianity. This is simply a worship of self.
An Example of Biased, Untruthful Storytelling to Paint a Narrative
The movie Fireproof was given a small sliver of mention in the book, but I want to consider what Du Mez says about it because it demonstrates the spin she so easily puts on the stories she tells. Fireproof is one that has been viewed and enjoyed by many. It is a common and known film in Christian spaces. On page 191 Du Mez explains the movie Fireproof to be “a film about a heroic but angry firefighter who feels his wife does not show him sufficient respect and turns to a Christian self-help book to save his marriage.” She says that the producer of the film was “reaching evangelicals” through “dominionistic-inspired teachings celebrating a patriotic militant Christian masculinity.” This “resonated with evangelicals awakened to the ‘problem’ of masculinity by the broader evangelical men’s movement.” She is saying that evangelicals of the time did not view men as behaving masculine enough, and this movie puts them back in their proper place as militant men.
Does that sound like the movie you watched? The movie I watched was about firefighter who had a porn addiction that was wrecking his marriage. The movie was one of redemption about a man who learned to serve his wife and untangle his life from this sinful lifestyle. It was about fighting for your marriage using Biblical principles and keeping your vows to your spouse.
Du Mez spins the movie in a completely different way. How was this movie at all about male dominion and “militant Christian masculinity?” Du Mez sees this problem of militant Christian men everywhere she looks and ascribes militancy where there is none. This film was not a “celebration” of “patriotic militant Christian masculinity.” Yet Du Mez sees Christian militancy to the be the major underlying problem of evangelicalism, so she sees it in a film such as this. Du Mez’s persistent use of footnotes makes everything she says seem unquestionable, yet the footnote for this paragraph points the reader to a couple of sources (relevant to Fireproof: A Huffpost article and a blog post) where you will find opinion pieces slamming the actor Kirk Cameron for his role in the movie and his connections with “Christian Patriarchy.” These are not unbiased sources that prove anything, just more of the same- all meant to make Du Mez’s assumptions and narrative appear be pure historical fact. This is so deceptive.
Du Mez uses persistent footnotes throughout the book. If someone could take the time to look at each one, I reckon you would find more of what is found in the above example. She is not simply using unbiased historical sources. She is persistently pulling from sources and real quotes people have said and using them to paint the narrative she wishes to paint.
What effect does a book like this have?
For the believer, the effects a book like this could have are numerous. If I were to read this book and take at face value every story, assumption, and intended implication, it would leave me floundering. This would not be because my faith is in any way built off of the opinions and beliefs of others, but because Du Mez has undermined the entire foundation on which Biblical Christianity is formed: Christ and the Scriptures. This would cause me to distance myself from the Word because she has cleverly demonstrated that actually standing firm on the plain meaning of the text of the Bible is oppressive and damaging, and those who do stand on Scripture only do so because they seek power.
Also, if I were to buy into the stories, assumptions, and implications of this book, I would be rendered ineffective. Why? Because now my entire foundation for determining truth is gone. I would begin to distance myself from other believers who believe similar things to the characters in this book (I.e. Biblical complementarianism, some form of patriarchy, strong men, Biblical submission) because I would have trained myself through this book to recognize and understand their hidden motives. They might not know that what they believe and how they behave is based in “white Evangelicalism” and “militant masculinity,” but I would have been enlightened to that fact through this book. This would lead me to question everyone’s hidden motives and ascribe sins and intentions where there just aren’t any. That’s what Du Mez does masterfully through crafting a narrative through this book.
If I were to buy into the stories, assumptions, and implications of this book, I would withdraw myself from any sort of political involvement. Du Mez asserts that Christian political involvement is simply used as a means by which to gain power. She creates a false dichotomy between faith and politics, implying that they should be separate and need not affect each other. This takes the voices and influence of Christians out of the public sphere and makes it a purely private matter. Of course, Christians who advocate for causes left of center are exempt from this because Du Mez demonstrates that those on the right have corrupt motives.
If I were to buy into the stories, assumptions, and implications of this book I would not only do all the above, but I would devote my future faith walk to the task of dismantling this harmful ideology. This is a deconstructionist book at its core, and Du Mez admits that on the last page. She says, “Appreciating how this ideology developed over time is also essential for those who wish to dismantle it. What was done might also be undone.” (pg. 304)
Conclusion
To wrap it up, Du Mez said something toward the beginning of her book that I thought was spot on. On page 5, Du Mez says, “When Evangelicals define themselves in terms of Christ’s atonement or as disciples of a risen Christ, what sort of Jesus are they imagining? Is their savior a conquering warrior, a man’s man who takes no prisoners and wages holy war? Or is he a sacrificial lamb who offers himself up for the restoration of all things? How one answers these questions will determine what it looks like to follow Jesus.”
Du Mez is right. The way we view Jesus, and consequently His Word, determines what it looks like to follow Him. If we have a low view of who Jesus is that does not align with Scripture, we are making a Jesus in our own image. That is not the true Jesus. If we lower the authority of God’s Word, submitting it instead to personal experience and the experiences, goodness, or sins of others, we are not serving and following the Jesus of the Bible. We are following a Jesus of our own making.
This book serves to undermine the authority of Scripture and of Jesus Himself. It serves to tear down the faith that many men and women described within its pages stand for. It elevates human experience and narrative over the clear teaching of Scripture. Believers, that is not how a disciple of Christ ought to live in light of who Jesus is, what He has accomplished, and what He calls us to in His Word. He calls us to humble submission and obedience to Him and His Word. The authority is not us. It’s not others. It’s Him.
If you stand on His Word, you are in the right place. A faith planted firmly on the truth of Scriptures can withstand the heat. It will withstand others who will question your motives. It will withstand the biased accusations of others. It will withstand the slander of those who wish to discredit your witness. It might not win you favor with the world, but you will be rewarded.
“All Scripture is inspired by God and profitable for teaching, for reproof, for correction, for training in righteousness, so that the man of God may be adequate, equipped for every good work.” (2 Timothy 3:16-17)
“God doesn’t need you to defend Him. He can defend Himself.”
“God’s Word is going to be preserved. His church is not going to disappear. He doesn’t need you to worry about His church and try to preserve His Word. He’s got it.”
“God doesn’t need you to defend the gospel. The gospel doesn’t need defended. ”
“Jesus will preserve His church. He doesn’t need your help.”
“God doesn’t need you to…”
Have you heard statements like these lately? They’re true, right? I believe that they are. But, so is the phrase, “You only live once.” The above statements are phrases that people say that are true, yet often something is being communicated beyond the plain words of the phrase.
Consider the phrase, “You only live once.” It is true that we only have one life to live, but how often do you hear someone say this phrase without the implication being something like, “I’m only going to live once, so I’m going to do this thing that I really want to do right now, regardless of whether I should or not.”? Not often. Probably never.
Generally when you hear statements like “God doesn’t need you” what is really being communicated beyond the plain words of the phrase is something deeply unbiblical. This is not always the case. Many people will say things like the above statements to try to silence or belittle you for standing for your convictions, for defending Christ’s church, and for defending Biblical truth because after all, “God doesn’t need you.” Right?
We can both recognize that God is sovereign and in total and complete control while also acknowledging He calls us to faithfully proclaim Him and be involved in His work here on earth.
When we purposefully say something that is true, yet we intentionally don’t state the whole truth, it will lead to an unbiblical application!
Imagine for a moment that you are sitting down with a dear friend. She has very real troubles in her marriage and wants out. She is concerned (rightly) that deserting her family will lead to bad outcomes for her children and family. She is telling you these things, asking for your advice, lamenting the decision that she is about to make. She wants to do the right thing. Then, you say, “God doesn’t need you to protect your children. He’s sovereign. He’s got it.” What you just said it totally true. Yet, you have left out other truths that are vitally important for your friend to hear in this moment! This statement that you have made if followed through to its natural conclusion will lead to an unbiblical application.
We can do this in Christianity, too. We do this in conversation when we do not want to acknowledge the things that are important to the other person: the topic or truth of Scripture that they are passionate about. Someone is passionate about the Church, and we say things like ,“God doesn’t need you to defend the church.” Someone is passionate about standing on the truth of the Word of God- “God doesn’t need you to defend His Word.” Someone is concerned that we are putting other things ahead of the gospel- “The gospel doesn’t need you to defend it. God will do that.”
We should not do this when it comes to the truth of Scripture. Paul preached “the whole counsel of God.” (Acts 20:27). He didn’t pick and choose the truth he would convey. We should not pick and choose either.
Let’s look at the whole truth for a moment.
God doesn’t need you to defend His Word, but He calls you to.
God doesn’t need you to defend the gospel, but He calls you to.
God doesn’t need you to defend Him, but we are called to represent Him well.
When we purposefully say something that is true, yet we intentionally don’t state the whole truth, it will lead to an unbiblical application!
Let’s be committed to speaking the whole truth so that we might live in a way that brings glory to God. Let’s not only speak part of the truth led by our own agenda. God deserves much better than that. His Word deserves to be handled better than that. Jesus deserves better than that. His sacrifice was costly. Let’s not be cheap in our handling of the truth.
As I have been studying the book of Hebrews, one thing that stands out to me is how Hebrews lacks any kind of introduction. There is no greeting. The human author does not identify himself. In the first verses, there isn’t even any indication about who is receiving this letter. The author jumps straight in, providing us with doctrine (right teaching) concerning the Person and Work of Christ.
What is doctrine? Doctrine is simply teaching. When it comes to Biblical doctrine, it could be described as a set of beliefs concerning a topic, such as soteriology (salvation), Christology (Jesus Christ), angelology (angels) and many more. Where a Christian derives his or her doctrine should always be the Word of God. Scripture is where God reveals to us the truths He wants us to know. All of Scripture is profitable and the whole of Scripture should be used to shape what a Christian believes.
We see in Scripture that doctrine is of vital importance. If a believer is not thinking and believing correctly, their walk will reflect their wrong beliefs. God does not only care about changing our behavior. He is also in the business of renewing our minds. This renewed mind, filled with right beliefs about God, Jesus, the Holy Spirit, Scriptures, angels and more, should result in changed living.
We see this demonstrated elsewhere in Scripture, but let’s look at the book of Titus for a moment. Titus 3:4-7 says, “But when the goodness and lovingkindness of God our Savior appeared, He saved us, not because of works done by us in righteousness, but according to His own mercy, by the washing of regeneration and renewal of the Holy Spirit, whom He poured out on us richly through Jesus Christ our Savior, so that being justified by His grace we might become heirs according to the hope of eternal life.” Here we see doctrine pertaining to Jesus and what He has accomplished for us.
It continues on. Titus 3:8 says “This saying is trustworthy, and I want you to insist on these things….” Paul is urging Titus to keep these truths front and center in his ministry. Make sure you teach these things. Don’t just teach them, insist on them! They are true. This doctrine is right and needs to be believed. He goes on “…So that those who have believed in God may be careful to devote themselves to good works. These things are excellent and profitable for people.” Do you see the connection that Paul makes there? Our believing will affect our living. Right thinking leads to right living. God is not only after our actions. He’s after our hearts and minds also. He wants us to be sold out for Him, but that should be the result of properly understood truths about who He is and what He has accomplished.
Also, it is interesting to notice what Paul is not instructing Titus to do in this passage. He is not saying, “This is what’s true for us, but maybe it won’t be true for other people in your congregation and that’s okay.” He’s not saying, “Hey Titus. If this feels right to you, then make sure you teach it to your congregation.” He’s not saying that this is just one right and acceptable way to believe concerning Jesus. He is presenting this doctrine as truth that a Christian needs to believe, and those ministering to others need to hold firm to and insist upon.
Correct doctrine comes from full submission to the truth of Scripture, not the way we feel about Scripture. Biblical doctrine is true regardless of how we feel about it or even whether we believe it to be true. The question is whether or not we will take the time to correctly understand the teachings of Scripture and apply them to our lives. Whether you submit to Scripture or not, you believe doctrine about something. Good doctrine that is worth believing is derived from Scripture.
The stakes are high when it comes to our understanding of Biblical doctrine, because what we believe affects how we live. Ephesians 2:10 says, “For we are His workmanship, created in Christ Jesus for good works, which God prepared beforehand, that we should walk in them.” God has good works prepared for those who have come to saving faith in Christ. We see in Titus that the way we live is a result of what we believe. Good works flow out of correct believing.
Our believing will affect our living. Right thinking leads to right living.
Hebrews 1:1-4 tells us many truths about Jesus. In that section of Scripture, we saw that Jesus is the creator of the universe, the perfect reflection of God, the purifier of sins, the heir of all things. Much more can be said about that first section of Hebrews. The last thing we noticed about Jesus came from verse 4, which is that Jesus is superior to the angels.
The rest of Hebrews chapter 1 expounds upon that fact, with example after example taken from the Old Testament and showing how Jesus is, in fact, far greater than the angels in position and power. He is Creator. Angels are created. He is worshipped. Angels worship Him. Jesus’ throne is forever. Angels come and go in their ministry. Hebrews 11:5-13 tells us all of these things.
As I have studied the beginning of Hebrews, one of my questions has been, “Why make such a huge deal over angels? Why does God, through the human author of Hebrews, spend such a huge portion comparing Jesus to angels?”
To the modern reader living in America, where naturalism rules and many people do not consistently think about the ministry of angels or their interaction with humans in the world, Hebrews 1 may seem unimportant. To understand its relevance and importance to the book, however, one must understand some of the background of the original readers of the book of Hebrews. To the readers who originally received this writing, the subject of angels would have been critical. These were Jewish readers. They understood angels to be one of God’s modes of communication with mankind. After all, throughout Old Testament Scriptures God communicated through angels. He gave the law through angels (Gal. 3:19). He spoke to Hagar (Gen. 16), Abraham (Gen. 22:11-18), Daniel (Dan. 10:11-12) and more through angels. Israel held that revelation from God through angels was binding. Therefore, if they were going to willingly put themselves under a new revelation from God, revealed through the person of Jesus Christ Himself, they would have to be shown that He was superior to angels. Jewish Christians who were baptized has renounced Judaism, and the temptation was to just go back to the old religious system. This was especially difficult for these Hebrew believers who were facing persecutions and hardships because they were followers of Christ.
These readers needed to understand and be reminded that Jesus, God Himself, is Superior to angels. They were tempted to go back to Judaism and needed to understand the Jesus’ revelation was superior to Judaism and the keeping of the law, even though both were from God. Jesus was superior to any other revelation that came before. Although God has used angels to communicate His message, God was fully and completely revealed through the person and work of Jesus Christ. He is the one worthy of our worship and adoration. Believers need not look elsewhere.
The rest of Hebrews 1 demonstrates just that: Jesus is Superior to the angels.
Throughout Hebrews 1:5-14, we see at least five different descriptions of Jesus that show us His Superiority to angels.
Jesus is the Son (Hebrews 1:5)
For to which of the angels did God ever say, “You are my Son, today I have begotten You”? Or again, “I will be to Him a Father and He shall be to me a Son”?
Here we see God, speaking through the human author of Hebrews, revealing that these Old Testament quotes spoke directly of Jesus. Jesus is God the Son. He is set apart in status as God’s own Son. Angels are referred to as sons of God collectively, but Jesus is Superior in that He is THE Son of God. This makes Him Deity, which sets Him apart from any angels existing. To be the Son of God is to be of the same nature as God. This is a declaration that Jesus is, in fact, God. Remember what we saw in Hebrews 1:3. It says “He is the radiance of the glory of God and the exact imprint of His nature.”
Many today will claim that Jesus never saw Himself to be equal with God and is never declared to be God. That is simply not true. Jesus emphatically declared “I and the Father are One.” (John 10:30). Many today believe in an inferior Jesus, one who is quite different that the Jesus revealed in the Bible. The Jesus revealed in Scripture is the Son of God. He is equal to God in every way.
No angel is given the same status. Jesus is Superior.
Jesus is Worshipped (Hebrews 1:6)
And again, When He brings the Firstborn into the world, He says, “Let all God’s angels worship Him.”
Here, Jesus Superiority to angels is displayed through the fact that He is worshipped by angels. Angels worship Jesus. It is not the other way around. In fact, Scripture makes it quite clear that angels are not to be worshipped. They are ministers of God, not equal with God as Jesus is. Jesus deserves our worship and is worshipped by angels.
Often, when seeing an angel, humans have been tempted to fall down and worship. We see this with the apostle John in Revelation 22:9. Angels are supernatural beings that we would be in awe to see. Yet Jesus is far above them. Let’s give Jesus the worship that He alone deserves.
Jesus’ Throne is Forever (Hebrews 1:7-9)
Here, we see two contrasting statements. The ministry of angels is contrasted with the ministry of Jesus. Jesus’ throne is permanent. Angels come and go in their ministry.
Of the angels He says “He makes His angels winds, and His ministers a flame of fire.” But of the Son He says, “Your throne, O God, is forever and ever, the scepter of uprightness is the scepter of Your kingdom. You have loved righteousness and hated wickedness; therefore God, Your God, has anointed You with the oil of gladness beyond Your companions.”
This passage is so rich! Here, God the Father declares Jesus to be God. Jesus is a righteous ruler who hates wickedness. He cannot and will not sin. Angels had the ability to sin. Many are fallen because of their rebellion, but Jesus is righteous, and will reign forever in righteousness as God in the flesh, while angels worship Him on His forever throne.
What an amazing hope we have as Christians that one day, Jesus will reign in complete righteousness and justice! This is a truth we can fix our eyes on. Keeping this in focus will equip us to face what comes.
Jesus is Eternal Creator (Hebrews 1:10-12)
And, “You, Lord, laid the foundation of the earth in the beginning, and the heavens are the work of Your hands; they will perish, but You remain; they will all wear out like a garment, like a robe You will roll them up, like a garment they will be changed. But You are the same, and Your years will have no end.”
This concept was also given attention in Hebrew 1:2, “through whom also He created the world.” Angels are created beings. Jesus is the creator. He is Superior. He is better. Angels only exist because Jesus is the Creator. John 1:2-3 says, “He was in the beginning with God. All things were made through Him, and without Him was not any thing made that was made.”
Think about this. Nothing would exist if not for Jesus being the Creator. Nothing. Jesus is Superior. He is better.
Jesus has Limitless Power and Dominion (Hebrews 1:13-14)
And to which of the angels has He ever said, “Sit at My right hand until I make Your enemies a footstool for Your feet”? Are they not all ministering spirits sent out to serve for the sake of those who are to inherit salvation?
Jesus is limitless power and dominion. One day, He will defeat all His enemies. Every knee will bow before Him and declare that Jesus is Lord. He will rule in perfect justice and holiness forever and ever.
This makes some uncomfortable because they have been taught a different Jesus. Jesus is just. His justice will fall upon all those who have rejected Him. This is a humbling truth and should cause us who know Him to be motivated to share Christ with others. I was at one time an enemy of Christ (Romans 5:10). He has gloriously saved me through His death and resurrection. He took my sin upon Himself on the cross, satisfying the wrath and justice of God. I am no longer awaiting God’s perfect justice, because that justice has been satisfied through Jesus sacrificial death. He took my punishment and in exchange, I have been given His grace. However, not all have chosen to believe upon Jesus. Have you? Do you know that if you were to die today, you would be allowed to enter heaven? If you are unsure of where you would spend eternity, I would love to talk with you and share with you from the Scripture how you can know you are right with God.
Jesus has limitless power and dominion, and one day, His enemies will be humiliated before Him. This is true from Scripture, revealed from God Himself. No angel has this power. Jesus is Superior.
Again, Jesus is contrasted to the limited power and scope of the ministry of angels. Angels minister to people, yet they only do so because God makes them to do so. They are controlled by God Himself. They are servants serving the King of Kings for the good of those who are to inherit salvation. Jesus is Superior.
So What?
Just as the Hebrew Christians needed to be challenged in their thinking and believing, so also do we. The Hebrew Christians needed to be reminded that Jesus is Superior to anything else. If they did not understand this, then the temptation would be to give in when the going got tough. We also need this perspective as modern-day Christians. Jesus is better than the acceptance of others, any comfort, any religious system, any praise, and any revelation given in the past. He is better than any other physical or spiritual thing. He is Superior. Understanding these truths should directly affect how I live my life in the here and now. Where do I spend my time? What do I devote my attention and adoration towards? Is it Christ? He is better. He is Superior.
This book is excellent and I cannot recommend it enough! Not only is Mama Bear Apologetics a wonderful book for the average Christian mama to pick up, but the topics covered in this book are beneficial to anyone: grandmas, aunts, sisters…really anyone who is with or around children or has any influence on kids. Not only will this book help you to feel empowered to be able to converse about cultural topics with the children in your life, but to also deepen and strengthen your own grasp on apologetics and cultural trends of the day. That is what I so enjoyed about this book. It helped me to be able to think through issues, pick apart worldviews, truly be able to discern truth from error, and then learn how to bring that into my everyday life and conversations. Some of the topics covered in this book include relativism, Marxism, linguistic theft, emotionalism, naturalism, progressive christianity and more. If you are a Christian concerned about cultural influences on your children or on your own faith, or just want to be able to better grasp popular cultural trends, this book will be of great benefit. Seriously. You should read it!
I worked through this study alongside the actual book with a group of women from my church. Although I didn’t particularly enjoy the style of the study guide, it did help to guide along our conversation so that we would have a productive dialogue. If you are working through the book on your own time, I wouldn’t necessarily say that the study guide would be of much help. However, it was useful in guiding a small group and having a jumping-off point from which to have a fruitful conversation.
This is just a fluff book that I finished at the beginning of the month as I was winding down my Christmas break reading. Halfway to Forever is that last of a three part series and ties the series together. If you feel like some mindless reading, the Forever Faithful series is decent. Not my favorite, but I do not tend toward reading Christian fiction as a normal part of the reading I do. I much prefer learning something if I’m going to take the time to read, so my opinion on Christian fiction you should take with a grain of salt.
Well, if you want a book that will make you think, this one definitely does that. If you are temped to discard this book as some sort of right-wing “conspiracy theory”, you should know that its author is actually a life-long Democrat. Of course, who the author is does not determine the truthfulness within a book, but if political affiliation is important to you, maybe that fact is too.
This book is loaded with history. It takes you through other pandemics and epidemics handled by Fauci in the past and also how he has managed the Covid-19 pandemic. Kennedy also walks the reader through various medical experiments and vaccine trials supported by Fauci, Gates, and those who benefit from such endeavors. If anything, it will make you step back and think about what it really means to “follow the science.”
I read this book to my kids as part of our school curriculum. They loved it and looked forward to the next chapter each day. The story is cute and engaging. It is Christian based so has lots of great messages and Biblical principles throughout.
The things that drove me nuts about this book was how some verses were mentioned out of context to prove a point that Scripture wasn’t actually talking about in context. One such commonly taken out of context verse was “I stand at the door and knock…” from Revelation. This verse was used to refer to salvation (which was based more on experience than belief) throughout the book. Also, “ask Jesus into your heart” was used many times, which is a pet-peeve of mine because it is not language used within Scripture itself.
Overall, great book and I’m glad I read it to the kids because it was a good exercise in teaching my kids some basic of Biblical Interpretation and clarity.
*I read the audiobook version of this book, so I will not be taking direct quotes from the book. Instead, my goal is to explain some of the key thoughts and ideas found within its pages.
The premise of the book is simple… “Jesus is a feminist.” Bessey does not believe that it would be accurate to say that Jesus is feminist in the way that many would view feminism today: anti-men, power hungry females who believe they can rule the world and don’t need a man to help. She believes that Jesus is pro-woman. He sees women. He regards women highly. He elevated women to a position they simply did not have in the society in which Jesus lived. While I agree with all of this, I do not believe it is appropriate to come to many of the conclusions that Bessey comes to in this book.
I have not read an author in a long time who is as gifted a storyteller as Sarah Bessey. When reading this book, one is immediately drawn in. Bessey makes the reader feel welcome, unthreatened, loved and listened to. In fact, she has the reader imagine they are sitting outside in the evening at a bonfire on a shore. The reader feels like a real friend of the author and in turn is willing to listen to what she has to say. She makes you feel seen as you read. In doing so, she pushes your guard down and you are that much more willing to listen to and believe her points, although she makes a point of stating that she is actually not trying to change your mind or get you to believe a certain way. I find this tactic very dishonest because obviously she believes that what she is trying to communicate in the book is good and a correct way of thinking. She wants you to come away from reading this book believing the same way that she does. Toward the end of the book, one will find that it is assumed that you are now going to go out and implement the truths you have learned. Of course, there is nothing wrong with someone like Bessey trying to convince you to believe what she does. The problem is that she will not admit that is what she is doing. Why write a book like this if it doesn’t serve to challenge the reader in his/her thinking?
Right away in the book, when seeking to explain the difference between the two views of women in leadership typically held in churches, I noticed that Bessey gives much grace to one side of the isle, while making the other side seem to believe things that most simply do not. She says “Egalitarians believe that leadership is not determined by gender but by the gifting and calling of the Holy Spirit and that God calls all believers to submit to one another. In contrast, complementarians believe that God establishes male leadership over women, making male leadership the Biblical standard.” (direct quote from Chapter 1)
I actually hold the same beliefs that she states are those held by egalitarians, although I am not an egalitarian. Leadership is not simply determined by gender. The Holy Spirit is the one who gifts and calls believers and we are all to submit to one another. I think any Christian who has a simple understanding of the Bible would believe all of these things, yet according to Bessey, this is a belief held by egalitarians. That is simply not true. When I read her definition that she gives for complementarians, my first reaction is that it is also very dishonest. Complementarians do not believe that God established male leadership over women. Leadership established by God is servant leadership and is not to be lorded over anyone. I also do not know any complementarian who actually believes that male leadership is the Biblical standard, meaning that men are to lead in every circumstance and situation, and women are never to be leaders. Those who hold this view probably exist, yet it is not the norm when it comes to one who holds a complementarian view. Complementarians believe that God has established males to be the leaders within their homes (in their marriage and with their children) and within the church. The position of pastor and elder is to be filled by men. Complementarians do not believe that male leadership is the Biblical standard in all situations and all contexts. In giving these definitions in the way that Bessey did, she has skillfully directed the reader to favor one position over the other through the dishonest way she described the positions held by both. This is quite manipulative and guides the reader to set of conclusions favored by the author. One who does not know much about the debate about the role of women in leadership and these two positions can easily be snared into thinking things about both sides that simply are not true. Whether this was intention or not, the way these positions were defined favors one side over the other.
I do not seek to write a comprehensive review of every subject discussed in this book. I will, however, focus on two specific chapters, seeking to demonstrate the way Scripture was used to explain her points.
Chapter 4
In chapter 4, Bessey seeks to show that the Bible does not put women down, values women, allows women to use their God-given gifts, and more. These are all things most Christians would agree with. However, the conclusions she draws while taking verses out of context do not convince me.
One thing that Bessey does immediately in this chapter is compares those who quote Bible verses to a clumsy four-year-old boy. She assumed that those who bring in Scripture verses to explain their view are usually doing so to shut down the opposite opinion. This is definitely not a charitable view toward other Christians with whom she disagrees. Yet, Bessey does the same thing throughout her book, using Scripture to try to demonstrate her view, which is egalitarian in nature and that women are ordained by God to be able to do and be in any position that God allows for men. She does not believe that any kind of structure, where one is in a higher position than another, is Biblical. She actually states later on in her book that patriarchy and hierarchy are part of the fall, not part of God’s original design. I share these things simply to show where she is coming from as she approaches these portions of Scripture.
Bessey says she believes that one cannot dismiss the parts of the Bible they don’t like, the Bible needs be read in the way the writers meant it, and it can’t be read in a vacuum. She admits that in her book, she is not seeking to expound on every verse that mentions women in the New Testament. That’s fair. What I seek to demonstrate is how Bessey actually approaches the text of Scripture throughout the book. At times, she takes verses out of context, quoting specific verses, while not showing the verses directly before and after those quoted, changing the entire meaning of the verse. One should not approach Scripture this way, and Bessey admits as much herself. At other times, Bessey will quote a verse to elaborate on a point she is trying to make, while the verse read in its original context is actually saying nothing about the topic she is discussing. Yet, this method is very effective if one does not have Bessey’s book in one hand and the Bible in the other. The reader would not realize this is what she is doing, especially since she has condemned this very practice within the pages of her book.
For example, Bessey quotes 1 Corinthians 14:34-35. It says “the women should keep silent in the churches. For they are not permitted to speak, but should be in submission, as the Law also says. If there is anything they desire to learn, let them ask their husbands at home. For it is shameful for a woman to speak in church.”
Bessey explains this verse as having been written in a certain context and that Paul was writing to one church who had unruly women who were causing others to not be able to worship because they were so curious and desiring to learn. She explains that Paul was not including all women in all churches in this statement.
It is fascinating that Bessey quotes this verse, as it is one that is translated many different ways. Many translations mesh the end of verse 33 and the beginning of verse 34 into one sentence which says “As in all the churches of the saints, the women should keep silent in the churches.” Yet, Bessey chooses the translation that allows for her not to consider this. Even if these two phrases are not meant to be read together, what do we do with the word “churches”, or sometimes phrased “meetings”? Bessey would have us to believe that Paul was only giving this instruction in isolation, to only this specific church, and maybe even to one woman. Yet, how do we reconcile the plural uses of these words if that is the case? Bessey has not struggled through these questions (at least as far as the reader can tell), leaving the reader with more questions about her selective use of this verse and even the translation she chooses to quote to prove her point.
Also, Paul gave similar instruction to other churches. This was not a command given in isolation and only to this church. Paul instructs Timothy in much the same way, saying “Let a woman learn quietly, with all submissiveness. I do not allow a woman to teach or exercise authority over a man; rather, she is to remain quiet.” 1 Timothy 2:11-12. This sounds very similar to what Paul said to the church in Corinth, yet that contradicts with Bessey’s belief that Paul gave his instruction to the church in Corinth in isolation.
Later, Bessey quotes Galatians 3:28. It says “There is neither Jew not Greek, there is neither slave not free, there is no male and female, for all are one in Christ Jesus.” This is a common verse used by egalitarians to demonstrate that women have the authority to pastor, yet in the context Paul is clearly describing one’s position in Christ, not roles within the church.
Bessey also attributes Acts 2:18 as words of Paul, yet in context they were part of a sermon preached by Peter, where he was quoting Old Testament prophecy. I would normally not take much issue with this kind of mess- up, but Bessey is using this verse to show that Paul was a feminist like Jesus- after all, he told women to prophesy! However, these are not even Paul’s words. This verse is mentioned multiple times throughout this chapter as having been Paul’s overarching belief and view toward women, yet the words were not from Paul, but Peter.
In this chapter, Bessey also quotes Colossians 3:11, using it in a similar way to how she used the verse in Galatians. “Here there is no Greek and Jew, circumcised and uncircumcised, barbarian, Scythian, slave, free; but Christ is all, and in all.” This is used to demonstrate, again, that there is not hierarchy in the church, that women can do the same things as men in the church etc. Again, this passage is talking about our position in Christ, not roles within the church. In context, one reads “Wives, submit to your husband, as is fitting in the Lord. Husbands, love your wives, and do not be harsh with them. Children, obey your parents in everything, for this pleases the Lord.” (Colossians 3:18-20). If Paul were using the previous statement to demonstrate that there is no distinct order within the church or marriage, why would he then go on to say what he did in the verses following that Colossians 3:11 statement? Again, Bessey takes this one verse out of context and in a vacuum, making it appear to say and mean something it just doesn’t.
Chapter 5
This chapter was all about marriage. She describes how her and her husband both live in mutual submission and love towards each other. She describes their relationship as a dance. Bessey then goes on to mention Ephesians 5:22-24, Colossians 3:18-19 (which she didn’t bring up when trying to prove a point about roles earlier in her book), and 1 Peter 3:1-2. She quotes these verses within the context of marriage, and explains away their significance to marriages today, saying they are not prescriptive or ideal, but the only respectable system that anyone knew of at the time. In other words, these commands were not of God, but simply Paul and Peter teaching Christians to be subversive to the government in that context without getting arrested for it. They had to work within the laws of the land.
This all sounds reasonable, except for the fact the Bessey did exactly what she doesn’t want her readers to do, which is pull verses out of context as a way to proof text or defend a position. She especially did this with the section of verses from Ephesians.
Bessey quoted Ephesians 5:22-24, which say “Wives, submit to you own husband, as to the Lord, For the husband is the head of the wife even as Christ is the head of the church, his body, and is Himself its Savior. Now as the church submits to Christ, so also wives should submit in everything to their husbands.” Let’s consider what the verses before and after these verses say. The previous verse (21) speaks to all believers submitting to each other, and then the verses following Ephesians 5:22-24 explain exactly why Paul gave the command he just gave to this group of believers.
Ephesians 5:25-33 has a lot to say. If one only considered the verses quoted by Bessey, her explanation might make more sense. However, what she failed to relate to her readers is that the verses immediately after Ephesians 5:22-24 explain why wives submit to their husbands, and husbands love their wives. “Husbands, love your wives, as Christ loved the church and gave himself up for her, that he might sanctify her, having cleansed her by the washing of water with the word, so that he might present the church to himself in splendor, without spot or wrinkle or any such thing, that she might be holy and without blemish. In the same way husbands should love their wives as their own bodies. He who loves his wife loves himself. For no one ever hated his own flesh, but nourishes and cherished it, just as Christ does the church because we are members of his body. Therefore a man shall leave his father and mother and hold fast to his wife, and the two shall become one flesh. This mystery is profound, and I am saying that it refers to Christ and the church. However, let each one of you love his wife as himself, and let the wife see that she respects her husband.” (Ephesians 5:23-33)
These verses have so much to say about marriage, and why husbands are called to love their wives and wives are to submit to their husbands. The foundation for these commands is laid way back in Genesis when God made Adam and then gave him Eve and they were joined in marriage. Paul states that this picture was a mystery then, but now he is making clear that the roles within marriage are meant to be a representation of Christ’s relationship to His bride, the Church. The man is to love his wife as Christ loves the church. He reflects Christ in the marriage. The woman is to submit to and respect her husband as the church submits to and respects Christ. Marriage is a glorious picture. Marriage represents Christ and the church! Bessey conveniently did not even read the verses she quoted in context. This is a glaring error on her part. Marriage roles stated within Ephesians were not merely cultural and a way for Paul to teach the believers how to live within the law of the land; the roles carry with them much deeper meaning, which Paul elaborates on in context! One must read the entire passage to understand entirely what is being taught, yet Bessey chooses to only quote the portion that she can pull apart to fit her purposes.
The same kind of thing happens when Bessey quotes the passage in 1 Peter 3:1-2. It says , ‘Likewise, wives, be subject to your own husband, so that even if some do not obey the word, they may be won without a word by the conduct of their wives, when they see your respectful and pure conduct.” Again, Bessey quotes this passage of Scripture and then goes on to explain that this wasn’t an actual command given by God, but a way for Christians to live within this society in which they lived and suffer the least amount of consequences from the governmental authorities who were looking for any reason to persecute them.
What about 1 Peter 3:5-6a, which grounds this command way back in the Old Testament with Sarah and other holy women? After teaching the proper way for women to present themselves, 1 Peter 3:5-6a says “For this is how the holy women who hoped in God used to adorn themselves, by submitting to their own husbands, as Sarah obeyed Abraham, calling him Lord…”. Peter demonstrated that Sarah was submissive to her husband. She was an example for believers to follow as a woman who was well-pleasing to God, not just someone who appeased worldly rulers by being extra obedient to their law. No, Sarah placed herself under the authority of her husband, and God was pleased with that action. Peter called all women to follow her example. As in the passage Bessey uses in Ephesians, the text here just does not make sense when applied and understood the way she is teaching. When taken in full context, it is teaching something completely different.
Final Thoughts
While I thought this book was well written and engaging, the way Sarah Bessey misused Scripture all throughout was very concerning and deceptive. She constantly takes verses out of context, quotes only small parts of a whole to prove a faulty point, and does so under the banner of the stated belief that to take verses out of context is wrong. In so doing, she invites the reader into this deception when their guard is down, because she has made herself out to be safe- not one of “those other people” who misread Scripture.
While I cannot imply that I know the inward workings of the heart of the author, I can say with certainty that she misuses Scripture frequently. Because of this, I cannot recommend this book.
Is having a relationship with Jesus something that we do apart from the Bible? As Christians, do we read the Bible, but then progress in our relationship with Jesus elsewhere, through personal experiences or feelings we develop outside of the word of God?
Many are believing a false dichotomy today….you either value the Bible more, or you value Jesus more. Phrases like “The Bible isn’t the third member of the Trinity” and “people just like to have rules and rigid beliefs and are too afraid to venture into a real, personal relationship with Jesus” seem to be pretty commonplace. Though these kinds of statements may have some truth to them (of course the Bible isn’t the fourth member of the Trinity), the assumptions driving these statements lead to somewhere that is deeply unbiblical and illogical.
Let’s look at it logically first. When I see statements like these, here are some of my thoughts and questions.
How do we even know who Jesus is apart from the Bible?
Is it possible to have a relationship with Jesus (based in truth) apart from what we discover and learn from the Bible?
If we can have a relationship with Jesus apart from the written revelation of Scripture, then what happens when your Jesus contradicts the Jesus I know? Aren’t we just making a Jesus in our own image if we approach our relationship with Jesus in this way? Isn’t this just a postmodern way of approaching truth?
I think that if we logically think through these questions and their perspective answers, it become fairly obvious why we need the Bible to inform our relationship with Christ.
What about the Biblical problems with these kinds of statements? First of all, let me just state that when I come to the Bible, I come with certain beliefs and expectations. I believe the Bible is God’s Word. It contains within its pages all that we need for life and godliness (2 Timothy 3:16-17). I believe that I must submit to the Bible as the final authority because through His Word, God speaks. I must allow the Word to shape my beliefs and mind.
The Bible is not a source of truth. It is the source of truth, because it carries with it the very authority of God. Through the Bible, we come to know Jesus, who has revealed Himself to be “the way, the truth, and the life.” Not only do we come to know Jesus through the Bible, we come to know all that we need to know about Jesus through the Bible. It is complete, lacking in nothing. There is nothing outside of Scripture that one must know or experience in order to know Jesus deeper or more fully. The Word of God is sufficient.
One cannot separate a person from what they say. Within the Bible, you see the Words of Jesus. You read what He says. You discover the mind of Christ as you dive into the words of Scripture, both about Jesus and by Jesus. One cannot have a relationship with Jesus without hearing communication from Him.
Jesus valued the Bible! He saw it as God’s Word and authoritative! He did not throw aside Scripture to bring in something completely new. No, He fulfilled Scripture, and one cannot understand the depth and breadth of what Jesus has accomplished without the study of Scripture.
What Did Jesus believe about the Bible?
The Bible, in its entirety, is authoritative. “You search the Scriptures because you think that in them you have eternal life; and it is they that bear witness about me”- John 5:39
Jesus believed in the literal interpretation of Scripture, even in what might seem like small, unimportant details. Jesus did not advocate getting rid of the Scriptures, or even that He was more important, but that He would fulfill what was written in Scripture. “Do not think that I have come to abolish the Law or the Prophets. I have not come to abolish them but to fulfill them. For truly, I say to you, until heaven and earth pass away, not an iota, not a dot, will pass from the Law until all is accomplished.” – Matthew 5:17-18
Jesus cited multiple Old Testament books, never casting doubt on events recorded in the Bible.
All of this is important, and much more could be said about the way that Jesus viewed Scripture, but it is most definitely true to say that Jesus had a high regard for Scripture, believing it to be the authoritative, true Word of God. If that is how Jesus viewed the Bible, that is how the Christian should view the Bible, too. If one is to love and follow Jesus, one must love and honor the Scriptures, as He did.
The truth of the Bible leads us to THE TRUTH- Jesus! The Word of God points us to and teaches us about THE WORD- Jesus. One cannot know Jesus as they ought without being immersed in the truth of the Word of God, and submitting to what the Word of God reveals about the person of Christ. If we fail to do that, we are not living and believing as Jesus did. Instead, we are placing ourselves in authority, making a Jesus in our own image, and not worshipping the true Jesus.
“Whoever says he abides in Him ought to walk in the same way in which He walked.” – 1 John 2:6
* I read the audiobook version of this book, so I will not be taking direct quotes from the book. Instead, my goal is to explain some of the key thoughts and ideas found within its pages.
The way that Rachel Held Evans captures the attention of the reader is through story. Throughout the book, she retells many of the most well-known Bible stories to make the stories fit more into modern context. She takes much creative liberty with her story-telling while doing this, nevertheless, this method of telling the Bible stories really captures the attention of the reader.
Evans moves the reader through different categories of the Bible as she tells these stories, while also seeking to explain and equip the reader with understanding regarding the texts of Scripture. This is where I take major issue with her method of interpretation and application.
Toward the beginning of the book, Evans admits that she views Scripture as being inspired by God. However, I believe that her working definition of what “inspired” means is much different that the historic Christian view. Evans views the Bible to be the Word of God, yet also admits that in her understanding, the Bible carries within it errors, lack of literalness in certain places, embellishments, exaggerations, and outright falsehoods. She also says that when one reads Scripture, they come away inspired. Therefore, Scripture is inspired because it inspires the reader.
The Bible is clear about what it means for Scripture to be inspired. 2 Timothy 3:16-17 says, “all Scripture is inspired by God and profitable for teaching, for reproof, for correction in righteousness, so that the man of God may be adequate, equipped for every good work.” This verse declares that the pages of Scripture are breathed out by God Himself, the truths found within the pages of Scripture, since they are the word of God, are enough for the believer to understand and believe when it comes to their personal walk with the Lord. They do not merely inspire the Christian; the very words of Scripture are inspired and carry the authority of God. They must be believed and obeyed.
2 Peter 1:21 gives more insight into how this process of inspiration played out as Scriptures were written. It says “…no prophecy was ever made by an act of human will, but men moved by the Holy Spirit spoke from God.” The Holy Spirit Himself used men to write His word. Men did not do this on their own authority. This verse is very important to understand as we further discuss the concepts found within this book, as it is ignored by the author. Instead of believing what God says through this verse, Evans throughout her book diminishes the work of the Holy Spirit in the writing of Scripture, and instead elevates the human authors and what they could have been doing behind the scenes. One cannot believe that human authors embellished stories, made things up, and were seeking their own agendas in their writing and still believe that the Holy Spirit guided them along in writing Scripture. However, this is exactly what Evans does throughout the book. She provides the reader with reasons to set aside the literalness of Scripture, reasons to question stories, reasons to disbelieve prophecy etc. by putting emphasis on the human authors, their motives, cultural issues, and more.
One example is when she discusses what she calls the war stories of the Bible. She especially focuses on the book of Judges. The way she has come to understand the war stories in the Bible is that they are exaggerated accounts, that God wasn’t really behind the Israeli conquests recorded in Scripture, and that men were just using God as a scapegoat to carry out their own sinful agendas. She explains that the war stories within the Bible would have been exaggerated and numbers would have been enlarged in order to boost the ego of the ones telling the story. In other words, “God didn’t really say…” She explains it all away with this reasoning.
Evans does this with many of the accounts in the book of Judges, yet when it fits her desires and what she wants the text to say, she will take the story literally. In one instance, it is all made up, embellished details, yet the next moment it is literal. When it comes to the mistreatment and awful stories about what happened to women toward the end of the book of Judges, that is taken literally without question because it explains the struggle of women under the patriarchy (in her understanding). What I see this method of interpretation doing as she goes throughout the book is that it makes the reader of the Scripture the final arbiter of truth, not Scripture itself. If you, as a reader do not like or understand what is being read, you can just brush it aside and make up a reason (whether logical or not) why you shouldn’t have to believe it. This is not how we should handle God’s Word! Reading the Bible this way is careless and lacks submission to the very God who reveals Himself through his Word. Instead of submitting to Him, we can pick and choose what is worth believing. This kind of interpretation is dangerous and lacking any kind of consistent approach and integrity. Anything can be explained away.
Rachel Held Evans also categorizes the major and minor prophets as well as Revelation as resistance stories. Instead of viewing the prophetic portions of Scripture as prophecy, she explains the books as stories of oppression meant to incite hope and resistance toward evil governments and leaders. The “resistance stories” are not about some distant future but the right now struggle. With the book of Revelation, she specifically says that it is not meant to be a book explaining something that would happen in the future, but that John wrote it to give his readers who were living under an oppressive rule hope. Yet, right in the beginning of the actual text of the book of Revelation, here is what is said. “The Revelation of Jesus Christ which God gave Him to show to His bond-servants, the things which must soon take place….Therefore write the things which you have seen, and the things which are, and the things which will take place after these things… Come up here, and I will show you what must take place after these things.”(Revelation 1:1, 19, 4:1b). How she understands Revelation is inconsistent with the very text of the book of Revelation. Yet, if you don’t understand Scripture as being God-breathed down to the very word and inspired by the Holy Spirit, one can come up with any interpretation.
This view held by Evans herself seems inconsistent as she explains it and continues on through her book. Sometimes, she would quote an Old Testament verse and then state the Jesus fulfilled this prophecy. How does that make sense if these prophecies were simply resistance stories and not about the future? She also consistently made reference to a New Heaven and New Earth that Jesus would one day bring in the future. Where does she get that information from if not from the prophecies from the Old Testament prophets and the book of Revelation? One would have an incomplete view of this future event without these prophetic texts.
Finally, Rachel Held Evans talks about the gospel within her book. She tells this story about how she was asked to sum up the gospel in one sentence and simply could not do it. In her view, the gospel cannot be explained simply. It means different things to different people. Her version of the gospel may look different from my version of the gospel, and it cannot be easily explained in one sentence. Everyone has their own “gospel according to”, she says, so who are we to say that we have the correct version of the gospel? This directly contradicts Scripture. The apostle Paul himself summarized the gospel in one sentence. “Now I make known to you, brethren, the gospel which I preached to you, which also you received, in which also you stand, by which also you are saved…For I deliver to you as of first importance what I also received, that Christ died for our sins according to the Scriptures, and that He was buried, and that He was raised on the third day according to the Scriptures, and that He appeared to Cephas, then to the twelve. (1 Corinthians 15:1-5). That right there is the gospel in one sentence, simply explained.
In the book of Galatians, Paul says “I am amazed that you are so quickly deserting Him who called you by the grace of Christ for a different gospel, which is really not another, only there are some who are disturbing you and want to distort the gospel of Christ. But even if we, or an angel from heaven, should preach to you a gospel contrary to what we have preached to you, he is to be accursed!” (Galatians 1:6-8). Paul did not speak kindly toward those who were espousing that idea that there are multiple versions of the gospel. To say such a thing is to distort the true Gospel. What Evans espouses is nothing more that postmodernism brought into Christianity- “My truth is my truth, your truth is yours, and all are equally valid.” This belief does not mesh with Scripture. The Christian must submit to the truth of Scripture above all else, setting aside our understanding and preferences and embracing God’s truth revealed through the Word. If we do not do this, everything becomes acceptable, all bending and swaying with popular opinions and beliefs of the day. As Christians, we know that there is an authority higher than ourselves that we must submit to.
Overall, this book was a struggle. Seeped in so many inconsistencies, it was hard to read and accept with any kind of integrity. The author trampled on Scripture, making herself the ultimate authority. We must not do such things as Christians. An unsuspecting person who reads this without much discernment, knowledge of the Scripture, and skepticism could easily be deceived by this book.
This book is a hard pass for me. I would never recommend it to another believer to read. What I did find helpful was getting into the mind of the author, as she has been a very popular thinker among those who would label themselves as Progressive Christians for years. Although Evans is no longer alive, her ideas and positions still have an impact on many thinkers today. For that reason, and only that reason, did I find this book informative.
The church in America does not need “diverse voices”. The church in America needs men and women who stand firmly upon the revealed Word of God, who are not willing to tolerate and accept falsehood.
Titus 1:10-11 There are many who are insubordinate, empty talkers and deceivers, especially of the circumcision party. They must be silenced since they are upsetting whole families by teaching for shameful gain what they ought not to teach.
I don’t think the apostle Paul would be concerned at all about skin color, social status, privilege etc. He was concerned that the truth of God’s Word be taught and guarded, and that those who taught in ways that contradicted that Word be not given a platform to promote their false beliefs. Those who taught in a way that contradicted Scripture were to be silenced.
False teaching has no place in the Church, no matter who is teaching it.
Brought Into focus 