He humbled himself

In an April 18, 2008 article, Brandon O’Brien of Christianity Today wrote about masculinity and how it relates to men and to the portrayal of Jesus. O’Brien critiques the “new masculinity movement” that seeks to undo the “feminization” that has occurred in the church. O’Brien proposes an approach based on the humble Jesus rather than an approach based on masculinity or femininity.

O’Brien mentions a quote from David Murrow, “The stallions hang out in bars; the geldings hang out in church.” O’Brien states, “This observation … strikes a little close to home for someone like me. I always thrived in my congregation but was never certain I fit the mold of masculinity I saw modeled around me. So as much as I resent Murrow’s sentiment, it nevertheless rings true: In many churches, a certain type of man is conspicuously absent.”

O’Brien states, “The disparity in men’s and women’s attendance in American churches has made men the target of specialized ministry over the last two decades.” He mentions Promise Keepers as an example of this type of ministry. He states, “Today a growing body of literature is leveling its sights on the church, suggesting that men are uninvolved in church life because the church doesn’t encourage authentic masculine participation.”

O’Brien mentions John Eldredge, the author of Wild at Heart, as “first writer to popularize this concern.” O’Brien states that Eldredge “lamented that the masculine spirit was at risk because ‘most men believe God put them on the earth to be good boys.’ The church’s tendency to promote discipleship as merely becoming ‘nice guys’ keeps men from embodying their God-given maleness.”

O’Brien states, “Wild at Heart sowed seeds that have sprouted as a new ‘masculinity movement’ aimed to get men into church by changing the church’s atmosphere.” O’Brien mentions David Murrow, author of Why Men Hate Going to Church. O’Brien says that Murrow “founded the group Church for Men because, while the local congregation is ‘perfectly designed to reach women and older folks’—with its emphasis on comfort, nurture, and relationships—it ‘offers little to stir the masculine heart, so men find it dull and irrelevant.’”

O’Brien mentions others in this “new masculinity movement” such as Brad Stine of GodMen and Mark Driscoll of Seattle’s Mars Hill Church. O’Brien states, “In Driscoll’s opinion, the church has produced ‘a bunch of nice, soft, tender, chickified church boys. … Sixty percent of Christians are chicks,’ he explains, ‘and the forty percent that are dudes are still sort of chicks.’”

O’Brien states, “The aspect of church that men find least appealing is its conception of Jesus … According to Driscoll, ‘real men’ avoid the church because it projects a ‘Richard Simmons, hippie, queer Christ’ that ‘is no one to live for [and] is no one to die for.’ Driscoll explains, ‘Jesus was not a long-haired … effeminate-looking dude’; rather, he had ‘callused hands and big biceps.’ This is the sort of Christ men are drawn to—what Driscoll calls ‘Ultimate Fighting Jesus.’”

O’Brien mentions Paul Coughlin, author of No More Christian Nice Guy. O’Brien states that Coughlin agrees with Driscoll’s sentiments, “The problem with the wimpy Jesus of the popular imagination is that ‘a meek and mild Jesus eventually is a bore. He doesn’t inspire us.’”

O’Brien says, “I respect what these authors are trying to accomplish.” And he goes on to explain the ways that the “masculinity movement” gets it right in regards to how the present culture has effected the church.

O’Brien states, “The movement’s method of reclaiming the radical nature of the gospel, however, poses a genuine threat to Christian discipleship. These authors see the church’s fixation on morality as part and parcel of the church’s feminization, and they suggest that the solution is to inject the church with a heavy dose of testosterone. In other words, allowing women to create Jesus in their image has emasculated him; thus, regaining a biblical image of Christ is as simple as re-masculating him.

The masculinity movement’s solution assumes that Jesus came to model genuine masculinity. The authors don’t say so explicitly, but their rhetoric assumes manly instincts are inherently godly.”

O’Brien states, “…for women and men alike, the Bible never speaks of Christians as reformed men and women, but as altogether new creations (2 Cor. 5:17). The Fall has done more damage to the human heart than the masculinity movement seems willing to admit.

…Most importantly, Scripture gives no indication that Jesus came to earth to model masculinity. He is the ‘image of the invisible God, the firstborn over all creation’ (Col. 1:15). As such, he is not simply the perfect male; he is the perfect human being. Through his obedience to the Father, Christ exhibited the qualities that should characterize all believers, both male and female.”

O’Brien states, “The masculinity movement would have us emulate the glorified Jesus—the one who will return on horseback and brandish the sword of judgment. That is certainly the Jesus we worship. But it is not the Jesus we are commanded to imitate. The only times Jesus appears in Scripture as a warrior are in his pre-incarnate debuts in the Old Testament and post-resurrection glory. Our model of behavior, then, is the suffering Son, not the glorified one. Humanity in the image of Christ is not aggressive and combative; it is humble and poor (Phil. 2:5). We are most like Christ not when we win a fight, but when we suffer for righteousness’ sake (Eph. 5:1-2; 1 Thess. 1:6; 2:14).”

O’Brien concludes, “The way to recover the biblical image of Jesus is to submit ourselves to the Scriptures and let them discipline our preconceptions. In the process, we must remember that the purpose of discipleship is not primarily to become fulfilled men or women, but rather to be transformed into the image of Christ.”

It is difficult for me to voice my opinion in this matter. There are some well known people who are in the “new masculinity movement.” But I would have to agree with O’Brien where he says that we should not seek to emulate the masculine Jesus or the effeminate Jesus. Rather, we should pursue the Jesus that is wholly presented in the scriptures. The Jesus who was both zealous (John 2:17) and gentle (Matthew 11:29).

I am hesitant to blame the crowd that remolded Jesus into an effeminate man, just as I am hesitant to criticize those who seek to remold Jesus into a masculine man. The reason is that these people use examples from scripture to support their viewpoints. If Jesus can be described as masculine or effeminate, it is possible that this is a result of hardened cultural stereotypes. What I mean is, it is the culture that has deemed Jesus masculine or feminine. We should not allow the culture to shape scripture. We should allow scripture to shape us and our understanding of Jesus.

Perhaps the reason that fewer men than women want to go to church is not because Jesus has been feminized as much as it has to do with the possibility that the culture has such a strong grip on men. Perhaps men are reluctant to go to a church that does not conform to the manly image that the culture has presented for men. I don’t deny the possibility that the church may have become more feminized. But I wonder, if the church somehow returned to its original state, would not the present culture still consider the church to be effeminate because of the way scripture presents Jesus? “Take my yoke upon you and learn from me, for I am gentle and humble in heart, and you will find rest for your souls.” (Matthew 11:29.)

I leave you with these verses:

“Your attitude should be the same as that of Christ Jesus:
Who, being in very nature God,
did not consider equality with God something to be grasped,
but made himself nothing,
taking the very nature of a servant,
being made in human likeness.
And being found in appearance as a man,
he humbled himself
and became obedient to death—
even death on a cross!
Therefore God exalted him to the highest place
and gave him the name that is above every name,
that at the name of Jesus every knee should bow,
in heaven and on earth and under the earth,
and every tongue confess that Jesus Christ is Lord,
to the glory of God the Father.” (Philippians 2:5-11.)

Matthew5sixteen.