Why Men Hate Going To Church ...


… is because the average American male has been taught to view the Lord Jesus as a pansy and a wimp

… and the average American male views Jesus as a pansy and a wimp because of the emasculation of Christianity in the minds of American males at the hands of large numbers of pastors, like the soft delicate Joel Osteen, who constantly presents the Lord Jesus based only upon carefully selected New Testament passages to the total exclusion of ALL other New Testament and Old Testament passages that demand everybody reach the conclusion that the Lord Jesus was NOT a pansy or a wimp but had the heart, mind-set, and spirit of a very masculine Warrior, balanced with the proper New Testament understanding of empathy, sympathy, and love.

Passages and ideas like these three:

(1) For example, the Lord Jesus said specifically that He would send forth His angels at the end of
history to seperate His people from Satan’s people and that His angels would throw IE FORCE
the wicked people of Satan to enter eternal Hell for an eternity of suffering.
How pansy is that? How wimpy is that?
(Matthew 13:49-50 Matthew 25:31-46)

(2) For example, the Lord Jesus held and taught the view that certain evil human beings were to be considered as
worthless dogs and pigs and that all attempts to help them or save them were to be stopped. "Do not give dogs
what is sacred; do not throw your pearls before pigs"
How pansy is that? How wimpy is that?
(Matthew 7:6)

(3) For example, in order to maintain Christianity’s doctrine of the Trinity, and thus maintain Christianity itself (when the
doctrine of the Trinity is denied then Christianity is totally destroyed), one MUST believe that the Father, Son, and Holy
Spirit were in COMPLETE MORAL AGREEMENT ON EVERYTHING without any disagreement whatsoever on any moral issue
ever. The moral unity of the Trinity is an absolute essential belief for the very survival of Christianity. It is absurd to even
suggest that the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit can disagree on what is right and wrong, while you still maintain your faith
in the legitimacy and truth of Christianity.

What does this mean? It means, for example, that when God the Father gave the order to destroy the totally evil and
totally wicked Canaanites that the Lord Jesus FULLY AGREED MORALLY with His Father’s command to Joshua. If you deny
that They fully agreed morally that the destruction of the Canaanites was the right moral course of action, then you have
God the Father and God the Son disagreeing on what is right and wrong, and you have thereby destroyed Christianity’s
essential doctrine of the Trinity and Christianity itself.

The Lord Jesus FULLY AGREED that the wars against the Canaanites was the right moral course of action.
How pansy is that? How wimpy is that?

End Jack Comments.

"Why Men Hate Going To Church"
by David Murrow
Quotes from a review of this book:
by Tractor Man

“The church of the first century was a magnet to males. Jesus’ strong leadership, blunt honesty, and bold action mesmerized men.”

“But today’s churches appeal more to women and folks over 50.”

Males in church are perceived, right or wrong, as passive, bookish, soft, nice, well-behaved, neutered wimps.

David Murrow has written an absolute must-read book for all churches interested in bringing men back, restoring a proper balance of the masculine and feminine spirits within the local church, creating an environment in which men will lovingly take charge, thrive, grow and be soldiers again in the Lord’s army.

I don’t consider myself a type-A personality. I’m pretty laid-back, studious and love going to church. I’ve love fellowshipping with God’s people. I’m not a knuckle-dragging Neanderthal that gets distracted after 10 minutes of a sermon. I don’t need the constant stimulus of entertainment to hold my interest, but I found myself burning with a holy anger' reading this book, mostly at myself for howfeminine’ I’ve allowed myself to become over the years. And please, no more `Jesus is my boyfriend’ songs !!

Two other men I know have been deeply affected to the positive by this book and are absolutely fired up about restoring the masculine spirit in their lives as well as their local church. One of them told me recently “I’m hanging up my skirt - not going to wear it anymore.”

David is not advocating a bombastic, abusive male domination of our churches. Don’t panic ladies, but let men be men. We were created to lead and contribute. “Most men will not invest themselves in anything that does not offer a shot at greatness. Boys do not dream of sitting in a cubicle; they dream of slaying the dragon, rescuing the princess, and absconding with the treasure.” The church thermostat, to attract men, must be set on Challenge, not Comfort, Ceremony, Control, Conformity …"

Amazon.com: Customer Reviews: Why Men Hate Going to Church

Order here:
Amazon.com: Why Men Hate Going to Church (9780785232155): David Murrow: Books
New $7.71 + $3.99 S/H
(The book has been out awhile, thats why its inexpensive. My paperback copy has 248 pages. Very interesting book)



When I was religious I hated going to church cause it was boring. I loved God but my preacher was so dull and so was the service. It was like going to church with Ben Stien.


/Big Grin You’re still religious. You think about God all the time. You will most likely end up a Pentecostal preacher and you will look back on your days at RO with fond memories and you’ll say, “Ha, Jack was right after all, I wuz just to young at the time to grab onto it, but now I Seravee, previously the Fang Of Destruction, have at last seen the light.”

Here is something of how you will sound when you get behind the pulpit in your role as pastor of your big huge Pentecostal Church Of Texas.
Pentecostal Preacher - YouTube

And I’ll be proud of you, even though I myself am not a Pentecostal type, I still can relate to my Pentecostal brothers who get on a roll. :biggrin:

Ben Stein is a dry dude to be sure, put ya right to sleep, er!

“Anyone, anyone, anyone”…
“Anyone, anyone” teacher from Ferris Bueller’s Day Off - YouTube

Bueller… - YouTube



There’s also this:

[QUOTE=John 2:14-16]14 And found in the temple those that sold oxen and sheep and doves, and the changers of money sitting:

15 And when he had made a scourge of small cords, he drove them all out of the temple, and the sheep, and the oxen; and poured out the changers’ money, and overthrew the tables;

16 And said unto them that sold doves, Take these things hence; make not my Father’s house an house of merchandise.[/QUOTE]


Exactly! And we can add this one too:

“See, the Lord is coming with thousands upon thousands of his holy ones 15 to judge everyone, and to convict all of them of all the ungodly acts they have committed in their ungodliness, and of all the defiant words ungodly sinners have spoken against him.” 16 These people are grumblers and faultfinders; they follow their own evil desires; they boast about themselves and flatter others for their own advantage.
(Jude 1:14)

That doesn’t sound like He is going to be smiling when He arrives either.


Then we can add this one:

15 Outside are the dogs, those who practice magic arts, the sexually immoral, the murderers, the idolaters and everyone who loves and practices falsehood.

16 “I, Jesus, have sent my angel to give you[a] this testimony for the churches. I am the Root and the Offspring of David, and the bright Morning Star.”

17 The Spirit and the bride say, “Come!” And let the one who hears say, “Come!” Let the one who is thirsty come; and let the one who wishes take the free gift of the water of life.

18 I warn everyone who hears the words of the prophecy of this scroll: If anyone adds anything to them, God will add to that person the plagues described in this scroll. 19 And if anyone takes words away from this scroll of prophecy, God will take away from that person any share in the tree of life and in the Holy City, which are described in this scroll.

20 He who testifies to these things says, “Yes, I am coming soon.”

Amen. Come, Lord Jesus.

21 The grace of the Lord Jesus be with God’s people. Amen.

Rev. 22:15-to the end of the Bible

(bolded by Jack)

The bolded remark make by the Lord Jesus at the very end of history is, in my view, inconsistent with the liberal view of the Lord Jesus as a soft sentimental warm and fuzzy type of Savior.

I mean as He contemplated those left on the outside to be confined with Satan and his fallen angels for eternity in Hell, the Lord Jesus said of them: “Outside are the dogs.”

Does that sound to anyone like something a soft sentimental warm and fuzzy Person would say about the loss of what may be several million human beings? The Lord Jesus refered to them as “…dogs…” and dogs left on the outside too, and He did not appear to be all that broken up about the loss of them either.

**"…Outside are the dogs…"__The Lord Christ ** does not harmonize very well with the Joel Osteen interpretation of either the Lord Jesus or the New Testament. And thats not to even mention all the other points made in the OP and elsewhere in the thread, eg. the quote you posted.

There is a **soft loving side to the Lord Jesus, but that side needs to be balanced with His Warrior side. The Lord Jesus was soft and kind and loving and very compasasionate to anyone that would receive His love and compassion, but to those who refuse His softness and kindness, there only remains the Lord Christ the Warrior.

**For example, His soft loving side is seen clearly in John 11:17-44 with Mary and Martha where He raised their brother Lazarus from the dead [this passage has the “…Jesus wept…” verse 35]

Thanks for the contribution, FC.


The libs on this forum keep trying to tell us that Jesus is a wimp.


Hmmm…Liberals calling others whimps. Such Irony.


When I was a kid, church was fine as long as the music was okay. But Sunday school; that is an abomination from the very pits of hell.


Anyone who thinks Jesus is a wimp does not know him very well, he broke me and no man was ever able to pull that off.

In fact, about 15 years ago I decided to stop saying things that started with “I will Never do…” because every time I made a self dependent pronouncement about something I really wanted to avoid forever God would take that as his cue to remind me of who exactly is in charge by making sure I had to do the thing I despised again.

Now if I really don’t want to work a particular vocation, live in a certain area or deal with a particular type of equipment I make sure I never say never, there is no profit in poking the Master that hears all and never loses a challenge.


Why? Sunday School is the place where you can discuss things. I would like to have seen it done differently when I was a kid, because it operated on the premise that all attending were believers, and thus weren’t addressing the concerns that made nonbelievers- well, nonbelievers. I’ve long felt that Sunday School classes should set aside one Sunday every quarter to address the specific needs and concerns of the attendees, instead of wall-to-wall programmed study. But even imperfectly done, why do you dismiss it as an abomination?


I enjoyed my Sunday school class.(the one good thing I can say about attending church) It was fun. STD maybe you just had a very bad church. Our classes were geared towards kids learning about God and Christianity in a way that was fun and informative.


Reference the book mentioned in the OP, "Why Men Hate Going To Church."
Chapter 4, “The Masculine Spirit And The Feminine Spirit” opens with a little test
put together by the author David Murrow.

Perhaps you would like to take the test? Here tis:

Examine These Two Sets Of Values. Which Set Best Characterizes Jesus Christ And His True Followers?

…** Set A ** … ** Set B **
…Competence… Love
…Power… Communication
…Efficiency… Beauty
…Achievement… Relationships
…Skills… Support
…Proving Oneself… Help
…Results… Nurturing
…Accomplishment… Feelings
…Objects… Sharing
…Technology… Relating
…Goal Oriented… Harmony
…Self-sufficiency… Community
…Success… Loving Cooperation
…Competetion… Personal Expression

Jack Note: Sure, of course there are words in both word Set A and Set B that are characteristic of the Lord Jesus and His true followers. However David Murrow says:

Start Murrow quotes.
“Over the years I have shown this list to hundreds of people: men and women, Christians and non-Christians. More than 95% of the time people choose the set on the right side, Set B, as the best representation of true Christian values. You probably did too.” …

“What is clear from this exercise is that when most people think of Christ and His [true] followers, they think of feminine values. People think of Jesus as having the values that come naturally to a woman. Thus, the true disciples of Jesus should adopt values that are commonly found in women while rejecting those most often found in men.” …

"Dr. Woody Davis of TEAMinistries studied this issue more formally. Davis ‘conducted a series of focus groups to identify the primary themes of the Christian faith. The ten most mentioned responses all came from American culture’s feminine set, including such themes as **support, nurture, humility, and **dependence. There is widespread agreement among the religious and the irreligious that to be a Christian is to embrace feminine values.’ " …

"Tell me when did feminine gifts become synonymous with Christian goodness? **Early Christians were known for risk taking, power, aggression, and heroic **sacrifice. But somewhere in church history, somebody monkeyed with the definition of a Christian! ** Today, a good Christian is known mostly for meekness, sensitivity, passivity, and sweetness. **This absurd standard of Christian behavior is very tough on men …while it is easier for women to acheive. Men have gottem this message: You’re flawed the way God made you. You need an extreame makeover.

And we wonder why men hate going to church."
End Murrow quotes.

Source: "Why Men Hate Going To Church"
pages 23-24


I don’t understand. What’s wrong with “feminine” values?

The only reason people see Jesus as “feminine” is because they are attributing love and caring and thoughtfulness and respect to women. Why? Why is that the gender role of a woman? What, can men not be loving and caring as well? The problem is not the portrayal of Jesus. It is the assigning of a gender role to his values. Change that, not Jesus.



Read this excerpt from “Why Men Hate Going To Church”: :freaked:

"[Greg is a good man, a family man, and a true tough guy] "But when it comes to doing church, Greg is incompetent. He’s a dope. A loser. And the deck is stacked against him.

Like most men he does not possess the natural gifts that make a good church goer. He’s not very expressive, verbal, or senstive. He’s not a very good teacher or singer.

He’s uncomfortable praying aloud or holding hands with strangers. [Murrow means these disgusting hug-a-thons in some churches where the men and women hold hands and sing a hymn and then everybody hugs each other…ugg puke]

"However Judy is absolutely fabulous at doing church. Her caring heart, relational skills, and emotional sensitivity make her the ideal churchgoer. She knows just what to say in every situation. She naturally coos for newborns, easily nurtures young children, and always has a tissue ready for a hurting friend.

In fact, the women in the church always outshine the men because their natural feminine gifts make them so much better at the spiritual work of today’s church: relating, emoting, nurturing, and offering verbal expression." …

"Since women are so much better at doing church, Greg doesn’t bother to compete. To really win at Judy’s church, Greg would need more than a conversion experience; he’d need a personality transplant.

Men need to be needed. Today’s church does not need Greg because it does not need his [masculine] gifts. In fact, masculine gifts often gum up the works of the ministry machine. If only Christianity required risk taking, boldness, agression, and heroic sacrifice, Greg might find his place in church."

End Murrow quotes.

Source: "Why Men Hate Going To Church"
page 16

/Big Grin

Typing this stuff in by hand, I am trying to promote interest in the book, “Why Men Hate Going To Church.” The book is worth a buy and a careful read. Like all books written by men this one is flawed, but the book is packed with some real truth-jewels.

You ever notice on posting boards that when men claim to be Christians while at the same time taking a tough aggressive hard-nosed Conservative stand on certain social issues, that they get accused of being “unlike Christ” or “hypocrites because you’re not following the meek and mild Christ?”


I think the problem lies in men’s perceptions of what values are good rather than the actual values. When you read the Bible, Christ definitely comes across as understanding and caring and compassionate. These aren’t “feminine” values, though, and men who think they are need to change their mindset. The problem doesn’t lie with the story being taught in church. It lies with the men perceiving those values as girly.

Aggression and anger are good qualities to have in moderation, but a constant aggressive tendency is un-Christ-like. Christ said to turn the other cheek and to be kind to strangers. To change Christ’s message to fit with men is missing the point. People need to change to understand the story. I don’t think changing the actual story to appeal to men is the solution.


Yeah Susanna, thats the common perception. I have heard it repeatedly in one form or another from the mouths of liberals on the web.

Imo, what liberals really mean is that they believe Jesus is a liberal like they are, IE a wimp. Yes, liberals are wimps. Thats what it means to be a liberal. Liberals, by definition, characteristically take the soft wimpy side of the majority of all moral issues and say Yes! to almost every disgusting evil choice that come down the road that request either their moral approval or their moral toleration. Liberals say yes! we will either morally approve or morally tolerate *****most anything you want to do because we as liberals are known for our boundless moral Non-Judgementalism and our boundless moral Tolerance and when it comes to taking a hard-nosed moral stand against immoralities we almost always choose the soft choice [IE the wimpy choice].“Yes, Yes, Yes, Go For It.”__Liberalism - Member Blogs - Conservative Republican Discussion Forums


*****That is, liberals will either morally approve or morally tolerate most anything anyone wants to do except sins against Flesh, Money/Property, and Ego/Feelings. The soft liberal position is, “Don’t hurt my Flesh, don’t hurt my Money/Property, don’t hurt my Ego/Feelings and we will either morally approve or morally tolerate just about any sins or evils you decide you want to commit. We liberals practice moral Non-Judgementalism and moral Tolerance.”



/Big Grin … Maybe what follows is why you did not like Sunday School ? :freaked:

"The feminization of Jesus begins in Sunday School. Think of the images you saw as a child. Didn’t they suggest a gentle meek Savior, a well-groomed and tidy man wearing a shining white dress? In these paintings He taps gently on a door, plays with children, or stares lovingly into the eyes of a lamb nestled in His arm.

Although these images are comforting, they do little to suggest masculine strength and resolve. Bruce Barton attacked these holy pictures: ‘They have shown us a frail man, under-muscled with a soft face – a woman’s face covered by a beard-- and a benign but baffled face.’

Jesuit priest Patrick Arnold laments Christ’s frequent portrayal as a ‘bearded lady’.

Christ has become, as John Eldredge puts it, ‘Mister Rogers with a beard. Telling me to be like Him feels like telling me to go limp and passive. Be nice. Be swell. Be like Mother Teresa.’ " …

"Liberal churches have re-created Christ as a benevolent Teacher who is always gentle, tender, and accepting. This Christ would never offend anyone, never judge anyone, and of course, never send anyone to Hell. If this Christ were a radio station, His slogan would be “all tenderness, all the time.”

Source: "Why Men Hate Going To Church"
page 134


Jack note: All that up there is the exact opposite of how the real Lord Christ actually is, as can be seen by reading the OP and other posts in this thread.

Btw, apart from all that in the OP, the Lord Christ was a carpenter in His earthly vocation, which required hard physical work especially back in the 1st century when boards were sawn by hand etc. The bilious artists that painted those “meek and mild” soft-looking pictures of the Lord Christ that male children are raised gazing upon every Sunday morning in Sunday School had zero authority from God to paint Him looking like that. Nobody knows what the Lord Christ looked like, but the New Testament says He was a carpenter and I have never seen a soft dainty looking carpenter and most certainly carpenters are not characteristically soft wimpy dainty Milquetoast type of men, rather just the opposite of that.


I think Bruce Barton is projecting feminine qualities where they are not present. When I was in Sunday School, Jesus did not come off as feminine. He came off as kind.


We need more pics of activities such as driving the money changers from the temple. And Jesus wasn’t always “kind” with words either, “hypocrites, snakes,” etc.


Those are some great quotes Jack, it sounds like the author gets it.
I would also add the tendency for churches to give the impression that it is “Not Christ Like” to say anything that makes anyone uncomfortable, as if “condescension” is a Biblical trait synonymous with Love.

Christ “Loved” his disciples but that never translated into not being direct with them in no uncertain terms regardless of how they “felt” about it. He loved them enough to tell them the truth in a way that they could not possible miss, whether it hurt their “feelings” or not. Christ also made sure that “Forgiveness” was never cheapened by making it synonymous with “not guilty”, he always made sure that sin was presented in the horrific and destructive light that it truly represents.

We tend to tout “forgiveness” as equal to “restoration” whether someone repents or not.
We tend to call speaking of biblical hard truths “not very loving”.
We tend to consider the immediate feelings that we generate in others with our words as more important than the new perspective we generate in others with our words.

All of this makes church much more of a natural place for women as most women prefer these principles of relationship with casual friends, but the Church is supposed to be family.
Families have a chain of command
Families have mutual expectations
Families are lead and populated by people who care immensely about the long term results of each others lives.
Family members do not quit the family and join a new one whenever they don’t get what they want.
Family Leaders do not decide what to emphasize based on how well they think it will be perceived.

Jesus was and is the Leader of the Christian Family, there was nothing soft or complacent about his style 2000 years ago and I see nothing soft or complacent about his style today.

“Get behind me Satan!” or “You are twice the sons of Hell as they were!” or “You are likened to a brood of snakes” or “Should I give the children’s food to the dogs?” are all pretty direct and harsh word ensembles that are designed to make sure that the hearer will get the point in no uncertain terms, not tickle their ears with condescending platitudes.

Christ had no trouble communicating how much he loved and cared for his own while embracing these strong traits of masculine leadership that commanded respect, even from those who would never respect a poor Carpenter from a hole in the wall town! Self Righteous Religious Leaders and Roman Soldiers were never submissive to the common people, but they were submitted and respectful of Jesus whenever they were in his presence.