Theology in the Raw - Seth Troutt: What Is Biblical Masculinity? Part 1

Episode Date: August 6, 2026

Join the Theology in the Raw Community on Patreon to listen to our Extra Innings Segment about whether or not you need to be married to truly be masculine. You’ll also get bonus episodes, Zoom meet ups, and more! What does it mean to be a man? It's a question that's generating plenty of heat online, but not much clarity. In this first episode of a two-part series on biblical masculinity, Preston sits down with Seth Troutt to separate what Scripture actually teaches from the messages coming from the online manosphere.Before we can have a meaningful conversation about masculinity and femininity, Seth argues that we first need to understand the difference between man and God. From there, the conversation explores what it means to bear God's image as men and women, the role of humility, responsibility, chivalry, provision, and the significance of the real physical differences between the sexes.Seth Troutt is the Teaching Pastor at Ironwood Church in the Phoenix metro area. He holds a doctorate focused on digital technology, Generation Z, and gender identity, and writes and teaches on the intersection of theology, technology, and culture. He’s also the author of Authentic Masculinity: Leaving Behind the Counterfeits for God’s Design which is available now. Part 2 of this series, featuring Zachary Wagner, releases next week.Time Stamps00:00:00 Introduction00:06:15 What is Biblical Masculinity?00:07:58 What Andrew Tate and the Manosphere get wrong00:14:48 Is Chivalry a calling for men only? 00:16:41 Examples of powerful women from Scripture 00:21:32 Cultural expectations versus scriptural mandates for men and women00:23:45 Physical differences between men and women (and the exceptions)00:25:52 Should men be providers? Culture vs. Biblical mandate 00:28:43 Should Mothers of young children have jobs? 00:31:33 Why discipline is important for young men 00:33:28 Should certain careers be just for men?00:38:23 Do Christian men have a moral mandate to protect women? 00:41:19 Why did god make men and women differently? 00:45:50 Physical Differences do not mean “better” 00:50:41 Nick Fuentes, Andrew Tate, real influence? 00:58:01 Pastoring in this weird cultural moment 01:02:28 Should Pastors podcast? See Privacy Policy at https://art19.com/privacy and California Privacy Notice at https://art19.com/privacy#do-not-sell-my-info.

I don't like beginning the question with how was man different from woman. The most important distinction in all of the world is that man is not God. Most of the masculinity influencers that I see online, whether it's Andrew Tate, Nick Fuentes, all that kind of manisphere group, it feels like they can't even get this distinction right. God is infinite. He's unbound. He's eternal. He's unmade. But man is a creature. What is biblical masculinity? If you've grown up in the church, you've probably heard this for, phrase often, but what does it mean? What does it mean to be biblically masculine? Does it mean you have to be

strong and powerful like Samson or a powerful leader like Moses or Joshua or maybe a man of faith like Abraham? Or does it mean you should be wildly emotional and an artistic poet and musician like King David? One of the problems in this conversation is the difference between the is and the aughts. You know, just because we see certain men in scripture behaving a certain way, you know, being masculine. This doesn't mean we should imitate their behavior. Samson, of course, is a model of how not to be a godly man. He's the last in a series of judges who get progressively worse and more immoral throughout the book of judges. Abraham has faith, but he also trafficked his wife twice on two different occasions and then taught his son Isaac to do the same. Not everything men do in

scripture that is is something that we should do today, the ought. Another problem about this conversation about biblical masculinity is the distinction between cultural or even biological norms versus biblical mandates, prescriptions that are absolute and universal requirements for all men of all time, at least for all followers of Jesus. You know, it might be culturally normal for men to like sports and action movies and eat nachos and wings and red meat. If you're a bail and you prefer romantic comedies over action movies and salad over barbecue and only watch a Super Bowl for the halftime show. Some might consider you not a real man. These are obviously kind of silly examples, of course, but what about other questions like protection?

Should men and only men protect women? Is protection a masculine and biblical virtue that men and not women are to pursue? And if a Christian man is not a protector, is he in sin? And what about providing? Do Christian men have a universal moral duty to provide for, say, their wife? If a Christian man, you know, is a stay-at-home dad whose wife goes off to work, is he in sin? And what about chivalry? Are godly men commanded to be chivalrous towards women? And are women commanded not to be chivalrous towards men? What is chivalry anyway? I can hardly even say it. Chevalry. Is this like a concept that's even in the Bible? And what about marriage? Can Christian men be truly masculine if they are not married?

Are men who marry and have children? Are they being more masculine than men who do not? Another related problem is distinguishing between moral mandates that are common for all followers of Jesus, man, in the generic sense of mankind, and moral mandates that male followers of Jesus are to follow, while female followers of Jesus are not to follow? Are there any moral mandates universally prescribed in scripture that are unique to men, to males? In other words, that men should do these things and women are not to do these things. It's courage, for example, a masculine virtue that only men should pursue, or is it a human virtue that all followers of Jesus should pursue? And now, as always, if we say something is, quote unquote, biblical,

we should be able to point to scripture to show that it is biblical. And of course, we must distinguish between the is and the ought, as we cite the Bible to support our view of biblical masculinity. These are questions that I've been wrestling with for a while, and I don't have everything worked out in my own head, which is why I'm doing a two-part series on biblical masculinity for the theology in the raw podcast. I've invited two different people who have done a lot of thinking and writing on this issue, Dr. Seth Trout and Dr. Zachie Wagner. Both Seth and Zach have

some similarities, a lot of similarities actually and how they're thinking through these issues, but they also have some differences. And I wanted to do two different episodes with each one precisely because of this. I think their similarities and their differences will help us better think through these issues. Zach will be my guest for part two of this series. For today's episode, I sit down with Dr. Seth Trout to talk about biblical masculinity. Seth has a D. Men from Covenant Theological Seminary. He's a teaching pastor at Ironwood Church in Arizona. His doctoral studies focused on Gen Z digitization and bodily self-concept. He writes about emotions, gender parenting and the intersection of theology and culture.

It's latest book, this one right here, authentic masculinity, leaving behind counterfeits for God's design deals with the topic that we're going to discuss for this episode and the next episode. In the extra innings portion of this episode, I ask Seth about his thoughts on the relationship between marriage and masculinity. Do men need to be married to be fully masculine? And I asked the same question for Zach Wagner in the next episode. So if you want to listen to this extra innings portion of our conversation, then head over to patreon.com forward slash theology in the raw and become a member of the theology in the raw community.

Okay. Without further ado, please welcome to the show for the first time, the one and only Dr. Seth Trout. Seth, welcome to theology in the raw. So I want to lead with a big question that's a. may take the rest of our podcast to answer, but what is biblical masculinity? We see that phrase thrown around a lot. You've done a lot of thinking around this. So how would you approach that question? Yeah, well, actually, the first half of my book is all answering that question. I don't do a great job at synthesizing it down to a one-sentence answer because I do think there's a lot of

texture to the biblical story in the way that it's talked about. And I do think there's a lot of over-emphasizing on that as a reaction, especially like the third-way feminism stuff that you see online and you see pastors who like have a tendency to kind of beat their chest and battle cry, masculinity type of stuff. But the best answer I have is actually the pyramid, which is the first part of the book, which is that man is not God. So I think I don't like beginning the question with how was man different from woman, what is masculinity versus femininity? Because I think that's kind of like trying to run before you know how to walk. But I think trying to get really clear on what a man is, period, and the responsibilities that the nature of his being create. And so the first chapter in the

book is on the masculine virtue of humility. And obviously, that's not a distinctly masculine virtue. It's just blessed are the poored spirit, beatitudes. But that's really rooted. And I think the most important distinction in all of the world is that man is not God, that masculinity is opposed or different than divinity, that God is infinite, he's unbound, he's eternal, he's unmade, but man is a creature. And I think that most of the masculinity influencers that I see online, whether it's Andrew Tate, Nick Fuentes, all that kind of manosphere group, it feels like they can't even get this distinction right. And so trying to get the masculine feminine distinction is weird. So man's not God, so it must be humble. That's chapter one of the book. Chapter two is man's not a, you

He's not like the other creatures that he's not just a creature, but he's image of God. And so he should have discipline. And by discipline, I mean the capacity to rightly order your loves, the capacity to let greater desires, supersede lesser desires. You know, I wake up in the morning and I want to eat six donuts. But more than want to eat six donuts, I want to function throughout my day and honor my body. And so the discipline, I think, is a product of rightly ordered loves. It's downstream from that. Then obviously, discipline's form, desires.

So man's not an animal. So you should have discipline. Then you have that man's not a boy. Boys are not responsible. They need to be taken care of. They need mothering. They need to be told what to eat, what not to eat. They need someone to tell them to wake up on time and do their homework.

But a man is responsible. And so a man's not a boy, so you should have responsibility. I see that, you know, an Adam blame shifting, that woman you gave me in the garden, that's boyishness. You know, my son who's six, when him and his sister are bickering, it's like, well, but she, well, but, well, but, and rather than just kind of taking responsibility for his sin or even responsibility for himself, he's six. And I'm not mad at him for doing that. He's six, but a lot of grown men still like to blame shift and not take responsibility. And I think as a man grows, he can take responsibility for himself and for others. you know, especially not just in the home, but in the workplace.

You know, I'm able to care for people beyond myself. I create margin in my life. And then, you know, kind of a bit of an in between chapter three and four, when Adam first sees Eve, it's boat of my bone, flesh of my flesh. It's sameness, finally one who is like me. And so I do think those first three virtues, while they're necessary for men to become the man, goddonesome to be, they're not at all distinct from,

what females are called to be. Okay. That was my question, because everything you're describing, you're using a language of man, but I assume you're using like mankind, humankind, so. Yeah, yeah. A lot of what I'm hoping to do is trying to just talk to a young man

and say, here's who you must be. And obviously, Christ-like, humble, discipline, responsible that might play out in different ways, generally speaking in a man's life than in a woman's life. But those are just talking trends, not necessarily universals per se. But then the fourth chapter, I think, is probably the most controversial chapter in the book, and that's man is not woman, so he must be chivalrous.

And I got the word chivalry. I stole it. C.S. Lewis liked the word chivalry a lot. It's the medieval term, but it's this knightly capacity for power and gentleness that you can be tough and tender. you can protect, but you use your strength to show honor. And so I see that kind of in two places in the scriptures where I kind of build that chapter out from.

One is First Peter 3-7, where Peter tells husbands to show honor to the woman as the weaker vessel. And vessel, I think, is just talking about bodies. You know, it's not morally weaker. It's not emotionally weaker. It's not intellectually weaker. It's just the physical disparity between men and women. generally speaking.

You know, Luis Perry, I think, said, you know, 99% of men are stronger than 98% of women. You know, and it's obviously it's like saying men are taller than women. That's generally true, not universally true. But it is a typical trend. And then in Genesis 2, when Adam's put in the garden to serve and protect or work and keep, how he'd translate those two words, that he was meant to be an intercessor, but instead ends up being passive. and the whole dialogue between him and the in the serpent,

just kind of between, even the serpent just plays out, and then she gave to the fruit of her husband who was with her, you know, and he took an aid also. And so that's like a failure of chivalry rather than having dominion over the serpent. He just kind of defaults to that passivity. And so chivalry, I think it can go wrong in two different ways. One is, you know, the neglect of power, which is the abdication or the misuse of, power, which is abuse.

But that's kind of what I would call the masculine virtues pyramid. So when I'm talking to young guys who are going, I want to be a godly man, I go, okay, humility, discipline, responsibility, chivalry. That's this pyramid. And it's important that you go from the foundation and up. Otherwise, you're just going to

be preoccupied and have this angst about I don't want to be feminine. I want to be masculine. And I do think there is an important question there for men to consider, especially as they're growing up and trying to plan for their future. or at least have a vision for their future that's compelling, that energizes, that drives. But men and women are far more the same than they are different, and there is difference. But that's the goal in chapter four of the book, just try to articulate some of that different

emphasis that men are supposed to carry. So on the one hand, what is biblical masculinity? I would just say chivalry. That'd be my shortest way of saying that. strength that honors using strength to honor. But on the other hand, I'd prefer to say it in four chapters with the whole pyramid structure. Summer nights can be brutal. You crawl in a bed already warm and 20 minutes later, you're kicking off your covers,

flipping over your pillow to find the cool side and wondering if it's worth turning the thermostat down another couple degrees. Sure, it might be a thermostat, but it turns out that a lot of it comes down to your sheets. Bowling Branch makes bedding that's specifically designed to sleep cool. Their sheets are made from 100% organic cotton that's woven for airflow, not with chemical cooling treatments or synthetic fibers, but by the way, the cotton is actually woven. So they're breathable and lightweight, and they keep you comfortable throughout the night. Honestly, it's one of the things you don't really think about until you experience the difference. I never really thought about bed sheets until I got my Bull and Branch sheets and said, man, these things are amazing.

So, sleep cooler this summer with Bowling Branch and get 15% off your first order plus free shipping at Bowling Brunch. branch.com slash t-I-T-R with code T-I-T-R. That's B-O-N-B-O-L-L-A-N-D-B-R-A-N-C-H. dot com slash T-I-T-R to unlock 15% off. Bolinbranch.com slash T-I-T-R, code T-I-T-R. Exclusions apply. I guess you kind of defined it and past it. Can you get, like, what is chivalry? Yeah.

And my biggest question is, are all men like, universally commanded to be chivalrous chivalrous and women in a way that women are not. Like if a woman is chivalrous, is she coloring outside the lines of her god-given femininity? And if a man isn't chivalrous, is he, like, in sinning against his God-ordained vision to be masculine? Yeah, so my shortest definition for chivalry is using strength to honor. And I think that call can be applied anytime there's a power disparity in any context. So my firstborn is a boy, so I told him to be chivalrous towards his sister. I do think chivalry is an inherently gendered word.

I've not seen that word really applied to women as much as like maternality is a different way of using power to care or consider other. other people. I do think that when Jesus is describing himself in maternal categories, you know, oh, I would like a mother hen gather you to myself. Like he is still, he's using distinctly feminine language to describe a way that he is behaving. And so I think that one of the ways that chivalry can get whacked is if you're afraid of leveraging a feminine side, you know, that fathers can have maternal energy towards their kids or pastors towards their congregants, you know, like Jesus has towards his followers. You know, like Jesus described himself as a mature, as a mother hen.

And so I don't think it's sin that a man would use feminine energy from time to time, like maternal energy. And I certainly don't think it's sin that a woman would use a masculine energy, which would be more intercessor. But I do think the Bible seems to still gender those types of behaving. And so I will say it's a sin if a man's not chivalrous in the way that I define. it, especially with regards to in his marriage or towards his kids, if he's not using his strength to honor.

I mean, first period 37 is a command. And so you betray a command that's sin that we ought to show honor to the woman as a weaker vessel. And that verse is chiefly in marriage. But I think the principle is the stronger leverages himself to serve the weaker period. I think you can get into that in organizations, financially, emotionally. that when you are in the position of strength, the Christian is going to use that to serve, not to be served, which is the upside down nature of the kingdom.

I don't know from getting that your answer there. No, it's good. No, it's good. Yeah. Because chivalry to me sounds like a medieval word concept. And my question is, is this in the Bible? But your definition, using strength to honor, I think that concept would be all over the place in the scriptures. I guess my question still is, is it, when you say strength, are you talking physical strength

or other forms of strength? Because I'm just, you know, I'm thinking of like several women in the Bible who have lots of maybe social power through being wealthy. Someone like a Lydia is an example. Like a Lydia or a Phoebe or the women who funded Jesus' ministry in Luke 8 or. or even like, you know, I think of like Abigail, who's kind of the strongest one of the story. David is unhinged. He's bloodthirsty. Her husband's a fool.

And all the servants in the house, male servants look to her for leadership. She's cool. She's calm. She's wise. Like she is clearly this. In some sense, David possesses all the, you know, social, royal physical power in the story. But when you finish first Samuel 25, it's clearly Abigail who is. using, I think, strength to honor.

She even honors her deadbeat husband in a way that doesn't, you know, yeah. I get to get that. And I think like even in 1st, Corinthians 7, you have the example of so a woman knows Christ and the husband doesn't know Christ. You know, in that sense, she's infinitely stronger than her unbelieving husband because she's yoked to the Lord Jesus Christ. And the example is of given of what she's ought to do. It's like to serve, you know, to serve and to not to and to steward that power in a way that's hopefully going to serve the person who has more social or physical power over her.

And so I think wherever we have power, we're called to use it in a way that's congruent with the kingdom. I do think that the feelings of vulnerability that when I talk to my wife or when I hear and I read the experiences of women, the physical vulnerability that women walk through the world with is just almost. universal, but probably not. It's probably just general. Generally speaking, very different than what men. You know, I can go walking through downtown Phoenix and feel safe, you know, whereas my wife's head on the swivel. And so I think First Pier 3-7 is explicitly talking about the stewarding of physical presence, whereas I think the principle is a kingdom principle, wherever you have strength, use it to honor. So where, yeah, whoever has, let's just, and there's different definitions of power, but like, you know, let's just keep it kind of open.

And whoever has power should use that power to honor others, to serve others, to protect the marginalized, whether that is financial power, social power, physical power. And in the biblical narrative, typically it's men, right, who have the power. You do have some exceptions, ones we mentioned, where women might have more power over men, especially, you know, a Roman citizen who's a female, is more power over male slave in the, in the New Testament. So, you know, with any culture, you're going to have, you know, different particularities of who generally has more power.

So, so that shiverly is, and again, I'm thinking out loud trying to understand what you're saying, um, using strength to honor. So it's not necessarily 100% unique to males, but men in most cultural contexts will generally be the ones that have certainly more physical strength, but also in many contexts, more power in terms of all these other categories. Yeah, I do think, especially when you're talking masculine femininity, you kind of have to stick to discussing trends and not universals. And that's why I think you read the Apostle Paul and he has these sin lists, you know, women must not, the men must not, the men should, the women should. And it's almost impossible.

to when Paul says, you know, women should learn quietly with all submissiveness. Well, I'd be really annoyed if I'm preaching on a Sunday and some dude is yelling back and being disruptive. You know, it's like, oh, well, that verse about learning quietly. That's for women. That's not for me. Because it's like, so I think he's always addressing trends within cultures and trends within men and women, you know, and so even like, I desire that men should lift up their hands

to pray. Well, if a woman lifts up her hands to pray, do you say, like, put those down. That's for men. No. But I think the example is. is like men, I think Paul's, my presumption is the men are not leading out in worshiping the Lord because there's like some social expectation that they'd be reserved. You know, that's not altogether different than modern times. You know, the men at my church are more likely to hands behind their

back and mouth closed during worship, whereas the women are more likely to raise hands and sing. And so I do think there's social expectations. And I think some of those social expectations are not purely social constructs, but they're rooted in. some of like biological tendencies and the hormonal differences. You know, I do discuss testosterone briefly in my chapter. You know, just the way that God designed men and women's bodies differently, it does play out into personality trends. You know, testosterone tends to create strength and aggression, and men tend to be strong

and aggressive. And that's a creational good that can obviously be distorted by sin and be misused, abused, or not used, but it's not like only men struggle with aggressive tendencies. My daughter is probably more aggressive than my son. She hits more. I've signed more incident reports for her than I did for him. And so, and some of that is just developmental capacity. And so I do think a lot of this has to live in the realm of trends. You know, men are taller than women. That's true, but it's not universally or true in every instance. I have friends whose wives are taller than them. Yeah. The way I've illustrated of that is if you randomly selected 100 men from a given cultural context, set them next to a random

selection of 100 women, and you average those heights of the 100 men, 100 women, men are always going to be on average taller. Or if you take the tallest 100 men, put them up against the tallest hundred women, men are going to win 10 out of 10 times, not win, but they're going to be taller, you know, because some people say, oh, no, I, you know, I know this Dutch woman who's like 7-2 or something. That's not where we're talking. We're not talking about like kind of the exceptions to the general. Yeah, the ends of the bell curve. Yeah, I mean, there's a, there's a reason that the USA women's soccer team loses to a 15 and under boys team, right? And that's it's physical design and that women's bodies are generally speaking,

less good at men's bodies at soccer. You know, and that's, I think that's, I think some of what I'm trying to get at is, especially this book, which is mostly for young men or fathers, they're trying to disciple their sons of going, what's the Bible say I'm supposed to be like? Now, obviously, I think, you know, in Genesis 1 and 2, you know, marriage is established as the norm. In Jeremiah 29, it's like, you should get married.

Obviously, there are exceptions to that in the Bible. You don't need to, but I think generally speaking, young men should go. I want to grow up to provide and protect and love a wife. And also they need to probably have this presumption that there's a very, there's a chance that they may not happen. God may have a different call for my life. God might do something else with me. And that's fine. But there is like a, you should go to high school and graduate. There are exceptions. You know, you should go to college. That's generally a best principal. But there's obviously really good exceptions to that. They're not. moral. They're just difference in what God has for people and the story he's writing for them. I want to come back to the marriage question, because I know that's a big matter of debate. A couple of, so the chivalry question we kind of addressed that. There's two other questions I had, again, that are along the lines of what are generalities in culture that might be good versus what are biblical moral mandates? Because again, I think when we talk about these things, so often we just don't clarify that, you know? So the provide and protect one is one that I have.

Like, you know, that's, I hear that talked about is kind of a man's absolute moral duty, or at least it's worded in that way. And it may be. But my question is always, as an obnoxious exeat is, like, does the Bible universally morally prescribe men, to provide for women. Maybe it's a more narrow question to provide for their wife. I don't know. Like, is that a moral mandate or a cultural norm? Like, if a man is not providing for a woman,

is he sinning against his God-given masculinity? Yeah, so a lot of this, I've trouble putting it in the category of sin versus guilt or innocence. I think probably more in the realm of wisdom versus folly. you know, I think it'd be a problem for a young man to grow up and presume that his wife will provide for him. You know, my plan is marry a doctor. You know, like, that's probably not a good thing to hang your hat on when you're 17. Instead, I'm going to tell you, you should work really hard to become someone highly capable of subduing and having dominion,

providing value to the common good, exchanging your labor for money, and steward that money. So I put a lot of this more in the realm of proverbs than in the realm. of law. And that's kind of what I'm trying to help young men see. I do think the protection one feels a little more clear, like in the Genesis 2, that the serve and keep or this call to be an intercessor, protector of his wife. And I think that's kind of inherently in the First Peter 3-7-2 that Adam in the garden has assigned this task, this priestly role of protect and serve.

the provide one you know the verse that tends to get used out of context is first Timothy 5 8 if any man does not provide for his family he's worse than a believer but that could easily be translated any man or woman and I think the context there's about caring for aging parents not necessarily the context is for kids for women caring for age the whole chapter the whole section is about dressing widows that's something people don't yeah it's about aging parents you know aging aging widows it's not about provide for a family and so I think that verse gets used incorrectly all the time. I do think, like this is, again, in the realm of wisdom, like when I see a woman, take like my wife, you know, the privilege and the responsibility

of being near to children when they're very young is a higher cost and a higher availability for the woman's body than the man's body. You know, just there's the biological wiring there. So I think as a young man, one of my goals was like, I would love it if my wife was able to be home with the kids when the kids were little. I don't think if I failed in getting myself financially in that position, you know, my wife works a couple days a week still. She's a speech therapist. And I don't think I'm sinning because I don't quite cover all the household expenses on my own income. Do you mean? I think that's more an aspiration that if you can do it, that's great.

I also know that my grandparents are wonderful grandparents and they're around to help out. A lot of people don't have that. So there's like goals that I think are non-moral, but I think are generally good for people versus the question of sin versus error. You know, I have one of my buddies. He's a great man, works faithfully at his job.

His wife's an oncologist. She out earns him by a whole lot of money. You know what I mean? And I don't think that's inherently a problem at all. I think the... So going back, You did say it's not sin, guilt, but it is wisdom, folly. So you're not saying he's being, like, foolish or unwise by having a woman to make more than...

What would be foolish is if he, as a young man, is banking on that or presuming on that. I think, especially talking to young men with the digital eternal scroll culture, video game culture, pornography culture, there's just an inherent. So I guess this is part of what I'm trying to do with. the book is there's an inherent slothfulness that I think is in young men. And I think, you know, the danger of the sluggard is in Proverbs is really kind of aimed at young men. And I know a lot more young women who seem to have more discipline and diligence by disposition, statistically speaking, than in young men. It seems like the lazy video game porn culture thing is sports betting culture is more kind of grabbing young men. And so part of what I hope to do,

And even telling men aspire to be a provider is to try to light a little fire under them and go, like, work hard, be diligent, don't be a sluggard. So it's not so, yeah, it's not so much make sure you provide for your wife, make sure you earn more money. It's more the root issue of be a hard worker, be discipline. Don't presume, I'm going to marry some rich women so I can play video games all day and not. It's more about that fundamental virtue of being a hard worker.

Yeah, the discipline aspect, I think is a big deal. And I do think that discipline is a symptom of vision. And I think some of just telling a young man be a hard worker, well, why? Because it's not very compelling or gripping. But like I think for myself, I go, one of the things that energizes my work is I have this dream that what if when I have grandkids one day, hopefully, I'd prefer that. I can't, I don't think it'd be sinned out to but what if when I have grandkids one day, my wife and I are freed up to be wildly helpful grandparents. And I guess so have this vision of what it looked like to not have to be locked into a job

in my 50s and 60s or my wife and not had to be locked into a job 15 and 60s, but we'd be available and be these hyper-present grandparents. And so, again, I don't think that's necessarily a from the Lord, the saith vision. I think that's more an imaginative dream I have that I think energizes my regular work. And so some of it when I'm telling young men, you should desire to be a provider. It's less like you should rebuke your wife if she wants a job. It's zero percent that. And more like what if you work so hard in your teens and 20s that your wife was able to stay home with the kids in homeschool or if she was able to serve in the classroom when your kids are not at your school.

And my kids go to public school. And so my wife's able to work part-time so she can serve in their classroom. And so there's more like vision-oriented things that I think energize some of that discipline rather than moral prescriptions. And so that's what I mean by wisdom folly is what are the dreams you're dreaming and can you dream them specifically such that they energize faithfulness on the daily and the weekly. I wonder, not wonder. I'll say it more definitively.

I do think so much of our thoughts around career providing jobs and everything is so shaped naturally. I mean, it's not wrong. It's shaped by our post-industrial situation because if you go back to like pre that, especially biblical times, a thought of like a man going off to work and the woman staying home just that wasn't a thing. And in agrarian culture, both men and women together provided for the economic success of the household. There was a division of labor. Men typically worked in fields, required an upper body strength. Women typically did a lot of things around the house, which were physically incredibly demanding and like baking bread and, you know, even child rearing, which was both men and women, but women did play a unique role.

Again, I'm talking about the ancient context. you know, child rearing was the number one necessity for economic stability. You know, so like who provided for who? It's like it was a joint effort. You can't really divide who's providing for the other. That wasn't even a question back then. Now, we live in a different age where post-industrial age and it just changes kind of everything. And even now in a post-internet age, a lot of jobs, they're not, there's obviously some jobs that are more.

oriented toward males and others more oriented towards females based on maybe demands on biological strength. But a lot of our jobs are kind of sitting in front of a computer and write in emails. You know, where the kind of male-female division of labor thing, you know, just it doesn't, it doesn't look the same in today's world and in the biblical world. That's where I, again, I just, this is helpful because I think you're constantly distinguishing between these are cultural generalities, not absolutes, because I think when I hear people talk about these topics, they often don't make that distinction. They just kind of talk about, they kind of talk in a way that sounds like universal prescriptions without being able to show that from scripture or being able to

distinguish between moral absolutes and cultural goods and norms. Oh, for sure. I think the post-industrial reality is a huge factor. And part of the... of what I'm trying to do with the young men in my church, the young men outside of the church, it's more about stewarding this cultural moment. How do you live your life faithful? Not necessarily does how does every man everywhere live their life faithful. If someone picked up this book who lived in Morocco, they might be like, this guy doesn't know what he's talking about. I'm like, that's okay. I was mostly writing to a suburban, urban context in 2025.

you know what I mean at 2026 and I think even on the protection side you know obviously like the man standing the gap woman like technology changes that too because a woman with a firearm and training is going to be better protector than most men you know because technology is the force equalizer you know and I think there's there's dynamics there that are changing based on technology and culture and so when I I don't necessarily even in the book say men ought to go out and be providers. period, but as more as like men ought to steward their gifts and participate in subduing and having dominion over the culture or over the unformed substance and they ought to steward their money well. And what could that do to your household if you actually ran after that really hard? If you killed the sloth that was inside your heart and decided I'm going to steward my time and work everything as though to the Lord and not for man. And, you know, it is a men's discipleship book, but a lot of the women in my church read it and were like, you know, 95% of this just immediately applied to me. I'm like, that's totally fine. It's just kind of, it's an audience you pick and you'd

speak to the audience. So I know a lot of what you do on this and in general, in your work, is more kind of clarifying a theology broadly speaking, whereas I think my book is a little bit more just trying to help a young guy figure out how to steward his life right now, not necessarily. Augustine read my book and go, what does he talk? about what's going getting a job you know what is what is investing for retirement you know it would make no sense so yeah i'm totally fine with a lot of this just being addressing a cultural moment yeah and i don't think this book will be helpful to people in 90 years that's interesting that you said women women said i've found 90 95 percent as helpful because that's yeah because

even like when you referenced genesis one there about you know exercising dominion and over creation as a man. Yeah, that's a shared task. It's a they shall have. Male and female. It's mankind. Yeah. Yeah. So is there, well, let's go. Okay. So we kind of hit provide chivalry. The other question I had was protect. Do Christian men have a moral mandate to protect women? And women don't have the same mandate to protect, say, men. this one

yeah what are your thoughts on that because we've kind of talked about it a little bit yeah no I don't I don't think so you know I there's a lot of ladies in my church that do

Brazilian jiu jitsu and some of that's to self-defense some of that is the capacity show for others and others defense you know obviously there's some households or the whole household does jiu-jitsu and the husband is

bigger stronger and he could do more in a situation. And this is where I think, I prefer to talk about this more in the realm of trends, Proverbs, not necessarily in the realm of universal 100% commandments. You know, if someone was going to come up behind me

and stab me and my wife saw him, and she's like, oh, well, it's not my job of protect, so I'll just let it happen. That'd be a huge, a huge bummer. You know what I mean? But I do think part of stewarding

greater physical strength is just an increased layer of responsibility there, not necessarily the creation. of the layer of responsibility, but an increased layer of responsibility. And similar how I think about rich and poor, right? Who's called to be generous, everybody? Who has a greater calling towards generosity and who can give out of more? But the widow who gives of everything is praised,

but, you know, the Joseph of Arimathea has this, like, different burden of generosity. So I do think there's like the more rich you are, the more you should be practicing generosity. I think it would be judged by God for how you leverage what you were given. And that's not false for people who have less, but I think the more money you have, the more you have to steward and the more responsibility you have based on what you've been entrusted with. And I think it's similar for physical strength. So I have a hard time saying rich should be generous, poor should not be generous. And obviously even defining those categories is difficult.

But I think, you know, the Uncle Ben, Spider-Man, you know, with great power comes great responsibility. I think that's true physically, spiritually, emotionally, financially. The more you have, the more responsibility, I think, is assigned to you. You know, the bigger your field, the more a yield is expected. Parable of the Talents type stuff, you know, faithful and little, faithful and much type stuff. And so that's more of the realm I prefer to talk about. and rather than universal prescriptions. Yeah, that's good.

That's good. It does make me wonder, and this is a question I constantly have, is why did God design men with more physical strength on average? Because, you know, the biological differences are largely due to different functions, different roles in procreation. I mean, think about what makes a man different from a woman from hormonal differences. to secondary sex characteristics and so on, and the byproduct of testosterone, even in the womb and everything. Like, all of these are oriented towards forming male and female in a way that is oriented towards procreation.

But the one that kind of, not one, but one of the differences that isn't necessarily oriented towards procreation is what you've already mentioned, just that high levels of testosterone produced. more physical strength, you know. So why did God design men to be physically stronger? Like, is there an ought built into the is? You know, it's just, this is just kind of what he created us to be, but is there a kind of a implicit moral stamp, moral, I don't know what the right word is here, but, you know, what does that mean for how men are to live in relation to women?

with the greater physical strength, at least upper body strength. Yeah, I think it's lower body strength as well, but it's upper body strength especially. That's true, yeah. But isn't it a much, much lesser, I don't know, it's been a while since I read the studies, but. Yeah, the upper body strength is, the gap is bigger, but it's lower body strength as well.

I think now we're in the realm of speculation, but I do think stewardship creates an ought, ought a person steward their gifts and their capacity, whatever it is for the greater good and out of love of neighbor, absolutely, period. And so I think whatever difference there is, you know, so why did God make some men seven feet and some men five feet? You know, well, there's, I think some of it is just God's artistic interest in beauty through diversity.

I think that's part of it. I think Carl Bart talks about his view on image of God is that it's the image of God is that it's, the image of God is the gender difference. I'm not sure I agree with that, but he's kind of getting at, well, you have one God, three persons, you have one humanity, two sexes, maybe that's part of it. There's just kind of reflecting the unity and diversity.

Then the Godhead Bart speculates, I don't think that's what the image of God is, but it's certainly an aspect of image of God in Genesis 1. I think some of it was even related to God understanding the differences in the pre-industrial revolution, workload, that someone had to harvest the wheat, someone had to grind the wheat. Someone had to do work further from the kids. Someone had to work closer to the kids.

And so there is a God creating the tool that was needed for the situation or the situation that he authored. I think part of that is this picture of the different aspects of the body even. Why did God give some the gift of evangelism, some the gift of shepherding? well, because this diversity builds up the unit. And so you look at some of the studies on, you know, I just read through a manuscript of a book that's coming out in a few weeks to write the review of it on the effect of fathers and fatherlessness on children.

Like, why did God do a man and a woman or a father and a mother? Well, the mother tends to provide this type of thing. And when the child doesn't get that, here are all the negative health and emotional outbreaks. And when there's not a father present, here's literally like some of the end of some other genetic code. doesn't develop properly when there's not a father presence early in childhood. And so there's, I think some of it is the, the diversity builds up the unit to kind of whatever the unit is, household, church, society. Some men are inclined to engineering, some men are inclined to being a firefighter.

And like, I think the diversity of these different things, I think is meant to function together. So I think some of what God's doing is just going, nobody has enough on their own to be the thing. we need this interdependence is part of his design. That's good. That's good. I could assume somebody even hearing his talk like better, better soccer, that we're saying like men are better than. But that's a bright product is assuming that being able to win a sport where you kick a ball

through a goal, it makes you a better human or even being more physically strong on average makes you a better human. But as Christians, obviously that makes no sense at all. We are created equal in the image of God. And these differences are beautiful displays of God's diversity, as you said. It's not ranking humans in terms of importance or better than. So, yeah. Yeah, I try to argue in that chapter four that men and women are equal but not equivalent. Right. Yes. And trying to just hold that out. And that to me seems to me, seems like the most obvious thing in the world, but you do see a increased prevalence of the right wing type resurgence online that does not think that, that men and women are not equal.

And I think that's some of why I felt even the need to write this book was it feels like there's a generation of young men who are fed up with the kind of progressive interchangeability of the sexes. Like this is just not true. You know, you read one history book. You're what are you talking about? You know there's difference. You read the social science, there's difference. And then they turn to what I would call is like the Genghis Khan masculine influencers. You know, and you hear Andrew, remember the first time I heard Andrew Tate,

was this group of eighth graders at my church at a summer, at a winter camp. This is a handful of years, May 5 years ago. We're standing around in a circle giggling. I was like, what are you guys laughing about? Just kind of walked up to him. And they say, oh, we're watching this video. It's kind of funny. but I'm like, is it funny or do you think it's true?

And they show me the video and half of what he says. I'm like, yes and amen. He's like, quit smoking weed. Get out of your mom's basement. Don't be a bum and work hard. And I'm like, this sounds great. Young men should hear this. And then like the next sentence is like, spread your genetic legacy.

Marriage is a bronze age invention designed to entrap and domesticate men so that they would be. And I'm going, this kind of right-wing influencer guy is now repeating. hyper-progressive talking points from the 1970s. And I'm like, well, this, and trying to talk to it. And so they're trying to put off the kind of hyper-progressive thing, but they're turning to these right-wing influencers that I think are beating this like hyper-patriarchal men are more valuable than women thing. And it's like real alphas back in the day had lots of wives and concubines.

And on the one hand, that's literally true. and it's evil. You know what I mean? Like, yeah, yeah, the patriarchs did do that, and God hated it. And so now, and so trying to provide something to those guys that's not going to just repeat kind of progressive, problematizing of gender differences, and it's going to hopefully lead them away from some of that online stuff. So the equal and not equivalent piece, I think, is a really big deal.

And, you know, there are things, a lot of things my wife is better than me at. and in that sense she's way more valuable than me, depending on the context. So if I'm building a soccer team, I'm more valuable than my wife. If I'm building a household, depending on the day, my wife's probably more valuable than me.

Ideally, when we're both healthy. But even my son, we have a friend who, you know, he has two step kids and a biological kid in the house. And there's one time they came over and the boys weren't there because they're at their dad's house. And my son goes, where are they?

Well, they're at their dad's house. Well, I thought he was their dad. No, he's their stepdad. And, you know, they're little. They're six and four, and they're connecting the dots. And then after they left, my son goes like, dad, how come I don't have a stepdad? And there's the insecurity to me that's like, wait a minute,

you know, you'll never have a stepdad. You know, it'll never happen, you know, because, you know, and like, I didn't say that, but I'm thinking that. You know, like, and instead I said, like, well, what do you, what about having a stepdad would be exciting or fun to you? And he said, well, maybe he'd be good at art.

You know, so he's going, dad sucks at art. Maybe if we got another stepdad in here, dad could be, and I'm like, you know, that's okay. I'm fine with him thinking I'm bad at that. You know, so there's, whereas my wife, if she's around, the kids are like,

let's do art because she's way better, you know, And that's not masculine feminine. That's just difference within the household. Right. Yeah. Do you, I'm curious with someone like Andrew Tate or you mentioned Nick Fuentes. Are these,

I mean, they just seem so, like such an obvious joke to me that it's like, I'm like, nobody really listens. Like nobody really hears this and say, ooh, that sounds good.

But they're massively influential. Do you find as a pastor? I mean, do you have their voices in particular, or others like them, influencing people. I could almost like, okay,

Andrew Tate, you know, he's a kickboxer. He's very masculine. I could, what he says, matches kind of who he is. So I can,

I can see where someone might be persuaded, maybe, I don't know. This stuff is so outrageous. But then when I see Nick Fuentes talking about being a man, I'm like, dude,

you're, I'll stop. I'll stop. You sit in front of a computer, screen. I'll tell you what I want to think. I'll tell you what I want to think and I'll tell you what I actually think. What I want to believe is that people watch their stuff like they watch real housewives of Orange County. Like it's, it's, it's, I don't even want, it's entertaining. It's, it's like watching an inappropriate comedian. Like, ha ha, that's funny because you shouldn't say it.

It's not. But when you, but here's what I actually think is desires are contagious, you know, the memetic transfer of desire is, I think, really fundamental to what it means to be human. That's why we delight ourselves in the Lord and he implants new desires in our heart is the memetic versus genetic transfer of our hopes and dreams for us. And so I think people watch it as entertainment, but it establishes a plausibility structure, an Overton window, that does really affect their formation and their desire. Just like you watch enough Real Housewives of Orge County as a stay-at-home mom, and you start to think, should I get work done?

Because it seems so normal, because the bell curve of normal is being skewed by this kind of stuff I see on TV. And so it starts to seem socially acceptable to behave in a certain Real Housewives of Orange County way. And I think that happens to young guys as well, that you watch an Andrew Tate and Nick Fuentes, and you go like, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, women are the worst, ha, ha, ha. And it's like you're laughing at these things that God hates, but it's like watching inappropriate comedian. But then it bleeds down into your heart, skews the Overton window on social acceptability,

and it starts to seem like an option within, you know, this guy talks about women like this, and he is still successful. I mean, not now. I think he's arrested. I'm not sure when this is coming out. but he seems to be respected and have peers and there's people who admire him you know maybe that is a maybe that's a road and so i think it it forms people i think all the media we consume forms us

and this idea that you can just watch love island or watch andrew tate and it's not going to bleed into your heart some way and and so there's a spiritual formation dynamic to it that is why i feel they need to talk about it i don't think anybody is like andrew tate is my mentor he's my discipler. But I think people watch it and then little seeds of evil get planted that when fully foreign give birth to death like James talks about. And so I'm nervous about people watching Rowley TV, just like I'm nervous about people listening to Andrew Tate as a pastor because just like I'm nervous about people watching Fox and CNN. Like these are containing like the emotions are contagious as well, what they're making, getting angry about, what they're getting excited about. You know, we

we're memetic. You know, we have these mirror neurons and we want to connect with the people and so it affects us and it moves us. So I do think they have a bigger influence than most thoughtful people think they have because it does seem so easy to dismiss. But it does, it moves the window on social acceptability and the plausibility structure aspect of it. I do think it's contagious. All human behavior is contagious in my view. And I think that's part of it. I think that's great. And they do have a massive, especially Nick Fuentes. I mean, massive, massive following.

People that kind of dismiss him as being not influential or insignificant, you know. Yeah, I mean, he's definitely very, and he, you know, rhetorically, rhetorically, he's way more compelling and convincing, I think, than a Nick than a Tate, in my opinion. When I say convincing, obviously. I know what to me. I mean, and everybody said, I mean, he's extremely talented in front of the camera in his basement or whatever. I mean, he's, I could see where people would be drawn in by his rhetoric and not, and be kind of blinded to some of the insanity that he, you know, says. And he is always, he, he, he, he almost the line between him being humorous, hyperbolic, overstating, you know, like, it's actually hard.

People think everything he says is like, oh, this is exactly what he believes. Half the time, he's just, I don't know. Like, he's, it's almost like a comedian. It's almost like a comedian. Yeah. Well, and I think he's playing Jenga. You know, he's pushing on, does this move? Does this not move?

Does this work? Does this not work? So he's always kind of doing this feedback loop thing with the people online. And so you say something and it's too much, okay, I won't say that again. You say this thing and, oh, people kind of resonate with it. I'll keep pushing on that one. Exactly right, yeah, because Andrew Tate does seem like he's playing a character. It does feel like, yeah, yeah.

I remember the first time, like after I saw that video, I looked at another one, I'm like, this guy, this is like a bit, right? You know, this is, and I'm like, oh, this is not a bit. He just seemed, but there's clearly like a hollow internal world to him, whereas Fuentes seems like he can read. Andrew Tate seems like he can't read. And so I do think, like there's a guy in my church two Sundays ago, 36 years old, who's like, hey, you ever heard of Nick Fuentes? I was like, yeah, I have. This guy's really offline, and I respect him for it. He's like, yeah, I heard this clip from him. And I was like, oh, this is awesome. This guy's great. And then listen to the next clip from him. And I thought, whoa, what are we doing here? This is a problem.

And I just think young men might get led us stray by this guy. And I'm like, he's because I got, I was with him for like 47 seconds. Oh, yeah. And in the next clip, I was like, oh, what happened to me? This guy's a white supremacist and the most literal of census, you know? And, whoa. And this guy's a sober person. So there's like a pump-to-breaks, lean-out thing. And this guy's 36 and is a well-formed Christian. And he found himself getting pulled. It was only for like a minute.

But some listeners would be like, how could you even get pulled for a minute? But I'm like, that's what happens. When you don't know anything about a guy, and then you see one clip and then the next clip asks you to take a step further. It's kind of like all sin. You know, you go with it one step,

then it takes you further than you plan on going. and next thing you know you don't recognize yourself. And so I think that's, I think that's part of what's concerned in me about influencer culture, period. It must be hard to pastor in this unique cultural moment with all the online influencers

and all the different voices that people absorb. Like you said, it might be almost like a secondary. It's not like they're sitting down, listening to a YouTube influencer, taking notes and whatever, but just the absorption of this stuff

shapes, as you said. I think you're spot on. It shapes how our desires or intuition, our hearts and ways we don't even realize it. And to have to be pastoring in a cultural moment where there's just a myriad of voices shaping people's hearts and minds. How do you, have you, I mean, between now and maybe 10 years ago, have you seen a shift in this, a challenge in pastoring people? Yeah, I think some of it is I've grown as a pastor, so I'm just more aware of what people actually deal. with. I think when you're fresh out of seminary, you think what people are dealing with is Aryanism and modalism and you get into pastoring. And it's like, yeah, there are a lot of LDS people

in my community. And so they are dealing with Aryanism. But there's, but mostly what people in the pews are dealing with. And I think 10 years ago, it's like if you kind of knew what Fox and CNN were saying, you kind of knew what people were hearing. Now you have no idea. You know, there's not, If you want to teach like Jesus, you've heard it said, but I say into you. If you want to do that, it's like, I can't, I can't listen to three and a half hours of Joe Rogan. I can't listen to the Sean Ryan show multiple times. I can't listen to call her daddy, you know, all these like big shows that are out there. There's a lot of reasons I can't listen to that show.

But it's just like, nobody has time for this. And you're trying to participate in your role as a pastor. And so that's, remember Luke, who's the other teaching pastor of the church, he's a lead pastor. He came to me like four or five years ago. I was like, we need to start a podcast. And I was like, what are you talking about? We're pastors. And he said, just another discipleship touch point that gives people something to listen to besides all the other garbage out there.

Michael, I can get on board with that if this is about formation, discipleship. And so we started the King and Culture podcast. And then another dude at my church came to me and was like, you should start a masculinity podcast. And I'm like, that's the most uninteresting thing to me ever. You know, I'm not trying to do. And he's like, no, here's why. And he's like, you should make them short and you should make him listenable. And I'll produce an edit that you should need to talk.

And so he convinced me like 18 months ago to start the authentic masculinity podcast, which is like six minute episodes once a week about how to break up with your girlfriend. And how do you think about jobs? And how it's like because all they're listening, they're looking for this advice on TikTok and Instagram. And maybe if you created something that was a better alternative. And so the Thomas Chalmers, you know, explosive power of the greater affection.

which is about the gospel, you know, the hostile, taking over the heart and helping you love Christ. I do think there's something about, and this is one of the privilege of working at a large church like I do, is there is like time and energy to create additional or different resources that you hope will form your people, or at least help them not listen to other things. And those additional multi-week, midweek touch points, I think,

become that much more valuable, digitally speaking. obviously you want people in community, in circles, laying hands on each other, praying for each other, but people are listening to podcasts at the gym and tune from work and trying to push. This is one of the reasons why I think theology in the raw is a good ministry. Like we just, it's, even if there's an episode that's like not that great, it still is better than Joe Rogan, you know, for people's spiritual formation. You know what I mean? And so I hope you don't take that as an insult. But I mean, even even, I mean, it's a same.

say you have. Well, his episode with, his episode with, oh, what's his face? The new West Huff, West Huff was worth. Oh, for sure. But I'm like a podcast where there's like Lordship of Christ, the gospel, Bible, the worst version of that show is better for my people than listening to whatever news thing was just going to make him angry and mad. And so I think that's some of, that's what's changed to me. Pastoring last 10 years is I do think pastors feel pressure. Some of that's good and so that's bad to put out additional content that can just be little nudges of formation away from the other deformative material that's out there. I completely agree and I encourage pastors to at least raise the question, you know, should I do a podcast? I mean, think about, you know,

10, 20 years ago and before people just, I don't know, they didn't have as nearly as many voices in their head. So when they come to like a Sunday morning sermon, it was much more meaningful, powerful. There's more anticipation. And of course, there's still going to be so that now, but you can't deny the social effect of having so many engaging, entertaining, influential voices throughout the week that people are consuming. And then you come to Sunday morning and yeah, I think it just generally speaking, it doesn't have the same kind of impact that it had on people 10, 15 years ago. There's that. And yeah, you can reach people's hearts and minds even with a conversation like this because people are getting much more used to this

kind of conversational interaction or at least absorption. And to be able to, yeah, not to diminish the sermon again, as always. But I mean, I think some pastors might have more of an influence in people's lives by speaking to them on the treadmill of the gym on Wednesday afternoon through, say, a podcast, and in some cases, than the sermon. I'm not celebrating that. I'm not saying that's an, you know, absolute, but I think it's just the cultural moment we live in. So yeah, I'm glad you're, you're doing that. Have you noticed any of, I mean, what was, what's been, have you been able to measure at all the kind of impact that's had on people after you. Oh, yeah. When I think like after a Sunday service, I talk to people in the lobby. It's almost like maybe 40% of the conversations that I have are about

the impact of an authentic masculinity podcast or a King and Culture podcast over and against what they just heard in the sermon. And some of it is the scalability and shareability of those things. So I talked to a guy this past Sunday who is like, hey, my son's 24, maybe going to go through a divorce. It's pretty brutal. I've been married seven months. His wife just decided I hate this and I don't. And his son comes to him. This guy's in his 40s.

And he got him a copy of authentic masculinity of the book and had him the authentic. So this is the same thing about books. I would say books are scalable, shareable resources like podcasts are. and he's like, let's sit down and read through the humility chapter and the responsibility chapter. What can you take responsibility for and why your wife hates this marriage? And so he goes to him, it's like, rather than just kind of going, I'm a victim of my wife's disdain, how can you take responsibility for ways you've maybe contributed to her disliking the situation instead of blame shifting? And so he's like, I read it with my son. He's 24. We read the one chapter. Then we

listened to this one. And we had these great, he's not a believer. so he was skeptical, but he listened to it and it's helpful. And so I think the library effect of the podcast or the resource value of a book that you may get the book and go, I'm pretty responsible. I don't need this chapter right now. But you may need it sometime in the future when you're talking about some type of blame shifting thing. And so I think it's been really helpful to people creating those additional things. Yeah, good.

I want to come back for the last question, that marriage question. But this is going to be part of our extra endings portion of the podcast where we talk about the relationship between marriage and masculinity. Do you need to be married to be masculine? If you want to access this portion of the podcast, head over to patreon.com forward slash theology in the rock. Seth, it was great talking to you. Again, the book is authentic masculinity, leaving behind counterfeits for God's design.

So thanks for being a guest on Theology Roth for part one of our series on biblical masculinity. Thank you, Preston. It was a treat getting to chat with you. If you would like to listen to the extra innings portion of this episode, head over to Patreon.com forward slash theology and raw to become a member of the Theology and Rock community.