John Stephen Piper

*Overall Thoughts

I appreciated that the authors continually came back to the fact that women are valuable and that just because they serve a different function than men does not mean that they or their function are “less than."

The following quote sums up their view, I believe:
“In the home when a husband leads like Christ and a wife responds like the bride of Christ, there is a harmony and mutuality that is more beautiful and more satisfying than any pattern of marriage created by man. ‘Biblical headship’ for the husband is the divine calling to take primary responsibility for Christlike, servant-leadership, protection and provision in the home. ‘Biblical submission’ for the wife is the divine calling to honor and affirm her husband’s leadership and help carry it through according to her gifts. (pp 52-53)

On submission, they are clear to point out that submission “is not an absolute surrender of [a wife’s] will. Rather, we speak of her disposition to yield to her husband’s guidance and her inclination to follow his leadership…. Even when she may have to stand against the sinful will of her husband (e.g., 1 Peter 3:1, where she does not yield to her husband’s unbelief), she can still have a spirit of submission – a disposition to yield. She can show by her attitude and behavior that she does not like resisting his will and that she longs for him to forsake sin and lead in righteousness so that her disposition to honor him as head can again produce harmony.” (p 61)

On the analogy of the marriage relationship being a picture of Christ’s relationship with the church, the authors say, “We may not press the analogy between Christ and the husband [too] far. Unlike Christ, all husbands sin…. Not only that, but also, unlike Christ, a husband is not preparing a bride merely for himself, but for another, namely, Christ…. At this point he must not be Christ to his wife, lest he be a traitor to Christ. He must lead in such a way that his wife is encouraged to depend on Christ and not on himself. Practically, that rules out belittling supervision and fastidious oversight.” (p 64)

I’ve heard that this book is used as a textbook for various colleges and seminaries, and I can see how it would be more appropriate in that setting. It is incredibly thorough - for a layperson like myself, the bulk of it became very tedious and dry reading.

*Section I: Vision and Overview

I appreciated chapter one, which gave an overview of “biblical complementarity." Chapter two is a Q&A which basically just rehashed everything in chapter one, but in question format. This annoyed me.

*Section II: Exegetical and Theological Studies

This is where the book gets boring – the reading is very technical and dry. It’s also very choppy, as every two or three words there are parentheses to either clarify or reference various Bible verses, etc. Great for the theology student, not so thrilling for the layperson.

*Section III: Studies from Related Disciplines

There are five chapters, dealing with various issues that come up in the areas of church history, biology, psychology, sociology, and law.

I particularly enjoyed chapter fifteen on women in the history of the church and chapter sixteen on biology, which delves into the physiological differences between males and females.

*Section IV: Applications and Implications

I was very disappointed in this section. It truly doesn’t offer much in the way of applications, and as I am very practical in nature, application is what I look for the most in the books that I read! It also only had to do with marriage and children. There is a foreword “For Single Men and Women (and the Rest of Us)” that apparently was supposed to make us single people feel better about reading the book – sort of “You can still be masculine/feminine even if you’re not married!” but there was no real application at all for singles in either the foreword or the entire application section. This was very unfortunate.… (meer)

I like Piper’s premise that the main thing of the gospel is Christ Himself, not just our getting Heaven or having our guilt gone through the forgiveness of our sins.

I wanted Piper to go deeper with God being the main thing, as I stated above. Instead he goes off on lots of other related things, sometimes the very things he says aren’t the most important good news of the Gospel, which sort of defeats the point of a book called GOD Is the Gospel.

Maybe it’s just his writing style as well as my disappointment with the book’s focus not being more on the title of it, but I’m only a quarter of the way through the book and I will probably only skim through the rest. There were some good points, but they were littered throughout a mostly surface skim of the main subject expressed by this book’s title.… (meer)