All Comments for: A Jesus for Real Men | Christianity Today

Free Newsletters:

RSS Feeds |

Audio |

Twitter

Home > 2008 > April

Christianity Today, April, 2008 |

A Jesus for Real Men

What the new masculinity movement gets right and wrong.

Brandon O'Brien | posted 4/18/2008 09:19AM

"The stallions hang out in bars; the geldings hang out in church." This observation from David Murrow strikes a little close to home for someone like me. I always thrived in my congregation but was never ...

[Reader Reviews]

Average User Rating:

Rate and Comment on this article

Displaying 1 - 25 of 148 comments.

Page: 1 2 3 4 5 ...

Show All

Buck Strickland

Posted: May 02, 2008 4:26 AM


Are there churhes in Sillicon Valley that have lots of single women? because there are lots of single male engineers over 40 who have never married. I think someone should set up get togethers and advertise in the radio about it.

John	Posted: May 02, 2008 12:31 AM

I have never heard Catholics, Muslims, or Jews talk about this issue. So, why is this such an issue in the evangelical world? Why is it so hard for men to attend church as an aspect of practicing their faith? The Catholic masses I've attended are attended by many single men and they're not there to hit on women right after mass. They are there to practice their faith, they go to church to have an encounter with Christ. I'm not making an argument for the Eucharist. I am making an argument for they way Catholics do church. Men are also not absent in universities, or investment firms. Church leadership should spend time teaching, teaching, and preaching. Men should then be challenged to go into the world and be fishers of men--this requires knowledge! They could apply their mental prowess and invest in establishing ministries of reconciliation so that sinners have encounters with the one true God. Now that takes guts, it takes a pair, and it takes faith that moves mountains!

Man Up!

Posted: May 01, 2008 11:39 PM

Thank you so much for a balanced article! As a woman, I find the whole "feminization" of the church argument extremely offensive, condescending and derogatory. I think it's the wrong focus to posture the genders against each other, or to value one gender over the other. Men and women both have a place in the church, and churches, like families, benefit from this balance. We have enough unnecessary divisions in the church as it is. I think it's high time for the excuses, whining, and rhetoric to stop, and time for the accountability and Christ-like leadership of men to begin for some (continue for others).

Karen DeGraaf

Posted: May 01, 2008 6:57 AM


Thank you SO MUCH for reminding us about true discipleship; i am so SICK of the recent tendency to sexualize everything, especially to make God and therefore real faith masculine. Thanks for the reminder about the fruits of the SPirit! And does anyone bring up the fact that the majority of missionaries out there risking their lives over the past couple of centuries have been women? Hmm.

Mike B

Posted: April 30, 2008 8:47 PM

The author picked excerpts to illustrate his view of the so-called "masculine movement", failing to corretly identify the thesis of the books he so pointedly takes exception to. Too bad he didn't start with a little history, like Leon Podles' excellent "The Church Impotent: The Feminization of Christianity". The church has re-framed both the Biblical message and the church culture to speak to the heart of hearts of their largest customer base - the women. Sensing the feminine culture, the men stay away in large numbers as a result. Some men are doing their best to change this situation. Instead of picking them off, how about helping them out? There should be room - a place - in our churches for EVERYONE, including women (lots of them now), passive men (lots of them now too), and "masculine" men (under represented). If we don't change the status quo, there will be no "church" left in 4 or 5 generations.

Isaac Downing

Posted: April 30, 2008 2:43 PM


Excellent thoughts. I have a lot of respect for the men you referenced (Eldridge, Driscoll) but agree with the article in pointing out where they might be taking it a little too far.

Jim Baxter

Posted: April 30, 2008 9:52 AM

Jesus served for A Season as The Word, and as The Creator, and for less than 24 hours as the Lamb of God. When we see Him as He IS, The Lion of Judah, we will all be changed. He will rule with a rod of iron for a thousand years. His Seasons are not limited. One Lamb of God was sufficient and His fruit will last for eternity. What are needed TODAY are more followers of The Lion of Judah. The seekers are saying, "Where do I sign up?" a follower of The Lion of Judah semper fidelis Sgt. USMC WWII & Korean War

Mike B

Posted: April 30, 2008 8:51 AM

This article is a bit of preaching to the choir. I have read two of the books mentioned and came away from them with a different interpretation of their intent. I suggest to all here that they read the books themselves and consider the points raised, thus avoiding the tendency to accept without scrutiny anything that fits what they already think. I mentioned "preaching to the choir" because on the top of the home page of the CT web site is a link for "Women", but none for men. Enough said.

Jim	Posted: April 28, 2008 4:38 PM


Yes, we need to see the manliness of Jesus, he courage, loyalty, self-sacrificing love... But it would be wrong to recast him in the image of a 20-something warrior. Long ago I switched role models from Luke Skywalker to Obi Wan Kenobi..... Which, pray tell, is the most masculine? let alone mature?

Seth Heasley

Posted: April 28, 2008 11:00 AM

I can't help thinking the author may not have actually *read* Murrow and Eldredge. I'm unfamiliar with GodMen and Brad Stine, but Murrow and Eldredge are just trying to bring men back to church. The modern church has painted over Christ with a pink brush, so all we see is "Gentle Jesus, Meek and Mild". Is it harmful to show his manly side to men? Should that scare off women? No. If we're going to present Christ as "Lover of my soul", would it hurt to occasionally show him as King and Lord? I think not. Balance is needed. Of course, covering over all the Grace and Compassion of Christ would be an equal mistake. Murrow and Eldredge suggest nothing of the sort. Read Murrow and Eldredge (get them from the library if you don't want to enrich these good men) and judge for yourself. Don't throw the baby out with the bathwater.

WarriorSaint

Posted: April 28, 2008 10:40 AM

Lord Help us! I find it interesting that this article did little to nothing to give you the full picture of this "movement". Equally scary is brother O Brien, has done nothing more than proof texting. I agree we are to be more Christlike, the question is, which Christ? Was he not tough as well as tender? The presupposition here is that there is only two types of men. Wrong! There is a broad spectrum of men and that is what the Creator God purposed. Several men will have characteristics of both tenderness and toughness. I believe you can be a lover AND a fighter and NOT lose any tenderness while being tough or toughness while being tender. This article doesn't even scratch the surface of what the men villianized in this article are truly saying. Obviously the question that should have been answered is, "What does BALANCED masculinity look like and how do we get there?" My suggestion to brother O Brien is to take a deeper look at this before you blacken eyes with the pen.

Lenita

Posted: April 28, 2008 9:23 AM

I believe that we are in need of true revival. I think it's sad that when God is calling folks to their harvest that we trample on their ministry instead of encouraging the efforts. Realistically, we need to admit that churches have not done enough to disciple men. Don't we think it's startling that most churches are filled with women and led by men only, does that not cry for a wake-up call! I pray that we all draw closer to Christ and pray more instead of blowing fires out. The efforts of the "masculine movement" is very much needed. Yes I agree that we need to draw closer to the image of Christ, meaning character, not just physical. I think we operate to much in extremes instead of dealing with real issues. We do need to pray for men to get more involved and take their rightful place in ministry. The reason why we live in a fallen world today, in need of a savior, is because, man, allowed a woman to be unprotected from satan, left her vulnerable, people- we need to pray

Johnny Raines

Posted: April 27, 2008 1:45 PM


Ah, the Sparkman lumber yards. You are more of a man than I am, Mr. O'Brian. I think you're exactly right, and you've said it beautifully. I would love to comment more constructively here, but I have nothing to add. Still waiting for an article explaining "The Predatory Wasp of the Palisades!" Johnny

Billy in Jax

Posted: April 27, 2008 12:38 PM

Wow! I cannot believe that I just read an article that clearly misunderstands the concept of men having a conversational relationship with God, a "movement" that seeks to have men stand up and become a real part of Jesus' mission on earth, as disciples and leaders. I mean, even secular counseling recognizes the defeat of our families, culture, and the church as a result of the lack of true, authentic masculinity in our world. Eldredge's and Driscoll's work also contain many statements about the role of women in our society and church, and challenge the role as "helpmate" vs teammate is incredibly fresh and true. Jesus is not all about suffering and He would have called down the guns if God asked Him to. He went to the cross in obedience to His father, the same way we should. His life on earth is a perfect example of how we can/should go to God for everything and obey Him...as Men. Your article seems overly negative in its approach to the material and what you call a "movement".

George

Posted: April 26, 2008 5:03 PM


This is such a gross misrepresentation of these fine men. Has the author actually read any of their books? Pulling sensational quotes out of context like he has done is like tabloid news. I expect more out of CT. These authors have nothing to do with re-masculating Jesus. It is the church that needs to be re-masculated. Very poor hack job of an article.

Lee	Posted: April 26, 2008 8:48 AM

The Author, though he comes close at times, has seems to lose the big picture of what Eldredge, Driscoll, Coughlin, and Murrow are trying to say. None are saying that the “only Jesus” is 100% man. They collectively are saying that in each man is an effeminate part but mostly driven differently than women. In this same vein, each woman has a masculine part but mostly driven differently than men. Each person is created in God’s image and endowed with aspects of God. An exercise I do with confirmation classes is to name attributes of women and of men. Then look at the attributes of God the Father, God the Son and God the Holy Spirit, as we perceive the Trinity. What my confirmation students find (if they are not shut down by some of the older men and women in the church), is that God has both the attributes of men and women collectively. We don’t have all the attributes of God – it takes both in the fullness of our maleness/femaleness to experience the fullness of God.

Charles

Posted: April 25, 2008 2:49 PM

I agree that we can't just create Jesus in the current culture's image of masculinity. Nevertheless, the criticism that the contemporary church is greatly feminized still stands. As Larry Crabb says, we are not merely humans, we are always human as either women or as men. In coming as a man, Jesus modeled what it means to be a man, even as he modeled what it means to be human. Therefore we men should take our cues regarding masculinity not from the culture, but from Jesus and, I would argue, other biblical characters, such as David, Jeremiah, and Paul. Jesus wept and was tender, but he also unashamedly confronted the power brokers of his day, even though it cost him his life. Jesus worked with his hands and undoubtedly knew the life of a tough blue-collar worker. Consider also King David. Yes, he was a musician and a poet. But he was also one of the greatest warriors Israel ever knew. Consider Paul and his willingness to share the gospel no matter the threat it posed.

Nathan

Posted: April 24, 2008 3:34 PM

I appreciate your perspective. I found myself nodding in agreement to much of what you said. I have read John Eldredge's books and while I enjoyed them, there was definitely an undercurrent that bothered me. As usual, people take things too far. I think that the masculine movement has some very valid points, but unfortunately there is a bit of sensationalism involved with it as well. As someone who doesn't fit the modern cartoonish caracature of masculity, I resent much of the movement's fluff. I guess like anything, chew the meat and spit out the bones. The idea that men need to step up and stop being passive is a very important message. I think its message gets muddied when it comes at the expense of virtues seen as traditionally feminine. By the way, sensitivity, gentleness and compassion are fruits of the holy spirit, not fruits of femininity. The masculinists emphasis on style is really pointless. The point of the gospel, as the author suggested, is to become more like Christ.

Linda

Posted: April 24, 2008 9:36 AM

I have not read the books by Driscoll and Eldridge, but I do think strong measures need to be taken to make churches not seem 'feminized' to men. Tim and Lee Hoy below are right, Brandon. It seems like you are trying to have it both ways, which will just maintain the status quo. Most women like myself desperately want to see more men in church. I was raised Southern Baptist but have started attending the Eastern Orthodox Church. My local parish is Antiochian Orthodox and almost entirely made of ex-Protestants, including many married couples. In almost every case it was the husband's idea to become Orthodox and the wife had to be talked or even dragged into it. It is more appealing to men. I don't know all the reasons but here is a partial list. 1. All priests, deacons, subdeacons and ordained readers MUST be male. Priests, deacons, subdeacons are required to wear beards. The beard is a symbol of authority, fatherhood, or both. (continued in comment above

Randall Wilkens

Posted: April 24, 2008 6:36 AM

Brandon, thank you so much for this article; it hits the nail right on the head! I can echo your statement: I'm not sure where a man like me fits when the only categories for masculinity are "metrosexual" and "Ultimate Fighting champion." Both of these extremes are lifted up by the world and neither of them describe me. I must find my true masculinity in Jesus, whose nature as a man transcends the expectations of the world.

Rich Gitschlag

Posted: April 23, 2008 5:16 PM

Having walked this walk for about 35 years now, I think this article falls into a common over-simplification of the issue. I read most of the sources that Brandon cites and several others, and have seen that he picks out several items from his sources and makes then look like stand-alone assertions. But when taken in context are only small parts of larger discussions. Shocking statements, this is true, but they were never meant to stand alone as primary truths, but as correctives to the opposite teachings. For most of the Church, there has been a subtle teaching that masculinity itself is the result of The Fall. To be masculine and active is to be sinful, to be feminine and passive is to be spiritual. This is what Murrow, Eldridge and Driscoll are trying to correct.

Gerry

Posted: April 23, 2008 12:42 PM


Thank you, thank you, thank you for a corrective concerning a movement that is going astray. Being a man is harnessing what it means to be manly and using it for God's glory. Is that meakness (power under control). At any time, Jesus could have called upon legions to strike down evil men, but He didn't. Quite manly! Blessings for a very well thought out article!

Eric Blauer

Posted: April 23, 2008 12:34 PM

It's a shame that such an honest and deep need (the masculine soul) is being reduced to pithy statements and generalizations. None of those men mentioned should have the totality of their messages reduced to the lowest common denominator or most edgy statements. This article is bland, typically safe and will be forgotten like most of the simplistic articles written on the subject. You could do better, come on, stretch yourself and dig into the marrow of the issue not the fat.

john	Posted: April 23, 2008 12:00 PM

I thought that the article points out the fundamental problems of the books listed. I only read Eldredge's book here, but I could've just watched "Braveheart" to understand what he is trying to say (it seems Eldredge quoted Braveheart as much as the Bible). There was nothing Biblical (not that what he said was unbiblical per se) in that book. The claim he made was "his presuppossed view" on maleness, not the Biblical view. I thought that this article was not biased and somewhat well-thought out. I do believe that we do have to express each gender should express its distinctiveness (1 Cor 11 see Thiselton's Commentary for more info). However, I never read anywhere in the Bible, the maleness (or musculinity) is shown through how one behaves roughly, but rather in how one leads and stand up for the truth and take the role God has assigned through the church to show the trinity aspect of God.

Gordon

Posted: April 23, 2008 4:04 AM

Thank you!! At last a balanced article about this whole masculinity craze (the flavour of the month?) Why is that we Christians get so carried away with some things - we either swing one way or the other instead of being balanced. Eldredge has written some wonderful books but I feel he too goes overboard about masculinity. I played rugby for 10 years ("Give blood play rugby" says the bumper sticker), hunted and hiked but also prefer reading, writing and drinking lattes. What does that make me? I have friends who are accountants, artists and musicians - they love what they do and are not interested in shooting guns, riding Harley's or sky diving - and they are masculine, godly men who treat their families like royalty. We are all different! Just look at those men who are "boss, bold, brash, bully and blunt." They are a pain! If you look closely you will find they have very few good friends, homes that are in a mess and leave a trail of wounded hearts.

Page: 1 2 3 4 5 ...

E-mail this page

Write CT

Print this article

Post a comment