An unfortunate reality today is that neither the church nor society properly understand the concept of masculinity. While prevalent illustrations of toxic masculinity abound, they provide examples of how men should not act, they do not automatically translate into clarity of how (and why) men should act. We should not be surprised by the level of confusion and misapplication permeating homes, ministries, and marketplace settings regarding what it means to be a man from God’s perspective.
Correcting this through a framework of biblical masculinity involves understanding foundational aspects of creation, implications of the impact of the fall on humanity, and applying these truths consistently across our spheres of influence. Clarity on the foundations, implications, and applications of biblical masculinity will equip men to live, love, and lead in ways that glorify God and demonstrate His truth.
Foundations
Before we can evaluate any concept, it is important to understand the terms and definitions being discussed. While this may seem like a trivial first step, breakdowns here are affecting the families, churches, and communities where we live, serve, and work. If we are evaluating biblical masculinity, we must understand what the words biblical and masculinity are referring to. Consider the following basic English definitions:
- Biblical = “Of, relating to, or being in accord with the Bible.”1 https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/biblical (accessed June 14, 2021)
- Masculinity = “The quality or nature of the male sex: the quality, state, or degree of being masculine or manly.” 2https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/masculinity (accessed July 2, 2021)
- Male = “An individual of the sex that is typically capable of producing small, usually motile gametes (such as sperm or spermatozoa) which fertilize the eggs of a female.” 3https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/male (accessed June 14, 2021)
With these basic definitions we know that the concept of biblical masculinity is one where what is understood about males (as individuals), or masculinity (as a descriptor) is consistent with the content and character of the Bible. However, a workable foundation requires that we add to these basic terms and definitions an understanding of how God uses them in Scripture. This discussion will focus on two key passages clearly showing us what God created to be characteristic of males.
Genesis 2
Genesis 2:4-8 explains that humanity (and the associated distinction of sexes) is a physical reality. Genesis 2:15-17 shows that humanity has a rational component, enabling us to think, evaluate, and decide. In Genesis 2:18 we learn that the man (male) was partial, or incomplete. Genesis 1:28; 2:15; and 2:19-20 identify that humanity (and the male specifically) was responsible to fulfill assigned tasks. Genesis 2:20-25 shows God’s solution for man’s isolation (which was, according to God, not good). None of the other creatures was suitable to resolve the relational aspect of the man, so God created the woman (female) to complete humanity.
Luke 2:52
This New Testament passage teaches us about masculinity through an example of the perfect Man. “And Jesus kept increasing in wisdom and stature, and in favor with God and man” (NASB). This short verse reinforces the masculine characteristics first identified in Genesis 1-2.
As a medical doctor, Luke identified four realities about men (males) through this description of Christ. Growth in wisdom identifies the mental (rational) component. Growth in stature confirms physical (biological) realities. Growth in favor with God expands on the relational aspect of males by clarifying the spiritual dynamic. Growth in favor with men (people) also enhances the relational component by adding a social layer.
Seeing clearly through the fog surrounding masculinity requires us to accept how God communicates concepts through words and examples. These definitions and passages lay the groundwork necessary to navigate today’s cultural battlespace. The next step is to appreciate the implications of these biblical truths.
Implications
Definitions are great on paper. The challenge comes when those definitions must come off the page and interact with real life. There are three primary implications surrounding masculinity feeding the confusion faced today.
First is the disparity between biological and cultural realities, or the current distinction between sex and gender. The textbook definition for sex (noun) is, “The male, female, or intersex division of a species, especially as differentiated with reference to the reproductive functions.” 4https://www.dictionary.com/browse/sex (accessed June 20, 2021) Things get interesting when we add the cultural definition of gender to the mix. Planned Parenthood provides this explanation, “It’s easy to confuse sex and gender. Just remember that biological or assigned sex is about biology, anatomy, and chromosomes. Gender is society’s set of expectations, standards, and characteristics about how men and women are supposed to act.” 5https://www.plannedparenthood.org/learn/gender-identity/sex-gender-identity (accessed June 20, 2021)
The implications come into play when we waver on what source of authority is allowed to set the baseline definitions, standards, and expectations. To understand biblical masculinity, one must understand how the Bible defines and explains what should, and should not, be characteristic of males. Both the Genesis and Luke passages above clearly identify the significance of the physical, or biological, starting point for the discussion. Culture may provide examples for consideration, but those examples must be evaluated against biblical definitions and standards.
The second implication extends from the first truth of the biological distinction between male and female. Here the implication is that while distinct, masculinity (male) is not better than femininity (female). Genesis 1:26-31 explains that both male and female were created in God’s image and are equally very good in His eyes. Genesis 2:21-25 goes on to describe the unity and equality between male and female. Biblical masculinity recognizes differences without acquiring a superiority complex.
The third implication involves the impact of the fall and human sin nature on the expression and understanding of masculinity (and femininity for that matter). Genesis chapter three describes the impact of sin on the mental, physical, spiritual, and social aspects of both men and women. Even before God’s proclamations of judgment in Genesis 3:14-19 we can see examples of the contamination of masculinity (and femininity). Since he did not step in to prevent Eve’s consumption of the forbidden fruit, we can deduce that Adam was either absent or disengaged (3:1-6). After realizing their error both male and female experienced shame (3:7-10). This led to avoiding accountability (3:10) and responsibility (3:11).
These implications are critical to understanding biblical masculinity. Millennia of either ignorance or rejection of biblical truths has permeated the perspective of both the Church and society. Genesis 3:17 explains that Adam’s mistake was listening to (obeying) a voice that contradicted God’s clear directive. This illustrates the God-created characteristics that men are rational (able to think and make decisions) and responsible (accountable for instructions and responses) beings. Biblical masculinity is expressed when men’s thinking and acting are consistent with Scripture.
Just as it is impossible to frame up a building when the concrete of the foundation is not set, so it is not possible to apply biblical truth when we refuse to see or accept it. Clear definitions combined with an understanding of the implications of biblical truth allow us to move into the practice of biblical expressions of masculinity.
Applications
Adding to the foundations and implications we can consider the antithesis; what biblical masculinity is not. Misappropriating practical aspects of masculinity distracts from biblical expressions, dilutes truth, and leads to more confusion. Two often-confused aspects of masculinity involve first roles and responsibilities, and second cultural expressions.
First, biblical masculinity is not defined by roles and responsibilities. God-ordained roles require God-defined masculinity, they do not bestow it. It is important to understand this distinction, especially within the context of the local church. Consider this attempt to define biblical masculinity, “When it comes to explicit points of testimony, I think it deals with eldership and headship. So, look at eldership, look at headship and from those we derive what it means to be a man in the eyes of the church.” 6https://ftc.co/resource-library/conversations/adam-mcclendon-on-christian-culture-and-masculinity/ (accessed June 18, 2021) It is easy to miss this, but the ramifications are significant if we do. The qualifications provided in Timothy and Titus require biblical masculinity as an entry point into the roles of pastor/elder and deacon, they do not create biblical masculinity in the individual.
Be it marriage, fatherhood, or leadership roles within the church, these positions of service and responsibility do not guarantee that men will display characteristics consistent with Scripture. Understanding how God defines masculinity happens before the assignment of positions. Otherwise, the concept is reduced to a basic task list. Defining masculinity by roles and responsibilities also negates the conversation for men who are not husbands, fathers, pastors, or deacons.
Second, biblical masculinity is not external expression. This should be a no-brainer. However, our families, churches, and communities are full of men attempting to define and demonstrate masculinity through activities and accessories. Flannel wearing, beard oiling, and axe throwing machismo do not define masculinity according to Scripture. These trappings are not necessarily wrong in and of themselves. However, they can be a well-crafted disguise hiding insecurity, confusion, or rejection of biblical distinctions. God’s definition of masculinity has nothing to do with how far your rifle shoots, how fast your computer processes, or how many awards your smoked brisket earned on the BBQ circuit. Cultural expression can also be manifested negatively when based on roles and responsibilities. Biblical masculinity accepts responsibility and leadership, but it is not ‘large and in charge’ or domineering. This perspective is the basis of toxic masculinity.
So then, what is biblical masculinity? This is where most contemporary literature begins; how men should apply God-intended characteristics. However, if we focus on the what and how without the why we begin from a faulty platform and our application will often be misdirected. When based on foundational definitions and scriptural implications we know what characteristics God created in, and expects of, men. Defined in Genesis and demonstrated in Christ, these four domains are the core of biblical masculinity: Mental, Physical, Spiritual, Social.
The mental domain includes the rational and responsible aspects identified in Genesis. To be biblical this aspect of masculinity requires men to renew and protect their minds (Ro 12:1-2; Php 4:6-7). Men must make decisions that are difficult and uncomfortable. Doing so requires confidence and commitment along with diligence and discernment. Cultural masculinity has not been concerned with mental health, but biblical masculinity recognizes the impact of sin and stress on our capacity to think and evaluate correctly. It is self-aware and self-filtering, while honestly and appropriately expressing emotions (Eph 4:25-32).
The physical domain accepts the biological and physiological realities of creation. While amazing examples of God’s creative power (but contrary to our own perspective) men are not invincible (2Co 4:16). We face a variety of limitations caused by aging, general fatigue, and stress. These boundaries require us to exercise layers of discipline to protect our physical capacity while also preventing sinful excesses (1Co 9:24-27; Ga 5:24; Col 3:5-7).
The spiritual domain recognizes the nature of God’s eternal relationship with humanity. Biblical characteristics accept that God is holy and just while man is sinful and unrighteous. This form of masculinity expresses itself in ways that accept the gift of salvation (Eph 1:3-14), abide in Christ (Jn 15:1-11), and grow in demonstrations of spiritual maturity (Php 1:9-11; Col 1:9-12; Ga 5:22-26; 2Pt 1:5-11).
The social domain applies to man’s relationship with other individuals and the broader communities of the church and society. How we serve our families (1Co 7:1-7; Eph 5:22-6:4) is an expression of our masculinity (biblical or otherwise). Our interactions with ‘one another’ and mutual support towards godliness demonstrate characteristics God intends of men (Ga 6:1-10; Eph 6:1-9; 1Ti 2:1-7; Ti 2:1-10).
Describing biblical masculinity is very different than defining it, especially when we take the shortcut of beginning with cultural standards and expectations. However, with clarity comes the confidence to teach and lead by example. Brothers, when understood and applied biblically, masculinity is good and necessary. Our homes, churches, and community are in desperate need of seeing what right looks like. Biblical masculinity is not defined by roles and responsibilities. It is the leveraging of scriptural thinking, physical capacity, spiritual growth, and social interactions into every aspect of a man’s life. Remember that discipleship through this requires patience as we gain biblical clarity and the associated confidence to follow Paul’s instruction in 1 Corinthians 16:13 and man up!
Jeff Campa is the VP of Operations and Student Affairs for Calvary University (Kansas City, MO). He also serves as a Chaplain (MAJ) for the Army Reserve Aviation Command. Jeff and Amy have been married for 24 years and live in Kansas City, MO with their pointer-mix, Lambeau.
This article was first published in the Sept-Oct. 2021 issue of the Voice magazine.
Comments are closed