Reaching Males

[David Koot]

does he remind you at all of someone we had here a while ago, from Australia, with the exact same set of ideas and issues?

Hey Bravus, please explain. Doesn't ring a bell.

[David Koot]

By the way, what I was posting about had to do with the original question of why not as many men attend churches. I was giving my take on it, based on my experiences. I continued to go to church and belong to the church because of my belief in God and in the Bible. But I did not feel respect for male church leaders I encountered, because what I saw of their actions gave the appearance to me, at least, of being driven by self-interest, job retention and church politics. Its kinda like this . . . if someone were to draw down on them, seemed like they would do whatever it takes to stay alive.

Dave

[Woody]

Quote:

He said the word "bloody" and was startled into reality with the words, "I beg your pardon!". He never came again .

If he was that much of a whimp ... then maybe the church didn't need him after all. To think that a male man would be frightened by a bunch of women .... well ....

[Woody]

Quote:

The church has already and subtley changed towards weakness

I don't think you can call it a change. Jesus called and used the weak. He became weak for us. He didn't use the strong. He avoided them. He called the sick and the disabled the blind and the poor and those who were not in power but those who lacked it.

The more we focus on the weak the better. Those who are strong and who want to strut their stuff ... are not the ones I want to be around. I will place my bet with the Shepard.

[Beryl]

*Hey Bravus, please explain. Doesn't ring a bell."

IT RINGS A VERY LOUD BELL!!

[Neil D]

For me, integrity, strength and courage are displayed in protecting others as well as in (sometimes) attacking others (or better, other ideas) in defense of truth. Note the proportions of time Jesus spent teaching about how to live with integrity in the world compared to the amount of time He spent on the attack. I mean literally, count up the sentences if you like. For every 'generation of vipers' there are several lost sheep and lost coins and women at the well and Golden Rules.

[David Koot]

And finally - does he remind you at all of someone we had here a while ago, from Australia, with the exact same set of ideas and issues?

[Guest Male Man]

Quote:

If he was that much of a whimp ... then maybe the church didn't need him after all. To think that a male man would be frightened by a bunch of women .... well ....

Unreal. It's not because he is a whimp, quite the contrary. It is out of respect and partly out of an image being put out by churches that causes men like him to not bother with church. In fact it is this very attitude which refuses to look at the problem that keeps our churches from being what they could become.

Church men who have been freed by this message however well know what I am saying but few are here on this site because it is not a very tolerable place for such. In the US and Australia this message has taken hold quite radically and strongly. It will come to a church like yours but it depends on the leaders reaction to it when it comes. Some may reject it as some of you have and some may mold it into what they want but some churches thankfully are looking very seriously at it and wondering if this is a researgance of the Holy Spirit to take the church to a place where they don't normally want to go.

Reputation means nothing alongside doing what is right - the sooner you people realise this the better the church will be for it.

[David Koot]

Okay, Male Man, you been ID'd in some way. This is your MO apparently. Are you in Oz? Beryl and Bravus apparently know you or know about you?? And you been here before under a different name? So, who are you? C'mon, be a man, fess up.

DAve

[D. Allan]

Quote:

If this is not applicable to the service, than what is "sticking to a liberal mainstream message"?

It has to do with the message. Not the type of service.

I should have put a comma after "liberal" to show it modifies "message", and not "mainstream." sorry for the confusion.

[Guest Male Man]

So what DK - stick to the topic.

A classic defense of those who cannot tolerate the opinions of others is to become personal.

I wanted to discuss the issues but some here have made it personal, so I have become personal if that is ok.

Of course it is not ok but hey,I'll make a prediction. I'll get kicked off for using the very same arguments they use against me. They will stay on here though to perpetuate the myth that the SDA church has nothing to say when it comes to the absence of men.

Thanks for the short ride.

[D. Allan]

Quote:

The church has already and subtley changed towards weakness

I don't think you can call it a change. Jesus called and used the weak. He became weak for us. He didn't use the strong. He avoided them. He called the sick and the disabled the blind and the poor and those who were not in power but those who lacked it.

The more we focus on the weak the better. Those who are strong and who want to strut their stuff ... are not the ones I want to be around. I will place my bet with the Shepard.

Good one, Redwood. That puts things in the proper perspective!

[David Koot]

Hey guy, I don't have a quarrel with you. I don't even know who you are--I guess?? I can't say that I agree with everything you have posted, but then again, my philosophy is, 'Live and let live.' Let each person's work be examined and tested. But on the other hand, if you are someone who has been active on here in the past, it might be helpful to know where you are coming from.

[Bravus]

You'll (everyone in the thread) note that I did *not* say "Male Man is the same guy that was here before, that invalidates all his opinions, he should be banned immediately". I simply noted that the ideas and argument style were familiar. Nothing more, nothing less.

I also challenged the ideas where they seemed to me mistaken. I'd see that as being an example of the kind of courage in defending truth we're being asked to display as men... but apparently I'm a hopelessly compromised girlyman and everything I say can be readily discounted.

Male Man, so far I have spoken about you rather than to you directly, but this is to you: how can a person learn or grow if any disagreement with his position is automatically rejectable? In other words, your position is such that you don't have to take on an argument and defeat it on the merits, you can simply characterise it as a 'feminised' argument and ignore it. You're allowed to do that, but don't you paint yourself into a corner where your ideas can never change or be challenged?

Again, no animus or hostility on my part, and certainly not any intention that anyone should be banned. I'm enjoying the discussion.

[Guest Male Man]

My reaction is based on your reaction to me - get personal and I will do the same. Let's stick to the topic and stop dithering around about if I'm some other guy or not.

If I see your ideas as being part of the very problem we speak about then yes, I will say they are feministic. This should not be taken as derogatory but simply identifying what I see as the problem with our churches. Its no different if I used the word "sleepy" or "Laodicean" except that my word better identifies the nature of the condition I feel.

I came in hot on this forum so as to get people's attention - I will settle down if you let me.

[Bravus]

Fair enough.

[Amelia]

I also would love it if all of you would stay on topic.

[Bravus]

I think specific changes to the worship service in terms of style are not a sensible response to the issue of reaching males, simply because males are incredibly diverse. It's impossible to think of a single stylistic change that wouldn't annoy and alienate at least as many males as it attracted. More hymns for older and more traditional guys, more contemporary music for younger or more contemporary ones... more heavy metal for me!

I do think high quality, compelling preaching is one change that would make a big difference. To me, that means neither entertaining preaching composed of jokes and stories, nor fire and brimstone, though it might incorporate either of those things. Just high quality communication - hard to describe, but we know it when we hear it.

In terms of program structure, more variety is definitely a key. Contemporary people used to disparage the '3 hymn sandwich' structure, but they seem to have just gone ahead and replaced it with '7 songs and a sermon': another structure that's identical every week. Finding ways to shake it up so people *don't* know exactly what's coming next would make the whole experience a lot more compelling.

Have to admit, I'm still just not convinced that the problem of attracting and retaining males is really any different from the problem of attracting and retaining people. Ladies, do any of these proposed changes sound horrible and deal-breaking to you?

[Beryl]

Quote:

Another simple test. Stay back in the car for a few moments before Sabbath School. Watch the families and couples walking to the door. Who walks out in front? A sure sign a man has given over his authority to his wife is if he consistently brings up the rear and she walks in front.

THAT has NOTHING to do with who is in charge!!! THAT is merely being courteous! For a man to stride out in front with wife and children meekly following behind is THE HEIGHT OF RUDENESS! It always has been and it always will be. A REAL man is a protector of his family. Most MEN (real men, I mean) would let the kids go in front (so he and his wife can keep four eyes on them) and he would walk WITH his wife because he loves to be able to be WITH her -- after all, if the marriage is happy, they love walking together. You have painted a picture, not of a Christian man, but of an abusive beast. That makes my blood boil!

Beryl

[Guest Male Man]

Quote:

I think specific changes to the worship service in terms of style are not a sensible response to the issue of reaching males, simply because males are incredibly diverse. It's impossible to think of a single stylistic change that wouldn't annoy and alienate at least as many males as it attracted.

Yeah but if you take this idea to it's logical conclusion then we should all be still singing the music of the previous centuries because it won't affect the way people worship? Yes men and women are diverse but what I have been saying in regards to worship (and if we use music as just one example), it usually favours feminine tastes. Old or new it the language of romanticism is very popular in today's church music.

Quote:

THAT has NOTHING to do with who is in charge!!! THAT is merely being courteous! For a man to stride out in front with wife and children meekly following behind is THE HEIGHT OF RUDENESS! It always has been and it always will be. A REAL man is a protector of his family. Most MEN (real men, I mean) would let the kids go in front (so he and his wife can keep four eyes on them) and he would walk WITH his wife because he loves to be able to be WITH her -- after all, if the marriage is happy, they love walking together. You have painted a picture, not of a Christian man, but of an abusive beast. That makes my blood boil!

Ha, ha, ha, ha....an "abusive beast" if he walks out front of his family? What?

I never said where he should walk anyway, I was simply drawing your attention to a distortion of adventist marriages where the woman wears the pants instead of the male as God designed.

[cricket]

Where should a man walk then? I mean, a "male" man? To give a clear representation of who wears the pants in the family??

[TIC]In the days the Bible was written, it is interesting to note that a shepherd clearly wasn't the one wearing the pants! A shepherd walks behind his sheep to keep an eye on them. Else, if he started wearing pants and walked in front of his sheep, he'd probably have to go looking for 99 instead of only one. No wonder he likely felt at ease in a dress![/TIC]

[Denise]

Oh....excuse me for a minute......just had to pop in here and say, Hi Cricket!!!!!

OK.......now......

hee hee

[Neil D]

Yeah but if you take this idea to it's logical conclusion then we should all be still singing the music of the previous centuries because it won't affect the way people worship? Yes men and women are diverse but what I have been saying in regards to worship (and if we use music as just one example), it usually favours feminine tastes. Old or new it the language of romanticism is very popular in today's church music.

[D. Allan]

Good Preaching is probably the most important. Second to that is preventing the flavor of the good preaching from being ruined by everybody who gets up front, (for announcements, for prayer, for scripture reading, for hymn singing, etc.) giving a short sermon of their own! A fast-paced controlled order of service is needed to obviate that most debilitating and dispiriting effect.

;-(

One has no control over what these lay people are going to say, and usually their comments are lacking in grace, and seasoning. Lacking in the qualities inherent in good preaching.

In my experience this problem is extensive in SDA churchs.

Often there is a call for spiritual self-flagelation.

This male stays away from it.

[Woody]

Quote:

You have painted a picture, not of a Christian man, but of an abusive beast. That makes my blood boil!

I love it. And I am with you Beryl. If only Danny knew who he was up against. He would surrender REAL quickly. And just out of respect if for no other reason.