 | | script type=text/javascript!--
google_ad_client = pub-1014475007611027;
//160x90, created 1/22/08
google_ad_slot = 2798103672;
google_ad_width = 160;
google_ad_height = 90;
//--/script
script type=text/javascript
src=http://pagead2.googlesyndication.com/pagead/show_ads.js
/script
brbr
script type=text/javascript!--
google_ad_client = pub-1014475007611027;
//160x90, created 1/22/08
google_ad_slot = 2798103672;
google_ad_width = 160;
google_ad_height = 90;
//--/script
script type=text/javascript
src=http://pagead2.googlesyndication.com/pagead/show_ads.js
/script |
|
|
| | | div align=center
script type=text/javascript!--
google_ad_client = pub-1014475007611027;
//336x280, created 1/22/08
google_ad_slot = 0634485649;
google_ad_width = 336;
google_ad_height = 280;
//--/script
script type=text/javascript
src=http://pagead2.googlesyndication.com/pagead/show_ads.js
/script
script type=text/javascript!--
google_ad_client = pub-1014475007611027;
//336x280, created 1/22/08
google_ad_slot = 0634485649;
google_ad_width = 336;
google_ad_height = 280;
//--/script
script type=text/javascript
src=http://pagead2.googlesyndication.com/pagead/show_ads.js
/script
/div |
|
|
| !-- Search Google --
center
form method=get action=http://www.google.com/custom target=google_window
table bgcolor=#ffffff
trtd nowrap=nowrap valign=top align=left height=32
label for=sbi style=display: noneEnter your search terms/label
input type=text name=q size=45 maxlength=255 value= id=sbi/input
label for=sbb style=display: noneSubmit search form/label
input type=submit name=sa value=Google Search id=sbb/input
input type=hidden name=client value=pub-1014475007611027/input
input type=hidden name=forid value=1/input
input type=hidden name=ie value=ISO-8859-1/input
input type=hidden name=oe value=ISO-8859-1/input
input type=hidden name=cof value=GALT:#008000;GL:1;DIV:#336699;VLC:663399;AH:center;BGC:FFFFFF;LBGC:336699;ALC:0000FF;LC:0000FF;T:000000;GFNT:0000FF;GIMP:0000FF;FORID:1/input
input type=hidden name=hl value=en/input
/td/tr/table
/form
/center
!-- Search Google -- |
|
|
| Singles at the Crossroads: A Fresh Perspective on Christian Singleness | 
 enlarge | Author: Albert Y. Hsu
Publisher: InterVarsity Press
Category: Book
List Price: $15.00
Buy New: $0.01
You Save: $14.99 (100%)
Buy New/Used from $0.01
Avg. Customer Rating:  (13 reviews)
Sales Rank: 631273
Languages: English (Original Language), English (Unknown), English (Published)
Media: Paperback
Number Of Items: 1
Pages: 194
Shipping Weight (lbs): 0.5
Dimensions (in): 8.2 x 5.4 x 0.6
ISBN: 0830813535
Dewey Decimal Number: 248.84
EAN: 9780830813537
ASIN: 0830813535
Publication Date: October 1997
Availability: Usually ships in 1-2 business days
|
| Editorial Reviews:
Product Description
Albert Hsu has written a book that provides a truly Christian understanding of singleness--what it means to be single and Christian. He suggests that a balanced, biblical view is one that honors singleness as a status equal to marriage.
|
| Customer Reviews: Read 8 more reviews...
 Making the "Gift of Singleness" Myth WORSE May 24, 2008
2 out of 2 found this review helpful
Maybe it's me, but I am absolutely stumped about how many glowing reviews this book has received. At the time it came out, it billed itself as some kind of groundbreaking new voice for singles, "debunking the gift of singleness myth", but over time, all it did was promote a new "GoS" myth, one that declares all singleness to be a gift, whether it's wanted or not. How did this happen? br /br /First, this book dismissed sound theology held for centuries about Paul's use of the word "gift" in 1 Cor 7:7, which that he was referring to some sort of special gifting, such as sexual continency for the sake of a mission. Instead, Hsu favored a newer translation of that passage from The Message, which reads "God gives the gift of the single life to some, the gift of the married life to others" -- a passage that is now being taken out and replaced with something to closer to the former, original meaning (the NLT has also recently replaced the "gift of singleness" with the more non-specific "special gift of God").br /br /Second, by taking the erroneous position that Paul was declaring that both marriage and singleness are equal gifts from God, Hsu figured that he was doing singles overlooked by the church a huge favor, declaring that "singles are valued just as much by God as marrieds". A fine sentiment, but this "equal gifts of equal value" message had the unintended consequence of providing ammunition to those who dismiss the concerns of the vast majority who want to marry but are finding it difficult to do so in a church culture that has been increasingly devaluing of marriage. Women in particular become anxious as time slips away and their chances of healthy childbirth dwindle. But how dare you express anything less than complete contentment when God, in His generosity, has given you His "gift" of singleness? br /br /Numerous books have since come out parrotting this one, with logical extensions that basically suggest that since singleness and marriage are gifts of equal value, it really shouldn't matter to you which one you get, because marriage isn't really better, just "different". In her lastest book "Get Married: What Women Can Do to Help it Happen", Candice Watters takes on these disingenuous comparisons, noting honestly that "people who marry well and are committed to their marriages don't wish that they were single again". br /br /If singleness is really a gift equal to marriage, why would anyone bother to seek God for a "gift exchange", as Hsu simplistically suggests? The kind of studied indifference towards marriage that many Christian singles dutifully affect tells us a lot about how these teachings have sown seeds of ambivilence and confusion that work against what has historically been considered a good and godly pursuit. And of course, there have been other social/cultural/economic forces at work, but how can singles talk about issues such as the shortage of men in our churches when it means that they'll likely be shut down with a lecture on how their singleness is a gift and they should just be content?br /br /Let's put an end to phony contentment with singleness and bad books on singleness. We can start by not confusing circumstantial singleness with "gifted" singleness, and insisting that biblical texts about singleness and celibacy not be dressed up to mean more than what they actually say. Perhaps then singles will be valued and supported in whatever unique way fits for them -- without being pitied or patronized.
 ALMOST Debunking the "Gift" of Singleness Myth May 22, 2006
6 out of 7 found this review helpful
"The Gift of Singleness" has recently (finally!) become a hot topic among Christian singles. Used almost universally among Christian writers ministering to singleness (13000 websites and counting), its most recent detractors argue that it is too closely linked with "called to singleness", an obsolete notion that places inordinate emphasis on receiving special revelation or "word from the Lord" about his plan to either marry or stay single. Debbie Maken is one of the critics who believes that it also overemphasizes contentment in the face of a growing problem of protracted singleness that affects mostly women, creating confusion about God's will, as well as complacency about taking timely action towards marriage. What's more, it's an entirely modern term, unheard of by previous generations of Christians who never considered singleness or marriage to be a gift or a calling, and weren't afraid to use agency to find a spouse.br /br /A predecessor to this movement, Albert Hsu's book promised to debunk the "myth of the gift of singleness", but added to the confusion by putting another spin on it. In this write-up of how he did this, I hope to illustrate how we've gotten stuck with this lousy gift and why it needs to go, not back to the gift shop "for an exchange" as Hsu cheerfully suggests, but straight to the Christian lexicon trashcan.br /br / Hsu's "gift of singleness" begins the same way as with other Christian writers on the topic: with a misinterpretation of 1 Corinthians 7:7: "Here's how we can read verse 7. `I wish that all were as I myself am [single]. But each has a particular gift from God, one having one kind [singleness] and another a different kind [marriage]' (NRSV). Some have one gift and others have another. Some are single and some are married. If you have one gift, you don't have the other. They're mutually exclusive." He credits these insights for this passage from The Message, which reads the latter part of the verse as "God gives the gift of the single life to some, the gift of the married life to others.", even though that is NOT what Paul said or meant! br /br /This misinterpretation all started with the Living Bibles of the early 70's that were most likely trying to downplay the "gift of celibacy" or bring modern relevance to the passage by making it about singleness. But even Gordon Fee says no one can be sure if "I myself am" in the first half is referring to singleness or celibacy. One thing that Fee and other scholars have overlooked was the Greek word IDIOS that precedes "gift" ("charisma": Greek for grace gift) in the second half of the verse. Idios is more correctly translated as "particular" or "peculiar", as a matter of fact, it's the root of the English word "idiosyncratic", and the French word "idiot", which means "peculiar one".br /br /Now, why all the fuss about IDIOS? Because: Paul was talking about something idiosyncratic, not something either/or. Your thumbprint is idiosyncratic, there's none other like it. The rh factor of your blood is NOT idiosyncratic: you're either positive or negative. Also, Marital status is not idiosyncratic: you're either married or you're not. The "idios charisma" Paul was referring to was neither singleness nor marriage: he was talking about his own preference and relating that with an aside about the uniqueness of our gifts from God. He accentuates his point about uniqueness using a Greek expression still common today: "hos men houto de hos houto", most closely translated in the KJV and NASB as "one after/in this manner, and another after/in that." It's a figure of speech! "This" and "that" are non-specific: "this" does not mean marriage and "that" does not mean "singleness", or vice versa, as the Living Bible, The Message and Al Hsu have concluded! Nor can we assume that Paul was claiming to have some special gift of celibacy: whatever was his gift that allowed him to proceed on such a perilous mission alone, he probably didn't quite understand himself. Certainly, there's no biblical evidence to suggest that God took away his sexual desires, (but plenty that suggests he struggled with something of a fleshly nature), nor has this happened to anyone else. However Paul may have been gifted, he was gifted in his own particular way.br /br /And so what does this mean? THERE IS NO SUCH THING FOR ANY OF US AS "THE GIFT OF SINGLENESS" OR "THE GIFT OF CELIBACY" for that matter. The Bible almost always talks about marriage and singleness pragmatically in terms of PERSONAL VOLITION, rather than divine calling: a man "finds a wife" in Proverbs 18:22, or "takes a wife" in 1 Corinthians 9:5, "made themselves eunuchs for the kingdom of heaven" in Matthew 19:12. And it seems that Hsu is trying to affirm this volitional quality by stating that "The "gift" of singleness is descriptive, not restrictive. It does not prevent singles from getting married if they so desire and circumstances permit."br /br /However well-intentioned Hsu's attempts at this revision of the term, it still carries with it the heavy history of biblical misinterpretation and mid 20th century church leaders, (proliferated particularly by the never married but later disgraced Bill Gothard) who used the term to over-emphasize the need for divine revelation for being "called" to marriage or singleness, creating untold agony and distress for countless numbers of single people, as described by Ellen Varughese in The Freedom to Marry. "Called to singleness" and "gift of singleness" are inextricably linked. br /br /We don't need to call singleness a gift to encourage people to work with its advantages and be content, or use it to honor those who devote themselves to celibate service (and they don't need the flattery of having it called a gift, if indeed their service is sincere). Even if God values single people and married people equally, it is patronizing and dismissive to suggest that singleness and marriage are of gifts equal value to the majority singles who indeed want to marry but can't find partners, as is the case with the many Christian women today who vastly outnumber their male cohorts. Deeming singleness a gift has become a Pollyanna ploy for avoiding issues, like the gender imbalance and other factors behind widespread protracted singleness, such as the bad teachings that go along with calling singleness a gift, as outlined in Maken's book (and my review of it).br /br /Let's all stop using it, and work together to persuade church leaders to do the same. We can begin by appealing to the editors of The Message and other modern translations to go back to translations of 1Corinthians 7:7 that conform more closely with the original Greek. br /
 Best book ever written on Christian singleness June 28, 2005
4 out of 4 found this review helpful
Most books written for Christian singles center around preparing for marriage or what to do while you're waiting for Mr. Right to come along. But what happens if Mr. Right never shows up? Albert Hsu is one of the few writers bold enough to take on this disturbing (to some) issue. He demolishes this "gift of singleness" talk and rightly points out that anyone who is currently single has been given the gift of singleness, at least for now. The history of how singleness was viewed in the church was also very instructive, considering the current emphasis on the family and "family values." As someone who has been single far longer than she expected, I reread this book from time to time to remind myself that God does not consider singles in any way inferior to those who are married.
Yay October 30, 2004
0 out of 4 found this review helpful
If you are single and Christian, read this book when you graduate from high school and again at the end of every decade of your life. Yay.
best in breadth and depth overall on the subject January 22, 2004
11 out of 12 found this review helpful
Dear friends of singles and singles. First things, though I read the Amazon reviews and use Amazon lots, and have thought of writing a review, this is the first I have written, ever. Why? Because, after countless discussion on singleness and marriage with folks, God and myself, I have found Hsu's book to be the most well-rounded and comprehensive, taking into account the breadth, depth and width of the worldwide and historical Church/Body of Christ, though clearly evangelical. After working with college campus ministry for 8 years, teaching college students 8 years, and teaching secondary for 6 years, this issue is very much discussed, debated even. And after living overseas for 6 years and visiting a dozen plus nations and the ethnicities, languages, ideas, religions, pedagogies, denominations, worship styles, theologies, etc., I realize in a much more profound way how so much of who I am and what I think is very much a construct of the culture and subcultures I am and were a part of. Short of it: all of us wear tainted lenses (though we seldom see it--"the fish never thinks of the water he is in" !!!), Hsu helped me to see that (though not his goal I am sure) and thus a fresh "perspective" on singleness/celibacy/chastity and I stand once again in wonder at Christ the Creator's diversity, greatness and goodness for all of us, single or married, and His Kingdom Will.
|
|
|
Powered by Associate-O-Matic
| | |