As a bloke I’m called to be and live like Jesus.

Here’s the problem, often Jesus is perceived as some kind of hippie Jesus with the long flowing locks and a nice beard who said lots of nice things and talked about his feelings. Often when we teach and preach about Jesus we do so in a way that makes him seem effeminate or at least not particularly blokey. Jesus didn’t play footy, he didn’t watch the cricket he wasn’t like James Bond and he didn’t watch 300 or even ultimate fighting.

Now obviously this is a stereotype but this brought me to a question. What does it mean as a blokey bloke to have Jesus as an example? Does it simply mean I need to be less blokey? Or is Jesus really a blokey bloke… and I just can’t see it yet?



John Dekker said... 4/12/2007 8:09 pm  

Is "blokey" the same as "masculine"?

The Borg said... 4/12/2007 11:54 pm  

Jesus didn't say nice things.

Dave Pinn said... 4/13/2007 12:06 am  

My response is here:

mike said... 4/13/2007 12:19 am  

for arguments sake lets say 'yes' John.

Cheers for the comment David. I'd be interested in your thoughts on how to engage 'blokey' blokes with the gospel. When I say 'blokey' I mean plumbers, builders, brickies, electricians and construction workers.

Anonymous said... 4/13/2007 12:29 am  

Jesus was a carpenter. that's pretty blokey. i don't think they had football back then - that's why he didn't play it.


Nick said... 4/13/2007 12:39 am  

Jesus went to the cross for us. If that's not "blokey" then i don't know what is. How many "blokey" blokes would go that far for their cause?

mike said... 4/13/2007 12:47 am  

So being a bloke is about doing things to the fullest possible extent for a cause?

Nick said... 4/13/2007 1:21 am  

I don't think we need to contrast a weak effeminate picture of Jesus to our contemporary Aussie idea of what it allegedly means to be a "bloke". In talking about going the distance for a cause i am simply talking about courage, and its apparent relation to blokeyness. The problem is the typical Aussie bloke is not really committed to anything (unless it suits his needs/wants) so we have come to capitulate to the notion that these qualities are expected of the bloke. Jesus certainly showed great perseverance and steadfastness which some may regard as solid manly traits, but any hope of reconciling this to our distorted picture of the blokey male may have to be abandoned.

ckhnat said... 4/13/2007 4:21 am  

i think Jesus would have to be pretty masculine to have 12 (plus a couple hundred) guys want to hang out with him all the time and to make the religious leaders of the day speechless.

but you're right in being cautious so as not to be pomo and make Jesus a Dali Lama to the hippies and a NASCAR fan to rednecks.

ckhnat said... 4/13/2007 4:55 am  

review of Eldridge's Wild at Heart

Profiling Christian Masculinity ... includes characteristics of the perfect man--Christ.

Jesus in a Pink Dress Overlooking the Grateful Dead

Is Jack Bauer a Type of Christ?

Jesus, Women, and Men

John Dekker said... 4/13/2007 8:34 am  

for arguments sake lets say 'yes' John...When I say 'blokey' I mean plumbers, builders, brickies...

Well, that's begging the question. In what way are these people "blokey" - more blokey than accountants, pharmacists, pastors?

And why do we connect blokiness with occupation?

No, we have this all wrong. If it's good for men to be blokey, than we need to derive our definition of it from Jesus.

Charging into battle a la 300 might possibly be defended - according to the Book of Revelation, that's certainly what Jesus does.

The Borg said... 4/13/2007 10:26 am  

From the Jesus in a Pink Dress Article: Pastor Teletubby stands up on Sunday in a quiet, non-offensive voice, whispering pink platitudes, after people sing a love ballad or two to a pink-dressed Jesus, instead of preaching the hard, painful, inviting, comforting, electrifying, liberating, convicting, offensive, loud, unraveling, authentic, transforming, truth of the Gospel of Jesus who alone empowers and enables his people to fight in the ancient redemptive mission of God to redeem the whole creation.

byron said... 4/13/2007 10:37 am  

Charging into battle a la 300 might possibly be defended - according to the Book of Revelation, that's certainly what Jesus does.

For a start, the Greeks at Thermopylae did not charge, which is precisely why they 'won' - they were able to defend a very narrow pass against much larger numbers by using their heads as well.

But more importantly, notice that the rider on a white horse in Rev 19.11-15 is: (a) using a sword coming from his mouth to win his 'battles' - he is the Word of God, after all; and (b) is dripping with blood, but before he rides into battle - this is not his enemies' blood, but his own. I wonder whether Revelation mightn't be deconstructing our assumptions about the value of violence.

mike said... 4/13/2007 5:02 pm  

I agree if it is good for men to be blokey then we need to derive our definition of it from Jesus. I’m certianly not arguing that we should define masculinity by occupation less still particular occupations.

I’m merely asking the question of how to reach blokey blokes. Men who aren’t intellectually driven… they haven’t been to University. They spend time watching footy, drinking beer they aren’t naturally into reading talking and are more comfortable talking about “chicks”. How is Jesus an example for them?

Mark Driscoll makes an interesting case as he constantly re-frames Jesus using more masculine terminology. He speaks of Jesus as a “construction worker” and being into “NASCAR”. You can listen to his talk here.

Robbo said... 4/13/2007 6:04 pm  

Well I'll see if I can add something on the footy theme...

One of the most interesting things about football is the amount of admiration for players who put their body on the line. Self sacrifice for the good of the team is something that gets drilled into you from day one. There is nothing more embarrassing for a player than to back out of a contest because they think they are going to get hurt. My aching back is testament to that.

I think the parallels are obvious.

Anonymous said... 4/13/2007 11:01 pm  

Is the word "bogan" no longer PC? because i think that's what we really mean, not "blokey blokes".


Anonymous said... 4/14/2007 10:31 am  

A blokey bloke is not necessarily a bogan.

Subcultural definitions a plenty, get them while they're hot!


John Dekker said... 4/14/2007 10:34 am  

how to reach blokey blokes. Men who aren’t intellectually driven

Yeah, but blokey blokes are intellectually driven. How do I know this? Because Jesus spent a large amount of time studying and memorising the Torah.

I think Robbo is on to something here - true blokiness means sacrifice...

mike said... 4/14/2007 1:48 pm  

So how does John Decker reach the construction workers who are blokey blokes and not Christian... blokes who can't spell properly, failed lower level English in year 10, who have 10 minute concentration spans people who struggle to read anything longer than an article in Ralph?

Rob can you think of a non sporting parallel?

Bron said... 4/14/2007 3:04 pm  

Oh gosh, I've been resisting joining in on this one... but it just seems to be going round in circles!

My 2 cents:

Sounds like the answer to the practical question is found in seeing clearly the true masculinity of Jesus which is already present in the gospels.

It's just that either:
- it's not often presented as masculine because our definition is so warped (ie, beer drinking, car racing etc)

- or because those who have been presenting Jesus have been pastor teletubbie and have ignored the maculinity that is there and focused on the soft and cuddly side.

I guess we need to see that Jesus' masculinity is true masculinity and then once we have seen that, to present it properly and not soften it.

We don't have to adapt Jesus for blokes or make him blokier, we just have to present the masculinity that is there without watering it down.

If we are preaching the gospel of Christ who died for us, not the gospel of 'your life has purpose' or the gospel of 'life is better with Jesus' then that IS masculine. Far out, he fought satan and death for us and won! I guess it's about showing that he is the lion as well as the lamb, the king as well as the servant, and that humility is truly masculine because it is the restraint of great power for the sake of others.

James said... 4/25/2007 5:47 pm  

Nicely put.

Post a Comment