Christian Faith, Soft and Strong: Refuting Strachan’s Unbiblical Manliness Myth

Christian Faith, Soft and Strong: Refuting Strachan’s Unbiblical Manliness Myth January 31, 2020

A few days ago, Owen Strachan made this statement on Twitter

“The gospel of grace takes men who have been softened by the devil and makes them hard, strong, lean, loving, and ferocious in pursuit of God and his glory. See ἀνδρίζεσθε in 1 Cor. 16:13, best translated “act like men.” Men aren’t soft. Men must be tough in Christ.”

There are quite a number of things that are unclear and unbiblical about this statement. Strachan seems to have a developed a theology of “softness” that he doesn’t bother to define or explain here. His theology has more in common with a Hans and Franz SNL sketch (watch one HERE) than the Bible. I think his statement is easy to refute. (And I am sad that it needs refuting at all.)

I. The Devil does not seem to have a man-softening agenda

A study of satanology in the Bible will quickly reveal the Devil’s main objective is to convince people to sin. In fact, we find that his agenda tends to involve getting people to acquire power rather than relinquish it (see Matt 4:9). He is associated with murder (John 8:44), acts of power. Man-softening is not his MO.

II. Strachan does not (and probably could not) define “softness” as a vice relevant only to men

Strachan fails to define softness in a clear or convincing way. Does it mean gentle? All Christians are called to be gentle (Gal 5:23). Does it mean warm and intimate? The model for this is Jesus who lovingly leans on the Father’s chest (John 1:18). Or perhaps it means cowardly? But in that case no believer should be cowardly, man or woman. All are called to be brave, resilient, strong. Who would favor “softness” if it meant cowardice? And perhaps again he means “weak in faith”—again, not a sin only relevant to men.

III. The verb ἀνδρίζεσθε is not best defined as “act like a man”

It is true this literally means “act like men,” but that does not assume that is the best way to translate it or understand it in 1 Cor. This verb comes from a cultural image of the courageous and fearless man, a nod to the great warriors of the day. But we must not assume all men were always courageous. And, likewise, we must neither assume all women were always cowardly. Hebrews extolls the brave faith of Rahab (11:31). Note too the intrepid and clever mother of the Messiah (Revelation 12). And what shall we say about the early martyrs Perpetua and Felicitas? The verb ἀνδρίζεσθε would naturally apply to all of these because they were brave. 

IV. Reinforcing modern manliness stereotypes leads to confused and convoluted male identity

To tell men, “Man up!,” or “just be a man!”: that has historically meant to bury one’s feelings or react in an angry or “tough guy” way. Can we point to any context where that has proven effective or especially useful?

Am I not included in Strachan’s “manly men” club because I cry sometimes? Or I like to sing? Or I wear an apron when I cook? Am I less of a manly man because I am not great at throwing a football?

What if I hold hands with my wife in public? Is that “manly” (because I am caring for my wife) or “unmanly” (because it include “soft” emotions on display)?

What if I do the laundry? Is that manly? Or unmanly?

What if I brush my daughter’s hair (which I do a lot, because I do morning care for my kids, and my wife tends to do afterschool care)?

It is impossible to correlate the virtues of these kinds of behaviors or activities with only one gender based on the Bible.

V. All Believers are called to be soft and strong

Strachan simply cannot reinforce the manliness myth because Scripture calls all believers to imitate the Jesus who was gentle and strong.

Let me finish with Paul:

Paul could play the “tough guy” if he wanted to, but he wanted to approach fellow believers as intimate friends instead (1 Cor 4:21). He saw human vulnerability (what one might call “softness”) as an asset, not a liability, and a model for apostles: “we were like young children [or “babies”] among you” (1 Thess 2:7a). He transitions to another “soft” image: “Just as a nursing mother cares for her children, so we cared for you” (2:7b-8a).

A healthy, Satan-repelling faith is soft and strong. We need to teach our boys and men, girls and women, mature emotional health and faith. Genderizing power and strength is not a biblical value.



"I chose only 50 to highlight, there are several thousand biblical scholars that gather every ..."

#50-2-Follow: 50 NT Scholars to Read ..."
"in my day half the kids were NT scholars and now we have only 50? ..."

#50-2-Follow: 50 NT Scholars to Read ..."
"I have never trusted Bayes theorem, not that I have ever applied it in real ..."

#50-2-Follow: 50 NT Scholars to Read ..."
"Brother, you can’t be serious!?! Your comment does not reflect Christ. Tearing down a lot ..."

#50-2-Follow: 50 NT Scholars to Read ..."

Browse Our Archives

Follow Us!

What Are Your Thoughts?leave a comment
  • It may have been an easy refutation, but it was a necessary one and it was well said. Owen parrots a crowd that is so terrified of appearing effeminate, it’s turning into a shame-based culture of its own.

  • Nijay Gupta


  • Jamin Andreas Hübner

    Good essay.
    I give a similar reflection regarding Desiring God’s anti skinny-jeans and flower shirt nonsense in my recent book (under “Scaffolding”):
    Deconstructing Evangelicalism: A Letter to a Friend and a Professor’s Guide to Escaping Fundamentalist Christianity

  • Kevin Collier

    If anything, the best thing this tweet generated were the pithy and insightful comments.

  • Thanks for this refutation. Well said …