Kathy Keller Reviews A Year of Biblical Womanhood
At The Gospel Coalition, Kathy Keller has posted a hotly-discussed (174 comments thus far), frequently-liked (3,244 “Likes” as of this moment), and predominantly critical review of Rachel Held Evans’ A Year of Biblical Womanhood.
Rachel Held Evans. A Year of Biblical Womanhood: How a Liberated Woman Found Herself Sitting on Her Roof, Covering Her 
Head, and Calling Her Husband “Master.” Nashville: Thomas Nelson, 2012. 352 pp. $15.99.
Rachel Held Evans had at least two stated goals for writing A Year of Biblical Womanhood, according to the promotional material accompanying my advance review copy. Under “Why She Wrote the Book,” Evans says:
“I’ve long been frustrated by the inconsistencies with which “biblical womanhood” is taught and applied in my evangelical Christian community. So . . . I set out to follow all of the Bible’s instructions for women as literally as possible for a year to show that no woman, no matter how devout, is actually practicing biblical womanhood all the way. My hope is that the book will generate some laughs, as well as a fresh, honest dialogue about . . . biblical interpretation” (emphasis mine).
Evans wants to show that everyone who tries to follow biblical norms does so selectively—“cherry picking” some parts and passing over others. She also says she wants to open a fresh, honest dialogue about biblical interpretation, that is, how to do it rightly and well. Rachel, I tried twice to get in touch with you when you were in New York City on the talk shows but wasn’t able to connect. So here’s what I would have said if we could have gotten the chance to open that dialogue.
Keller then lists four areas of concern about the book:
1. Picking and Choosing
2. Narrative or Prescriptive?
3. Intended Meaning
4. Love Defined
Read what all the discussion is about at A Year of Biblical Womanhood.
Join the Conversation
If you’ve read the book, what is your assessment?
If you’ve read the review, what is your assessment of the review?
RPM Ministries: Equipping You to Change Lives with Christ’s Changeless Truth
In short, I thought Keller missed the point of the book (yes, I have read it). She criticizes Rachel for not picking and choosing when the whole point of the book was to show that picking and choosing is necessary and it doesn’t work if you don’t. Then she goes on to explain what type of picking and choosing is the best with hermeneutics that Rachel would probably have completely agreed with. Keller has demonstrated Rachel’s point that everyone has a hermeneutic, not just reading the Bible as objective literalism which is what is typically taught.
Ryan, Thanks for sharing your thoughts. I would disagree with you on most points. I don’t think Keller missed the point at all. She understood that Held was being “ironic.” Does that mean no one can engage her writing? Held’s point wasn’t simply that everyone picks and chooses. Held’s point, if you follow it to its logical conclusion, is much scarier: there is no right or wrong ethic that we can glean from the Bible. Keller’s point was that there are hermenutical principles that guide how we decide whether something is cultural or trans-cultural. Held ignores that in her book to make her ironic point, and Keller pointed that out. Held’s extremen choices make a point that no one in the real world is making: no one is choosing the way Held did. So created a red herring. Of course, folks in the secular world who hate the Bible and do not believe there is a meta-narrative (no absolute truth) are thrilled with Held. Held made the secularists’ point! That’s scary. Now, if Held wants to engage Keller in serious conversation about biblical interpretation and application, I’m all for that.