As many of you know, I have had major concerns about Candace Watters coming out with a new book, given that she wrote an article with horrible exegetical mistakes concerning the book of Ruth, which I have documented here.
I have been waiting to see if the book would get endorsements from any Old Testament professors. You can usually tell a whole lot about the nature of a book from who endorses it. Well, today Candace Watters revealed who has endorsed her book:
"Candice Watters offers genuine help to Christians thinking about marriage, adulthood, and God's purpose for humanity."
- R. Albert Mohler Jr., from the Foreword
"Get Married is forceful, persuasive, and a must-read for today's Christian single."
- Gary Thomas, Author, Sacred Marriage
"Get Married not only brings healing and renewal to the Christian single confused by scriptural misinterpretation, it offers them practical advice to get to the altar."
- Debbie Maken, Author, Getting Serious about Getting Married
I mean, what can you say. You have Albert Mohler, who is really one of the leaders of the mandatory marriage movement, and Debbie Maken who is as bad as Gail Riplinger when it comes to historical and exegetical issues. Hence, you have no one whose area of expertise is Old Testament studies, nor even someone whose area of expertise is New Testament studies! That makes this situation very dangerious.
I want to avoid saying anything until I have had a chance to read the book. However, as I said before, if her article Ruth Revisited is any indication of the level of exegetical argumentation we are going to find in this book, I am not overly optimistic. I will be reviewing the book if I see anything that needs a refutation.
Also, I was looking at the subtitle What Women Can do to Help it Happen, and trying to figure out why this movement appeals to women so much. Candace could have directed this book at both women and men, but she choose not to do so. Also, most of the people whom I have dealt with online with this issue have been women. Also, Candace Watters is herself a woman. I mean, we have women who are being trained her at Trinity, and they absolutely laughed at Debbie Maken's ideas. However, why is it that a woman is more likely to be dragged into this movement? Honestly, I have not been able to come up with any reason.
Anyway, this also encourages me to get my book started again. I greatly grown in my exegetical skills since I have been at Trinity, and I think I would be able to give stronger responses now than when I first started writing the book. Hopefully, in a few months, after more research, we will be able to put a book out to counter this stuff. I will also be thinking about how I can gear it towards the female population, so that we can give strong exegetical refutations of the arguments that Maken, Watters, and Mohler are using.