Skip to content

 

jesus gun

Three pictures of manliness in the gospels:

ONE.  Jesus, pictured as the father in Luke 15, (seriously the father is Jesus.  Just straightforwardly and obviously Jesus.  It's demonstrable beyond any question of refutation.  Really).  Where was I?  Oh yes, Jesus, pictured as the father, is turned in his stomach with compassion, hitches up his robes, runs to his good-for-nothing son, flings his arms around him and kisses him.

Here is the most poignant picture of Jesus' love for sinners.  And Jesus chooses a patriarch to show it.  We might think he looks pretty motherly and not fatherly.  We might question the masculinity of this scene.  We'd be dead wrong.  Here is a picture of total Jesus-shaped manliness.

TWO.  Jesus gets up from the evening meal, downs his drink in one, belches and tells a cracking gag about women drivers.  No wait.  That's not John 13.  In John 13 He gets up from the table, takes off His robe, picks up a towel, and He gets down on His hands and knees to wash and pad dry the dirty, naked feet of His friends. 

Was this a detour from His otherwise robust masculinity?  No, it was the expression of it.  Here was Jesus showing the full extent of His love (v1) - the Bridegroom washing His bride in sacrificial service. 

THREE.  Gethsemane: Jesus, overwhelmed with sorrow, actually lets His friends in on His distress - inviting Peter, James and John to watch with Him.  The Passion of the Christ gets this wrong - Jesus does not say 'I don't want them to see me like this.'  The only reason we know about this episode is that Jesus must have told them all about it.  Desperate praying, sweating blood, heart poured out, never has Jesus looked weaker.

I've heard Driscoll repeatedly describe Gethsemane as a portrait of femininity - Jesus in submission to His Head, the Father.  Of course both men and women need to look to Christ as Model.  But frankly I think Driscoll is avoiding something that ought to challenge his macho-man masculinity. Here is Man in submission to God.  This is what man is made for.  The Ruler under God, in the garden, obeying submissively in total dependence and willing to die for His bride - here is the Last Adam, the true picture of manliness.   

Of course it doesn't look very macho.  It isn't.  But it's what Jesus-shaped masculinity looks like.

To be a man like the Man doesn't look manly to men.  A man must be man enough to reject men and follow the Man.

.

Quote:

Real manliness is defined by Christlike character, and not just the Gentle-Jesus-meek-and-mild-style character, but the full-orbed fruit of the Spirit rounded out with strength, courage, conviction, strong passions, manly love, and a stout-hearted willingness to oppose error and fight for the truth—even to the point of laying down your life for the truth if necessary.

From TeamPyro's More on the Sissification of Church

Just the other day I was going to post on the fruit of the Spirit - wondering whether 'real men' would find Paul too feminized at this point.  All that girly 'patience and gentleness' and nothing about mechanical, athletic or barbecuing ability.  

Then I read the quote above. Now I think I agree with much of what the author says.  He himself is reacting against a kind of John Eldredge 'wild man' myth.  And who could disagree that manliness is defined by Christlike character?  But to say the fruit of the Spirit requires 'rounding out' when it's applied to real men....  ?? 

Does this mean that 'faith, hope and love' are a bit 'chickified'?  Perhaps they require rounding out with 'strength, honour and belching'?  Or maybe 'be joyful, pray and give thanks' (1 Thes 5:16-18) need augmenting with 'build, fix and kill.'

Oh look, I'm all for stout-hearted fighting spirit.  I know that men are cowards.  I know what a problem this is.  After all, the silence of Adam got us into this mess in the first place.

But when true, stout-hearted, courageous manhood is expressed, you know what it will look like?  Cheek-turning, cloak-giving, rights-yielding, foot-washing, burden-bearing, shame-absorbing, sacrificial love. 

It will look like the fruit of the Spirit.  And even though these qualities may look sissy to the world - well...  Real men don't care about looking sissy.

.

Other posts on men stuff:

Models of masculinity

Three thoughts on Headship

He said - She said

.

 

Quote:

Real manliness is defined by Christlike character, and not just the Gentle-Jesus-meek-and-mild-style character, but the full-orbed fruit of the Spirit rounded out with strength, courage, conviction, strong passions, manly love, and a stout-hearted willingness to oppose error and fight for the truth—even to the point of laying down your life for the truth if necessary.

From TeamPyro's More on the Sissification of Church

Just the other day I was going to post on the fruit of the Spirit - wondering whether 'real men' would find Paul too feminized at this point.  All that girly 'patience and gentleness' and nothing about mechanical, athletic or barbecuing ability.  

Then I read the quote above. Now I think I agree with much of what the author says.  He himself is reacting against a kind of John Eldredge 'wild man' myth.  And who could disagree that manliness is defined by Christlike character?  But to say the fruit of the Spirit requires 'rounding out' when it's applied to real men....  ?? 

Does this mean that 'faith, hope and love' are a bit 'chickified'?  Perhaps they require rounding out with 'strength, honour and belching'?  Or maybe 'be joyful, pray and give thanks' (1 Thes 5:16-18) need augmenting with 'build, fix and kill.'

Oh look, I'm all for stout-hearted fighting spirit.  I know that men are cowards.  I know what a problem this is.  After all, the silence of Adam got us into this mess in the first place.

But when true, stout-hearted, courageous manhood is expressed, you know what it will look like?  Cheek-turning, cloak-giving, rights-yielding, foot-washing, burden-bearing, shame-absorbing, sacrificial love. 

It will look like the fruit of the Spirit.  And even though these qualities may look sissy to the world - well...  Real men don't care about looking sissy.

.

Other posts on men stuff:

Models of masculinity

Three thoughts on Headship

He said - She said

.

 

It's an age-old question, but it's taken the Flight of the Conchords to pose it again with aching poignancy:

What man?  Which man?  Who's the man?

When's a man a man?

What makes a man a man?

Am I a man?

Yes... technically I am.

.

[youtube=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TLEK0UZH4cs]

.

On reflection there were two models of masculinity on show at the London Men's Convention on Saturday.

The first was communicated in mainly non-verbal ways.  As John has put it, there was, at times, a 'Top Gear' spirituality (Top Gear is a popular British TV programme where middle aged men salivate over an array of sports cars).  You can guess the kinds of things - jokes about sports teams, jokes about baldness (lots of them!), jokes about scrotums.  All the usual stuff.  There was an uncomfortable insistence on making fun of the main speaker (Tim Keller) in a laddish kind of, 'Hey, you big bald son of a gun.  Not much hair on you is there? Baldy.  You big bald son of a bald man. Ha!'  That kind of thing.   Graciously Keller did not call down bear attacks as was his right as prophet of the LORD.  Now that really would have sorted out the men from the boys.

(Just as an aside - British men, the cruelty that passes for 'banter' among men is quite shocking for foreigners to cope with.  On one hand I speak as someone who's lived here half his life and, for better and for worse, speaks the lingo.  I also speak as an Australian male.  But I confess that even we hard-headed convicts gape in wonder at the incessant jibes about 'Fatty' and 'Who ate all the pies?' when the man in question is only slightly overweight.  Or 'baldy', when we're really dealing with a high forehead.  Or - and I dare not even name what red-heads are called in this country.  I would try to dissuade anyone with auburn hair or lighter from stepping foot in the British Isles.  The word "Ginger" could be followed by any number of appellations, most of them four-letter.  And this kind of culture is rife in the church too.  Last night in the pub I heard two Christian men speak about another Christian friend in shockingly unChristian ways.  But it was completely in keeping with this lads culture.)

Under this first model of masculinity we're told that we have a God given masculinity to be lived out.  Which is true.  We're told what a huge problem it is when men aren't real men.  Which is true.  But then it's basically assumed that everyone knows what a real man is.

So Mark Driscoll bemoans the prevalence of 'chickified' men in church.

[youtube=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fSrZVF3FEUQ]

Apparently the real men are those "watching a ball game, making money, climbing a mountain, shooting a gun, or working on their truck."  And these are the men that are getting it done in the world.  So Driscoll wants these kind of men in the church.

Well.  Alright.  It'd be great to have them in church.  And yes, in some limited sense they'd make a welcome change from the other kind of false masculinity that abounds.  But let's be clear - all natural masculinity is wicked.  Masculinity as it occurs in its natural state is horribly and dangerously perverted.  Whether the perversion occurs in the cowardly retreat direction or the aggressive domination direction, it's a perversion.

The other model of masculinity came in Keller's talk on the cross.  He took us to Gethsemane where Jesus was at His wits end, craving the support of friends, crying, sweating blood contemplating the cross.  The furnace of God's wrath lay ahead of Him.  He begged His Father for another way.  But there was no other way to save us.  The prospect was simple: It was Him or us.  And so Jesus said 'Father, Let it be me.'

That's a man.

Laying down His life for others, bearing shame in their place, accepting weakness to strengthen them.  None of these things looked impressive.  He looked like a total failure, naked and choking to death on a cross.  He did not look manly.   And men from all sides told Him so.  They had all sorts of opinions about what Jesus needed to do to be a real man.  They were all wrong.  He reigned from that tree.  Here was the manliest thing ever done.

And it has nothing to do with back-slapping dudesmanship.  It's not about being mechanical or sports-loving.  And it's not threatened by aesthetic sensitivity or quiet thoughtfulness.  It's defined by heart-felt, loving, sacrificial service.  It's stepping into the roles Christ has for us and saying 'My life for yours.  My weakness for your strength.  Father, Let it be me.'

Oh for real men!  Oh to be a real man.  But not like those 'real men' we're told to be.

More posts on masculinity:

Larry Crabb on gender

Three thoughts on headship

He said - She said

Is the fruit of the Spirit too sissy for real men?

What real men look like

Spouse speak

Arian misogyny

.

Twitter widget by Rimon Habib - BuddyPress Expert Developer