Andrew Tate and Seeking God’s Plan for Manhood

For young men who frequent any social media platform, the name Andrew Tate likely sounds familiar. The 35-year-old former professional kickboxer exploded in popularity from viral posts featuring cigars, misogynistic hot-takes, and Tate’s signature fiery persona. Tate received widespread negative feedback and his subsequent social media bans did not come without further political discussion online. The Left immediately categorized Tate as a conservative firebrand, citing his target audience of young, mostly white men and heavy doses of toxic masculinity to justify the ban. The Right also condemned Tate’s message, but for conservatives, the ethical problem of social media censorship took center stage.

While the marketability of extreme views and outrage should not be understated, the ongoing masculinity crisis plays a massive role in Andrew Tate’s success. In 2020, men in the US were 3.88 times more likely to commit suicide than women, with white men committing nearly 70 percent of all suicides. A single cause for this disparity does not exist, but given this data, the Church should contemplate how it raises men. As a result of progressive cultural norms and the ongoing effects of the sexual revolution, the Church, perhaps unknowingly, has forfeited precious ground on biblical standards for men. These blurred lines taint Christian and conservative views on gender roles and predictably result in widespread confusion on the role of men within families and communities.

Establishing an identity for Christian masculinity, John Piper states in Recovering Biblical Manhood and Womanhood: “At the heart of mature masculinity is a sense of benevolent responsibility to lead, provide for and protect women in ways appropriate to a man’s differing relationships.” Maturity must precede masculinity. Without maturity, masculinity manifests itself as “incomplete and perhaps distorted” rather than “growing out of its sinful distortions and limitations, and finding its true nature as a form of love, not a form of self-assertion,” according to Piper.  Young men, including myself, often fall prey to the belief that masculinity is an undeniable right to be harnessed without obstruction. After all, we agreed the masculinity crisis created this problem, right? However, Piper characterizes masculinity as a responsibility, not a right, requiring men to turn to scripture and reconsider the worldly definitions we have frequently operated under.   

Ephesians 5:25 exemplifies this definition of manhood appropriately. The passage calls husbands to love their wives “as Christ loved the church and gave himself up for her.” While this passage focuses on a marriage relationship, the importance of masculinity manifested as love, “not a form of self-assertion,” reflects that of Christ’s sacrifice to the church. Masculinity thus requires not solely physical attributes, but an attitude of self-sacrifice and servitude towards those around us.

With servitude in mind, Piper identifies leadership as a key aspect of masculinity. Servant leadership seems contradictory, but Mark 10:44-45 explains this paradox: “And whoever would be first among you must be slave of all. For even the Son of Man came not to be served but to serve, and to give his life as a ransom for many.” Jesus’ death as substitutionary atonement is the supreme example of servant leadership. Capable leaders, like Jesus, prioritize the needs of those they serve over anything else, and Christian men should strive to imitate the exemplary character of Christ throughout their lives.

 Piper bookends his definition with “ways appropriate to man’s differing relationships.” While this statement certainly includes men’s relationships with their wives, relationships involving young Christian men and women will exceedingly fall outside of this category. When culture drastically undervalues the marriage covenant, man’s sinful nature and confusion on identity – generated by progressive sexuality – leave Christians surrounded by sexual practices that prioritize cheap pleasure over God’s plan for sexuality. The Council on Biblical Manhood and Womanhood’s Nashville Statement portrays the fundamental principles for Christians navigating sexuality in modern Western culture.  The statement received endorsements from prominent Christian pastors and theologians including John MacArthur, R.C. Sproul, Wayne Grudem, and John Piper, among others. Article 7 claims that “self-conception as male or female should be defined by God’s holy purposes in creation and redemption as revealed in Scripture.” When man defines his own identity, he discovers only emptiness within. For young men to achieve healthy relationships, their identity must be grounded in the living word of God.  

Seeking God’s plan for manhood presents a difficult task for every man, especially when destructive men like Andrew Tate dominate the current conversation. By understanding God’s model for manhood, men may better exemplify Christ through the demonstration of mature masculinity. Men who manifest their masculinity as love, self-sacrifice, and servitude can mend broken relationships with manhood and effectively lead both in the Church and in their personal relationships.