Take a photo of a barcode or cover
lingfish7 's review for:
Hedges: Loving Your Marriage Enough to Protect It
by Tim LaHaye, Jerry B. Jenkins
I was recommended this book by a wise friend and I think there is definitely a need for a book like this discussing the need for boundaries (both emotional and physical) within a marriage to keep the covenant maintained and the marriage strong. However, this is not that book. The author may have been well intentioned but he failed on a number of crucial points necessary for strong argument and just plain old good writing.
1. He lacked a consistent, coherent thesis. In fact he never really defined what a hedge was or stuck to a clear message. Most of the book was stories of friends he knew who got divorces because they crossed boundaries but he claims if they had hedges the affairs would never have happened. His focus was kind of the danger of infidelity but he contradicts himself on many details. He even ended the book without tying anything together. He just dropped 3 unrelated stories about difficult marriages that got better through loving each other - nothing to do with marital infidelity, which left the reader super confused as to what a hedge really is and what is his point?
2. His tone was condescending, arrogant, and legalistic. Even though he said at the beginning of the book that not everyone should adopt his exact hedges, I felt more like he was subtly saying “but my hedges are the best and that’s why my wife and I have stayed together.” Most of the book are stories from friends or from his life where he looks down on those who don’t have hedges and fell, all while rooting his own horn about how he hasn’t fallen because of his hedges. I don’t think this tone was intentional on his part, but it was very off putting.
3. The facts, stats, and data he used was suspect. Some were outdated (from 35 years before the book was written). Other data didn’t have good sample sizes and some was outright wrong due to unclear questions and responses.
4. Worse than the bad data was his use of the data! He typically used the data to get on his high horse of boomer bias and say how good the olden days used to be when the divorce rate was lower back in the 30’s or 50’s. Nevermind the rate of alcoholism or physical abuse and sexism back then, or the fact that women had to depend on men financially for those years. The divorce rate was lower so it must have meant more stable families, right
5. Some parts of the book were very cringeworthy and uncomfortable. For example, he once told a female colleague she looked delicious. Excuse me? That’s just creepy, that’s not even flirting, just creepy. Then he used that to say how he now has a hedge to just compliment women on what they wear, not their physical beauty. (He covered it up by saying he meant delicious like fruit but really? Who says that?) Other parts of the book made it seem like all men are sex crazed and constantly tempted by women they just met. I don’t think every man or woman for that matter is that tempted by sitting on the plane next to an attractive person of the opposite sex to want to immediately have sex with them! (Real story of real dude in the book)
6. His Bible backing was minimal and weakly supported. The hedge verse he uses is from Job where it says God put a hedge around Job. Really? That’s not related to infidelity at all. It felt like a topical sermon gone south with him trying to find Bible passages to support his book rather than him finding truths from scripture first.
7. All in all, the book seemed much more legalistic than grace based. He mentioned the gospel a few times, but he also stuck to very strict rules without always addressing the core heart struggles. Furthermore, if I was an adulterer, I would not feel grace from this book because he calls them liars at multiple times in the book. He’s very inconsistent in his gospel message. Which is it: grace or legalism? Which is it: we are all adulterers in heart or actual adulterers are on a different tier of sinners? Which is it: we should have hedges in place and not focus on heart issues or we should work on our heart issues because hedges are solely external rules?
8. He used fear as a motivator instead of love. The reason for building hedges he thinks should be driven from fear of falling into adultery. His entire argument is built on this fear motivation, which I think is inherently flawed. Yes, we should be aware of how susceptible all of us are to sin but I think our primary motivation should be love for our spouse, not fear of cheating on them. Overall I don’t think it’s a biblical approach to use only fear. He ignored a lot of core heart issues this way. Instead of repenting of the lust in our hearts, he focused on fear motivating us to have external hedges. Doesn’t God want us to be sanctified though? Doesn’t He care more about our hearts than about the external rules we are following? I felt like the author didn’t care about this point. He was hyper focused on the outward safety net of not falling into adultery.
All in all, I would recommend reading a book by Henry Cloud and John Townsend instead. Their Boundaries book accomplishes the same concept but better and consistently. I hear they have a book called Boundaries in Marriage. I haven’t read that but I can guess it’s probably a more valuable read. Again, I think this author was well meaning but he just had terribly poor execution. I’m kind of surprised he’s written so many books but he cannot successfully write an organized, thesis driven, clear nonfiction book.
1. He lacked a consistent, coherent thesis. In fact he never really defined what a hedge was or stuck to a clear message. Most of the book was stories of friends he knew who got divorces because they crossed boundaries but he claims if they had hedges the affairs would never have happened. His focus was kind of the danger of infidelity but he contradicts himself on many details. He even ended the book without tying anything together. He just dropped 3 unrelated stories about difficult marriages that got better through loving each other - nothing to do with marital infidelity, which left the reader super confused as to what a hedge really is and what is his point?
2. His tone was condescending, arrogant, and legalistic. Even though he said at the beginning of the book that not everyone should adopt his exact hedges, I felt more like he was subtly saying “but my hedges are the best and that’s why my wife and I have stayed together.” Most of the book are stories from friends or from his life where he looks down on those who don’t have hedges and fell, all while rooting his own horn about how he hasn’t fallen because of his hedges. I don’t think this tone was intentional on his part, but it was very off putting.
3. The facts, stats, and data he used was suspect. Some were outdated (from 35 years before the book was written). Other data didn’t have good sample sizes and some was outright wrong due to unclear questions and responses.
4. Worse than the bad data was his use of the data! He typically used the data to get on his high horse of boomer bias and say how good the olden days used to be when the divorce rate was lower back in the 30’s or 50’s. Nevermind the rate of alcoholism or physical abuse and sexism back then, or the fact that women had to depend on men financially for those years. The divorce rate was lower so it must have meant more stable families, right
5. Some parts of the book were very cringeworthy and uncomfortable. For example, he once told a female colleague she looked delicious. Excuse me? That’s just creepy, that’s not even flirting, just creepy. Then he used that to say how he now has a hedge to just compliment women on what they wear, not their physical beauty. (He covered it up by saying he meant delicious like fruit but really? Who says that?) Other parts of the book made it seem like all men are sex crazed and constantly tempted by women they just met. I don’t think every man or woman for that matter is that tempted by sitting on the plane next to an attractive person of the opposite sex to want to immediately have sex with them! (Real story of real dude in the book)
6. His Bible backing was minimal and weakly supported. The hedge verse he uses is from Job where it says God put a hedge around Job. Really? That’s not related to infidelity at all. It felt like a topical sermon gone south with him trying to find Bible passages to support his book rather than him finding truths from scripture first.
7. All in all, the book seemed much more legalistic than grace based. He mentioned the gospel a few times, but he also stuck to very strict rules without always addressing the core heart struggles. Furthermore, if I was an adulterer, I would not feel grace from this book because he calls them liars at multiple times in the book. He’s very inconsistent in his gospel message. Which is it: grace or legalism? Which is it: we are all adulterers in heart or actual adulterers are on a different tier of sinners? Which is it: we should have hedges in place and not focus on heart issues or we should work on our heart issues because hedges are solely external rules?
8. He used fear as a motivator instead of love. The reason for building hedges he thinks should be driven from fear of falling into adultery. His entire argument is built on this fear motivation, which I think is inherently flawed. Yes, we should be aware of how susceptible all of us are to sin but I think our primary motivation should be love for our spouse, not fear of cheating on them. Overall I don’t think it’s a biblical approach to use only fear. He ignored a lot of core heart issues this way. Instead of repenting of the lust in our hearts, he focused on fear motivating us to have external hedges. Doesn’t God want us to be sanctified though? Doesn’t He care more about our hearts than about the external rules we are following? I felt like the author didn’t care about this point. He was hyper focused on the outward safety net of not falling into adultery.
All in all, I would recommend reading a book by Henry Cloud and John Townsend instead. Their Boundaries book accomplishes the same concept but better and consistently. I hear they have a book called Boundaries in Marriage. I haven’t read that but I can guess it’s probably a more valuable read. Again, I think this author was well meaning but he just had terribly poor execution. I’m kind of surprised he’s written so many books but he cannot successfully write an organized, thesis driven, clear nonfiction book.