Recovering Biblical Masculinity in Christ

“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, nor thieves, nor the greedy, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor swindlers will inherit the kingdom of God” (1 Cor. 6:9-10, KJV).

Recent research by the Barna Group indicates a reversal of a church attendance trend among women and men. For decades, regular church attendance by women had outpaced that of men. The intricacies of this changing dynamic are addressed in the linked article, but with a softening of the church environment in recent decades, often referred to as the feminization of the church, men seemed to find less meaningful connection. The winsome environment, while pleasing to some sectors of culture for its therapeutic and emotional disposition, seemed to exclude masculine identity rooted in mission, doctrine and challenge. This is not a critique of femininity or compassion, both of which are needed in a healthy church environment, but rather, a lack of discipleship depth, specifically toward and for men. The response in some churches ultimately led to the promotion of cultural stereotype over substance, and masculine caricature over godly character. The seeker-friendly model, it seems, led to a softened Christianity, while the alternative led to a shallow Christianity. These scenarios, however, are symptoms, not causes of the disconnect among men. What are men searching for, and why do they need it?

Men of all ages need purpose, direction, and a strong sense of meaning. When men are intentionally formed through disciplined discipleship, the Gospel-shaped life provides that direction and meaning for men renewed in Christ. For too long the overreaction to a caricatured, cultural masculinity has demanded that men “soften,” even become effeminate. Is this consistent with biblical design, or with social convention and pressure? Is this “softening” of masculinity in the Church what the Lord expects? He calls us to take up our cross and follow Him. Therefore, men must shape their faith and lives according to the Cross of Christ by the Holy Spirit.

To evaluate whether such “softening” reflects biblical faithfulness or cultural accommodation, we must examine the New Testament’s own moral vocabulary, specifically the use of the Greek word μαλακοί (malakoi). As we will see, biblical masculinity it not grounded in temperament, but in discipleship.

The moral vocabulary of the New Testament is at once precise and penetrating. Among its most discussed and, at times, misunderstood terms is the Greek word μαλακοί (malakoi), translated “effeminate” in the King James Version, and rendered “soft” in other contexts. In some translations, the term appears in Paul’s list of vices (1 Cor. 6:9), while in some modern translations it is coupled with “abusers of themselves with mankind.” Yet the theological and pastoral weight of “effeminate” demands careful consideration. Its lexical background, its New Testament usage, and its spiritual implications, particularly in relation to the Cross of Christ and the endurance of suffering, reveal a concept far deeper than cultural stereotypes or external mannerisms. However, it must be emphasized that Paul’s use of “effeminate” is not the presence of or an argument against feminine virtues, but the absence of moral fortitude.

The adjective μαλακός (malakos) means “soft.” In classical Greek usage, it could describe soft garments, delicate textures, or refined living. Over time, however, the term acquired moral significance. In Greco-Roman ethical discourse (cf. Aristotle’s Nicomachean Ethics 7.1.4), malakia (softness) came to denote weakness of character, lack of discipline, and surrender to self-indulgence, even sexual indulgence. Paul seems to indicate this by following μαλακοί (malakoi) with ἀρσενοκοίτης (arsenokoitēs) in 1 Corinthians 6:9. Arsenokoitēs (ἀρσενοκοίτης) describes one who lies with a man as he would a woman, a reference to Leviticus 18:22, “Do not have sexual relations with a man as one does with a woman; that is detestable.” Μαλακός (malakos) stood in contrast to virtues such as courage (ἀνδρεία/andreia), endurance (ὑπομονή/hupomoné), and self-control (ἐγκράτεια/enkrateia). A “soft” man in this moral framework was not gentle or compassionate, but lacking fortitude, he was ruled by appetite, unwilling to endure hardship, or willing to be used for sexual gratification, if malakos is interpreted in conjunction with arsenokoitēs as a unified vice pair. While I do not believe reading this as a unified pair is necessarily incorrect, it seems to miss the textual subtlety of Paul’s argument regarding “soft” or effeminate men.  

This moral dimension forms the backdrop for its use in the New Testament. In Matthew 11:8 (cf. Lk. 7:25), Yeshua/Jesus asks the crowds concerning John the Baptist: “What then did you go out to see? A man dressed in soft (malakois) clothing? Behold, those who wear soft clothing are in kings’ houses.” Here the term refers to luxurious garments, yet the rhetorical force is unmistakable. John the Baptist was not a courtly figure clothed in comfort. He was a prophet shaped by austerity, courage, and theological confrontation. The contrast is not sartorial, but moral: prophetic faithfulness is not formed in comfort, but in faithful endurance.

The more debated instance of μαλακός (malakos) appears in 1 Corinthians 6:9, where Paul warns that “the unrighteous will not inherit the kingdom of God,” including among them the malakoi. Historically translated “effeminate,” the term in its Greco-Roman context referred broadly to moral weakness and capitulation to sensuality. Paul’s concern is not superficial traits or personality types, but a disposition that refuses discipline and self-control. In a city such as Corinth, synonymous with luxury and moral laxity, malakia would have signified surrender to appetite and avoidance of costly discipleship. It names a spiritual condition in which comfort triumphs over faithfulness.

It is essential to note that Scripture does not condemn tenderness or compassion. The Messiah Himself embodies tenderness, compassion, humility and gentleness. The biblical contrast is not between masculinity and kindness, or femininity for that matter, but between fortitude and self-indulgence, endurance and comfort-seeking, faithfulness and avoidance of costly discipleship. Effeminacy, understood in the moral sense reflected by malakoi, signifies an unwillingness to suffer for His righteousness.

Nowhere is this clearer than in the theology of the Cross. The Cross stands as the ultimate contradiction of effeminateness. In Luke 9:23, Yeshua declares, “If anyone would come after Me, let him deny himself, take up his cross daily, and follow Me.” Discipleship in Christ is defined by self-denial, perseverance under shame, and willingness to suffer loss. The “soft” man instinctively seeks approval, ease, and escape from affliction; the disciple embraces costly obedience because of his love for Christ. Paul reinforces this vision in 2 Timothy 2:3: “Share in suffering as a good soldier of Christ Jesus.” The soldier metaphor evokes discipline, hardship, and mission-oriented resolve, qualities fundamentally opposed to moral softness, qualities often overlooked in church settings in recent years. Christ examples obedience, endurance, courage in the face of public shaming, and leadership that is sacrificial.

If malakia represents avoidance of suffering and surrender to appetite, biblical masculinity represents strength under the lordship of Christ. Such masculinity must not be confused with cultural caricatures of dominance, emotional repression, or aggression. It is neither bravado nor tyranny. Rather, it is cruciform strength, modeled supremely in Jesus Himself. Biblical masculinity protects by serving, leads by sacrificing, and remains steadfast under trial.

From Genesis onward, men are called to “work and keep” (Gen. 2:15), to guard and cultivate, to assume responsibility before God. The tragedy of Adam’s fall lies not in excessive aggression, but in passive abdication. Biblical manhood refuses such passivity. It embraces responsibility, not as self-assertion, but as obedience to God’s calling. Faith in Christ produces the endurance needed. Hebrews 11 recounts men who endured exile, persecution, and loss because they looked toward a better country (Heb. 11:16). Godly strength in Scripture is inseparable from hope.

Moreover, biblical masculinity is inseparable from self-control (Gal. 5:23). A man governed by impulse is not strong, but enslaved, specifically to sin. The fruit of the Spirit concludes with self-control, demonstrating that genuine strength is Spirit-empowered restraint. Still, biblical masculinity also bears reproach without surrender. It does not bend under social or cultural pressures, but remains faithful to Christ even when obedience entails cost.

This recovery of masculinity cannot be achieved through cultural reaction in the church or a sense of nostalgia. It must arise from union with Christ. In Ephesians 5, husbands are commanded to love their wives “as Christ loved the church and gave Himself up for her” (Eph. 5:23). Here masculinity is defined not by dominance, but by sacrificial love. Husbands are to give themselves as Christ did. Likewise, in 1 Corinthians 16:13, Paul exhorts the congregation, “Be watchful, stand firm in the faith, act like men, be strong.” The Greek verb ἀνδρίζεσθε (act like men) conveys courage and steadfastness, yet the following verse immediately commands, “Let all that you do be done in love” (1 Cor. 16:14). Courage divorced from love becomes brutality; love divorced from courage becomes sentimentality. Biblical masculinity unites these apparent extremes by faith in Christ.

In a culture that oscillates between aggressive caricatures of manhood and passive moral softness, the Church must proclaim a masculinity formed at Golgotha and animated by resurrection life. The issue is not personality type or cultural expression, but whether men will endure hardship for Christ, and in doing so, lead their families and communities faithfully. The Cross dismantles both tyranny and timidity. It produces men who lead by serving, protect by sacrificing, speak truth without cruelty, and suffer without surrender.

Ultimately, the New Testament’s warning against malakoi is a warning against moral softness that recoils from the Cross, choosing the palace over the prison. It calls men, and indeed all believers, to spiritual fortitude. A return to biblical masculinity is not a return to cultural nostalgia, but to Christ crucified. The Kingdom does not belong to the self-indulgent or the comfort-seeking, but to those who, by grace, deny themselves, take up their cross daily, and follow the Lord with steadfast, courageous, covenantal faith. The inheritance of the Kingdom belongs to those formed by the Cross, not those preserved by comfort. Though addressed particularly to men in this context, the call to cruciform endurance belongs to men and women who would inherit the Kingdom.

As men return to the Gospel and to the fellowship of the Church, they must be intentionally formed through godly discipleship into a biblical masculinity shaped by the Cross of Christ. At Messiah Congregation, where I serve, we have created two men’s groups. One gathering is study-oriented, working verse by verse through books of Scripture in conversational depth. The second gathering meets biweekly and provides a topical, discussion-driven environment for working men. Both meetings provide space to share, talk, encourage, develop deeper friendships, pray for each other, and hold each other accountable. In the years these gatherings have been active, we have been blessed to witness evident fruit, to the glory of God.

In the service of Messiah and His Church,
Bishop Justin D. Elwell
Restoration Fellowship International