You know, for a book on “biblical marriage” there isn’t a lot of Biblical exegesis in here.
The Driscolls do eventually get to the Scriptures when talking about marriage as a covenant instead of as a contract, and I thought that section of this chapter was decent.
Only three chapters in and it is fairly obvious just how inconsistently this book was edited. Some chapters are obviously refined. Others are just plain poorly handled. This chapter sadly falls into the latter category.
It was very uneven, beginning with a strange set of “caricatures” dealing with poor models of manhood. It was more in keeping with something Bill Hybels might have written in the early 80’s than something I would expect from Driscoll in the year 2012. I think it was intended to be humorous.
I felt that the chapter tripped around the edges of being powerful but never got there. While the Driscolls wrote a lot about covenants, they did not really set it in terms of relationship. I would have liked to have seen them draw the parallel of Jesus’ submission to the Father because of their relationship to the submissive relationship of marriage partners.
Thus far, this is the weakest chapter of the book simply because it should have been (and with some editing could have been) so much more than it is. And what is it? It is a weak self help chapter with a little pseudo humor thrown in. That’s my take anyway.
You do realize that the chapters are written by both Mark and Grace, and that might account for some of the inconsistencies. I think they didn’t want to edit out the personality and nuance of each writer.
I do agree that he went easier on the men in this chapter than I had anticipated, having heard him “yell” at the men many times before.
I was aware of that, but I have seen books written by husband and wife teams that flowed much better than this one. Whether we want to admit it or not, the publishers were fully aware that this book would make a profit regardless how well put together it was because it had Mark Driscoll’s name on it and it would generate controversy. All too often, the guaranteed profit aspect of these kinds of books lend to sloppy editing. A good editor who was not intimidated by Driscoll’s reputation could have turned this chapter into something exceptional. Instead, it was only mediocre.