By Richard Phillips /
Reformation Trust Publishing
There is a crying need in the church today for men to be men. But competing visions for what a man is to be, some growing out of popular culture and others arising from flawed teaching in the church, are exacerbating the problem. Here is biblical exposition of the most practical sort teaching that reveals not only what men are to think but what they are to be.
In The Masculine Mandate Richard Phillips lays out a framework for
Biblical manhood based primarily on his exposition of God’s mandate originally
given to Adam. The book, however, isn’t just a commentary on the teaching about
manhood from Genesis; it is also part of an ongoing debate within the culture
of American Evangelicalism about what it means to be a Christian man.
A little background might
be helpful. The Masculine Mandate is
a response to John Eldredge’s book Wild
at Heart which itself can be seen as a reaction to teaching prominent in
earlier Evangelical “manhood” movements such The Promise Keepers. Although this
was certainly not an entirely new concern The Promise Keeper movement in
particular highlighted that there was a large group of Evangelical men who were
willing (or at least desired) to emphasize Biblical expressions of manhood
against the unbalanced expressions of masculinity in the broader culture.
Many, however; both within
and outside of Evangelical circles, thought that the movement had imported too
much femininity into its message thus “domesticating” men in ways that were not
appropriate. Following the peak of the movement a number of books and articles
such as David Murrow’s Why
Men Hate Going to Church were written in
reaction to this domesticated view of Christian manhood. The most famous,
however, was John Eldredge’s Wild
at Heart: Discovering the Secret of a Man's Soul. These books
argue to a greater or lesser extent that Biblical manhood does not require men
to cease expressing those attributes that make them uniquely masculine. The
idea is that men are not to be cowed or domesticated but rather refocused to
discover their male identity.
Phillips agrees that it is
inappropriate to expect men to conform to a feminized view of manhood and also
reacts against the concept that men must be soft and sissy-like in order to be
Biblical. He points out; however, that God intended man to participate in
relationships and gave him duties and work to do. He sees the Wild at Heart
mentality as an over reaction that encourages men to shirk responsibility and
remain immature rather than Biblical providers who work and keep as God
designed them to. Phillips emphasizes that men were created to function in a
particular way within a covenant relationship.
The book has two parts.
The first part, “Understanding Our Mandate” is focused on laying a doctrinal
foundation for Christian manhood. Phillips focuses heavily on the Genesis
account and the responsibilities that God gave to Adam to work, tend, and keep
the garden. He uses a type of thematic exegesis throughout the book that
assumes that this narrative account is normative for properly functioning
manhood. He discusses the identity and function of man within this context and
most of what he says here is helpful. The second part, “Living Our Mandate” is
an application of the teaching that he lays out in the first half of the book.
There are many helpful illustrations both from the Bible as well as everyday
life that nicely highlight Phillips points.
The book has a number of
strengths. There is a lot of scripture in the book which helps the reader to
constantly come back to the Biblical foundation from which Phillips is working.
The examples and illustrations are clear and well chosen. There is a lot of
really helpful insight into the thinking and lives of men and at a number of
points I was challenged regarding areas in my own life. Phillips also does a
good job of pointing out certain legitimate weaknesses in the recent popular
books on Christian masculinity as well as the obvious issues in the broader
culture.
There were also some weaknesses.
Although I did not disagree with most of the teaching points that were made I
couldn’t help but feel that the author’s thematic approach to interpretation
and application were stretched at times. His interpretation is reductionistic
at times. Also, I felt as though his emphasis on marriage was overbearing. He
throws in a couple of statements assuring the reader that single men can live
complete and Biblical lives but the bulk of the discussion seems to leave the
distinct impression that marriage is the ideal expression of Biblical
masculinity. This, however, is a rather incomplete view of the Bible’s teaching
on the issue. In fact, Paul seems to say the opposite in his letter to the
Corinthians when he writes, “to the
unmarried and the widows I say that it is good for them to remain single as I
am.”
Overall, I thought the
book was OK. There were no major issues with the writing or the teaching and I
think the topic is one worth continued examination. It was a book of the type
one might expect from a conservative Evangelical on the topic.
* I received a free copy of this book from Reformation Trust Publishing as part of their book review program. Reviews are not required to be positive and the opinions I have expressed are my own. I am disclosing this in accordance with the Federal Trade Commission' 16 CFR, Part 255: "Guidelines Concerning the Use of Endorsements and Testimonials in Advertising."