The CBE Scroll

I would like to generate some discussion about how to attract men to CBE. At the conference last summer there was some mention about CBE wanting to do that — maybe it was even put in terms of a goal — I can’t remember. If any of you have been successful in doing that (signing men up), I’m sure it would be helpful to the organization if you would share it here.

Personally, I don’t have much hope that it can be done, at least in large numbers, due more to the nature of the way Christianity is practiced than the nature of CBE. Beyond the obvious reason that many do not agree with CBE’s mission, a lot of men don’t like something even more basic: going to church and other Christian organizations’ meetings. In Why Men Hate Going to Church [Thomas Nelson, Inc., 2005], David Murrow presents a practical and realistic appraisal of why men actively avoid church — even Christian men. This is not the typical Bible book store book. Part of this book will make you see red, but it may be worth the effort. Murrow does remind the reader that he is presenting men as they are, not as they should be, and that while he does have to generalize to make his points, he realizes that many people do not match the stereotypical views.

According to published statistics, about 61 percent of the people in the pews are women and only 39 percent are men. Almost a quarter of married women who attend Christian churches attend without their husbands. Neither is this just an American problem. Women are much more likely to be involved in the activities the church believes makes you spiritual (or look spiritual): discipleship, attending Sunday School, holding a leadership position, attending small groups, having a quiet time, reading the Bible, sharing faith with others, etc. But “38 percent of men described themselves as spiritual but not religious compared with just 28 percent of women, suggesting ‘traditional religious institutions may be somewhat less equipped to fulfill the spiritual needs of men.’ [Gallup] This is further evidence that men are interested in God, but uninterested in Christianity as it’s currently practiced.” [Murrow, p. 65]

If the majority of people actually showing up at church are women, it only makes sense that pastors aim their sermons at those who are present. Listen to the words you’ll hear there: sharing, relationships, support, nurture, feelings, community, precious, tender, gentle. Worse yet are theological words: being saved (something passive and done to me?), lost (oh, yes, let’s ask for directions), bride of Christ (what!?), family of God (how about kingdom of God?), personal relationship with Jesus (not in the Bible; how about walk with Christ?), or worse yet, passionate relationship with Jesus (you mean sex?), intimacy with God (you mean sex?). And even worse yet, the songs we sing: “Jesus, lover of my soul, let me to Thy bosom fly,” (Yikes!), “Away in a Manger” (The little Lord Jesus laid down his sweet head), “In the Garden” (the sound of His voice is so sweet the birds hush their singing); and even praise music lyrics: “Hold me close, let your love surround me.” “Bring me near, draw me to your side.” “I’m desperate for you. I’m lost without you.” “You’re altogether lovely… altogether wonderful to me.” “Oh Lord, you’re beautiful. Your face is all I seek.” “You are beautiful, my sweet, sweet song.” Between church and chapel at my university, most of these praise songs were sung within the last month while I was present. While I do love my savior, I don’t sing these songs. I don’t speak that way. Why would I sing that way? A lot of other guys in the room don’t either.

Most of this stuff would make a male heathen’s skin crawl. Lots of male Christians’, too, and probably some females’ as well. Is there anything CBE can do to communicate better with men? Maybe form a task force to look into it?

What can CBE do differently that would attract men? Is it possible for couples to live egalitarian lives and still recognize differences between the sexes? Statistics are apparently starting to show that Christians are living egalitarian lives more and more even while they profess headship heirarchy. I’m not sure how that works, but maybe the rank and file are ahead of the philosophers and theologians.

I have been driven to biblical egalitarianism by honestly evaluating what the Bible teaches in the light of historical research. I have never actually thought of myself as a “feminist”. Given the “lightening rod” kinds of connotations around that word, I am surprised I have not thought about it more. This is especially true, given the fact that I am a linguist, Bible translator, and teacher. I suppose that people would consider me a “feminist” but I have honestly never even given it a thought until today. I am actually quite neutral about this label. The label is less important than the content in the can anyway. I bet there are others out there that think like I do.

Conversations continue about Today’s New International Version (TNIV) translation of the Bible. While much has been debated over this issue already (see CBE’s articles in response to criticisms of the TNIV here), I believe the direct personal critique of the people involved in this translation warrants a post. Gordon Fee, Ronald Youngblood, Bruce Waltke, and others on the translation team are men of that stature and outstanding biblical scholars; I studied text criticism under Dr. Fee and I know Dr. Youngblood from his work in the ministry I presently help oversee. One wonders where this might lead.

Christianity Today surveyed 750 people in 2002.

There were many interesting results but two are especially important for CBE.

1. 78% stated that “Christian leaders need to speak out on proper roles for men and women”.

2. 38% agreed with the complementarian contention that only men should be ordained. 47% disagreed with the complementarian contention that only men should be ordained for ministry.

Both of these conclusions argue strongly for our task to preach the truth of Scripture about gender relationships to a generation which hears many competing voices.

[For the whole survey, see Christianity Today, the article titled "Adam and Eve in the 21st Century," March 11, 2002.]

Together with a team of 5 others, I translated a New Testament for an Asian Bible-less tribe back in the 1980′s. Wycliffe, Living Bibles and others helped us get it out. I know something about translating.

Having written that, the recent activity of whole denominations and religious groups publicly stating that the recent TNIV translation is “not commendable” makes me flash back to the 1950′s to the pictures of fundamentalist churches piling up huge stacks of RSV’s in their church parking lots and burning them. I suspect God cringed in the 1950′s and He does now in the early part of a new millenium over the same behaviors.

The issue is control. The critics of the TNIV want to control 60% of the church [read: the women]. These self-proclaimed “Bible evaluators” are out of step with contemporary evangelical Biblical scholarship. I spoke with one seminary president who confided to me that 90% of contemporary NT evangelical professors are egalitarians. How much further out of step can loud detractors of the TNIV be?