The Masculinity of Christ in the Face of Effeminate Christianity

Upon arrival, fuel was pouring down the driveway and the aircraft’s engine was still running. My dad, knowing the risky circumstances of broken electrical, the engine’s heat, and loose fuel looked at me and said, “I have to turn off that engine!” He ran into the rubble climbing some seven-to-ten feet into the divided two-story home and opened the cockpit. He immediately killed the engine and then checked the pulses of all the bloodied passengers—all four had died on impact. It was one of those moments in your life where you get to witness, in real-time, genuine masculinity. 

Moments like this are everywhere in human history; each of them falling somewhere on a continuum of courage. While these acts can be carried out by both men and women, history confirms that resolve, courage, and bravery rest primarily in the masculine domain. The Apostle Paul even closes the book of 1 Corinthians by saying “Be watchful, stand firm in the faith, act like men, be strong. Let all that you do be done in love.” (16:13-14). Combine this text with the hundreds of passages recording provision, battle, sacrifice, and honor and you quickly begin to see the intrinsic differences God has designed into the male genus. Yes, there is Deborah and Rahab and Esther who demonstrated great courage, but they are far outnumbered by the courageous examples of men like Joshua, Gideon, Sampson, David, Jonathan, Nehemiah, the Prophets, the twelve Apostles, and Jesus Himself. Namely, the Bible is dripping with examples regarding male strength, boldness, courage, and rough responsibility. These moments range from short acts of valor to extraordinary displays of fortitude, but the harmonizing thread is rugged masculine virility.

In my research for this article, I noticed a link between many of these courageous acts. These links were often formed by a statement of necessity—a group of words that captures the commitment of the moment. For my dad, it was “I have to turn off that engine” For Martin Luther it was, “Here I stand. I can do no other. God help me. Amen.”^[1] For Winston Churchill it was, “We shall fight on the beaches, we shall fight on the landing grounds, we shall fight in the fields and in the streets, we shall fight in the hills, but we shall never surrender.”^[2] For the early church martyr Ignatius of Antioch, who was sentenced to death by lions, it was, “May I enjoy the wild beasts that are prepared for me. I pray that they would be found eager to rush at me, and I will also entice them to devour me speedily… If they are unwilling to assail me, I will compel them to do so.”^[3] History (both biblical and secular) is saturated with incredible stories of resolved men making valiant statements that precede powerful acts. These acts have become inspirational records illustrating commitment to God or values or morals in the face of pain, terror, and even death. 

But of all the statements demonstrating the raw masculinity recorded in human history, there is none remotely more courageous than the words in Matthew 20:18 where Jesus says, “Behold, we are going up to Jerusalem.” Just seven words. At face value, they are not unique or extreme. Grammatically, they form a simple phrase in the future tense. Descriptively, they are directional, unremarkable, and flat. But behind these words, lies a degree of masculine resolve which no man can ever rival.

These words, without a doubt, make up the greatest and most dauntless statement made in the history of the world.

But unfortunately, the modern church has altogether missed it. Like the flyover territory of air travel, this pinnacle moment has been read over without any notoriety or consideration. But why? Why has the church not seen what I’m about to present? How have we missed what may be the most masculine act of Jesus’ life?

My hypothesis is this: Due to the feminization of Jesus, the cultural hatred of masculinity, and the lack of faithful exposition in the pulpit we have been conditioned to not recognize the potent manliness and courageousness of Christ.

We, as a church, are certainly able to see such attributes in Daniel or Joshua, or Sampson. We definitely accept them in David’s war chronicles and the decapitation of Goliath. But, for some reason, we are unwilling to see it in Christ’s ministry and the decapitation of the serpent of sin. In this article, however, I will attempt to unearth and reveal the fierce, manliness of Christ. I will argue that He is not merely a sacrificial Lamb but also a conquering Lion. But more than that, I will bring to light what can be learned from Jesus’ masculinity and how the church of today can return to a proper balance of masculine and feminine Christianity.  

The Delicate Deity

Both the culture and the modern church have done an excellent job at misrepresenting the biblical Jesus. As a culture, we have largely produced a caricature of Christ based on the anemic and soft-smiled Roman Catholic paintings where Jesus looks like He’s just put on a fresh coat of blush and tweezed His eyebrows. Add the rise of feminism, the deconstructionist movement, and the progressive church and you end up with a delicate Jesus who’s “knocking gently on the door of your heart.” But it goes much further than this. Our culture despises masculinity. In fact, any form of masculinity that doesn’t adhere to the world’s standard is deemed “toxic.”^[4] There’s a reason Ariana Grande’s song “God is a Woman” was number one on Billboard’s Top 100 list.^[5]

The world is hellbent on distorting, perverting, and redefining any biblical comprehension of gender, whatsoever.

Unfortunately, the pulpit hasn’t helped, either. For the past 30-50 years, the church has been infatuated with keynote Christianity where infotainers crack jokes and sprinkle in Scripture. As a result, these pulpiteers have left thousands of congregations with a Christ the people want but not the Christ that God sent. In truth, we have made a Jesus in our own image. Consequently, we are left with a Christology where Jesus is portrayed as some divine doormat who passively submits to the cross and begs people to accept Him as their Savior. In fact, I recently saw a social media graphic where fragile Jesus was in a hospital bed in heaven with a transfusion bloodline down to the world that read, “If they would only believe.” What a falsification of Christ!

The truth is, Christ is not passive but active. He is not in distress, He is predominant. He is not subject, but King! The modern church has not only misrepresented our Savior in His divinity but has also robbed him of His masculinity. We have not seen Him as our sovereign nor have we seen Him as a man. As a result, we have produced a version of Christianity that lives up to the Christ we have created—weak, effeminate, delicate, and soft. 

The Maleness of Christ

Jesus was a man—conceived by a virgin, born biologically male, raised by a carpenter, a boy wise beyond his years (Luke 2:41-52), fully divine (John 1:1), and potently masculine. In fact, if you hate masculinity you will despise the biblical Jesus. He wasn’t interested in “getting to know His feminine side” nor was He the macho and chauvinistic domineer that some failing men have become. Jesus was the epitome of manhood—a stalwart in mission, bold, obedient to the point of death, fearless in His proclamation of truth, sacrificial in His acts of love, and resolved to do His Father’s will. Jesus had force, authority, and control in a way that marked Him as virile and robust. 

Yes, it is true that our Lord also exemplified gentler traits, but these marks are not effeminate in nature they are, in proper placement, the completion of true masculinity. Historically, some theologians have claimed that Jesus is the perfect amalgam of man and woman. The 19^th century English divine F.W. Robertson once said, “There is in Him the woman heart—as well as the manly brain.”^[6] Namely, he is claiming Jesus to be a pure breed image of God. This, of course, is true. But there is a nuance in Robertson’s treatment which I believe, at a scholarly level, has injured the full maleness of Christ. I believe he has projected Adam’s biological state upon Jesus. Namely, I believe Adam, prior to the extraction of Eve from his makeup, held within himself a more accurate representation of Robertson’s definition.

That is, the newly created Adam was sexually male but intrinsically housed the qualities of man and woman. As Dr. Alastair Roberts of Durham University put it, “The woman’s being derives from the man’s, the man’s being from the earth—the adamah. Adam was ‘formed’ while Eve was ‘built.’”^[7] This is both faithful exposition and wise logic. Prior to the “building” of Eve, Adam was the raw material for such a divine task. However, in a world in which woman already exists, this cannot be said equally of Christ’s biology. He, unlike Adam, was born of a woman in the same way we are. Furthermore, to claim that Christ has some unique form of biology is to severely wound the Doctrine of the Hypostatic Union. Hebrews 2:14-18 [NASB] clearly states (bold for emphasis):

“Since therefore the children share in flesh and blood, he himself likewise partook of the same things, that through death he might destroy the one who has the power of death, that is, the devil, and deliver all those who through fear of death were subject to lifelong slavery. For surely it is not angels that he helps, but he helps the offspring of Abraham. Therefore he had to be made like his brothers in every respect so that he might become a merciful and faithful high priest in the service of God, to make propitiation for the sins of the people. For because he himself has suffered when tempted, he is able to help those who are being tempted.”

The crux of this passage is the result clause in verse 17 that states, “Therefore he had to be made like his brothers in every respect…”An alternative translation is “in all things.” This does not mean Christ must be made to be like us in our spiritual state of sin and the effects thereof (wicked affections, sickness, disease, and death) but He must be made like us in our physical state (biologically human, and in His case, male). For since the human species fell into sin under the Law only another human (not an angel or animal) born under the Law could redeem humanity through perfect obedience to the Law and sacrificial propitiation to satisfy the justice of the Law. This is the clear teaching of Paul in Galatians 4:4-5 when he said, “But when the fullness of time had come, God sent forth his Son, born of woman, born under the law, to redeem those who were under the law, so that we might receive adoption as sons.”

I say all this to defend against the idea that Christ had some special or supernatural emotional, hormonal, dual-gender physiology. We, as humans, certainly know that biological males do not have a “woman heart” and a “manly brain.” No, males have a manly heart and a manly brain. In Christ’s humanity, He was classically human.

For that reason, I argue that Jesus was fully and naturally a masculine male. In fact, He was the most masculine male who ever lived.

But how was His masculinity expressed and what can the modern church learn from His example? The answer to these questions will be the focus of the following section.

The Masculinity of Christ

I believe males must primarily learn masculinity from Jesus. For this reason, I perform a short evening catechism with my boys. I often include two questions: What do men do? My sons (whose names are Honor and Valor) both respond “They protect and provide!” Next, I ask: Who is the only perfect man? “Jesus Christ!” they yell. Through further discussion, I attempt to demonstrate, in the simplest of ways, how Christ is the premier provider and protector. That is, I explain how He provides salvation at the expense of His own life and how He protects His Church from the attacks of the enemy and the grip of sin. In short, Jesus is the ultimate Provider and Protector. But this is merely fingers deep into the ocean of Christ’s masculinity. This concentrated exhibition of manhood manifests itself in four primary ways: His Boldness, His Fearlessness, His Sacrificial Love, and His Resolve. Let’s briefly review each of them. 

1. The Boldness of Jesus

The opposite of boldness is ambiguity. Many Christians today dance around hard issues using fuzzy language to communicate clear positions in Scripture. In short, we have an affection for improper prudery and apprehension. This was not true of Jesus. Standing before thousands of people He turns and says to them: 

Jonathan Edwards in his work Religious Affections once said, “Boldness enables Christians to forsake all rather than Christ, and to prefer to offend all rather than to offend Him.”^[8] That is, at the center of Christ’s boldness is the commitment to please God no matter the cost. Namely, He was willing to speak God’s truth in love regardless of the relational or physical consequences. Now the culture will surely cry, “Boldness is not a gender issue!’ In one sense, this is correct. All people can exhibit boldness. However, in the Bible, the character trait of boldness rests squarely upon the shoulders of men. In fact, the Scriptures even instruct the opposite character trait for a woman, “Let your adorning be the hidden person of the heart with the imperishable beauty of a gentle and quiet spirit, which in God’s sight is very precious.”(1 Peter 3:4).

Biblically speaking, Christian women are to be in spiritual submission to their fathers or husbands. Boldness, however, implies one to be out front (as Christ was). The Oxford Dictionary lists one definition as “Willing to meet danger.” This was characteristic of Jesus’ ministry. He was a righteous provocateur! In fact, every biblical command for individual “boldness” (παρρησίας) is a descriptive or prescriptive act of a male. So when we think of boldness, we must not first think of Churchill or Lincoln or Martin Luther King Jr. but Jesus— the boldest man who ever lived. 

2. The Fearlessness of Christ

Fearlessness is the anchor of boldness. They cannot rightly operate without one another. That is to say, beneath the boldness of Christ is the sheer fearlessness of man. Sinclair Ferguson once said, “The fear of the Lord tends to take away all other fears. This is the secret of Christian courage.”^[9] I believe this to be true. But more importantly, I believe Jesus believed this to be true. Psalm 19:9 in the KJV says, “The fear of the Lord is clean…” Namely, the fear of the Lord is based in love and not in wrath. It is a reverential form of fear. Christ was not frightened by God but He righteously reverenced God. Hebrews 5:7 says, “In the days of his flesh, Jesus offered up prayers and supplications, with loud cries and tears, to him who was able to save him from death, and he was heard because of his reverence.” The fear of man, however, is a product of sin. 1 John 4:18 says, “There is no fear in love, but perfect love casts out fear.” Because of Christ’s divinity and His complete union with God and His love, He had unfettered fearlessness. He was famous for unflinching and intense remarks and responses to godless men. He was able to authoritatively command others to “fear not” and to face the devil himself, to cast out demons, condemn religious leaders, and face the horrors of the cross.

In short, Christ was not timid. He was fearless—a foundational trait of masculinity.

His posture is instructive to all but especially to men. He lives out the words of Paul in Romans 8:31, “If God is for us who can be against us.” And John’s words in his first epistle, “Greater is He who is in you than he who is in the world.” Ultimately, Jesus’ fearlessness comes from His perfect communion with God. It is a quality required for faithful leadership in a fallen world. It is a trait we must, by God’s grace, nurture in the church. We need more men who are fearless because they fear Him! 

3. The Sacrificial Love of Christ

In today’s culture, love has more counterfeits than money. Our society is brimming with pithy catchphrases like “Love is love” or “Love wins” or “Love yourself” that attempt to put forth a definition that is all-accepting, all tolerant, and all liberating. But the river of love must flow down the banks of truth. The truth is, love has a definition. 1 Corinthians 13:4-8 states, “Love is patient and kind; love does not envy or boast; it is not arrogant or rude. It does not insist on its own way; it is not irritable or resentful; it does not rejoice at wrongdoing, but rejoices with the truth. Love bears all things, believes all things, hopes all things, endures all things. Love never ends.”

In short, love is not based on superficial feelings but on sacrificial commitment. We cannot accept culture’s fraudulent substitutes. Jesus in John 10:11 says, “I am the good shepherd. The good shepherd lays down his life for the sheep.” At the core of love, we see sacrifice. But at the core of sacrifice, we see true masculinity. In Ephesians 5:25 Paul instructs: “Husbands, love your wives, as Christ loved the church and gave himself up for her…” To be clear, this is not a two-way street. There is no passage of Scripture telling women to sacrifice themselves for men.

Sure, there is a general principle of sacrificial love which can be applied by all; but men, like Christ, are called to sacrifice themselves for their women—specifically, their wive’s but I would argue for a form of sacrifice even for their daughters, mothers, and sisters as well. This is yet another mark of manliness exemplified by Christ. But how is this love masculine? To put it briefly, love forms the basis for the fight. The masculine desire to protect is fueled by the love of one’s own. Namely, we battle for what is ours. We guard the flock that has been entrusted to us. G.K. Chesterton once wrote, “The true soldier fights not because he hates what is in front of him, but because he loves what is behind him.”^[10]

This is Christ to the core. Jesus came to fight and sacrifice Himself—not for all but for His. He didn’t sacrifice Himself for everyone, but for His bride—the church. He didn’t sacrifice Himself for all, but for the sheep.

Matthew 1:21 says, “She will bear a son, and you shall call his name Jesus, for he will save his people from their sins.” Jesus came for sacrifice. The cross was His aim. He was spiritually and biologically designed for it. It was masculine love on grand display. There is no greater example and men must learn to follow it.  

4. The Resolve of Christ

If sacrificial love was the rose of Christ then His resolve is its stem. That is to say, the beauty of the cross is elevated when we see what drove it. Theologically speaking, it was our sin that induced the cross. It was God’s love that compelled the cross. But it was Christ’s resolve that made the cross so beautiful. Resolve is defined as “deciding firmly on a course of action.” The cross was not merely an occurrence in time—it was divinely chosen. Namely, the divine Trinity was not obligated to select this course of redemptive action. There were no grounds to justify such a choice. Nevertheless, God chose it and Jesus was born for it. In a very real sense, His mission was not life, but death!

John Stott in his renowned work The Cross of Christ said, “What dominated his mind was not the living but the giving of His life.”^[11] Christ chose the cross! In the truest sense, He ran to it. This is not seen more clearly than in Mark 10:32-34 which states:

Do not miss the words “and Jesus was walking ahead of them.” This was a remarkable display of resolute masculinity. The moment was drenched with courage. Webster defines courage as “not deterred by danger or pain” This was surely an expression of just that. Christ knew exactly what was going to happen to Him. He knew of the spitting, beating, whipping, and nailing that was about to come. But more than that, He knew of the wrath of God He would endure for the sins of His people. He knew of the coming anguish and horror of being forsaken by the Father. He knew of the unspeakable and, for us, unknowable agony of divine penalty. And where was Jesus? Walking ahead of them! He would not be deterred or deflected. He would not be intimidated. He was resolved to accomplish His mission—to save His people from their sins. 

Now, like all the attributes listed above, resolve is not limited to the masculine realm. However, the highlights of heroic history exude moments primarily of male resolve. When it comes to persevering through difficult, risky, traumatic, and bloody tasks, men take the crown. Elizabeth Hoisington, one of the first women to attain the rank of Brigadier General in the U.S. Army says: 

“I do not doubt the Army has women who can complete a combat course, endure three days or three weeks under field conditions, and shoot as straight as any man. But in my whole lifetime, I have never known 10 women whom I thought could endure three months under actual combat conditions in an Army unit. Women cannot match men in aggressiveness, physical stamina, resolve, and muscular strength in long-term situations.”^[12] 

This is not shocking information. An intellectual person cannot deny the science that demonstrates the biological advantage that testosterone offers in moments of resolve in the face of death. A team of researchers from a 2018 study in Wales concluded, “The striking male post-pubertal increase in circulating testosterone (15-30 times higher than women) provides a major, ongoing, cumulative, and durable physical advantage in sporting contests by creating larger and stronger bones, greater muscle mass and strength, and higher circulating hemoglobin as well as possible psychological differences.”^[13] We must admit that the resolve of Christ was, in part, made possible by His biological body.

God, at a physiological level, sent His Son Jesus into the world with a male, testosterone-producing body that equipped Him with the masculine attributes required to fulfill His physical duties as Messiah. He was not toxic or effeminate. He was wonderfully and perfectly masculine.  

The Effeminate Infiltration of the Church

David Murrow, the author of Why Men Don’t Go to Church opens with a bold fact, “Christianity is the only world religion with a chronic shortage of men.”^[14] Brenda E. Brasher the author of Godly Women affirms this reality when she writes, “If American religion were imaginatively conceptualized as a clothing store, two-thirds of its floor space would house garments for women.”^[15]

Unfortunately, both of these statements are correct. Study after study affirms that women significantly outpace men in church attendance. But why? One would think that having such a masculine Messiah would prevent such an effeminate local church. However, these results are not without basis. For the past 40-50 years, the church has drastically shifted from the historic expression of Christianity to an effeminate alternative. We have traded the fire and brimstone preaching of the early 20^th century for the soft and encouraging Ted-Talk style infotainers of today. We have moved from classic hymns about doctrine and sacrifice and piety to emotional love songs where people sway their hips to “Jesus is my boyfriend.”

As for the pastoral dress, the suit has gone to the garbage and has been replaced with skinny jeans, a necklace, and a swoop-cut shirt that looks like a repurposed woman’s blouse. But it doesn’t stop there, we have pastors using phrases like “Do life together” and “love on each other” and “let go and let God” and “Share what’s on your heart.” In addition, more churches are ordaining women as pastors which is a direct attempt to flip the biblical order of feminine submission to husbands, fathers, and biblical elders upside down. In short, we have, in a very real way, emasculated the local church. 

The gender-role distortion and infatuation with egalitarianism have contributed to great confusion in the church of what it means to be a biblical man or woman. It has left women fighting for leadership and left men without direction in their role in marriage, church, and family. In fact, I strongly believe this has been the enemy’s central strategy for this generation. He has influenced the church to such a place of feminine emotion that when the time comes for masculine boldness, fearlessness, sacrifice, and resolve, the church (and culture) will be grossly unprepared.

Coffee shop and book store Christianity is no match for prison cell and angry mob Christianity. The truth is, church history is saturated with Christians being tortured, dismembered, eaten, shot, hung, racked, boxed, buried, and burned for Christ. The timidity of the current church, which submits to government overreach and complies with laws enforcing unbiblical support of sexual sin, will be costly.

The time is coming soon when the need for masculine Christian men will be intense and their availability will be short. This should not shock anyone, either.

The feminism movement of the 21st century is not about noble female valuation, it’s about male domination. Furthermore, by now we must see that their movement does not have borders. Like the LGBTQ community, they seek to saturate every facet of public, personal, and spiritual life. This should, at the very least, cause alarm to the current local church and at the very most prepare us to fight strongly against it. Ultimately, we need both biblical shepherds and faithful women to see through the societal smoke and guard against this dangerous infiltration of effeminate culture. 

Lastly, we cannot forget that Christianity is not an egalitarian religion. Yes, men and women are equal in value before the cross but we are not equal in our role or our duty. Christianity, while complementarian in marriage, is patriarchal in leadership. This generation, of course, abhors the word “patriarchy.” I admit, that patriarchy, like marriage or fatherhood, or heterosexuality, has an ability to express itself in unbiblical and sinful ways. But these are good and fruitful structures when they are carried out in sacrificial love, biblical order, and to God’s glory. All that said, we must not reject femininity in the church, either. God is pleased with His daughters. However, we must aim to set the gender culture of the church to be in alignment with gender-culture of Scripture. Namely, it must be gentle, safe, and encouraging while at the same time being strong, bold, and resolved to maintain biblical order and mission. When this balance is achieved we see the whole person of Christ manifested in the church and His people can march on in step with their conquering Lord. 

Conclusion

I opened this essay with a story of my father and how I noticed that courageous acts were often marked by succinct statements of responsibility. I noted that the most courageous words ever spoken were by Jesus in Matthew 20:18 when He said, “Behold, we are going up to Jerusalem.” It was these words that marked the transition from Christ’s general ministry to His passion ministry (the cross). “We are going up to Jerusalem” really meant, “I am going to die for you, suffer the wrath of God for you, and be separated from my Father for you.” Now, with context, we can grasp how intense these words truly were. He was marching toward the “hour” for which He had come (John 12:27). The Gospels repeatedly display His resolve. Jesus says, “The son of man must be lifted up.” Mark 8:31 states, “And He began to teach them that the Son of Man must suffer many things…” In Luke 24:44 Jesus says, “My words which I spoke to you while I was still with you, that all things which are written about Me in the Law of Moses and the Prophets and the Psalms must be fulfilled.” Jesus was on a mission. He was marching. He was leading. He was bold. He was fearless. He was sacrificial. He was resolved. He was, at this moment, the manliest male who ever lived. 

Without reservation, we must be able to agree that the narrative of Christianity is not predominantly feminine. It includes women. It elevates women. It adores women. It honors women. But from the patriarchs and the prophets to the Messiah and the Apostles, biblical Christianity is predominantly masculine. It is robust and rugged. It has heart and it has hope. What it does not have is a sense of effeminate character. For this reason, we must examine why the church does. We must see the gap between the intense and costly Christianity seen in the Scriptures and our modern age’s frail and costless Christianity. We must find a way to restore alignment, to honor the masculinity of Christ and His men in the local church. For when men and women fall into their proper place the glory of God shines with heat. In a world that’s grown cold, finding the kindling to spark this flame will permit the church and her Gospel to burn brightly. 

[1] Roland H. Bainton, Here I Stand: A Life of Martin Luther (Nashville: Abington Press, 2013). 

[2] Curtis Brown, “We Shall Fight on the Beaches,” International Churchill Society, https://winstonchurchill.org/resources/speeches/1940-the-finest-hour/we-shall-fight-on-the-beaches/. 

[3] Paul A. Boer Sr., St. Ignatius of Antioch (Create Space Publishing, 2012).

[4] Wikipedia, “Toxic Masculinity,” 2020, https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Toxic_masculinity.

[5] Gary Trust, Ariana Grande Hits No. 1 On Pop Songs Chart With ‘God Is a Woman,’ Goes Top 10 With ‘Breathin,’ Billboard, https://www.billboard.com/pro/ariana-grande-god-is-a-woman-no-1-pop-songs-chart/. 

[6] J.R. Miller, “The Manliness of Jesus” GraceGems.org, https://www.gracegems.org/

Miller/manliness_of_jesus.htm. See also fwrobertson.org for a collection of his 19^th century sermons. 

[7] Alastair Roberts, “Man and Woman in Creation (Genesis 1 and 2)”, 9Marks, December 10, 2019,   https://www.9marks.org/article/man-and-woman-in-creation-genesis-1-and-2/. 

[8] Jonathan Edwards. Religious Affections (Moscow, ID: Canon Press, 2020). 

[9] Sinclair Ferguson. Grow in Grace (Carlisle, PA: Banner of Truth, 1989), 33- 34.

[10] G.K. Chesterton, “War and Politics,” The Society of G.K. Chesterton, Originally said in the Illustrated London News, Jan. 14, 1911, https://www.chesterton.org/quotations/war-and-politics/. 

[11] John Stott. The Cross of Christ (Downers Grove, IL: Intervarsity Press, 2006), 37. 

[12] Debra Bell, “Debate: Should Women Fight in War,” U.S. News & World Report, February 13, 1978. Digital Version: https://www.usnews.com/news/blogs/press-past/2013/05/15/arguing-for-and-against-women-incombat-in-1978

[13] David J Handelsman, Angelica L Hirschberg, and Stephane, “Circulating Testosterone as the Hormonal

Basis of Sex Differences in Athletic Performance” NCBI, July 13, 2018, https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/ PMC6391653/#__ffn_sectitle

[14] David Murrow. Why Men Hate Going to Church (Nashville: Thomas Nelson, 2011). 

[15] Brenda E. Brasher, Godly Women: Fundamentalism and Female Power (Chicago, IL: Rutgers University Press, 1997).