The Institute (協会)

Isn't there a time for being "nice" though? Should we all just strut around like a bunch of horses asses? I think these types of discussions do more damage than good, these "we shouldn't be nice" arguments. Be transformed by Christ, repent, draw near, and let the rest happen as it will. This whole anti-niceness bit threw me off for a long time in my walk, and I started to think it was "correct" and "more Christian" to be a dick and "not nice." I was more concerned with not appearing "nice" that I was under a new law, one that isn't even in the Bible. I think this complex of "not wanting to be nice" comes from a deep insecurity within the person. "I shouldn't be nice because people will think I'm a pushover."

I'm with you, Anthony; we do need more pastors up in pulpits who are "men" and not Emo Elmos. But geez, I don't know much of a witness we can be if we're total dicks to everyone.

Huzzah!! I often wonder whatever happened to Peter? As the type of guy that would pull out a sword and cut someone's ear off (and then repent), I sit and church sometimes and wonder where that guy went? What kind of man was the 1st century fisherman in Palestine? I know this much, he didn't wear mauve!

In response to Tyler, I don't think we have to be complete dicks to be Peters (ha ha ha ha!!), but the American Christian dad/househusband/cheerleader could benefit from growing a set.

Tyler said, "I'm with you, Anthony; we do need more pastors up in pulpits who are "men" and not Emo Elmos. But geez, I don't know much of a witness we can be if we're total dicks to everyone."

Well, the other extreme isn't the answer either which I'm not advocating (I'm even more curious why that was your initial response--that is, the opposite dysfunction).

But back to my original question: why do guys think they need to sound like Elmo and why do church people expect that in evangelicalism? This is NOT true in other circles, BTW, the black churches, Korean, or the churches I've been too in central america. It's particularly America (maybe in Europe too). I dunno???

I like your illustration of grace. Simple. Straightforward. I think a certain segment of American Christianity has forgotten that the reason Christ offered Grace to sinners is because He suffered a brutal death. Just like we've disneyized fairy tales to remove much of the brutal elements, we've disneyized our faith. We've begun equating "grace" with some form of spinelessness. (I won't even call it gentleness, because I don't think that's what gentleness entails.) Grace is seeing the brutal and braving it to bring hope and salvation. If you paint over the brutal, what need is there for the hope and salvation? The happy ending is meaningless without the dark valley first. I think it's easy to mistake being a "big softy" for being someone full of grace when we've ignored the dark valley. I hope that makes sense.

Along the lines of balance, I've been thinking a lot lately of Teddy Roosevelt. He's just about my favorite historical figure. But he had an amazing balance between the bravado and strength of true masculinity, and the nurturing that enables growth or true masculinity. I think he managed the balance: Avoiding the trap of being "macho" by understanding that contained strength is true gentleness. I hope that makes sense, too. It's been a long Monday.

Anthony,

I can't speak to Europe, but we certainly have the same problem in Canada.

Anthony, have you been listening to Driscoll? I know that in Korean American churches there is a lot of emphasis on repentance and not enough grace which can be very damaging. I do think we need more kingdom oriented preaching. People only see Jesus as friend instead of a KING!!!!! John Piper sums it up nicely in this sermon jam.
http://1031sermonjams.com/media/war.mp3

Nice people don't confront sin in their own lives nor do they give rebuke and offer correction in other's lives when needed.

It's a nice easy comfortable way to live.

Yeah, you can be plenty nice while still having a backbone.

random guy, That was hilarious.

Tyler, I had the same initial thoughts as well.

Anthony, For some reason we (meaning a lot of people like me) often gravitate from one extreme to the other. I'm not sure why this is so, but it might explain why Tyler and I first thought 'Well, being a jerk isn't good either'. It's weird how easy it is to go to the extremes when what is right and good is almost always somewhere in the middle.

Part of it might be explained by looking at the etamology for "nice"; the Latin "nescius," or "silly." As much as we might claim that time has changed the meaning, I'd simply point out that the word still retains its former meaning.

To draw a picture, is there any quicker way to (rhetorically) castrate a man than to have an attractive young lady call him a "nice guy"? It means he's weightless.

And we can overdo it; as much as I appreciate what a soldier does, we can miss real manhood by concentrating on the military. Never forget that the soldier's profession has historically been a dishonorable one due to associations with drunkenness and abuse of civilians. Our military works HARD to prevent this from happening, to put it mildly. To make a Marine into a worthy companion for St. Sebastian, to draw a picture, isn't always easy.

Grace, and manhood, can also reside in the accountant driving a minivan, loving his wife and kids--but sometimes dreaming of playing linebacker for the Pack, or being a Ranger, too.

Your last picture said more than a thousand words.
Picture #1 did too.

Thank you.
I'm sick of being a puny whimp with my feel good sermons and Elmo counseling. I'm tired of all the pressure to do so.

Jeff.

I think we have a soteriological problem. Our soteriology informs our ecclesiology. I have some ideas about this but I'll throw out the question to you fellas why might this problem be theological - do we need salvation or not?

Taylor Mali hits the nail on head with this short video clip entitled "Like_youknow"...

http://youtube.com/watch?v=SCNIBV87wV4

It speaks volumes about what is wrong with most preaching today.

This discussion sounds somewhat to familiar to John Eldredge's book "Wild at Heart"...he was quick to say, I think even in the introduction or first chapters that masculinity shouldn't be defined by whether or not you drive an old CJ with mud tires et...And then from this book, I also heard the counter-argument which somebody above mentioned about the anti-anti-nice movement.

Perhaps people are confusing nice with kind. God commands us to be kind, as a fruit of the spirit. How you could differentiate the two could be this: nice has become a word that is bad, it's become acting in a way in which you would attempt to control, or even use manipulation, the other person's opinion of you in way that makes them be pleased with you. Synonyms could be placate or mollify. Kind however isn't about being controlling, but a way to love, even boldy love others with sensitivity. Are we confusing definitions, and over generalizing? (I just reread this in the "preview" option and I don't know if I'm being clear, I do much better at talking. Typing in thie little box on my roommate's laptop--with small keys, bc she has a MacBook, isn't helping either)

One last thought: also in Eldredge's book he uses a quote from Howard Thurman that I love, and I thought of it when I saw your (Anthony) quote near your proflie, by St. somebody. Thurman says, "Don't ask what the world needs. Ask what makes you come alive, and go do it. Because what the world needs is people who have come alive."

Good point/s, "girl."

Nice = Goo-Dooder = Absolution of Responsibility.
For a long but well thought out explanation of what responsible action might mean, look here. (my own blog)
http://naturalaw.failuretorefrain.com/2007/10/24/prosperity-and-the-christian-ethic/

Obviously joining this discussion a little late, but to Anthony's point about the "nice guy" preacher not being the norm in other settings - I was one of several guys who had the opportunity to visit a Missionary Baptist Church in East St. Louis last year with a classmate of mine, and I'll never forget one of the first things this BIG, elderly black preacher said as he began his sermon: "Now I don't mean to step on nobody's toes. But I don't aim to miss nobody." He then launched into a passionate sermon that employed the use of the pronoun "you" a great deal more than the pronoun "we". I, for one, found his "in-your-face-ness" refreshing.