Looking for a round of thoughts on this article

[Telrunya]

[FONT=Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif][FONT=Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]This is from Bill Perkins, author of 6 Battles Every Man Must Win.[/FONT][/FONT]
[FONT=Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif][FONT=Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif][/FONT][/FONT]
[FONT=Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif][FONT=Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]Why Men Hate Going to Church[/FONT][/FONT][FONT=Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif][FONT=Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif]David Murrow’s book, Why Men Hate Going to Church, isn’t just a home run; it’s a grand slam out-of-the-ball-park homerun. He begins chapter four with the following pop quiz: “Which set of values best characterizes Jesus Christ and his true followers?”
LEFT SET..............RIGHT SET
Competence................Love
Power........................Communication
Efficiency...................Beauty
Achievement...............Relationships
Skills..........................Support
Proving Oneself............Help
Results.......................Nurturing
Accomplishments..........Feelings
Objects......................Sharing
Technology.................Relating
Goal-Oriented..............Harmony
Self-sufficiency...........Community
Success.....................Loving cooperation
Competition................Personal _expression
Murrow said that over the years he’s shown that chart to hundreds of people, both Christians and non-Christians and more than 95 percent of the time people choose the Right Set as the best representation of true Christian values. Now here’s the kicker, he pulled the lists from John Gray’s book, Men are From Mars, Women are From Venus. And you guessed it—the Left Set represents Martians and the Right Set Venetians.
Murrow concludes that most people view Christ and his followers as expressing feminine values. Furthermore, they think that Jesus possessed traits that come naturally to a woman. So many men believe that to become follower of Christ they must adapt feminine values and reject masculine ones (pp. 23-24).
And what happens when the masculine spirit shows up in a church? After years of hard research he concluded, “When the masculine spirit shows up in church, Christians and non-Christians roundly condemn it. People who speak the truth too boldly are stifled because they might hurt someone’s feelings. Leaders who make bold moves are accused of being power hungry. Efforts to make the church more efficient or effective are tabled in the name of harmony. Churches that set specific goals and measure achievement are looked down upon for being too focused on numbers. And how many times have you heard this chestnut: ‘the church is run too much like a business?’” (p. 26).
Neither Murrow nor I would suggest the church needs to become a male club. Nor that the feminine spirit isn’t a wonderful thing that strengthens the church. But too many churches today have allowed the pendulum to swing too far in the feminine direction—from the programming to the language to the decorating. I haven’t even counted the number of churches I’ve visited where the men’s room is decorated with flowers. Who did that? I guarantee you it wasn’t the men of the church!
I remember a couple of years ago a church developed a wonderful ministry aimed at linking people together according to recreational interests. They formed a biking team, a hiking team, a hunting team, a backpacking team, a fishing team, a golfing team—and for the women a scrap book team and a decorating team. The power point slide that advertised the new ministry said, “It’s all about relationships.” I pulled the pastor aside and said, “That’s a great slide if you want to attract women. But I’ll guarantee you most men didn’t come to this church looking for “relationships.” I urged him to change it to read, “It’s all about FUN!”
The great thing about Murrow’s book is that he not only slaughters a herd of sacred cows—he gives practical suggestions aimed at helping churches attract and keep men. And his suggestions don’t require launching new ministries. But they do require creating a masculine spirit within a church.
I think it’s time we remember that Jesus loved children and honored and ministered to women. But his disciples were men. The leaders of the early church were men. And Jesus doesn’t ask men to abandon their masculinity to follow him.
Anyway, I want to urge you to get David’s book—buy one for yourself and one for your pastor. When you’re through reading it, give it to a friend. God’s doing a work in the church today and it involves men!

[/FONT][/FONT]

 

[Dr. Shon]

Telrunya, I agree with you 100%. I read a thread on this same issue on ZolaBoard a few months ago. It makes perfect sense to me and I applaud you for this post.

 

[indagroove]

[FONT=Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif][FONT=Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif]The leaders of the early church were men. And Jesus doesn’t ask men to abandon their masculinity to follow him. [/FONT][/FONT]
[FONT=Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif][FONT=Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif]
Anyway, I want to urge you to get David’s book—buy one for yourself and one for your pastor. When you’re through reading it, give it to a friend. God’s doing a work in the church today and it involves men!

[/FONT][/FONT]

Thanks for posting this.

Christ is looking for all men to be real men. Servant leaders to lead their families, home, communities. Men who accept the love and grace of God, and see the need to pass this to the children.

We do need to take it serious. On of the trends has been that women lead the Sunday schools and kids ministries. As boys get older and become teenagers, they feel less inclined to want to go, as there are no men involved, and they want to be with the men. This is why men MUST be involved in the ministries of the church to show our young men what they need to become.

Our church has a powerfull men's ministry and discipleship training programs. Our Pastor of men's ministry is very active and a great down to earth guy that captivates you with his own testimony and witness. Not a man steps foot in that church that is not welcomed by him. But he does not pressure. His first goal is to make you feel at home. Later he will get a feel for your walk in Christ and lead you closer.

MEN , get involved ! Be a man in Christ !


God Bless!

 

[theend0218]

I suspect the real reason many men and women do not go to church is that their experience demonstrated that "it" was irrelevant to their lives, focused too much on "things" and the money to get those things, and much too interested in controlling aspects of belief and behavior in terms of "church memebership."

The characteristics above - those on the right can be expressed in NT terms; those on the left actually play into a "male/business" demographic that many churches do in fact want to "reach" for church attendance. The ideas as to how to do that are right in line with the "church growth" movement that borrows very heavily from MBA marketing strategy. Pick your group - identify their interests or needs - package your product accordingly - advertise and go for "conversions." The strategy above simply makes the "modern American corporate male" another demongraphic to be reached in the same way or by the same type of methodology the church used to go after Yuppies in the 80s.

Jesus did in fact call men to himself, but not many of the Strong, Competitive, Powerful men of his day repsonded. Why? He deliberately "packaged" himself and the kingdom in a way that confronted the beliefs and practices of the primary "demographic" of his day. As for those he did call, he constantly corrected, rebuked and taught them before they ever understood him and the mission. Most of the time they were complaining, competing, and misconstruing his message and his activities. They were men, though. Interestingly, little is said of the women who followed him. Apparently they faired pretty well.

I have little interest in attending church today. The buildings, properties, social activities, constant need for money to acquire more stuff, etc. have nothing to do with my spiritual life in Christ.

 

[Addicted2~Jesus]

Hmm, I cain't say what's yours an what's sumthin else, could you elabortate a bit at least what's comin from you an what's on the article, I'm jes a bit confused, which really isn't anythin new I'll grant you LOL

I do agree wit what I read for the most part, I donno, I'm jes not that complex I don't think, me anyways. So when I hear talk of thins sorta like this when thins seemed to be made complex when they should jes be simple it kinda throws me for a bit. But I do understand an agree.... I don't know many men who woulda stuck flowers in the mens room... what does any man care bout spendin a second longer in a restroom then he has to? Certainly not goin to be lookin at flowers I don't think.

I also can see how 'man' has managed to sink this one to, in the sense that 'man' has been the one to come up an say this is a woman value an this is a mans, an Christ was a woman in mans clothin type thin, it's nuthin so complicated as that anyways, Christ made all of us an He made us to complement each other, we're the ones that fowled it up an started segragatin thins into this an that. I for one think all those values listed for Christ / women, should be sumthin we as men posses as well, I jes don't see where it's written that we should only have these sets of values, Jesus wasn't so one sided wit these thins, He has all of em, He was the author of em ya know? We jes seem to git so caught up in what's what instead of what's the real point of these thins.

To the extent that ... what? I might be off base here, but is the article talkin sumthin to the effect that women have taken over the church an men feel like they are a minority type thin? I'm not so sure that's true mysef, I mean I cain't say as I've been to to many churches where this was the case, but I cain't say as I have a broad spectrum to go off of either. I know when I went to England we went to this one church that had a gal as the 'speaker'... I bout feel asleep but that was jes the type of church it was... maybe that's it though an I am much more complicated then I thought, I cain't say as I've ever gone back to a church that didn't have a strong .... erm.. what? Male thin goin on? Authority type deal when they spoke. I cain't stand folks that beat round the bush to try an say sumthin cause thier worried bout hurtin ones feelins. I really like Jesse Duplantis, while I think he's gotten a bit more subtle, years ago, it was say it as it is. I think the world could really benifit from folks tellin it like it is, if it's black it's black, white it's white, illegal then so be it, right an wrong, plain an simple. But I reckon that's jes me so... enuff ramblin hehe

 

[Cordy]

I have great difficulty believing that the answer to church problems is to perpetuate gender dichotomies and stereotypes.

Why does the column on the left mean masculine and the one on the right feminine? I must be a hermaphrodite, because I think they are all important and highly valued in my life. I do not like going to a church that tells me that I should like the “feminine” things there, and my husband the “masculine”. Not only does this break the unity of marriage, but it is extremely artificial.

 

[TheDag]

I agree with mbams. Why is it that guys must like the things on the left and women the things on the right??? If we look at Jesus there are alot of female characteristics. If we are honest then really what it means is guys do need to work at bringing some of the characteristics from the right set and women need to work at bringing some of the things from the left set into their lives. We should be well balanced not heavily weighed to one side or the other.

 

[Telrunya]

A2J There is nothing in the article from me. It was written by Bill Perkins (author of Six Battles Every Man Must Win) and he is refering to things written by David Murrow (author of Why Men Hate Going to Church) who used something written by John Grey (author of Men are From Mars, Women are From Venus). If figured that was more than enough writers so I kept my paws off of it. Though I am humbly flattered that with as long as you and I have been reading each other's posts here on the forums that you can't tell the differance between my writting and that of three best selling authors.

The basic premise is that guys in general dont like going to church because the tone of churches today is set to address the feminine. That masculine traits are frowned upon. In effect we talk about the Lamb of God and dont say anything about the Lion of Judah. We hear about turning the other cheek but not about flipping tables of money lenders in the Temple. We're only getting one side of Jesus.

Mbams and TheDag. As I stated in the last sentence, it's not so much a gender war or saying that we must choose one or the other. There is no question that Jesus was all about love. Contrary to popular opinion in the world, men need love too. Contrary to what the world says, women need adventure and excitement out of life. Jesus had and has qualities that fall on both lists there. The right and the left. What Murrow and Perkins are saying is we have effectively stopped telling people about the left side and anytime anyone, be they man or woman, exibits the traits from the left side over the right they are shut down and frowned upon. While the traits on the left mean something to all women, as a rule (and ofcourse rules are made to be broken) they speak more to a man's heart, and while men need and can relate to the traits on the right they speak more to and are identified with more easily by women. Neither set is wrong.

TheDag hit it right on the head. We need both. The article is lamenting the abandonment of the left side.

 

[Telrunya]

I suspect the real reason many men and women do not go to church is that their experience demonstrated that "it" was irrelevant to their lives, focused too much on "things" and the money to get those things, and much too interested in controlling aspects of belief and behavior in terms of "church memebership."

The characteristics above - those on the right can be expressed in NT terms; those on the left actually play into a "male/business" demographic that many churches do in fact want to "reach" for church attendance. The ideas as to how to do that are right in line with the "church growth" movement that borrows very heavily from MBA marketing strategy. Pick your group - identify their interests or needs - package your product accordingly - advertise and go for "conversions." The strategy above simply makes the "modern American corporate male" another demongraphic to be reached in the same way or by the same type of methodology the church used to go after Yuppies in the 80s.

Jesus did in fact call men to himself, but not many of the Strong, Competitive, Powerful men of his day repsonded. Why? He deliberately "packaged" himself and the kingdom in a way that confronted the beliefs and practices of the primary "demographic" of his day. As for those he did call, he constantly corrected, rebuked and taught them before they ever understood him and the mission. Most of the time they were complaining, competing, and misconstruing his message and his activities. They were men, though. Interestingly, little is said of the women who followed him. Apparently they faired pretty well.

I have little interest in attending church today. The buildings, properties, social activities, constant need for money to acquire more stuff, etc. have nothing to do with my spiritual life in Christ.

All I can say about this is you've been going to the wrong churches. I know for a fact that there are many curches out there where this is not the case. I agree completely that if a church is focused on "numbers" and building projects for bigger and better, then they are completely failing their congregations.

Sometimes buildings are needed. If a church is overflowing and can't accomedate new people coming in then they need a bigger building. Thats ok as long as they are focused on sharing the Good News and that is the reason people are pouring in.

The focus need to be on 2 things. 1 Loving God with all our hearts and 2 loving those around us. We can't give up on fellowship and corperate worship and prayer.

 

[Cordy]

Mbams and TheDag. As I stated in the last sentence, it's not so much a gender war or saying that we must choose one or the other.

I am not saying it is a gender war.

Through the language of the article, it is implied that we already accept that we are each on a side:

The basic premise is that guys in general dont like going to church because the tone of churches today is set to address the feminine.

That masculine traits are frowned upon.

While the traits on the left mean something to all women, as a rule (and ofcourse rules are made to be broken) they speak more to a man's heart, and while men need and can relate to the traits on the right they speak more to and are identified with more easily by women.

Those types of statements tell us that certain characteristics are innately feminine, and the others innately masculine. That is an artificial way to solve the problem, since none of those traits are innately anything. I believe the premise on which they believe the problem is based has missed the mark.

If they find that the church exhibits too much of the right side, well, say that. But don’t call those traits feminine. I find that equivalent to saying that the problem of increased weight gain and obesity in North America is due to the feminine diet, since women naturally like eating those types of “comfort” foods. We need to bring in masculine foods like “raw” veggies to fix this. That would be a ridiculous way of explaining the problem. Genderizing the problem doesn’t help. In both cases it is not about masculine and feminine, it is just about balance.

 

[Entertaining_Angels]

Honestly, I've thought for some time that the watered-down christianity in America is due to its feminization. Heck, look at popular pictures of Jesus...they look absolutely nothing like the Jesus that is described in the Bible.

Honestly, I believe this is one of the reasons women are told in letters of the Bible that they are not to be in positions of authority in the church. Women have their ministries and they are equally important but christianity is so watered down now, it really does not have much to do with Christ anymore. Look at how many churches have turned in a 'feel-good' experience. Look at popular authors like Joyce Meyer, Joel Osteen, Kenneth Copeland and the lot. Talk about weakening the true message of Christ.

Well, I could go on and on. I feel christianity is suffering in America and I think this is an important reason why.

 

[Addicted2~Jesus]

You must spread some Reputation around before giving it to OreGal again.

Amen to that.

I don't actually have a problem wit the way thins have been described in that article at all. I don't think it's a gender war type thin either, I re-read it an I see what they are sayin like I posted above. If it's not to be classified as feminie er what have you, then it is like OreGal says, watered down. Inherently I do think the traits listed on left an right do fit the men an women they are talkin bout, the problem is, we as Christains need not be stuck in one class er the other, we need to have both of those traits, the world/church/man etc have allowed those thins to creep into the church... ya know, we never manage to git anythin right, we either jump from the right side clear out into left field, do nuthin, do to much, go to one extreme er it's complete opposite, seems we never manage to find the middle ground which I believe Jesus is tryin to git us to see. An it's really weird, you'd think in transition between one extreme an another we'd actually cross that middle ground somewhere an it jes doesn't seem to be so.

 

[Telrunya]

I am not saying it is a gender war.

Through the language of the article, it is implied that we already accept that we are each on a side:







Those types of statements tell us that certain characteristics are innately feminine, and the others innately masculine. That is an artificial way to solve the problem, since none of those traits are innately anything. I believe the premise on which they believe the problem is based has missed the mark.

If they find that the church exhibits too much of the right side, well, say that. But don’t call those traits feminine. I find that equivalent to saying that the problem of increased weight gain and obesity in North America is due to the feminine diet, since women naturally like eating those types of “comfort” foods. We need to bring in masculine foods like “raw” veggies to fix this. That would be a ridiculous way of explaining the problem. Genderizing the problem doesn’t help. In both cases it is not about masculine and feminine, it is just about balance.

I have to disagree. I believe God made us male and female, and that there are differances besides the physical aspects between the sexes. Those differances manifest themselves in traits that while not exclusive to one sex or the other tend predominately to one or the other.

I would have said obesity is more attributable to the male diet than the female. The only veggy that the guys I know like (myself included) on a regular bases is a baked potato and that better have a ton of butter on it and be accompanied by a massive slice of BEEF!!! LOL My wife is the salad person.

 

[Leanna]

Well.... I know the author was trying to help.... but um, we should have characteristics on BOTH sides of that list. I am a woman and I value some of the characteristics from each list more than others, but I don't even think this effectively characterizes the women I know. Women are not all feely feely.... we are competent too-- or at least can be.

 

[Cordy]

I have to disagree. I believe God made us male and female, and that there are differances besides the physical aspects between the sexes.

I am reading an interesting book right now, that goes into a few different cultures. In some cultures, what we consider masculine and what we consider feminine are completely reversed. Sometimes they are shared.

I believe that Truth crosses culture, and doesn’t speak to simply one culture, or sub-culture. I think we are being rather egocentric to apply the cultural ideas of gender to humanity. It seems extremely extra-biblical.

I would have said obesity is more attributable to the male diet than the female. The only veggy that the guys I know like (myself included) on a regular bases is a baked potato and that better have a ton of butter on it and be accompanied by a massive slice of BEEF!!! LOL My wife is the salad person.

See, that is the whole point! Slapping gender on to things, and attributing things to gender is culture specific, and has nothing to with inherent gender characteristics.

In your circle of friends and associates, men hate vegetables and like buttery carbohydrates. You therefore conclude that this is a “male” trait and the “male diet”. I am, however, surrounded by men that care deeply about their health and love eating vegetables, sometimes more than their wives. My husband’s favourite food is my Cajun chicken salad. It is therefore clearly not a universal understanding of the male diet.

We have to be careful not to put people and gender in boxes like that. It causes so many problems, including the misidentification of the issue in the article.

 

[InTheFlame]

ARGHHHHHH!!!!! I'm filled with the masculine spirit!!!! What do I DO??

( No need to take that seriously, I felt like being silly)

 

[jak]

The basic premise is that guys in general dont like going to church because the tone of churches today is set to address the feminine. That masculine traits are frowned upon. In effect we talk about the Lamb of God and dont say anything about the Lion of Judah. We hear about turning the other cheek but not about flipping tables of money lenders in the Temple.

I have to agree with mbams that you're "genderizing"!

You've branded the Lamb as a female picture and the Lion as masculine! In fact, lambs can be both male and female...and so can lions!

 

[Cordy]

[I have to agree with mbams that you're "genderizing"

I was hoping that new word would "catch on".

 

[Telrunya]

I am reading an interesting book right now, that goes into a few different cultures. In some cultures, what we consider masculine and what we consider feminine are completely reversed. Sometimes they are shared.

I believe that Truth crosses culture, and doesn’t speak to simply one culture, or sub-culture. I think we are being rather egocentric to apply the cultural ideas of gender to humanity. It seems extremely extra-biblical.



See, that is the whole point! Slapping gender on to things, and attributing things to gender is culture specific, and has nothing to with inherent gender characteristics.

In your circle of friends and associates, men hate vegetables and like buttery carbohydrates. You therefore conclude that this is a “male” trait and the “male diet”. I am, however, surrounded by men that care deeply about their health and love eating vegetables, sometimes more than their wives. My husband’s favourite food is my Cajun chicken salad. It is therefore clearly not a universal understanding of the male diet.

We have to be careful not to put people and gender in boxes like that. It causes so many problems, including the misidentification of the issue in the article.

So you're using my tongue in cheek comment to support a position that there is essentially no differances between the sexes other than physical attributes?

 

[Addicted2~Jesus]

I have to agree with mbams that you're "genderizing"!

You've branded the Lamb as a female picture and the Lion as masculine! In fact, lambs can be both male and female...and so can lions!

I disagree wit this, it's not lion = male, lamb = female. It's lion = strength, a typical male trait an lamb = meekness a typical female trait.

I don't think Telyarn is makin any generalin statements er genderizin anythin personnaly. I think the article is spot on wit respects that its simply listin whats observed in the church today. I hope folks aren't gittin thier hackles up bout male vs female type thin cause I don't see that this article even touches that subject but more to the point that folks seem to be carterin to more of the female traits then they are the male.

Like I've said before, we should all have each of those traits, but we shouldn't be carterin to one set. Male an female are different, we were made that way an each has different qualities, some stronger traits then others, but we should strive to be well rounded as it were an not cater to jes one set of values/traits solely, which is what we see in the article I think.

Like flowers in the mens room, that jes seems such a waste to me an could almost be viewed as a battle of the sexes, a man could interpet that as women invadin thier space an tryin to change who they are, I don't think a person ever lived that was happy bout another person tryin to change who they are.