Man up! What does this mean to you?

[WolfGate]

To my mind the danger of this kind of approach is that it shames people who genuinely are in need of support. The classic case is someone with mental illness; telling someone with a genuine health issue to "man up" (or "gird your loins," or whatever) is to denigrate the very real situation they're in, and the need for time and appropriate support to learn to manage that.

Yes, but the same kind of misuse of even the best intended and most innocuous phrases can be damaging in the wrong context. Heb 13:17 while a true and good instruction has been used by bad leaders to shame people into subservience and squash constructive dialogue and feedback among congregations.

We see it in another thread on Christian Advice where the advice given to someone asking about dealing with repeated physical violence in marriage includes people commenting on divorce and remarriage scriptures. Worthwhile discussion but dangerous in this case as it is encouraging the abused to stay with their abuser.

To me the issue isn't the phrase itself, but the misuse of the phrase. That should be called out when seen - but the solution isn't to stop using a phrase in proper context. Again, I acknowledge my experience is not universal and shapes much of my viewpoint. I come from a military and athletic heritage, but also one when where emotions of compassion, empathy, etc. have been suppressed. I can see from posts others have dealt with that.

Heb 13:17 Have confidence in your leaders and submit to their authority, because they keep watch over as those who must give an account. Do this so that their work will be a joy, not a burden, for that would be of no benefit to you.

 

[JCFantasy23]

I always just took it to mean 'toughen up'

 

[RDKirk]

Yes, but the same kind of misuse of even the best intended and most innocuous phrases can be damaging in the wrong context. Heb 13:17 while a true and good instruction has been used by bad leaders to shame people into subservience and squash constructive dialogue and feedback among congregations.

Hebrews 13:17 would be okay if it wasn't used in a one-sided manner.

Have confidence in your leaders and submit to their authority, because they keep watch over you as those who must give an account.

You see, the pastors and elders who want to use this verse on people only pay attention to the first clause, the clause that tells you to obey them.

They skip over the clause that says the Lord will hold them accountable for your welfare. Jesus has several parables of stewards being held accountable. All of them end badly for somebody. It's not going to go well for a pastor who lives in luxury if a single under his stewardship lived hard.

 

[Dave-W]

I have also heard it used in a sports context when a team or athlete is showing a lack of confidence or effort when things are hard.

My dad's denomination forbade sports, either as a participant or spectator, as it tends to engender strong emotions.

 

[Dave-W]

Hebrews 13:17 would be okay if it wasn't used in a one-sided manner.

Have confidence in your leaders and submit to their authority, because they keep watch over you as those who must give an account.

I prefer the NASB:

17 Obey your leaders and submit to them, for they keep watch over your souls as those who will give an account. Let them do this with joy and not with grief, for this would be unprofitable for you.

 

[RDKirk]

I prefer the NASB:

17 Obey your leaders and submit to them, for they keep watch over your souls as those who will give an account. Let them do this with joy and not with grief, for this would be unprofitable for you.

That's fine. Just don't ignore everything after the first comma.

Why would it be unprofitable for us to disobey our leaders? Because our leaders are taking care of us....or should be.

This was something we understood thoroughly in the military. The commander placed troops under my authority. They were obligated to obey me; I was obligated to look after their welfare. When the commander made his inspection, I was the one he held accountable if the troops didn't look good.

We had a philosophy in the military: Leaders eat last. Make sure your people are fed before you eat. Make sure your people are boarded before you look for a room.

 

[Dave-W]

That's fine. Just don't ignore everything after the first comma.

Absolutely. That reflects the principle in example in Genesis 18:

9 Then they said to him, “Where is Sarah your wife?” And he said, “There, in the tent.” 10 He said, “I will surely return to you at this time next year; and behold, Sarah your wife will have a son.” And Sarah was listening at the tent door, which was behind him. 11 Now Abraham and Sarah were old, advanced in age; Sarah was past childbearing. 12 Sarah laughed to herself, saying, “After I have become old, shall I have pleasure, my lord being old also?” 13 And the Lord said to Abraham, “Why did Sarah laugh, saying, ‘Shall I indeed bear a child, when I am so old?’ 14 Is anything too difficult for the Lord? At the appointed time I will return to you, at this time next year, and Sarah will have a son.” 15 Sarah denied it however, saying, “I did not laugh”; for she was afraid. And He said, “No, but you did laugh.”

Abraham was called to give an account for Sarah's laughter, even before he had a chance to say anything, or perhaps before he even heard it. She did not have to answer until she spoke up defending herself.

 

[ValleyGal]

I made a post a couple of years back about the term "man up." I hate the term. To me it conveys contempt. Men take pride in their manhood, and if you tell them to man up, then you are telling them they are less than a man and stripping them of part of their identity. Additionally, it also puts down women. To me, "man up" = "stop being such a girl." If men are told to man "up" that means that girls are "down."

I have never, ever heard the term used in the context of living up to Christian principles. Though, I have known it to be used in different words, like "be a man" in the context of "stop being like a child and mooching off of the women in your life." So it would have been better said "grow up" rather than "be a man."

When are terms like this used? Only in times when men are not measuring up to the speaker's expectations, which is why it conveys contempt. I hate the phrase. There are better ways of getting the same message across.

 

[Dave-W]

There are better ways of getting the same message across.

Sometimes the message itself is full of contempt.

 

[RDKirk]

I made a post a couple of years back about the term "man up." I hate the term. To me it conveys contempt. Men take pride in their manhood, and if you tell them to man up, then you are telling them they are less than a man and stripping them of part of their identity. Additionally, it also puts down women. To me, "man up" = "stop being such a girl." If men are told to man "up" that means that girls are "down."

I have never, ever heard the term used in the context of living up to Christian principles. Though, I have known it to be used in different words, like "be a man" in the context of "stop being like a child and mooching off of the women in your life." So it would have been better said "grow up" rather than "be a man."

When are terms like this used? Only in times when men are not measuring up to the speaker's expectations, which is why it conveys contempt. I hate the phrase. There are better ways of getting the same message across.

But you know what?

You don't get to define or direct terms men use among themselves any more than you'd permit men to define and direct the terms you women use among yourselves.

 

[Tallguy88]

The bible has many instances of people being told to "man up" or "act like a man", Here's a famous example of God's enemies being told to "act like men" in the face of certain death at the hands of the Israelites. And after determining to die like men, they not only acquitted themselves well, they won the battle, killed the corrupt priests leading Israel, and took the Ark of the Covenant as a trophy (to their later regret).

1 And the word of Samuel came to all Israel. Now Israel went out against the Philistines to battle, and pitched beside Ebenezer: and the Philistines pitched in Aphek.

2 And the Philistines put themselves in array against Israel: and when they joined battle, Israel was smitten before the Philistines: and they slew of the army in the field about four thousand men.

3 And when the people were come into the camp, the elders of Israel said, Wherefore hath the Lord smitten us to day before the Philistines? Let us fetch the ark of the covenant of the Lord out of Shiloh unto us, that, when it cometh among us, it may save us out of the hand of our enemies.

4 So the people sent to Shiloh, that they might bring from thence the ark of the covenant of the Lord of hosts, which dwelleth between the cherubims: and the two sons of Eli, Hophni and Phinehas, were there with the ark of the covenant of God.

5 And when the ark of the covenant of the Lord came into the camp, all Israel shouted with a great shout, so that the earth rang again.

6 And when the Philistines heard the noise of the shout, they said, What meaneth the noise of this great shout in the camp of the Hebrews? And they understood that the ark of the Lord was come into the camp.

7 And the Philistines were afraid, for they said, God is come into the camp. And they said, Woe unto us! for there hath not been such a thing heretofore.

8 Woe unto us! who shall deliver us out of the hand of these mighty Gods? these are the Gods that smote the Egyptians with all the plagues in the wilderness.

9 Be strong and quit yourselves like men, O ye Philistines, that ye be not servants unto the Hebrews, as they have been to you: quit yourselves like men, and fight.

10 And the Philistines fought, and Israel was smitten, and they fled every man into his tent: and there was a very great slaughter; for there fell of Israel thirty thousand footmen.

11 And the ark of God was taken; and the two sons of Eli, Hophni and Phinehas, were slain.

1 Samuel 4:1-11

 

[Paidiske]

I'm not sure that war and slaughter is really want we want people to associate with manhood, or something that's in any way good for society. If anything, I see that as an example of everything that's wrong with asking people to "man up."

 

[Tallguy88]

I'm not sure that war and slaughter is really want we want people to associate with manhood, or something that's in any way good for society. If anything, I see that as an example of everything that's wrong with asking people to "man up."

You cannot read the bible and come away with the belief that God is a pacifist. The Bible is full of righteous war and slaughter. Saul even lost his kingdom because he disobeyed God and didn't completely destroy the Amelakites:

17 Samuel said, “Although you were once small in your own eyes, did you not become the head of the tribes of Israel? The Lord anointed you king over Israel. 18 And he sent you on a mission, saying, ‘Go and completely destroy those wicked people, the Amalekites; wage war against them until you have wiped them out.’ 19 Why did you not obey the Lord? Why did you pounce on the plunder and do evil in the eyes of the Lord?”

20 “But I did obey the Lord,” Saul said. “I went on the mission the Lord assigned me. I completely destroyed the Amalekites and brought back Agag their king. 21 The soldiers took sheep and cattle from the plunder, the best of what was devoted to God, in order to sacrifice them to the Lord your God at Gilgal.”

22 But Samuel replied:

“Does the Lord delight in burnt offerings and sacrifices
as much as in obeying the Lord?
To obey is better than sacrifice,
and to heed is better than the fat of rams.
23 For rebellion is like the sin of divination,
and arrogance like the evil of idolatry.
Because you have rejected the word of the Lord,
he has rejected you as king.”

1 Samuel 15:17-23

In addition, David was a great warrior, both before and after becoming king. And David was a man after God's own heart, who only strayed from God in the matter of Uriah the Hittite, not in the wars and slaughter he participated in.

 

[Paidiske]

I cannot look at the cross and come away with the belief that God desires war.

War is, at best, a concession to our sinfulness; a forceful opposition to our worst evil. It is never something to be celebrated, lauded, or promoted.

 

[RDKirk]

You cannot read the bible and come away with the belief that God is a pacifist. .

God may not be. That's not relevant.

It's also not relevant what permission God gives worldly kings to use the sword.

Relevant is determining the instructions Jesus gave the Body of Christ. Did Jesus give His believers any explicit instructions in how to met threats and violence?

 

[Tallguy88]

I will defer to St. Thomas Aquinas, who lays out the conditions for a Just War based on Christian principles:

SUMMA THEOLOGIAE: War (Secunda Secundae Partis, Q. 40)

 

[Tallguy88]

My point still stands, however, that the Word of God contains plenty of positive uses of the equivalent of "man up" in both the old and new testaments.

 

[Paidiske]

The example that comes to mind for me is in Job 38:3. That seems a more positive set of implications; have the courage to follow through on your convictions.

 

[ValleyGal]

Sometimes the message itself is full of contempt.

Yes, that's why I don't like it. But the same message can be given without contempt. Iow, the complainer may be very specific: Honey, I know it's depressing to be out of work, but another job is not going to knock on your door; you need to start putting resumes out there because I can't support us on my income alone. The "man up" contemptuous answer would be: Quit your pouting, man up and get a job. Same message, but one is much more respectful.

But you know what?

You don't get to define or direct terms men use among themselves any more than you'd permit men to define and direct the terms you women use among yourselves.

Okay, maybe it's okay for men to tell men to man up, but I'll bet hearing it from a woman is akin to a man telling a woman that she is the submissive and must therefore cater to his every whim for home, sex, and children. Imo, it's just wrong.

 

[Dave-W]

Yes, that's why I don't like it. But the same message can be given without contempt.

The "man up" message I got as a 5 or 6 yo from my dad was to not cry no matter what. So he beat me with a belt to near unconsciousness over and over until I could get thru it without crying.

How is that message delivered without contempt?