Coming Out Of Egypt

Part 5. Where Are All The Men?

April 23, 2007

Ron and Karen Schwartz

To subscribe to these notes: SUBSCRIBE

To see more of these notes: Ron's Thoughts

Throughout the Book of Exodus, we find a developing theme: Pharaoh did not like the Hebrew men.

Exodus 1:15-17 KJV

15 And the king of Egypt spake to the Hebrew midwives, of which the name of the one was Shiphrah, and the name of the other Puah:

16 And he said, When ye do the office of a midwife to the Hebrew women, and see them upon the stools; if it be a son, then ye shall kill him: but if it be a daughter, then she shall live.

17 But the midwives feared God, and did not as the king of Egypt commanded them, but saved the men children alive.

Exodus 5:6-9 KJV

6 And Pharaoh commanded the same day the taskmasters of the people, and their officers, saying,

7 Ye shall no more give the people straw to make brick, as heretofore: let them go and gather straw for themselves.

8 And the tale of the bricks, which they did make heretofore, ye shall lay upon them; ye shall not diminish ought thereof: for they be idle; therefore they cry, saying, Let us go and sacrifice to our God.

9 Let there more work be laid upon the men, that they may labour therein; and let them not regard vain words.

Exodus 10:8-11 NIV (use of NIV for clarity)

8 Then Moses and Aaron were brought back to Pharaoh. "Go, worship the LORD your God," he said. "But just who will be going?"

9 Moses answered, "We will go with our young and old, with our sons and daughters, and with our flocks and herds, because we are to celebrate a festival to the LORD."

10 Pharaoh said, "The LORD be with you--if I let you go, along with your women and children! Clearly you are bent on evil.

11 No! Have only the men go; and worship the LORD, since that's what you have been asking for." Then Moses and Aaron were driven out of Pharaoh's presence.

Pharaoh hated the men-children because the deliverer was to come from them, he hated the men laborers because they supported His antithesis (Moses), and he hated men in general because they were too prone to revolution and revolt.

Sissification

Sissification is slang used to describe a form of feminization. It is used to describe the process for making something feminine. It is often used to describe the shift in gender roles in a society. It is sometimes used to describe female dominance and male submission and servitude, or even men made to dress and act like women. It is without a doubt a perversion of natural order.

On many occasions, Paul uses the idea of natural order as an example of how God meant things to be (i.e., Romans 1:26; 11:24; 1 Corinthians 11:14, etc.). When this natural order is violated, you have perversion. Paul writes, “In the last days perilous times shall come. For men shall be lovers of their own selves… unholy, without natural affection… (2 Tim 3:1-3).” We see this lack of natural affection in abortion. Mothers lacking “natural affection” for their unborn children often sacrifice their baby’s life for the sake of convenience. This is perversion. On another occasion, he wrote, “Likewise also the men, leaving the natural use of the woman, burned in their lust one toward another; men with men working that which is unseemly, and… Being filled with all unrighteousness, fornication… without natural affection, implacable… (Rom 1:27-31).” Once again, we find Paul using the idea of natural order to identify sexual perversion.

Now let’s consider the church. The Barna Group Ltd. uses polling to research moral and spiritual trends in America. Their research shows an alarming trend of feminization in the church. Some suggest that the face of the American church is an elderly single lady. Studies by denominational headquarters, the Internet, and even mainstream news agencies like ABC News have documented this gender shift. Is this something that should concern Christians?

To begin with, female leaders should NOT alarm Christians. There is ample precedence set in the scripture for women in leadership positions (i.e. Matthews 28:7, Acts 18:24-26, Judges 4-5 [Deborah], etc). Many of our generation have heard of Kathryn Kuhlman. Her relationship with God was undeniable. She is still regarded as one of the most popular and powerful female evangelists ever. But she was hardly alone. Less widely known is Maria Woodworth-etter (1844-1924) and Aimee Semple McPherson (1890-1944) both of whom were pioneers and evangelists in what became known as the Pentecostal Movement. No, it is not female leaders that should concern us but the feminization of the church.

Quietly over the past few decades, men have become fewer and fewer in institutional churches. It is reminiscent of the silent slaughter of the men-children by the midwives in Egypt. Back then, the midwives had a conscience for God and disobeyed Pharaoh, but what of today’s midwives? Where are all the men?

Spiritual Sissification, An Unnatural Order

Ephesians 5:22-28 KJV

22 Wives, submit yourselves unto your own husbands, as unto the Lord.

23 For the husband is the head of the wife, even as Christ is the head of the church: and he is the saviour of the body.

24 Therefore as the church is subject unto Christ, so let the wives be to their own husbands in every thing.

25 Husbands, love your wives, even as Christ also loved the church, and gave himself for it;

26 That he might sanctify and cleanse it with the washing of water by the word,

27 That he might present it to himself a glorious church, not having spot, or wrinkle, or any such thing; but that it should be holy and without blemish.

28 So ought men to love their wives as their own bodies. He that loveth his wife loveth himself.

It would seem that since the model of the marital relationship (described here) is so clearly presented throughout the scripture and is extensively used to portray the relationship Jesus Christ desires with His people, the church would take care to protect and nurture this relationship, would it not? But nothing could be further from the truth.

Deep within the heart of every man and woman who marries abides this understanding of natural order. It is the desire of every woman’s heart to be cherished, cared for, and loved by her protective, nurturing husband. Similarly, there is a driving need in every man’s heart to be the protector and provider for his wife. His need to be admired by his wife is as strong as his wife’s need to be cherished by him. When this natural order is followed, nothing can tempt or break this union.

1. By nature, men want to be the spiritual leaders in their homes.

In every Christian home, the husband/father desires to be the spiritual head of his home. As a responsible godly man, he tries to put his family in an environment that nurtures spiritual growth. Some men control access to TV and other media to which his children may be exposed. Some control who their friends are, the way they dress, and even where they get their education (home school or Christian school). Often these things are carried out properly with admirable results in that children become mature, respectful, well-behaved young people with a conscience for God. Most Christian parents know intuitively what is right for their family.

In addition, both the husband and wife know they need the fellowship of like-minded Christians both for themselves and for their children. Eventually, they settle on a church that they feel can best support their spiritual and social objectives for their family. It would seem on the surface that this model would go far to strengthen the family unit, but just the reverse is true. The Barna Group Ltd. studies, as well as that from many other groups show that the family unit of contemporary Christianity is NO stronger than that of its secular counterpart. In short, the church has had zero impact in strengthening the family unit. Some studies even suggest that it has made matters worse. Of course, none of this makes any sense, or does it? Let’s consider what spiritual principles are really at work and whether these spiritual principles do in fact strengthen the family unit.

2. The structure of the institutional church forces men into sissification.

Once again, drawing from The Barna Group: “The United States is dominated by small churches, with the average church attracting less than 90 adults on a typical weekend… Overall, the research found that the typical Protestant church has 89 adults in attendance during an average weekend.” Churches that draw a thousand or more members account for only 2% of all churches. Consequently, the average church in the U.S. tends to be small.

In small churches, sissification tends to be more obvious than in the large. They tend to have a single pastor who is the ultimate authority and around whom everything tends to revolve. In large churches, this is less pronounced because of all the people who are involved in making the machine go. Therefore, it is easier for the pastor to assume an elevated position in small churches.

In small churches, people assume some of the aspects of an audience but many of the characteristics of children. People are treated as children. They are often scolded. They are sometimes humiliated. But most importantly, the pastor (from his elevated position of authority) usurps the spiritual authority of the husband. The husband/father, who should be the spiritual authority of his home, is cast as a peer to his children. This breaks down the spiritual authority that the husband/father ought to have in his home and replaces it with that of the pastor. It forces the husband/father to subjugate his authority, thereby breaking down the family’s respect for the father/husband.

In larger churches, sissification is less obvious. They tend to have a good mix of men, women, and children. In these churches, the service is held more in the form of Christian entertainment, and the people are actually treated as an audience. Like an audience, most of the people don’t really know each other, but they attend because of the emotional stimulation. The meeting is progressive, the music is tailored to the community, and everything flows in a non-stop manner designed to keep the audience from becoming bored or tired. But the outcome is similar. Men are stripped of their leadership and made to sit as an audience with no more spiritual authority than his children. This system made up of preachers, worship leaders, Sunday school teachers, and other small group leaders fill in for the spiritual leadership that should be coming from the man. His authority is eventually lost to the taskmasters of Pharaoh. The family unit becomes nothing more than any other secular family with no spiritual leader in the home.

3. The spiritual leader of the home is not the husband but the pastor.

Wives tend to see their pastors as the ultimate spiritual authority. They spiritually idolize him. It is his influence that directs the home and family unity. When this happens, spiritual adultery begins to take place between the wife and her pastor. Such a relationship is unhealthy to the marriage and plants the seed of marital breakdown.

4. The ONLY route open to most men to become spiritual leaders (at institutional churches) is to quit work, go to seminary, and become pastors.

Oddly enough, the only way to fix the problem with spiritual authority in their own home is by destroying the spiritual authority in others. Thus, we find the reason for the plethora of small churches in America (it is estimated that many communities have as many as one church or Christian organization for every forty to sixty adults). Men feel the need to provide spiritual oversight to their families but the institutional church does not allow for it. As a result, instead of abandoning a bad design, many men go out and recreate the beast by creating yet another institutional church. It fixes the problem for their family but recreates it for others.

5. Men cannot compete with pastors for the spiritual leadership role in their homes.

Therefore, …

6. Most men eventually give up.

Most men do not understand the problem. They simply assume that the current church model, with their families submitting to other men, is correct. After all, this model has been around for almost two thousand years. They become frustrated by their inability to fit in. But how can they fit in when there is no role for men, but only for spiritually effeminate men. Many times their frustration leads them into giving up.

Meanwhile, the wife cannot understand the problem her husband faces. After all, submission comes quite naturally to her. She also assumes that the current model of church structure is correct. Since she is able to learn and receive from the pastor, the only logical conclusion is that her husband has backslidden, does not care about her spiritual needs, or is simply not a spiritual person.

7. Women eventually see their husbands as weak, spiritual failures.

Because the traditional structure of the institutional church remains unchallenged, failure to comply with it constitutes rebellion, disobedience, and sin. Just what if the forced feminization of men is not correct?

People point to the many successes of men throughout history who were part of the institutional church. This is true, BUT historically these men who provided spiritual leadership while part of the institutional church were men who eventually found some leadership function in the church, started their own church, or worked in an independent manner on a mission field. Functioning in the typical spiritually effeminate capacity required by the institutional church does not produce leaders.

8. Women then cause spiritual sissification in their homes by setting themselves in place as the spiritual head.

The result of forcing men into effeminate submission is a breakdown in the spiritual authority of the home and spiritual perversion. Women become the dominant spiritual force of the home and the husband becomes submissive. She receives her direction from her pastor (her spiritual head), and commits spiritual adultery with him. But this form of adultery seems to be okay since everyone does it.

The pastor, who sits at the top of the pyramid, directs his subordinates: the women who freely submit to his authority. Under the women are their children who submit to them, and after the children, the husband/father. Many pastors identify with the wife’s frustration over her husband’s spiritual condition, and some even encourage their divorce. The irony is that quite often the pastor himself is responsible for the breakdown of the marriage in the first place. And yet he counsels the wife and advises her to divorce her husband when he refuses to come in and “submit” himself even further to the pastor’s counseling. Getting the man out of the picture gives the pastor total control over the family.

The alternative is that the man plays along. He attends church and does his part all the while giving the pastor the submission that he requires. The pastor is happy, his wife is happy, and so he is happy. And as long as the man has no spiritual aspirations, everything will be fine. As long as the man is willing to stay spiritually effeminate, there won’t be any trouble. Because in the institutional church, there is room for only one person to “wear the pants,” and it is certainly not you, Christian man.

Conclusion

A note like this will invariably draw responses from pastors quoting a favorite verses of theirs: “Let the elders that rule well be counted worthy of double honour, especially they who labour in the word and doctrine, 1 Timothy 5:17.” Let’s put this into perspective. The scripture tells us that, “Now I say, That the heir, as long as he is a child, differeth nothing from a servant, though he be lord of all; But is under tutors and governors until the time appointed of the father (Galatians 4:1-2).” We know that even men who are babes in Christ (children) will be under mentors. If, however, men are still treated as children in your church after 2, 3, 5, 10, 15 or 20 years in the Lord then something is wrong with your ministry. Paul made this abundantly clear when he wrote, “For when for the time ye ought to be teachers, ye have need that one teach you again which be the first principles of the oracles of God; and are become such as have need of milk, and not of strong meat (Hebrews 5:12).” Even the disciples of Jesus grew up (Henceforth I call you not servants; for the servant knoweth not what his lord doeth: but I have called you friends; for all things that I have heard of my Father I have made known unto you, John 15:15. See also Luke 12:4).

How important is it for the Church to respect the position of a man in relation to his family? Consider the following scripture:

James 1:27 KJV

Pure religion and undefiled before God and the Father is this, To visit the fatherless and widows in their affliction, and to keep himself unspotted from the world.

The words “fatherless and widows” describe families where NO man is present. James makes it clear that the Church must take care NOT to usurp the authority of the man. The responsibility of the Church is to the poor and needy who have no husband/father to provide for their material and spiritual needs. Where men are present the Church may offer help but act only when invited.

Where are all the men? Like Pharaoh, the institutional church is anti-man. It has one person, the pastor, playing the role of the man, and that seems to be enough. Other than finding a leadership function, if a man chooses to stay, he must become spiritually effeminate. He must surrender the spiritual authority of his family to the pastor. He must sit in submission as another man assumes his role as the spiritual head of his family.

Deuteronomy 22:5 KJV

The woman shall not wear that which pertaineth unto a man, neither shall a man put on a woman's garment: for all that do so are abomination unto the LORD thy God.

The steps for the feminization of men are:

1. By nature, men want to be the spiritual leaders in their homes.

2. The structure of the institutional church forces men into sissification.

3. The spiritual leader of the home is not the husband but the pastor. Women spiritually idolize their pastors.

4. The ONLY route open to men to become a spiritual leader (while attending an institutional church) is to quit work, go to seminary, and become ordained ministers.

5. Men cannot compete with pastors for the spiritual leadership role in their homes.

6. Most men eventually give up.

7. Women eventually see their husbands as weak, spiritual failures.

8. Women then cause spiritual sissification in their homes by setting themselves in place as the spiritual head.

Okay, so perhaps comparing an institutional church to a sheik and his harem is too vulgar. So we won’t. We won’t say that it is uncanny that, like a sheik, a pastor seems to desire being surrounded by the spiritually submissive that hang on their every word. So we won’t say that either. But we will say that if you are a man who attends an institutional church in the traditional (non-leadership) role, then like it or not, you are becoming something God hates: spiritually effeminate. It is a disgrace for you to turn over the spiritual responsibility for your family to another man. It is a disgrace for you to sit submissively, in subjection, week after week and be treated like a child by another man. Are you a man?

1 Corinthians 6:9 KJV

Know ye not that the unrighteous shall not inherit the kingdom of God? Be not deceived: neither fornicators, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor effeminate, nor abusers of themselves with mankind.

To turn over the spiritual responsibility for your family to another man is give your family over to spiritual adultery. It is one thing to hear an innocuous message on the radio or from a friend or guest speaker, but it is something altogether different to attend a church where a man sets himself between you and your family’s spiritual development and addresses you as he would his children.

Studies from groups like The Barna Group indicate that growing churches have small “cell” groups that meet throughout the week, separate from the main larger services. It is these small cell groups that draw new members who eventually attend the larger church. The reason for the success of these cell groups is that, in these smaller group settings, men (as well as women and children) find they can finally participate in a meaningful way and provide the spiritual leadership for which their hearts yearn. The sense of satisfaction is often misconstrued as God’s approval. But whereas God may approve of the dynamics of the small cell group, He most certainly does not approve of the larger meetings’ structure.

Christian men need to understand that the smaller group setting is what they need to develop spiritually as God intended. They should abandon the larger meetings that serve only to force them into effeminate spiritual submission and their wives into spiritual adultery. Just because something may feel good does not make it right any more than the “feel good” of adultery makes it right.

Finally, consider the hypocrisy of an institution that condemns effeminate natural qualities in men normally associated with homosexual behavior yet forces its spiritual counterpart upon its own members. Don’t be partakers of its sin.

Amen.

kmsrjs@triton.net (use the same address for MSN Messenger)

To subscribe to these notes: SUBSCRIBE

To see more of these notes: Ron's Thoughts

· You have my permission to post this article, publish and reprint it, and to forward it to others and to your groups. This permission extends to messages that you previously received.

· More messages can be found at: http://members.triton.net/kmsrjs/thoughts.htm

· To unsubscribe, simply email me with the word ‘UNSUBSCRIBE’ in the subject.

· To subscribe, email me with the word ‘SUBSCRIBE’ in the subject. You may also send me your email list to add to my subscription list.

· To send a prayer request please put PRAYER in the subject line. To send a request for our employment page please place the word EMPLOYMENT in the subject line.

· Please pray for these needs: http://members.triton.net/kmsrjs/Prayer.htm

· Can you find employment for these: http://members.triton.net/kmsrjs/Employment.htm

E-mail me: kmsrjs@triton.net.

Back to Ron's Thoughts Page

Counter: