Emerson Eggerichs Misuses Scripture in Love & Respect. Here's How He Got Away with It
See if you recognize these strategies...
If an author is going to say their book is rooted in Scripture, it needs to use Scripture correctly.
But over and over again we see evangelical authors using proof texts, sloppy use of Scripture, and more to justify something that isn’t Scriptural at all.
Over the last two weeks we’ve been doing a deep dive into Emerson Eggerichs’ runaway best-selling evangelical marriage book Love & Respect. We’re publishing a video deep dive docuseries, and this week episode 2 dropped!
(You can watch episode 1 here if you haven’t seen it already!)
In the first episode, we looked at the thesis of Love & Respect, and how it is so ridiculously misogynistic (and cringeworthy).
In the second episode, we’re looking at how the claims of Love & Respect don’t hold up to scrutiny, and more importantly—are so flimsy and easy to see through. How did people buy this? Misrepresented data, bad stats, copying 1970s best-sellers while claiming the idea is “brand new” and totally you’re own, and, of course, misrepresenting Scripture.
How did we buy it? Anti-intellectualism, and you’ll have to watch the video for the whole story. It’s fascinating.
Today, in this article, I want to focus on a part of what we talked about it in that video.
A few years ago our team did a deep dive into how Eggerichs handled Scripture.
Nijay K. Gupta and Joanna Sawatsky joined me for a podcast where we talked about this, and I wrote a definitive post on Eggerichs’ misuse of Scripture. I’m going to include the highlights of that post here today.
So let’s jump in!
Even though we are specifically looking at Emerson Eggerichs’ use of Scripture in the book Love & Respect, I hope that reading this will help you be able to evaluate other books and pastors. The methods that he uses to twist and misconstrue Scripture are quite common, and so consider this an object lesson in the ways that we often go awry with the Bible.
A. Big Picture Problems with Emerson Eggerichs’ Approach to Scripture
Before we look at specific passages that Eggerichs misuses, let’s hone in on three approaches to Scripture that color all of the rest, and seem to explain why he treats Scripture the way that he does.
1. “Appeal to Authority” Method
The “appeal to authority” is a logical fallacy:
The Definition of Appeal to Authority
Insisting that a claim is true simply because a valid authority or expert on the issue said it was true, without any other supporting evidence offered.
Marshall McLuhan, a famous Canadian socioologist from the 1950s and 1960s, famously said “the medium is the message,” by which he meant that the way something is conveyed often changes the meaning of it (for instance, TV news has way fewer words than a newspaper account, and so TV tends to make things more sensationalized because there’s not as much room for nuance).
In Love & Respect, the “medium” by which the message is delivered is to quote Bible verses everywhere. On most two-page spreads there is at least one Bible verse in a call-out box. Bible verses are sprinkled throughout the book, both in the margins and in the text.
Now, this isn’t necessary a problem (though you will see below why it becomes very problematic). But what is the message being given by putting Bible verses literally everywhere?
This book is rooted in Scripture, and so you cannot disagree with it.
Below are some examples of verses that are used superfluously (note how in each case, the verse does not add anything, and in many cases, only a few words of the verse are quoted anyway):
“As God revealed the Love and Respect message, I experienced Psalm 119:130: “The unfolding of your words gives light; it gives understanding” p. 14
“The Crazy Cycle is, indeed, “the evil of folly and the foolishness of madness” Ecc. 7:25″, p. 16
“When counseling couples, I often ask “what causes fights and quarrels among you?”” James 4:1 p. 27
“Using the Love and Respect Connection proves that “a man of knowledge increases power” Prov. 24:5″, p. 122
“When you act on COUPLE you will “enjoy with your wife, whom you love” Ecc. 9:9″, p. 123,
“If you are angry with your wife, even for “a brief moment” she is “grieved in spirit” and “rejected,” and needs reassurance that you love her Isaiah 54:5-8″, p. 156
By quoting Bible verses, even when they add absolutely nothing to the argument or to the text, the message conveyed is an appeal to authority–you must trust this book because it is full of Scripture.
2. Treating Verses as Proof Texts
Closely related to appeal to authority is the practice of proof-texting.
The Definition of Proof-Texting
Proof texting is the method by which a person appeals to a biblical text to prove or justify a theological position without regard for the context of the passage they are citing.
When proof-texting, the author starts with a supposition or theory, and then searches for verses to support that theory. Rather than approaching Scripture and asking, “what does this entire passage say? How does it fit in with the broader picture of the Bible? What is it trying to tell me?”, someone who is proof-texting will often search for keywords in Scripture until they find a verse that appears to say what they want it to say, often ignoring context.
People who make a practice of proof-texting often focus on just one verse, or even parts of verses, and rarely use whole passages.
Most of the examples that follow in this post are of Emerson Eggerichs proof-texting.
To give just one, on p. 31, Eggerichs says: ”Runaway divorce statistics reveal that “insanity is in their hearts” (Ecclesiastes 9:3).
Here, he is using a verse from Ecclesiastes to imply that the Bible abhors runaway divorce stats. The problem? Divorce rates are actually at their lowest in fifty years right now. We don’t have an epidemic of divorce, if you look historically. And even if we did, divorce, in and of itself, is not the problem. What leads to divorce is the problem. If abuse rates are high, the problem is not divorce; it is abuse.
To use a snippet of a verse from Ecclesiastes which has nothing to do with divorce to prove social commentary about divorce without providing any data to support these claims is inappropriate, and an example of both proof-texting and appeal to authority.
3. Sidelining the Words of Christ
Jesus is the Word of God. He is the image of the invisible God. He has shown us the Father, because whoever has seen Him has seen the Father.
Thus, it is Jesus who is central in our faith. We interpret Scripture through the lens of Jesus.
Often, though, those arguing for patriarchy, or male leadership over women, virtually ignore Jesus in favour of quoting other verses in Scripture. It’s very, very difficult to argue for patriarchy using Jesus’ words and example, and so instead they go to other passages and leave Jesus’ example behind.
A good rule of thumb when judging if a pastor or author is committed to Scripture is to look at how often they talk about Jesus versus how often they talk about God and the Bible. When people insist on saying, “The Bible tells us…” or “God says…” but they don’t talk about Jesus, it’s likely because the things they’re trying to teach you are actually in opposition to how Jesus lived and acted.
Only 11% of Scripture references in Love & Respect are from the gospels. But even when Emerson Eggerichs does quote the gospel, often the gospel passage quoted is itself quoting the Old Testament:
“Matthew 19:4 tells us that God made them male and female.” (p. 32)
Matthew 19:6, “two will be one.” (p. 163)
Or he quotes the disciples:
“Realizing marriage demanded permanance and work, the disciples complained “If the relationship… is like this, it is better not to marry.”” (Matthew 19:10), p. 42
Even when he does quote Jesus’ words, Eggerichs often misapplies them:
In a passage telling women not to speak up when something is bothering them, Eggerichs writes, “Ultimately, we must depend on “the Helper” the Holy Spirit, to “convict… concerning sin” (John 16:7-8), p. 269.
Telling women to put up with atrocious things on earth because we will get our reward in heaven– “Jesus is preparing us to hear, “Well done.” He wants to say, “Well done, good and faithful servant! You have been faithful with a few things; I will put you in charge of many things. Come and share your master’s happiness!” p. 272-273.
In the chapter these quotes are from, Eggerichs is reiterating how women must have unconditional respect towards husbands, using illustrations from husbands who were physically abusive, or husbands with such withering rage that she wants to get away and hide.
In Love & Respect, we do not see Emerson Eggerichs actually grappling with Jesus’ words and telling us how they should apply to marriage.
Those three practices–appeal to authority, proof-texting, and sidelining Jesus–color Eggerichs’ treatment of Scripture throughout the book. Now let’s turn to specific egregious examples of how Eggerichs mishandles Scripture.
B. Specific Ways Emerson Eggerichs Misuses Scripture
1. Quotes Pagans as Authoritative
In two instances (and there may be more; I only looked in detail at about 25% of the references Eggerichs used) he quotes pagans who are actively working against God in the story sympathetically, as examples to emulate.
a. The King’s Advisors in the Book of Esther becoming upset that wives may not respect their husbands
In Esther 1, King Xerxes orders Queen Vashti to dance before his drunken guests, and she refuses. In response, the king’s advisors warn the king to take strict action against Vashti, “For the queen’s conduct will become known to all the women, and so they will despise their husbands and say, ‘King Xerxes commanded Queen Vashti to be brought before him, but she would not come.’ This very day the Persian and Median women of the nobility who have heard about the queen’s conduct will respond to all the king’s nobles in the same way. There will be no end of disrespect and discord.” (verses 17 and 18)
Eggerichs uses this passage to explain why men fear disrespect (as if we should be emulating pagans), pp. 57-58
He later quotes: “Women virtually ask to be unloved when they “look down on their husbands.” Esther 1:17 (p. 59)
It is the pagan nobles who are worried that wives will disrespect their husbands. Nowhere in the Bible is this lauded or called correct.
b. The Philistines’ attitude towards war
Eggerichs writes: “a husband is geared to hear the command, “take charge and fight” (1 Samuel 4:9), p. 50
In context, this is the exhortation given to the Philistines as they enter battle. The Israelites in this same story are instead relying on the ark of God rather than their own strength.
Once again he uses an example of pagans to say, “this is the way men are”, even though in this story too the Philistines are not the ones to emulate.
2. Edits and Distorts Scripture to Change the Meaning
Love & Respect hinges on the thesis that women must show unconditional respect to their husbands. The only verse that Eggerichs uses to “prove” the unconditional part, though, is this:
“The Bible teaches unconditional respect: “show proper respect to everyone… Not only to those who are good and considerate… but… harsh” (1 Peter 2:17-18), p. 43
The only problem? That’s not what these verses say, as I shared on social media:
Eggerichs took a command given to one group of people, and used qualifiers for it from an entirely different command given to an entirely different group of people. My husband cynically said, “Perhaps Eggerichs believes wives are slaves,” but regardless, this is an abominable way to treat Scripture.
But let’s assume that Emerson Eggerichs is right for a minute and that this text does teach us that we should give unconditional respect even to those who are harsh. Who is this text directed at? All believers. It is not written to women or to wives, but to everyone. Thus, if he is going to use this text to argue that women should give husbands unconditional respect, he should be intellectually consistent and use the text to argue that husbands should give wives unconditional respect, too.
These are only a few of the ways that Emerson Eggerichs misuses Scripture in Love & Respect.
I document many more in my original article about this.
But I think these are common strategies that pastors and authors use when they want to convince people that their material is rooted in Scripture and can’t be questioned. And once you start to recognize these strategies and these patterns, it’s easier to see through what these pastors and authors are teaching.
Quite frankly, this is a horribly offensive use of Scripture. I’m just utterly disgusted.
For a man who claims to be a Christian to treat Scripture like this is abominable.
And yet, it is not that different from what so many evangelical pastors have been doing for years. We need to demand better. When pastors do things like this, they need to be called out. We need to empty the pews of people who treat Scripture as their personal play thing, and instead go to churches where the Word of God is actually treated with the respect it deserves.
Pastors and authors often try to make some of the most ridiculous things (like the theory behind Love & Respect) sound authoritative by misusing Scripture, data, and even history. We show how with Love & Respect in this week’s deep dive video, which, again is right here:
We want to teach you to recognize these red flags. Because it’s our prayer that books like Love & Respect, and other harmful resources, never get the chance to take off again, because people see right through them.
You may also enjoy:
Our Good Fruit Faith YouTube channel, where these deep dives are hosted, as well as short videos explaining the problems with complementarianism
Our downloadable one-sheet on the problems with Love & Respect
Our HEALTHY marriage book The Marriage You Want, which also has a video series to go along with it!
The problem with proof-texting is that if a doctrine based on a stand-alone verse of the Bible doesn’t stand up to the rest of scripture, then it doesn’t have a leg to stand on.
This type of cherry picking with Bible verses is a lot like what I occasionally heard in the courtroom. People focus on one part of the contract, or one line from a Supreme Court case, or one subdivision of a statute, while ignoring context. (Good advocates either give the context or refrain from using that source.)
I had to read fully to make sure I understood the context, even if the litigants weren’t going to give it to me. This experience comes in handy when I listen to sermons.
Anyone who says we should just trust our faith leaders as being God’s representatives ignores the Bible. The Bereans were praised for fact checking Paul. We have the responsibility to do the same.
Sheila, I’m so grateful for your work over the years in exposing the truth of this toxic book. Would you consider doing a survey on the effects it’s had on Christian women specifically in abusive marriages? You’ve exposed that it’s done great harm. But the proven stats would be even more proof. I speak as a survivor, and one who spoke up when L&R felt so wrong. But as with so many others, I was dismissed. You’ve given a voice to us. We are not crazy. Thank you.