Scan barcode
A review by josiahdegraaf
The Mark of a Man by Elisabeth Elliot
2.0
I'm not really the intended audience for this book since, while I may be a guy, I have some pretty big concerns with Elliot's version of complementarianism and I don't care much for her personal writing style that tends to make a bunch of claims without really defending or supporting them.
However, there was one really important chapter of this book that made me quite upset and which I'd like to note and warn against.
In chapter 23, Elliot attempts to set forward a definition of how God's expectations for men and women differ. In that chapter, she explains that, for these lists, "what is right for men is wrong for women." In other words: these are unique roles that both men & women fill that the other should not do themselves.
And what's #1 on her list for women?
"The wife has no longer full rights over her own person, but shares them with her husband."
(And no--there's no similar statement on her list for men.)
This is pretty horrible.
1 Corinthians 7:3-4 makes a similar statement--but it makes it very clear that this command is equally true for both the husband and the wife. Both men and women are equally called to surrender their full rights in that passage. But by only including this in the list for women (and by arguing that what's right for women on these lists is wrong for men, Elliot is suggesting that this surrender goes only one way. And that's a pretty disastrous patriarchal argument to make that is not at all based in Scripture (and that, in fact, actually twists Scripture in order to make it).
I'm not going to argue malicious intent on Elliot's part. Most likely, this was a sloppy oversight. But it exemplifies so many of the issues I have with this book. Its arguments are sloppy--and they veer toward exalting male authority in such a way that women are too easily trampled on when people act on such beliefs in real life. Elliot may have been a pretty strong woman who wouldn't be trampled on herself. But I've heard far too many stories of women in Christian circles who have been trampled on by husbands who believed the errant view of marriage that she's teaching in this book (even if she wouldn't have fully practiced or believed this herself). This is a really bad oversight--especially in a book that's written to men about how they should act.
While there are certainly many parts of this book that are uncontroversial and decently good advice for the average Christian, the 15-20% that isn't that really stands out. And not only do her opinions tend to lack much support or defense, but her claims are pretty sloppy--at times with pretty disturbing implications as shown above. As a result, I really can't recommend this book.
Rating: 1.5 Stars (Poor).
However, there was one really important chapter of this book that made me quite upset and which I'd like to note and warn against.
In chapter 23, Elliot attempts to set forward a definition of how God's expectations for men and women differ. In that chapter, she explains that, for these lists, "what is right for men is wrong for women." In other words: these are unique roles that both men & women fill that the other should not do themselves.
And what's #1 on her list for women?
"The wife has no longer full rights over her own person, but shares them with her husband."
(And no--there's no similar statement on her list for men.)
This is pretty horrible.
1 Corinthians 7:3-4 makes a similar statement--but it makes it very clear that this command is equally true for both the husband and the wife. Both men and women are equally called to surrender their full rights in that passage. But by only including this in the list for women (and by arguing that what's right for women on these lists is wrong for men, Elliot is suggesting that this surrender goes only one way. And that's a pretty disastrous patriarchal argument to make that is not at all based in Scripture (and that, in fact, actually twists Scripture in order to make it).
I'm not going to argue malicious intent on Elliot's part. Most likely, this was a sloppy oversight. But it exemplifies so many of the issues I have with this book. Its arguments are sloppy--and they veer toward exalting male authority in such a way that women are too easily trampled on when people act on such beliefs in real life. Elliot may have been a pretty strong woman who wouldn't be trampled on herself. But I've heard far too many stories of women in Christian circles who have been trampled on by husbands who believed the errant view of marriage that she's teaching in this book (even if she wouldn't have fully practiced or believed this herself). This is a really bad oversight--especially in a book that's written to men about how they should act.
While there are certainly many parts of this book that are uncontroversial and decently good advice for the average Christian, the 15-20% that isn't that really stands out. And not only do her opinions tend to lack much support or defense, but her claims are pretty sloppy--at times with pretty disturbing implications as shown above. As a result, I really can't recommend this book.
Rating: 1.5 Stars (Poor).