“For John came neither eating nor drinking, and they say, He hath a devil. The Son of man came eating and drinking, and they say, Behold a man gluttonous, and a winebibber, a friend of publicans and sinners. But wisdom is justified of her children.” – Matthew 11:18-19
When conservative churches discuss biblical masculinity they go to great lengths in declaring Jesus as masculine. While absolutely correct on this point, the evidence they present is often poorly framed. They bring up the story of turning over the tables at the temple, battling demons, turning over the tables at the temple, the crucifixion, and don’t forget that He made a whip and turned over the tables at the temple. For example:
The real Jesus was nothing like what most people imagine! The Bible says Jesus was a muscular man of perfect health and enduring strength. He kept all the physical laws of good health (Hebrews 4:15). Before His ministry began at age 30, He worked with stone and timber as a carpenter (Mark 6:3). He had well-developed, hardened muscles and tanned skin from laboring outdoors throughout His life. During His ministry, He walked from city to city through mountainous terrain, sometimes traveling many miles in one day.
Artists who paint Jesus as effeminate must not have read John 2, where Christ confronted moneychangers in the temple. When He saw shady business transacting inside God’s house, He took a handful of ropes and whipped the livestock to drive them out. He kicked over tables and chairs and threw money all over the floor. His deep voice bellowed through the halls: “Get out of God’s house, and take your things with you!” This was at the beginning of His ministry, when few even knew who this man was (verse 18). Yet these Jews were too fearful to challenge this strapping, righteously indignant young man.1
Despite statements like the one above, the fact is that Jesus had a reputation among the religious conservatives of the time for not being disciplined or rigid in His application of the law. You can even say they viewed Him as being weak.
That doesn’t mean their opinion was valid. Jesus was neither weak nor undisciplined – He was gracious, courageous, and strong. But He didn’t parade His masculine virtue by wearing muscle shirts or speaking brashly. He told stories that both implicated the powerful and raised up the weak. John was not a storyteller; his communication was direct and confrontational. Jesus did confront at times, but it was not the dominant portion of His ministry. Why then do some try to make Jesus into a similar mold as John the Baptist? Because our version of masculinity is limited.
The context surrounding this passage is Jesus commending the work of John the Baptist, who had just questioned whether or not Jesus was the promised one of God. John was in prison due to his prophetic condemnation of Herod and would soon be killed. Jesus, rather than responding defensively, reminds the people of John’s faithfulness.
An Old Testament counterpart to the ministries of John and Jesus can be found in the ministries of Elijah and Elisha. The prophetic ministry of Elijah was that of a wilderness prophet, declaring Yahweh’s condemnation against Israel. His ministry and miracles are often associated with fire, dearth, and destruction: proclaiming a drought in Israel, fire consuming the altar in the contest with Baal’s prophets, Ahaziah’s soldiers consumed by fire, and finally himself carried up to heaven in a fiery chariot. The ministry of Elisha is associated more often with water, provision, and life. We see him healing poisoned waters, multiplying oil, healing poisoned food, multiplying loaves of bread, raising the dead, healing Naaman from leprosy, and making an ax-head float. We see Elisha as a shepherd, teaching and leading the school of the prophets. The ministries of these two prophets were different, complimentary, and ordained by God.
Scripture also presents a contrast in the prophetic ministries of Jesus and John. Just like Elijah, John was the austere, wilderness prophet, thundering God’s word and predicting the coming fire of judgment on those who would not repent. His work prepared the way for Jesus as a gracious shepherd. Like Elisha, Jesus’s ministry emphasized providing, gathering, and building God’s people. The majority of Jesus’ ministry consists of telling stories, explaining God’s law, healing, answering questions, battling evil spirits, and feeding the people. We see Jesus eating and drinking so much that his reputation among the religious crowd was of gluttony and drinking too much wine; whereas John’s asceticism led to the accusation that he had a devil. The contrast of Jesus’ and John’s ministry leaves no doubt as to their different emphases.
Jesus and John’s ministries, while not similar, were complimentary. Matthew Henry, in commenting on this passage, says, “Christ conversed familiarly with all sorts of people, not affecting any peculiar strictness or austerity he was affable and easy of access, not shy of any company, was often at feasts, both with Pharisees and publicans, to try if this would win upon those who were not wrought upon by John’s reservedness: those who were not awed by John’s frowns, would be allured by Christ’s smiles…”2 In other words, both Jesus and John were faithful, but in different ways.
The trajectory of the church for the last hundred years has been to exalt the feminine as the ideal form of piety. The Victorian era in Britain and the U.S. emphasized feminine symbols and the softer elements of Christianity. This change of focus is captured well in Ann Douglas’ The Feminization of American Culture, and Callum Brown’s The Death of Christian Britain. Many conservative churches bombard men from the pulpit for being poor fathers, husbands, and workers. The same churches tell stories of faithful women who kept their families together, feminine virtues, and the importance of being nice. Consequently men no longer feel welcomed in the church.
Many want to rescue the church from this feminine captivity. They understand that the success of secular “pastors” like Jordan Petersen, Jack Donovan, etc. demonstrates a glaring failure in the church. These church leaders see the need to teach men how to be masculine rather than effeminate. But problems arise when the only ideal of manhood is John the Baptist – the austere prophet who thunders against evil, is bold in pronouncements, and commands attention. Consequently, if your speech is not blunt, your workout routine regular, and your presence commanding, you are not biblically masculine. Men who don’t fit that template are left outside. While some might try to fit this legalistic mold, they will eventually quit. They are then vulnerable to joining effeminate churches, thinking those are the only places where people like them fit.
Masculinity has always come in a couple of varieties: the bolder, more active type and subdued, quieter type. Scripture is filled with examples of the first (Esau, Aaron, David, and Peter) and the second (Jacob, Moses, Solomon, and Barnabas). The same is the true for church history: for every John Knox there is a Thomas Cranmer, both faithful to their tasks but pursuing them in different ways. Churches must not exalt the first type of masculinity and overshadow the second.
Masculinity begins when a man pursues his God-given responsibilities. The natural tendency in our time is to be effeminate and ignore those responsibilities. Calling men to masculinity is an essential part of Christian discipleship. Yet we fail if we ignore the temperament of the man we are teaching. Does masculinity look the same for John Knox as it did for J.R.R. Tolkien? Was Tolkien less masculine because he didn’t get into arguments with people about religion, faith, and culture wars? Yet this quiet, gentle man who gardened, taught, wrote, and worshipped helped bring more people to Christ than most of us ever will. Where does his masculinity fit? This is where the examples of Jesus and John can help.
While we are called to imitate Jesus, we should remember that Jesus had a specific, human personality and prophetic ministry. To assume His particular ministry to be the only ideal is silly. Just as women can be like Christ even though He is a man, men can imitate Him without having to replicate His type of ministry. His work fits with His specific gifts, or as Matthew Henry calls it, his “deportment.”
Now our Lord Jesus, by his freedom, did not at all condemn John, any more than John did condemn him, though their deportment was so very different. Note, though we are never so clear in the goodness of our own practice, yet we must not judge of others by it. ‘There may be a great diversity of operations, where it is the same God that worketh all in all’ (1 Corinthians 12:6), and this various manifestation of the Spirit is given to every man to profit withal, Matthew 11:7. Observe especially, that God’s ministers are variously gifted: the ability and genius of some lie one way, of others, another way: some are Boanerges–sons of thunder others, Barnabeses–sons of consolation yet all these worketh that one and the self-same Spirit (1 Corinthians 12:11), and therefore we ought not to condemn either, but to praise both, and praise God for both, who thus tries various ways of dealing with persons of various tempers, that sinners may be either made pliable or left inexcusable, so that, whatever the issue is, God will be glorified.3
While we want masculine men to be a part of our churches, we shouldn’t confuse masculinity with brashness. Doing so pushes the sizeable number of men with moderate dispositions towards the exits. The church should encourage the virtues of courage, strength, and piety, while remembering that those virtues are manifested differently in men like Daniel and Barnabas than they are in David and Elijah. Quiet strength may not be as inspiring as the boldness of David or Elijah, but God doesn’t call everyone to be inspiring. He calls us to use our gifts in His kingdom.
Matt Carpenter teaches history, government, and economics in Athens, Alabama. He has been in ministry for ten years and is presently interim pastor of Trinity Reformed Church in Huntsville.
- https://www.thetrumpet.com/literature/read/15689-biblical-manhood/1953; see also “Why the Church Desperately Needs Violent Men, https://ericconn.com/violent-men/ ↩︎
- Matthew Henry, Commentary on Matthew 11, https://www.truthaccordingtoscripture.com/commentaries/mhm/matthew-11.php ↩︎
- Ibid ↩︎