The Institute (協会)

I was just having a conversation about this today... Man, I really need to pick up that book.

Anthony,
Celsus' charge against the church was that "By the fact that they themselves admit that these people are worthy of their God, they show that they want and are able to convince only the foolish, dishonourable and stupid, and only slaves, women, and children." Looks like the composition of the church hasn't changed in several centuries! Maybe it is the pride of our self-sufficiency that keeps us men from coming to the One who welcomes us only on the admission of our inadequacy and insufficiency. Gordon Fee writes, "What Celsus saw as the shame of Christianity, Paul saw as its greater glory. By bringing "good news to the poor" through his Son, God has forever aligned himself with the disenfranchised; at the same time has played out before our eyes his own overthrow of the world's false standards. Every middle-class or upper-class [and may we add "male"] domestication of the gospel is therefore a betrayal of that gospel." (Fee, 1 Corinthians, NICNT, p.82)

I read Murrow's book earlier this year and thought it was ok. It was sort of like he had a good idea that couldn't quite fill a book. He tried real hard to expand it, but in the end it sort of lacked imagination. There were a few "laugh out loud" moments like when he said men don't like ceremony. Yeah, that's why there's so little ceremony among our armed forces. Better that men don't like ceremony done badly, but then who does?

I think I came off more critical than I intended there. For all its flaws, I do want to emphasize that his main point is solid and important.

Anthony,
We (non-Acts 29/Piper(BGC) reformed types) can't focus on that kind of thing. We're too busy excommunicating each other over divergent views of the character of the pre-Fall covenant. Next on the list, we've got to decide what to do with the people who bring their cups of coffee into the sanctuary on Sunday morning. When we're done with important, the-gospel-is-at-stake, type matters as these, perhaps then we can consider how to bring that gospel to people who don't know Jesus as anyone other than a character on The Family Guy.

Nick said, "We (non-Acts 29/Piper(BGC) reformed types) can't focus on that kind of thing. We're too busy excommunicating each other over divergent views of the character of the pre-Fall covenant."

Bro, I'm glad I was NOT drinking water 'cause it would have been all over my screen--that was hilarious. Understood. . .

I have no idea what is going on the the BGC (though it doesn't sound good), but Piper was one of the guys leading the complementarian charge that has been picked up by others these days.
I think they are fighting the same battle, just on a different front. They are calling men to be vitally involved, and they don't come across as girly-men.
It would be great if there was solid men's stuff instead of all the John Eldredge romanticism & open theism. He's more influenced by hollywood than the great godly, dudes we find in Scripture.

We still have a long way to go.

I've been pondering this Xn pansy-ism a long time as well.
Could this be why there is such a Staggering Lack of Evangelism in the PCA?
Sharing the Gospel takes GUTS. It means you actually have to Tell People that they (as well as yourself) Don't live up to GOD'S Standards. It means speaking Truth in the face of FEAR. Confronting others. Putting your LIFE on the LINE, often literally depending what part of town you're in. It means... Well, It means we've got to have some very strong men to lead the way.
*Jenny Shain*

http://adventurerevolution.stlouisblogs.org/

John Eldredge is not an open theist and, while he gets most of his illustrations from movies, his views of masculinity are clearly grounded in the biblical story. Eldredge remains and will continue to be my greatest influence on this topic. I love most of his stuff!!

Anthony,
Was trying to go to your now defunct blog to get the list of books on this topic. Couldn't do that . . . so a little orientation, and then a request.

What I have read of Eldridge hasn't attracted me. Seems a lot like mistaking regeneration for becoming a person who needs less of Jesus rather than living out of need for Jesus who gives to me. (opinion, without any evidence so nobody should agree or assail).

And, then I find it difficult not to see how his depiction of masculinity isn't mostly self-assertion against the stereotypes of pansy man and the ludicrous prescriptons of feminism. In sum, he makes me think there is a problem, but he doesn't make me think he has the answer. (obviously, haven't read enough of him).

I am an academic. I am looking to learn. I work with college men, and function as a model and mentor as much as a teacher and explainer. But, I don't have good teaching on this. I know very well that I am trying to be a man and from that personal framework sketching something out of the Bible. I don't have for myself a sufficient framework similar to other crucial topics.

Could you provide something of an annotated biblio? I have that for understanding women-- books that I can suggest to folks and themes from them I can work with to give a big picture. Don't have that for my men.

A large request. Or just tell me three books I should read in the next month and why I should read them. Maybe only one Eldridge?

Thanks for doing work you don't *have* to do.

I have been trying to find a list of the authors/pastors that appeared w/ Matt Crouch in that Father's Day 2007 chat-show on TBN. The link above (www.tbn.org/index.php/2/37.html) doesn't keep shows back to June 14 2007. If anyone knows all the names of the men who appeared w/ Matt Crouch, please post them here or email them to me. I was especially interested in the man who was seated next to Dr. Myles Munroe, & he commented on the impact that youth groups play on boys/young men. I definitly got the impression he was NOT in support of youth groups. I have to say I agree that it seems so often some of the boy/young men in youth groups do not seem to have spiritual leadership qualities.... I'm trying to be polite & non-judgemental here, but many seem - weak. The man (trying to remember his name & cannot) stated that males in his church when they move from the "kiddie/little boys dept/classes" they go in w/ men. While no doubt many man still need to return to mommy's side & go back-n-forth for a while (expected & normal), when that moment comes, he finally stays with the 'men-folk'. I spoke w/ other men in my family about this & they (ages 30-45) agreed it was a bit like potty training. When out in public, little boys may for a while go to the ladies room w/ mom & sisters & sometimes they may go to the men's room (if dad or big brother are in the group) but once he has finally made the official move, he never again goes back to the ladies room w/ mom..... and there is no in between "youth" restroom..... they are either w/ mom or they officially always go to the men's room. They learn to "go men's style" only by being w/ men....... if you allow a group of 4 year old boys alone in the bathroom, things would be a disaster. They have to be either w/ mom or w/ dad & the big boys. I hate using 'potty training' as an example but it seems to fit.
Looking forward to learning the names of all the different men who appeared w/ Matt Crouch in that 'chat show' on TBN about men, leadership & the church.