Phil Johnson is on the board of directors for Wretched radio. He does a program regularly with Todd Friel, called Too Wretched for Radio or what Friel calls “Philsosophy.” At the beginning of this segment is a montage of audio of Phil Johnson from sermons and speeches, and one of the statements that surely is included to characterize Phil is “Act like men, not like girls.” In a sense, Friel is saying, “that’s Phil for you.” Especially among evangelicals, Phil is considered to be a tough guy.
I searched to find what sermon the quote of Phil may have come from. I found that Phil has written a post on “Act like men, not like girls,” titled,
“Man up,” and a sermon, perhaps from which it comes, called,
“Marching orders.” The text from which he comes is 1 Corinthians 16:13, which the King James Version translates, “quit you like men, be strong.” Johnson quotes a modern version with, “act like men.” The two commands are the latter two of four. Johnson writes:
Incidentally, the military tone of this verse is clearly deliberate. These are orders for an army going to combat. Paul was reminding them (and us) that the Christian’s existence in this earthly realm is a battle, not a banquet. We are soldiers engaged in warfare, not merry-makers enjoying a party. Do we get that? because frankly, most contemporary evangelicals don’t get it. The typical evangelical church seems to think Christ has called us to be clowns who entertain the world rather than soldiers whose duty is to wage war against false religion and spiritual lies. There are churches not far from here this morning where the pastors are doing exegesis of the latest movies or trying desperately to plug into whatever the latest cultural fad is. Look around and listen to what’s happening in the evangelical movement today and you might get the impression that friendship with the world is the number one goal of the church. It’s not. It is a grievous sin to be avoided. “Friendship with the world is enmity with God.” The church is supposed to be an army waging war against worldly values.
I agree with Phil. It’s actually a very strong message for an evangelical. My point of writing is something different. I’m going to use Johnson’s statement, “Act like men, not like girls,” to say that God and the Apostle Paul assume that we know how men act. And Phil Johnson assumes that we also can know how girls behave too.
The Bible doesn’t tell us how men act, so how do we know? How do girls act? The Bible doesn’t say. So how can anyone judge men or girls as to how they act? How can someone judge something for which the Bible does not give criteria?
There are a lot of issues in scripture that (1) assume understanding of meaning and (2) require application. If I said to someone, “Act like a man,” how would he know how to do that? I could explain it, because God assumes us to know. I know. Today, however, what people really do know, they are unwilling to apply. They might say, “Act like a man,” but they don’t have any expectations. They don’t even think they can have expectations, because the Bible doesn’t say what those expectations are. As a result, the passage is disobeyed. If someone criticizes the lack of application, he is viewed and accused to be an unloving, insensitive, bad person.
Johnson says, “Act like men,” means, “Be manly.” He says that Corinth was an effeminate culture. What is “effeminate”? These are all concepts that scripture doesn’t define. There are many similar principles in the Bible — example: what is corrupt communication? Scripture doesn’t say. It doesn’t say what is the “attire of a harlot.” Johnson is stepping onto the “dangerous ground” of cultural issues or making application of scripture to the culture.
At the most Johnson says to act like a man is to be militant or a warrior. What is that? Is manliness just being militant and a warrior? I would agree that we can know what all of these are, but can we be dogmatic in their application? If someone is not practicing them, is it a sin? Can we say someone is disobeying scripture? I have found that church leaders are unwilling to make any personal judgments or do anything about acting like a man. If you do judge someone for not being manly, you are in bigger trouble than being effeminate.
Not being able or willing to apply the Bible to cultural issues relates to postmodernism, which is something to which Phil Johnson has written as much as anything. Are men just going to talk the talk or will they walk the walk, or perhaps better act the act? Your masculinity is not your masculinity and mine is mine. It’s something we can judge and should act like it.
Historic sola scriptura means scripture rules every area of a life. In the history of the church, that means that men can make applications of the Bible to culture. They are required to do so. There is something ironic here. Men are not manly enough to require manliness.
Recent Comments