Over the last year, I have been on a quest to discover what the Bible actually says about the role of women in ministry. As I have been diving into this subject, the topic of head coverings has surfaced over and over again. I have spent countless hours combing through research trying to answer the questions surrounding this topic:
Was Paul commanding the women to wear head coverings as a reaction to the culture around the church in Corinth?
Is this a command for the Corinthians then and for us now?
If this is a command for us now, what are the parameters? Is it for while we pray? While we worship? Only at church, or also at home?
The passage addressing head coverings is 1 Corinthians 11:2-16. Some would argue that because this is the only passage in Scripture that mentions this topic, we shouldn’t put much weight on it. On this issue, I agree with Partridge when he points out that the number of times something is mentioned in the Bible doesn’t negate its truth. There are many commands in Scripture that appear only once, and we don’t question their authority (11). So we should treat this passage as we treat any passage in Scripture and study it to answer the questions it raises.
I have listened to both men and women discuss this topic, most in favor, yet have not been convinced by their arguments. I’m not trying to be obstinate; I have truly wanted to be convinced. I even wore wide headbands to church for a while wanting to err on the side of caution until I fully studied the topic. Yet no argument has proven to me definitively that Scripture commands head coverings for women today. I also watched a seven-hour-long YouTube video from Mike Winger in which he concludes that head coverings are not mandatory but an issue of Christian liberty and potentially church or location specific.
When I saw that Dale Partridge, a pastor I have admired and respected for some time*, published a book on the topic, A Cover for Glory, with the subheading, “A Biblical Defense for Headcoverings,” I was excited to get my hands on it and dive in. I was not disappointed by the amount of research he put into the book. He cites many Bible scholars throughout church history, discusses the topic of submission in depth, and honestly, seems to come at the topic from every possible angle. Yet I find myself unconvinced that I should be wearing a head covering during my church’s worship service. While he includes all of the research, he fails to prove biblically that all women in all times and in all places should wear head coverings in church.
I am certainly not dismissing this book as poorly written or lacking in content. Partridge includes a lot of great information about the history of head coverings in the church, the definition of submission, and the meaning of glory. He simply fails to prove the point his book is intended to prove.
The Role of Feminism
One thing that has bothered me for a long time, and honestly one reason I have wanted to be convinced on this topic, is that women stopped wearing head coverings in church due to the feminist movement. As feminism grew, many of the symbols of submission in our society began to fall out of practice, including the wearing of head coverings during worship. I, like many other Christian women, do not subscribe to the feminist ideals and would have relished a way to react against it, even in some small rebellion like wearing head coverings.
Partridge dives into this issue and points out the influence feminism has had on the church. In fact, he goes so far as to accuse pastors who don’t encourage head coverings in their church of bowing to feminism because they don’t want to “poke the bear” (115-18). There is no doubt that feminism has affected the American church, but this raises another question for me. Did women understand the reason they wore head coverings in the first place? If there had been a biblical reason for it, would they have been so quick to toss it aside?
As a child, I remember watching the movie Easter Parade in which the focus of Easter, a religious holiday with so much meaning, was the hat or bonnet on each woman’s head. If the concern is what our hat looks like instead of what it is supposed to represent, we are wearing it for the wrong reason, potentially even sinning in doing so. So while it is true that the practice of head coverings diminished due to feminism, I have to wonder how many women even understood the meaning behind wearing a hat (or bonnet) to church. The purpose fell away long before the practice.
The Definition of Submission
Partridge does a good job of explaining biblical submission in the book. He spends multiple chapters talking about biblical authority and gender roles, and he returns to the topic again and again throughout the book. Overall, I was impressed with his ability to explain this complicated and nuanced topic. However, I will add that many times he left the statements incomplete, leaving the impression that women are to submit to men in general while Scripture says that a woman is to submit to her own husband. This is an important distinction.
The dilemma I had with this topic is that, while he goes to great lengths to define and describe biblical submission, he does not successfully tie it back to the practice of head coverings. Yes, the passage talks about headship but it is unclear if this discussion about head coverings was specific to the Corinthians due to their culture or if it is for all believers in all time periods and cultures.
Errors and Inconsistencies
One major concern for me in this book is the misrepresentation of Scripture. In chapter 2, Partridge introduces Tamar. While he says she disguises herself as a prostitute in one paragraph, in the next, he refers to her as a harlot as an introduction into the topic of punishment for harlotry in the Old Testament. This is misleading because the account of Tamar is not about prostitution but about a woman who is mistreated by the men in her life and how God vindicates her (in spite of her tactics) and allows her to be included in the lineage of the Messiah.
In another instance (chapter 10), he begins to tell the story of Haman and Mordecai. The book of Esther makes it clear that in God’s sovereignty and providence the king innocently made Haman honor Mordecai in the way Haman himself hoped to be honored. Yet Partridge tells the account differently: “For those of you who know the story of Esther, Haman had planned to sabotage Esther’s uncle Mordecai, but the king had become aware of his scheme, and Haman is now forced to honor Mordecai in public” (145). It made me question if he knew the story.
Finally, Partridge discusses Naaman, the military commander who was stricken with leprosy. When he visits the prophet Elisha and is told to dunk in the Jordan seven times, he is offended and refuses. Partridge ends the story here, using it as an argument that pride keeps us from blessing (so women should not be too proud to cover their heads during worship). But the story goes on, and Naaman does what he is told, thus healing his leprosy. So he didn’t miss out on the blessing.
At best, Partridge simply doesn’t know these stories. At worst, he is twisting Scripture to support his argument. In either case, this is not proper handling of the Word of God.
Adding to the Book
But worse yet is when Partridge adds to God’s Word. This is most notable when he claims “Eve’s purpose was never to rule but to ornament and help her husband” (emphasis mine) (92). Scripture never says that a woman is an ornament to her husband. Yes, the Proverbs 31 woman does make her husband look good, and wives should always strive to be a positive reflection on their husbands, but there are times in a woman’s life when the last thing on her mind is to be an ornament to her husband because she is concerned with her duties as a wife and/or mother. Scripture never commands that a woman must ornament her husband but that she honors God in all she does. (I would also argue that the command to have dominion over the earth was given to both Adam and Eve, so in some sense, Eve’s purpose was to rule, just not over her husband.)
More subtly in the same chapter, he presents the argument that women are not to have authority over men in any arena of life. Scripture only addresses this in the realms of church and home. The Bible does not forbid women to participate in leadership positions in their communities, education, business, etc. You could certainly make an argument for this being your preference, but it is not discussed in Scripture.
Honestly, this chapter (chapter 7) was the most problematic for me. Partridge quotes a Dr. McFall in a way that leaves one thinking a woman must go through a man to reach God (though he denies this in other sections of the book). At one point, I even wrote a question in the margin: “Can a woman lead a man to the Lord?,” and I wonder how Partridge would answer this question.
But this chapter was also the most interesting because he presented an idea that was new to me. He described Adam as a representation of Christ and Eve as a representation of the church–a new Adam and a new Eve. Since he quotes Tertullian and Augustine in this section, it is obviously not a new idea, but it was one I had never encountered, and it caused me to ponder.
In chapter 10, Partridge brings up the topic of a woman’s long hair being attractive to men and baldness being unattractive to them. This leads to the implication that women should cover their hair during worship so as not to become a distraction to men. While it may be true that some men are sexually aroused by a woman’s long hair, the only passage in Scripture about head coverings does not point to this as a reason for wearing them. Since this would be an easy position to defend and would certainly make this passage clearer to modern readers, one would think Paul would have included it if it was pertinent, yet he didn’t.
“Universal” Examples of Head Coverings
Partridge includes several examples from our culture to reinforce his points, but he fails to see that these examples are unique to our culture. For example, he claims that women demonstrate submission by laying down their last names at the altar. I grew up in a culture where this was not the practice. He claims that there is gender-specific attire for special occasions (weddings, the opera, etc.), yet women refuse to wear the appropriate attire for worship. Again, this is very culture-specific, and honestly seems to be changing in modern times.
He uses the example of men removing their hats during prayer at a Nascar event as evidence that men don’t struggle to practice the command to them to not wear a head covering during worship. Yet when you walk into a worship service at many churches in our country, you will see many men wearing hats because this is not something they have been taught. And when it is taught, men are to remove their hats inside any building, not just the church.
“Spiritual Transgenderism”
At the beginning of the book, Partridge states that our culture’s current confusion about gender is a result of women no longer wearing head coverings (14). His argument is that removing this symbol of truth has caused the truth of gender distinctions to be forgotten. But at the end of the book, he brings this argument full circle when he says, “To God, a man worshiping with his head covered and a woman worshiping with her head uncovered is a sight of spiritual transgenderism, and it is shameful” (158). This is a bold claim!
What I Learned about Head Coverings
While Partridge claims this book is a biblical defense for head coverings, I felt it was a better defense of the cultural argument for head coverings. Chapter 5 discusses the Corinthian culture at the time this letter was written. After going through several descriptions of religious practices in Rome during this time period, he says, “In sum, Paul’s teaching here in 1 Corinthians 11:2-16 is not simply affirming the religious customs of Corinth; it was instructing a new Christian practice that was the exact opposite of the religious customs of Corinth” (61).
Paul was giving the Corinthians a new practice to set them apart from the religious customs of their culture at that time. It even set them apart from Jews whose Rabbis wore prayer shawls during religious events. To this day, Jewish men wear yamakas during their worship. This argument seems to fit the best with this passage based on my study.
Where I Land on Head Coverings
As believers under the New Covenant, we do not follow all of the laws given to the Old Testament Jews. The laws that still apply to us are those that are repeated or reinforced in the New Testament. This is why we don’t worry about eating pork and why we no longer offer birds or livestock as sacrifices. This practice of head coverings was not even a law for the Old Testament Jews, so this mention in the letter to the Corinthians is the first time any Jew would have heard the law, yet it is vague as if it is given to people who would understand and have a reason to practice it.
Another concern I have with the practice of head coverings is that it adds to the to do’s of the Christian life while Christ and the authors of the New Testament were continually removing things from the lengthy to-do list. This goes so far as circumcision, the symbol of being one of God’s chosen people. Paul goes to great lengths in the book of Romans to establish that circumcision is no longer necessary and to reinforce that God is more concerned about the heart of the person than any outward symbol.
I am not saying that women should not wear head coverings if they feel led to do so. There are countries where a head covering is culturally necessary. And there are churches here in America that teach head coverings, so wearing one is a sign of submission to the leaders of the church. You may attend a church that does not practice head coverings but you feel a conviction to do so. By all means, submit to the guidance and conviction of the Holy Spirit in your life.
I am saying that I am still waiting to be convinced that this command is meant for all people at all times in all places, and thus far, I remain unconvinced. And I want to be convinced! If this is truly what God would have all women do, I want to be obedient. But until such a time as that happens or the Holy Spirit convicts me personally, I will continue to worship from the heart knowing that is what God sees.
*Recently, Dale Partridge, along with Joel Webbon, the author of the foreword in the book, have made some public statements about the role of women that add to the standards set in Scripture. As a result, I have ceased to follow or listen to Dale Partridge, relearnhq, and Right Response Ministries.
If you would like to learn more about how to study the Bible, I invite you to download my FREE Bible study workbook, 6 Steps to Study the Bible on Your Own at the button below.
If you would like to join a group of like-minded women who are pursuing godliness together, check out the Bible Study Academy by clicking the button below.
Should Christians participate in the Old Testament Jewish feasts? Is Christmas really a pagan holiday? Does the word Easter refer to a fertility goddess who is depicted with bunnies and eggs? In his book, Holidays and the Feasts, Nicholas Campbell does a deep dive into the origins of the Old Testament feasts and our modern holidays of Christmas and Easter to find the truth.
The book is based on a series of podcast episodes Campbell published at christisthecure.org. He has adapted those episodes for the book and included an additional section regarding Christians and the celebration of the Christmas holiday.
I will admit I started this book in the middle. With it being so close to the Christmas holidays, there are all kinds of claims floating around on social media, so reading the sections on Christmas was at the top of my list. One claim that made its way into my direct messages was that Christmas was originally a pagan holiday. In truth, while I had heard this before, I never really took the time to research it because, honestly, it just did not seem like a legitimate claim. But I had previously purchased and perused Campbell’s book, so I decided to take a more careful approach.
In the book, Campbell explains each of the pagan celebrations that have been cited as the origins of the Christian Christmas. He dives in to the origins of each one and why the claims have been made. He also dives in to the origins of the Christmas celebration, originally dubbed the Festival of the Nativity, demonstrating how church leaders landed on the date of December 25th, detailing the origins of Santa Claus, and even discussing peripheral icons like the Christmas tree and stockings.
Ultimately, Campbell concludes, “The threat to Christmas is not paganism, but secularism” (63). Celebrating Christmas is a matter of Christian liberty. However, “If we are going to celebrate Christmas and say that it isn’t secular, then we need to actually celebrate it as it was intended.” This means we should be doing our due diligence to make sure we are putting the emphasis of the holiday where it truly belongs.
In part 3 of the book, Campbell addresses the concern by some Christians that we should not celebrate Christmas because it was not celebrated in Scripture. He unwraps the importance of the incarnation, the purpose of celebrations, and the evidence in church history. We can stand on the shoulders of those who have gone before us into this debate about the holidays, but we have to be willing to take the time to look at the facts instead of accepting at face value what an influencer says on social media.
Once I finished the sections on Christmas, I went back to the beginning of the book and read all about the Old Testament feasts. There seems to be a current movement encouraging Christians to get back to their roots by observing these feasts. The feasts were established for the people of Israel to remember specific events in their history. Many of the feasts explained in the Torah (the first five books of the Bible) appear throughout the rest of the Old Testament. The Israelites frequently abandoned feasts only to rediscover them and celebrate them anew. Some of the feasts from the Old Testament appear in the New Testament, too. Probably the most notable of these is the Passover, the reason Christ was in Jerusalem at the time of His crucifixion.
What is most important about the feasts is they were intended to not only look at the past and remember how God had blessed His people, but also to look to the future to the promised Messiah who would fulfill the law and provide ultimate salvation. Campbell details different verses in the New Testament that point to Jesus as the culmination of the feasts. Because we have the privilege of a personal relationship with Jesus, celebrating the feasts can be a great way to rehearse Old Testament knowledge, but it should not be a source of division among Christians.
Finally, Campbell addresses some controversies about Easter, most of which center around the origins of the word Easter. As with Christmas, many of the claims about Easter are either provably incorrect, or there is no evidence to support the claim. Campbell takes each claim individually and walks the reader through his research. Not only does he research the claims against Easter, but also he dives into the origins of our Christian celebration. And he addresses the themes of Spring and bunnies floating around the holiday.
As with Christmas, the threat to Easter is more secularism than paganism. Campbell encourages us here when he says, “The world will act as we would expect, and will try to secularize anything. Additionally, the church will sometimes adopt the culture to appeal to the culture. However, regardless of how the secular world attempts to secularize the holiday, everyone is still talking about Jesus whether negatively or positively. Even when critiquing Easter and trying to change its purpose and meaning, individuals are still speaking of Jesus” (101).
Campbell states his conclusion at the beginning of the book, not by detailing his findings but by encouraging us not to be legalistic with our convictions. He admonishes us that the New Testament church was dealing with similar issues when it came to Christian liberty. And he encourages us that, “May we never become legalistic by enforcing our conscience onto others in regards to these issues” (20).
Holidays and the Feasts is a short read, but it is rich in information. I encourage you not to let this review be your source, but to read the book for yourself. No doubt you will encounter many of the controversies presented this Christmas season, and it will be a great resource for you to know how to respond when those conversations present themselves.
Few books have left me with so much food for thought as Rebekah Merkle’s book Eve in Exile. In this book, Merkle explains some daunting and controversial passages of Scripture in a way I haven’t heard before. She also explains how women have been the drivers of our cultural downfall and how we can drive the rebuilding of our society. Merkle is clear, concise, and even funny at times in her unpacking of difficult topics, making the book an easy and enjoyable read.
She begins the book by reminding us that freedom does not mean we live without boundaries. Her analogy of a basketball game with no hoops or lines hits home as she compares it to our society’s current inability to define what a woman is. She says, “True freedom lies in the opportunity to pursue excellence, and that opportunity is dependent on the boundaries that define and restrict the entire field of endeavor” (10). Later in the book, she adds, “[…] we can grow, mature, and change, sure. But we can’t grow past the fixed limits that He has built into our natures” (99). It is a sobering thought as we wrestle with what our purpose is as women created in the image of God.
Part 1 of the Book
The book is divided into four sections that develop the purpose of women and how and why we have gone so wrong. The first section of the book explains some of the pitfalls. Whether it is longing for a fictional era or chasing a mythical idea of fulfillment, women have been the driving force behind the downfall of our society and culture. We long for a time we have only seen in the movies, and we have distorted our God-given drive into something completely disconnected from our purpose.
Part 2
In the second section of the book, Merkle delves into the history of feminism, but she does so in a way that makes the journey very clear. Her explanation makes it obvious that we would end up where we are long before we arrived. Going back to a “simpler” time will lead us to the same place we currently stand because the seeds were sown during that “simpler” time. Merkle doesn’t get into the weeds of a purely academic history, but instead, looks at the potential and legitimate causes of the different waves of feminism. While some of her ideas are purely opinion, they make sense when you follow her logic.
Merkle describes my dilemma with feminism so well when she points out that some of the causes the feminists took up were good, but how we accomplish those outcomes matters, and a feminist is never going to get there the same way a Christian should. She reminds us that, “Trajectory matters, and the trajectory of the feminist movement has been opposed to Christianity since day one. We need to get over the fact that sometimes we happen to agree with feminists on this or that issue. Just because we occasionally agree with the what does not mean we were ever agreed on the how or the why” (92).
Looking at the outcomes of feminism we are experiencing today and the fact that more women seem to be unhappy now than ever before, we must ask if feminism will ever deliver on its promises. After documenting the statistics, Merkle summarizes, “For the last fifty years, American women have chased the rainbow and the pot of happy has not turned up” (69). She adds, “We need to figure out what went wrong—not so that we can sit around and criticize our grandmothers, but so that we can figure out how to spare our daughters” (73).
Part 3 of the Book
In the third section, Merkle takes us back to Genesis to unpack our purpose. She points out that, “Design matters. The intent of the designer matters. And we women, as God’s creatures, are designed by Him to fulfill a particular role” (98). But that role may not look like what we have been led to believe it looks like. What does the Bible say we are designed to do? What does this look like for women in our current time? As she develops the ideas presented in the passage of subduing, filling, helping, and glorifying, she explains what the biblical terminology means and draws analogies that make those meanings clear. In this section, Merkle goes to great lengths to define the biblical view of submission.
Part 4
Merkle gives examples of ways women can fulfill their purpose in the fourth section of the book. She reminds the reader that one woman’s way of fulfilling her purpose may not look like her neighbor’s way, yet they can both be obedient to their callings of womanhood. While she talks about different ways we can subdue, fill, help, and glorify, she is careful to repeat that the examples she gives are just some of the things we can do, and we can make them our own. Merkle describes women as, “[…] born translators. We take principles, abstract ideas, and then put flesh to them” (143). One analogy Merkle makes when it comes to the difference between the roles of men and women is that of music. Men are singing the melody while women are singing harmony. But feminists want all of us to be singing the same note, making the music monotone and boring (174).
In the conclusion, Merkle sets out the path to rebuild our culture. While it will look very different than the path to destruction looked, there really is nowhere to go but up from here. Ultimately, we should not seek to escape, but we should rise up to fight for our convictions as we instill them into the next generation. Merkle points out that, “God hasn’t called us to run away from the world […] Christ expects his church to launch a full scale assault on the world” (24). While I may not agree fully with her statement that, “The majority of our most pressing moral issues are the direct result of the women of this nation fighting for what they have declared to be their ‘rights,’” I can understand that there is definitely truth in it (197) because, “A wise woman is capable of building a house just as much as a foolish woman is capable of tearing one down” (202).
Draw Back to the Book
One draw back to the book is that some of the ideas presented, when followed to their logical conclusion, could lead to an attitude of arrogance or self-importance even for the godly wife. And considering that has been the crux of the entire feminist movement, it is something we should guard against. After all, isn’t it just like a sinner to take what God created as good and pervert it into selfishness and self-service?
Updated. This book review of Praying for Your Husband from Head to Toe was originally published on January 10, 2020.
Although 2019 brought many memorable events in my life and our family, I will be honest and tell you I was not sad to see 2019 come to an end. It was a tough year. Mainly, it was a tough year for my marriage.
A major change in 2019 was moving our business from a small building we rented to a large building we purchased and remodeled. Mark and I had different expectations of the process and our roles during that time, and when those expectations weren’t met, it took a toll on our relationship. I vividly remember sitting on a couch in an Airbnb, pouring my heart and my tears out to a new friend who happens to be a marriage counselor.
I went searching through my bookshelves for books I had on marriage, and I found Sharon Jaynes’s Praying for Your Husband from Head to Toe. I had bought it several months before based on a friend’s recommendation, but I hadn’t cracked it open yet. I had no idea what I had been missing!
This book teaches a pattern of prayer that has been a game-changer in my marriage. There have been many times I have cried through the prayers and many more times when I have prayed the prayers for myself and not just for Mark. I have even modified them to pray for my children.
It’s very easy to get stuck in a rut of prayer, especially when praying for those we pray for repeatedly. I can’t tell you how many times I’ve prayed, “Lord, be with Mark today.” This book has put words to my thoughts, paired Scripture with those words, and reminded me of things I’ve forgotten to pray for a long time. But it is not the book itself that is life-changing, it is the practice of prayer paired with Scripture.
I do not agree with nor endorse everything Jaynes includes in the book, but the prayer pattern she teaches, of praying for your husband literally from his mind to his feet and including Scripture for each part of his body along the way, has transformed my prayer life. These prayers can be modified to pray for anyone in your life. With small tweaks, they can be prayed for your children. You can use the pattern to pray for your parents, your siblings, your best friend, members of your Sunday school class, etc. You don’t have to be married to understand the benefits of having this tool in your arsenal.
Jaynes pairs Scripture with each prayer, which is so powerful because the Word of God is living and active. There is no better way to communicate with God than to pray His Word back to Him.
In 2020, the governments of the Unites States, Canada, and around the world, took it upon themselves to somehow protect the global population from a virus by imposing lockdowns that prevented church congregations from meeting. Three things quickly became obvious: 1) The virus was not nearly as deadly as had been predicted; 2) the measures taken were more damaging than the virus itself; and 3) there was a double standard as mobs took to the streets in protest of so called police brutality, yet the church doors remained shuttered.
Many churches not only complied with the government overreach, but also criticized those pastors who did not acquiesce to the government “guidelines.” I specifically remember when two churches and their pastors made headlines as they stood in opposition to the authorities dictating their worship: Grace Community Church in Los Angeles pastored by John MacArthur and GraceLife Church in Edmonton pastored by James Coates.
In their book, God vs. Government: Taking a Biblical Stand When Christ & Compliance Collide, Nathan Busenitz and James Coates not only tell their stories, including many details that were never reported by the media, but also explain the biblical basis behind the decisions they made and how those decisions impacted their ministries. Part 1 of the book details what happened in both churches. They describe everything from the decisions made by the elders to the law enforcement presence in their services to the law suits, trials, and consequences each church faced. In Canada, these consequences included a time when the church met in secret. Part 2 of the book includes sermons preached and biblical support for the actions taken by each church. The support provided is incredibly thorough and insightful.
While I highlighted so many lines in the book, one thing that has stuck with me is Coates’s reminder that the church is a flock and the pastor is its shepherd. When this analogy plays out, it is easy to see why a church that is not congregating is not fulfilling its purpose. He asks, “How can a shepherd feed an absent flock? How can he protect them? How can he tend to their wounds?” These questions are rhetorical because it is obvious the shepherd can’t do his duty if he is not with his flock.
I was also struck by how gracious Coates was toward those families who left GraceLife Church as a result of the decision not to comply with the lockdowns. He praised those families as being “instrumental in helping [the church] refine their thinking.” He goes on to say, “They led us to make sure we could defend the biblical veracity of the stance we had taken and helped us develop the courage and conviction needed for the battle yet to come.”
This book gives great insight and guidelines for knowing when it is appropriate to comply with the government and when it is imperative to resist it. Christians need to know where they stand before the next crisis hits, and hit it will. We can’t wait until we are in the thick of it again to figure out what we believe. Busenitz and Coates walk through Scripture and carefully lay out interpretations, boundaries, and guidance for the role of the government, the role of the family, and the role of the church.
** This book would be a great addition to a worldview curriculum and/or a government curriculum.
If you are intimidated to share the Gospel, contradict lies, or address controversy, Tactics: A Game Plan for Discussing Your Christian Convictions by Gregory Koukl is the book for you! Not only does it give the tools needed to have a respectful conversation, but also it gives ideas and examples to hone the skills it teaches.
I remember reading Tactics while I was struggling through another book that was full of logical fallacies (errors in reasoning). Koukl’s explanations and examples helped me identify those errors and gave me the tools to clarify my position. But the purpose of his book is to help us engage in real-time dialog.
As a general rule, probably because political correctness has so permeated our interactions, we think that arguing is wrong, sinful even. There is a difference between an argument and a fight. The truth is we should, especially as Christians, be able to argue our positions with knowledge, wisdom, and respect. Scripture tells us that we should always be ready with an answer to defend our faith (1 Peter 3:15).
In his book, Koukl provides the reader with tools to implement when having controversial conversations. This could be witnessing to an unbeliever, having a conversation about a culturally-relevant topic with someone on the other side of the issue, or debating the finer points of theology with a brother or sister in Christ. Koukl gives the reader specific examples and “tactics” to have a successful and respectful exchange.
One of my favorite principles discussed in the book is what I affectionately call “the pebble principle.” Our job as Christians is not to convince others they are wrong and we are right. Our job is to put a pebble in their shoe—you know, a thought they can’t get out of their heads that keeps rolling around until they have to do some research and find out the answer.
Koukl reminds us that “it’s not [our] job to defeat their claim. It’s their job to defend it.” As Christians, we often get caught up in trying to prove them wrong when they haven’t given any evidence that they are right. He reinforces this idea by demonstrating that questions are more effective than statements.
In fact, most of his book is dedicated to teaching the reader how to ask the right questions in different situations. The goal is not to “trap them” but to gain insight into their worldview and lead them to recognize its failure. This opens the door to share Christ and the consistent biblical worldview.
Another important lesson from the book is the difference between opinions and facts. Koukl reminds us there is a difference between giving an explanation and giving evidence. Our society often forgets that Christians are not the only ones who need to answer for their beliefs. Whoever makes the claim must be able to defend it, and his opinion is not proof. Critics of Christianity rarely are prepared to defend their own “faith,” but instead focus on attacking.
Not only does Koukl give us tactics to use in dialog like asking leading questions, identifying self-defeating arguments, and getting down to the facts of the claim, but also he teaches us what the other side will do to distract from their claim like attacking our character, deferring to an “expert,” or using disproven data. And he gives all of these tactics clever names to help us remember them!
He ends the book with practical steps and ideas to prepare ahead of time so when we have the opportunity to dialog, we are equipped. But he makes an important point when he says, “Know your Bible well enough to give an accurate answer. Tactics are not a substitute for knowledge. Cleverness without truth is manipulation.”
This book is an excellent addition to an apologetics, worldview, or logic curriculum.
