Christ and Masculinity
Why should the unworthy be considered by the Creator to be worthy recipients of the greatest role model in the history of creation?
In our time, it is generally acceptable by all to say that the masculine is an embodiment of a somewhat tame caveman. Men are largely considered to be impulsive, irrelevant, sex-hungry, expendable, less intelligent, less intellectual, and violent beings. The media products of our day are too eager to reflect these tropes; think Homer Simpson, the male characters in the sitcom Friends, and Ken from the Barbie movie. This isn’t to say that there is some coordinated attempt by the opposite gender to subdue men. Rather, men themselves, as evidenced by the so-called influencers on the internet, have run to the forefront to either castrate themselves or present themselves as playthings.
Throughout history, and especially in recent times, “enlightened” men have sought to escape extremes such as the one typically displayed in IQ scores. We will address this desire to run away and submit to hastily imagined gynarchy, but first, let us glance at what these men are escaping from. A great artistic depiction of the masculine extreme can be found in the messianic character of Paul Atreides from Frank Herbert’s Dune series.
In Herbert’s fictional universe, aristocratic houses control their territories, but these houses or families are influenced and engineered by a shadowy group of telekinetic witches called the Bene Gesserit. The child Paul Atreides is a result of disobeying the Bene Gesserit. When this sisterhood finds out about the birth of Paul Atreides, they are furious but also fearful. As the story progresses, we find out why exactly they are fearful. The Bene Gesserit, to the dismay of modern readers, would soon be no match for the intellect and power of Paul Atreides. The messianic Atreides’ violent force would be so consuming that it would eventually turn on himself.
Another great example of the masculine extreme is found in the manga Akira, specifically the troubled adolescent Tetsuo who reaches the peak of human evolution and single-handedly causes the destruction of Neo-Tokyo and resets the universe. Such examples trivialize the observation of analysts like Jordan Peterson who insists that the world’s inheritor is the one who “keeps his sword sheathed.” If Dr. Peterson were correct, why is it that the most extreme men are always involved in accelerating, within history, bad and good ideas to their logical conclusions?
Perhaps the deeper issue lies in the violence that often explodes from within a man’s heart. With Jesus’ revelation on the cross — one that convicts the human psyche about how our comfortable existence is often dependent on the threat of retribution — extreme masculinity got curtailed through methodical shaming on the pretext of brutal violence being morally wrong. Not only masculinity, but many other extremes were subdued or cheapened. Where once gratitude meant being indebted to another, and repentance followed regret, the words “thanks” and “sorry” became cheap substitutes and easy cop outs.
Once we have established the cheapening of difficult actions through mere words, it would seem reasonable to conclude that Christianity is an emasculating movement. However, this conclusion makes no sense in light of the actual teachings contained within Jesus’ ministry on Earth. What would be far more accurate is to say that these cheapening effects are a result of societies, when confronted with the revelation of the cross, doubling down on already existing taboos, sometimes in a contradicting way, that seek to restrict violent chaos. Where once it was forbidden to murder, it is now forbidden to judge. Where once it was forbidden to steal, now it is forbidden to “appropriate.” Where once it was considered dangerous to be a zealot, now it is “cringe” to have conviction. This goes on and on.
One may deduce that these new norms are the result of Jesus telling men that it is sinful to lust after women and commit murder in their minds. This would only be partially correct if one were to completely miss out on how Jesus channels the extreme urges of men into something which is not at all contingent on the sexual desires of the opposite gender. Jesus does this by suffering a torturous death on the cross and reasserting the warrior spirit in a far more dangerous way than anything that existed prior. Indeed, the European pagans of the first century were justified in thinking that Christianity was a dangerous religion. Where once it was considered honorable to kill or die for family, tribe, and empire, it now became completely acceptable to lay down one’s own life for the sins of the entire world.
The consequences of Christlike self-sacrifice are earth-shattering. Empires fell and societies erupted in chaos, all because of the actions of one man: Jesus Christ. “Do not think that I have come to bring peace to the earth; I have not come to bring peace, but a sword. For I have come to set a man against his father, and a daughter against her mother, and a daughter-in-law against her mother-in-law; and one’s foes will be members of one’s own household” (Matthew 10:34–36). If Jesus’ movement is of an emasculating nature, why would his teachings be the complete opposite of contentment within picket fences or even fortified walls?
Because societies have doubled down on their resistance to Christ’s sacrifice and its anthropological effects, the male of the human species have become ineffective. What do the church leaders, male feminists, manosphere influencers, liberal conservatives, etc. all have in common? They all preach various forms of conformity and contentment behind a system of refined human sacrifice. Indeed, post-Christian masculinity is nothing but a domesticated retreat from the Christlike masculine extreme that defeats Satan and his tool of accusation and coercion once and for all.
Jesus said to the Laodicean church, “I know your deeds, that you are neither cold nor hot. I wish you were either one or the other! So, because you are lukewarm — neither hot nor cold — I am about to spit you out of my mouth” (Revelation 3:15–16). This statement should be a direct assault on the modern spirit of emasculation and conformity. The incarnation of Christ means something for the masculine spirit hijacked by Satan and manipulated into becoming a force for stagnation and destruction. Should the masculine extreme — the ability to radically transform the world — be treated as a synonym for tyranny? Not at all. It is precisely the masculine extreme in synergy with God that makes the crucifixion such a world-changing event.
Jesus’ revolution calls for nothing less than the male extreme to follow his death and resurrection. Through Him, God the Father, bestowed the Holy Spirit on the apostles, all of whom were men. Out of all these apostles, only one was able to die a natural death; the rest were slaughtered for preaching the Gospel. To the apostles, Jesus said, “Very truly I tell you, whoever believes in me will do the works I have been doing, and they will do even greater things than these — ” (John 14:12). What does Jesus mean when He says, you will do greater things? A case can be made that Jesus was predicting how extreme male energy, armed with Christ’s sword of truth and nonviolence, would branch out into various spheres of human life. Throughout history, we see this extreme Christlike masculinity in various forms among Christ-imitators as they push the boundaries of religion, art, science, and philosophy.
The ones who are considered geniuses in history always leave comfort, face persecution, and in the spirit of martyrdom, give life in service to humanity. As history has progressed, we have been drained of geniuses and have instead been subjected to a feminine type of innovation. In the age of emerging secularization, men began their full conscious retreat from dominion over nature and started incorporating within themselves a slavish adherence to “mother earth.” The result of this slavish worldview, which became more and more predominant, is a full retreat from dangerous innovations like the creation of airplanes and life-saving surgeries, and the rise of safe technologies like social media and smartphones. Safe technologies are always a reflection of the feminine desire for comfort and interaction without repercussion; they do not require you to become strong or brave.
Safe technologies instill into men feminine mannerisms and into women the masculine. The result: incompatibility, confusion, and stagnation. In light of this, can we really pretend to be surprised when we see society in such a bleak and dismal state? When confronted by Christ and the suffering of the cross, humanity has the option to catechize its men and unleash the masculine extreme upon the face of the Earth, the result of which would be the elimination of mediocrity and the emergence of radical life-saving forces. Whether the male of the species would be willing to do that is, of course, another question.