Book Write-Up: Different by Design, by John MacArthur, Jr.

John MacArthur, Jr. Different by Design: Discovering God’s Will for Today’s Man and Woman. Victor, 1996. See here to buy the book.

This book defends a complementarian view of gender against evangelical feminism. Essentially, John MacArthur believes that married women’s primary responsibility is in the home. Husbands are to be the head of the household, but women still contribute their own unique insight, plus husbands are to love their wives as Christ loves the church, a tall order indeed. MacArthur also interprets the New Testament’s position to be that only men can have senior leadership positions in the church, but he also maintains that women can be deaconesses.

Here are some thoughts and observations:

A. There are some tensions in MacArthur’s book. On the one hand, MacArthur wants to argue that men and women are different by design. Men should be leaders in the church because they are more naturally qualified for that than women are, so churches run more smoothly when they respect that order. On the other hand, MacArthur acknowledges that there are women who may be better teachers than men. In those cases, he argues, women should still submit to the male authorities in the church, even if they feel that they are more qualified. Similarly, an employee may be more knowledgeable and talented than his boss, but he still must submit to his boss for there to be order in the company. MacArthur does argue that women can find an outlet for their teaching ability, for they are to teach their children spiritual matters in the home. Still, there seems to be a tension in that MacArthur believes that men are naturally more apt for certain responsibilities, yet he also acknowledges that some women may find themselves to be more apt than men.

B. Another tension concerns marriage and divorce. On the one hand, MacArthur has a “tough it out” approach. Men are to love their wives, period, regardless of whether or how much the wives reciprocate. Divorce is out of the question, with very few exceptions. That is called “dying to self.” Christians can love, even when it’s difficult, through the power of the Holy Spirit. On the other hand, MacArthur acknowledges that marriage can be extremely difficult. He talks about why some people may prefer a single life and acknowledges that as a legitimate desire. He also refer to I Corinthians 7:15, which states that a Christian is not bound to a marriage with an unbeliever if the unbeliever leaves, for God calls Christians to live in peace. MacArthur interprets that to mean that God wants Christians to have a peaceful life, rather than one of continuous turmoil, and God recognizes that marriage with an unbeliever can be tumultuous. But what if two believers are married and find their marriage to be tumultuous? What about their peace? And should not the believer married to an unbeliever tough things out and die to self, by MacArthur’s standards?

C. Overall, MacArthur’s interpretation of New Testament passages about gender makes sense, from an exegetical standpoint. What that means is that he shows how individual words and verses make sense within the larger argument of the passage. In his interpretation of I Corinthians 11, he interprets kephale in vv. 3-4 to mean “head”—-the man is the head of the woman—-rather than “source,” as many evangelical feminists interpret it. It is not enough, in my opinion, to show that kephale in antiquity can mean “source.” If one wants to go with that interpretation, one must also explain how “source” fits in with the larger argument that Paul is making in I Corinthians 11. MacArthur provides a coherent interpretation: Christian feminists in that day were causing disorder in church services by transgressing what Paul considered to be their position, so Paul was exhorting them to respect the male headship that God had established. Similarly, MacArthur offers a coherent interpretation of I Timothy 2:11-15: women are not to teach officially in church because God created men first, and Eve was deceived after she transgressed her husband’s authority. MacArthur provides a coherent picture of how the pieces can fit together to form a whole. By contrast, the feminist interpretations that he engages appear to be a stretch, cutting against the grain of the passage. It is easy to forget them in reading the biblical passages because they do not go with the flow of what the passages are saying. I admit that there are many evangelical feminist books that I have not read, but I am sharing my impressions based on what I have read.

D. That said, there are things that MacArthur says in this book that appear to be a stretch. MacArthur has to deal with biblical passages that seem to indicate that women can have teaching authority among the people of God: there are prophetesses in both the Old and the New Testaments (Miriam, Huldah, Philip’s daughters in Acts 21:9), and Paul in I Corinthians 11:5 accepts women prophesying, provided they do so with their heads covered. MacArthur says that the prophetesses were not prophesying in a church setting but outside of it, and he disputes that Miriam and Huldah had a prophetic ministry: they just prophesied on occasion, like Hannah and Mary. That seems to cut against the grain of what the passages are saying. The topic of I Corinthians 11:1-16 appears to concern what goes on in church services. And Huldah in II Kings 22:14 is a prophetess whom King Josiah specifically consulted for her prophetic word, which contradicts her being someone who merely prophesied every now and then. Of course, MacArthur goes the route that he does because he believes that the Bible must be internally consistent. He has to deal with passages like I Timothy 2:11-15 and I Corinthians 14:34-35, which exhort women to be silent in the churches. Many historical critics would say that these passages reflect Deutero-Paul, who is more conservative on gender roles than Paul, but MacArthur cannot go that route, as it contradicts his view on the nature of Scripture. MacArthur does what he can with what he has.

E. MacArthur offers an interesting interpretation of I Timothy 2:15, which states that women shall be saved through childbearing, if they continue in faith, love, and holiness. MacArthur contends that Paul is not saying that women receive salvation from sin through childbearing, for people are justified by grace through faith alone. Women are saved, however, from the stigma attached to the first woman being deceived, for they have an opportunity to raise godly children. I am ambivalent about this interpretation, for it seems to me that MacArthur is trying to reconcile I Timothy 2:15 with his Protestant position on salvation. This is not to suggest that Deutero-Paul thought women could earn their salvation through bearing children, for the pastorals maintain that Christ’s gracious work was necessary for salvation even to occur (see I Timothy 1:9-11). But what if Deutero-Paul saw salvation as more of a process: one receives forgiveness, but one still needs to persevere and live out the Christian life to finally receive eternal life (see I Timothy 6:12; 2:10-13)? Part of women’s sanctification, in this scenario, is raising godly children.

F. MacArthur comments on the qualifications for elders and deacons in the pastoral epistles. He says that these are not qualifications, so much, for specific tasks. They can be that: you do not want a greedy deacon embezzling funds, or a lustful bishop chasing women. But the overall goal is that leaders in the church be solid spiritual examples. Another consideration is the reputation of the church with outsiders. I thought about what MacArthur was saying when I was reading about an acquaintance. This acquaintance attends a conservative church, and he is being considered for an eldership position. He has admitted to struggles with same-sex attraction in the past, however, and there was a season not long ago when he was out of work and publicly questioned the existence of God. Some in the church do not want him to be an elder because they believe he fails the qualifications, but others were comparing him to the Psalmist, who himself questioned God when times were rough. They were saying that this man, especially, would be able to minister to people in church who struggle, unlike a person who has had no spiritual struggles.

This book, like other MacArthur books, is informative. MacArthur systematically goes through biblical passages, highlighting the nuances of Greek words to illustrate what the texts mean. He also goes some into historical background, such as feminist sentiments in ancient Greco-Roman sources, and concepts of external beauty.