I find the world's definition of manhood to be as pathetic as it is deplorable. As the election of Donald Trump has demonstrated, the 'alpha male' of Western culture is characterised by a sociopathic aggrandizement of self and a callous disdain for others. Inheriting male genitalia (and, in Donald's case, a fair bit of wealth) is apparently considered sufficient qualification for leadership (especially, in Donald's case, if the genitalia are self-reportedly large).
For a long time, my contempt for worldly manhood led me to reject the idea of manhood altogether, construing gender as an exclusively sexual phenomenon. To the extent that gender roles existed, they were, in my view, merely corollaries of physical differences, the most obvious example being the maternal role of the mother. Accordingly, I found many of the Bible's teachings on gender - particularly those pronounced by the Apostle Paul, which appeared to reflect the ethic of machismo championed by the world - deeply disagreeable.
Recently, however, I have begun to realise that some of my own character flaws stem from an incomplete progression into manhood. I have begun to realise, moreover, that the Biblical model of gender is exactly the piece I have been missing. In this post, I'd like to present what I have interpreted that model to be, and how I think it differs from the (Western) world's model - which, by the way, I reject even more emphatically in light of my newfound understanding.
***
Created in the image of God, Adam was the first man, who nevertheless chose to be ungodly - and consequently unmanly - by failing to fulfill the role for which he was created (Genesis 1-3). He was given no small measure of responsibility over the Garden of Eden; yet he failed to take responsibility for his actions, hiding in the bushes instead of facing the consequences of his disobedience. Just as importantly, he failed to take responsibility for the leadership of his family, allowing his wife be deceived and even proceeding to blame her for his own deception. Adam's son Cain would later mimic this behaviour, impudently deflecting responsibility for his brother's whereabouts and welfare (Genesis 4:9). For our purposes, the key lesson of Adam's story is that, in diametric opposition to the world's paradigm, the characteristic of being strong-willed corresponds to the characteristic of being unmanly. Adam failed to fulfil his role as man precisely because he was determined to pursue his own will. He was, in Trump's verbiage, a 'loser'.
Contrast the worldly model of manliness exemplified by Adam (and Trump) with the Biblical model of manliness exemplified by Jesus - the only 'self-made man' to ever have existed. Jesus exhibits a somewhat paradoxical character, at least from the world's perspective. He was confrontational when He needed to be, furiously driving out profiteers from the temple and overtly insulting the scribes and the Pharisees (Matthew 21:12-13, 23:1-36). On the other hand, he avoided confrontation when the situation required - witness His refusal to defend Himself before Pilot (Matthew 27; Mark 15; Luke 23; John 18), not to mention His constant refrainment from obliterating his enemies (Matthew 26:47-53). He did not hesitate to rustle jimmies, even to the extent of getting Himself killed; yet He was gracious and compassionate, even to the extent of forgiving those who killed Him (Luke 23:34). He was no respecter of persons, but His loyalty to God was absolute (Matthew 22:16; Mark 12:14; Luke 20:21).
Crucially, unlike the "first Adam", Jesus, the "last Adam", was man enough to submit His will to that of His Father (1 Corinthians 15:22, 45-49). Whereas Adam failed to take responsibility even for his own actions in the Garden of Eden, in the Garden of Gethsemane Jesus chose to take responsibility for the actions of all mankind. Whereas Adam introduced death to the world by failing to choose the Tree of Life, Jesus chose to die on a tree so that the world may once again have life. Whereas Adam's death was the result of his disobedience, Jesus was obedient to the point of death (Philippians 2:8). Thanks to that great act of heroism, we can be recreated in the image of the Son, who in turn is the very image of the Father (Colossians 1:15).
Speaking of the relationship of the Son with the Father, the Biblical man is defined by his role not only as a male, but also as an adult - which, paradoxically, involves becoming more like a child. While adults tend to be cynical, proud, and neurotic, children are trusting, teachable, and playful. It is no coincidence that the Kingdom of God belongs to such as these (Matthew 19:13-15; Luke 18:15-17), for they are more prepared to lead others to Christ rather than to themselves (Luke 22:26). To be sure, we are not meant to be childish in the sense of being ignorant (1 Corinthians 3, 13:11; Hebrews 5:11-14); we are to be wise as serpents but innocent as doves (Matthew 10:16). Indeed, we should be humble enough to learn from our elders, just as we teach, including by example, those less mature than ourselves (1 Timothy 5:1-3; Ephesians 6:1-3; 1 Peter 5:5).
This model of leadership stands in stark contrast to that of the world, afflicted as it is by family breakdown and obsessed as it with societal redefinition. What we observe instead is a devastating lack of parental guidance and positive role models - particularly for young, impressionable males, who end up trapped in a constant state of immaturity. Though they are immature, however, they are not innocent; they assume the worst aspects of both childhood and adulthood, leading to murder, rape, and all the other evils associated with worldly masculinity.
True manliness is not only profanely distorted by the world; it is also fiercely and shrewdly resisted by the world's ruler (1 Peter 5:8). The figure of King Herod - "that fox", as Jesus refers to him in Luke 13:32 - personifies this satanic resistance. Herod was so addicted to power, and so paranoid about losing it, that he resorted to infanticide. Of course, the very person whom he strove to kill, namely Jesus, displayed the opposite sort of behaviour: "though He was in the form of God, [He] did not count equality with God a thing to be grasped, but emptied Himself, by taking the form of a servant, being born [as a child] in the likeness of men" (Philippians 2:6). Later, Herod was seduced into beheading John the Baptist - another exemplar of Godly manhood, who not only defied the ways of the world but resolved to change them - having already flouted John's advice by joining himself to his brother's wife (Matthew 14:1-12; Mark 6:14-29; Luke 9:7-9). Before the crucifixion, we read that Herod treated Jesus with contempt and ridicule (Luke 23). Herod - who, like the dragon in Revelation 12 that seeks to kill the male child, is clearly a type of anti-Christ - does not want the youth of today to grow up; he seeks to stifle their spiritual maturation, and thus their potential to advance the Kingdom, by keeping them locked in a puerile state of rebellion and perversion.
Thank God that "He who is in [us] is greater is greater than he who is in the world" (1 John 4:4), and that through Him, we too can "overcome the world "(1 John 5:4-5; cf. John 16:33). For we put no confidence in the flesh (Philippians 3) - in status, wealth, or anything else that will eventually pass away (Psalm 49). We fear God, and we submit to Him (Matthew 10:28-31; Luke 12:4-7; Proverbs 14:26); but, ipso facto, we do not fear man (Psalm 18, 56; Proverbs 3:25-26, Hebrews 13:6), or even Satan for that matter (1 John 5:18-20; Luke 10:17-19; James 4:7). For our confidence is in Christ (2 Corinthians 3:4-6), through whom we can "with confidence draw near to the throne of grace" (Hebrews 4:16), so that when we we are weak, then we are strong (2 Corinthians 11:30-12:10). Jesus "made no answer" to Herod's interrogation, for He knew that He - along with anyone who believed in Him - would be vindicated (Luke 23:9). Indeed, He has given us a Spirit not of fear, but of power (2 Timothy 1:7). This same Spirit is a Spirit of self-control - another characteristic of a Godly man that is sorely lacking in today's world. It is also a Spirit of love - the very love that drives out fear (1 John 4:18).
***
The worldly man pursues his own desires and ambitions to the neglect of others. The Godly man, by contrast, gives his life as a service to God - and, concomitantly, to others. We need less worldly men and more Godly men. Far from dispensing with manhood, we need to reclaim it according to its God-given purpose.
For a long time, my contempt for worldly manhood led me to reject the idea of manhood altogether, construing gender as an exclusively sexual phenomenon. To the extent that gender roles existed, they were, in my view, merely corollaries of physical differences, the most obvious example being the maternal role of the mother. Accordingly, I found many of the Bible's teachings on gender - particularly those pronounced by the Apostle Paul, which appeared to reflect the ethic of machismo championed by the world - deeply disagreeable.
Recently, however, I have begun to realise that some of my own character flaws stem from an incomplete progression into manhood. I have begun to realise, moreover, that the Biblical model of gender is exactly the piece I have been missing. In this post, I'd like to present what I have interpreted that model to be, and how I think it differs from the (Western) world's model - which, by the way, I reject even more emphatically in light of my newfound understanding.
***
Created in the image of God, Adam was the first man, who nevertheless chose to be ungodly - and consequently unmanly - by failing to fulfill the role for which he was created (Genesis 1-3). He was given no small measure of responsibility over the Garden of Eden; yet he failed to take responsibility for his actions, hiding in the bushes instead of facing the consequences of his disobedience. Just as importantly, he failed to take responsibility for the leadership of his family, allowing his wife be deceived and even proceeding to blame her for his own deception. Adam's son Cain would later mimic this behaviour, impudently deflecting responsibility for his brother's whereabouts and welfare (Genesis 4:9). For our purposes, the key lesson of Adam's story is that, in diametric opposition to the world's paradigm, the characteristic of being strong-willed corresponds to the characteristic of being unmanly. Adam failed to fulfil his role as man precisely because he was determined to pursue his own will. He was, in Trump's verbiage, a 'loser'.
Contrast the worldly model of manliness exemplified by Adam (and Trump) with the Biblical model of manliness exemplified by Jesus - the only 'self-made man' to ever have existed. Jesus exhibits a somewhat paradoxical character, at least from the world's perspective. He was confrontational when He needed to be, furiously driving out profiteers from the temple and overtly insulting the scribes and the Pharisees (Matthew 21:12-13, 23:1-36). On the other hand, he avoided confrontation when the situation required - witness His refusal to defend Himself before Pilot (Matthew 27; Mark 15; Luke 23; John 18), not to mention His constant refrainment from obliterating his enemies (Matthew 26:47-53). He did not hesitate to rustle jimmies, even to the extent of getting Himself killed; yet He was gracious and compassionate, even to the extent of forgiving those who killed Him (Luke 23:34). He was no respecter of persons, but His loyalty to God was absolute (Matthew 22:16; Mark 12:14; Luke 20:21).
Crucially, unlike the "first Adam", Jesus, the "last Adam", was man enough to submit His will to that of His Father (1 Corinthians 15:22, 45-49). Whereas Adam failed to take responsibility even for his own actions in the Garden of Eden, in the Garden of Gethsemane Jesus chose to take responsibility for the actions of all mankind. Whereas Adam introduced death to the world by failing to choose the Tree of Life, Jesus chose to die on a tree so that the world may once again have life. Whereas Adam's death was the result of his disobedience, Jesus was obedient to the point of death (Philippians 2:8). Thanks to that great act of heroism, we can be recreated in the image of the Son, who in turn is the very image of the Father (Colossians 1:15).
This model of leadership stands in stark contrast to that of the world, afflicted as it is by family breakdown and obsessed as it with societal redefinition. What we observe instead is a devastating lack of parental guidance and positive role models - particularly for young, impressionable males, who end up trapped in a constant state of immaturity. Though they are immature, however, they are not innocent; they assume the worst aspects of both childhood and adulthood, leading to murder, rape, and all the other evils associated with worldly masculinity.
True manliness is not only profanely distorted by the world; it is also fiercely and shrewdly resisted by the world's ruler (1 Peter 5:8). The figure of King Herod - "that fox", as Jesus refers to him in Luke 13:32 - personifies this satanic resistance. Herod was so addicted to power, and so paranoid about losing it, that he resorted to infanticide. Of course, the very person whom he strove to kill, namely Jesus, displayed the opposite sort of behaviour: "though He was in the form of God, [He] did not count equality with God a thing to be grasped, but emptied Himself, by taking the form of a servant, being born [as a child] in the likeness of men" (Philippians 2:6). Later, Herod was seduced into beheading John the Baptist - another exemplar of Godly manhood, who not only defied the ways of the world but resolved to change them - having already flouted John's advice by joining himself to his brother's wife (Matthew 14:1-12; Mark 6:14-29; Luke 9:7-9). Before the crucifixion, we read that Herod treated Jesus with contempt and ridicule (Luke 23). Herod - who, like the dragon in Revelation 12 that seeks to kill the male child, is clearly a type of anti-Christ - does not want the youth of today to grow up; he seeks to stifle their spiritual maturation, and thus their potential to advance the Kingdom, by keeping them locked in a puerile state of rebellion and perversion.
Thank God that "He who is in [us] is greater is greater than he who is in the world" (1 John 4:4), and that through Him, we too can "overcome the world "(1 John 5:4-5; cf. John 16:33). For we put no confidence in the flesh (Philippians 3) - in status, wealth, or anything else that will eventually pass away (Psalm 49). We fear God, and we submit to Him (Matthew 10:28-31; Luke 12:4-7; Proverbs 14:26); but, ipso facto, we do not fear man (Psalm 18, 56; Proverbs 3:25-26, Hebrews 13:6), or even Satan for that matter (1 John 5:18-20; Luke 10:17-19; James 4:7). For our confidence is in Christ (2 Corinthians 3:4-6), through whom we can "with confidence draw near to the throne of grace" (Hebrews 4:16), so that when we we are weak, then we are strong (2 Corinthians 11:30-12:10). Jesus "made no answer" to Herod's interrogation, for He knew that He - along with anyone who believed in Him - would be vindicated (Luke 23:9). Indeed, He has given us a Spirit not of fear, but of power (2 Timothy 1:7). This same Spirit is a Spirit of self-control - another characteristic of a Godly man that is sorely lacking in today's world. It is also a Spirit of love - the very love that drives out fear (1 John 4:18).
***
The worldly man pursues his own desires and ambitions to the neglect of others. The Godly man, by contrast, gives his life as a service to God - and, concomitantly, to others. We need less worldly men and more Godly men. Far from dispensing with manhood, we need to reclaim it according to its God-given purpose.
