Dalrock has another excellent post criticizing the “servant leadership” concept of modern Churchians, link below. However, he too missed the point of a Scriptural passage, focusing on a tangent of Dread Game.
Dalrock quoting Douglas Wilson:
.But Jesus called them to him and said, .You know that the rulers of the Gentiles lord it over them, and their great ones exercise authority over them. It shall not be so among you. But whoever would be great among you must be your servant. (Matt. 20:25.26, ESVOpen in Logos Bible Software (if available)).
Those who are great in the kingdom are those who have given themselves away like this. So a man who wants his authority to be recognized in his home.whoever would “be great..must pursue that authority the way Jesus says to do it. But when he pursues the role of servant, he is pursuing genuine authority. He is not pursuing the status of “nullity” or .milquetoast.” And when he pursues this under the blessing of God, the very first person to see it will be his wife.
No, that is not what Christ meant. Why do Godless men seek power? For the sake of having power, getting the seat of honor and being remembered in the history books. In other words, for his personal benefit. Why should a Godly man seek power? To accomplish deeds, to follow Christ’s example, to raise a healthy family, to do well at his job. In other words, for the benefit of others.
Consider a Colonel in a banana republic. He has a company of soldiers under his command, logistics/wealth, a great deal of power. Living amongst corruption, he is often offered money for mercenary activities, everybody from local governments seeking priority to drug cartels wanting to purchase protection. What should he do with the power he has?
Most such Colonels will act in his own best interest. By the time he retires, he will have a fortified compound staffed with personal retainers. Money, status and harems are what he deserves because he’s a Colonel! He’s too busy looking out for himself to care about the long-term consequences of his actions.
The Christian Colonel, however, understands that responsibility came with his position. He must defend taxpayers in general and his nation from foreign threats specifically. He might still take mercenary work–he might well need to, to feed his men–but he is guided by a purpose outside of himself. The world doesn’t revolve around him.
Mission focus. The mission comes first. That was the point Christ was getting at. It is also a major sexual difference. Women are solipsistic; they seek power to hoard power, to patch their personal weaknesses, for their benefit. Men want to accomplish, to do things outside himself that will outlast him like the works of a sculptor.
Wilson is the Godless Colonel. He’s a winner in his society and if you want to have success like him then you need to become a winner, too! But unsaid is that if you actually try, well, the company can have only one Colonel and he’ll assassinate the upstart before risking replacement.
By contrast, the Christian Colonel isn’t threatened by the success of others. He doesn’t want to get killed/replaced either but understands that he can’t hold his position forever and will look after his own interests only after securing his chosen mission’s success.
What is the significance of this for the common MGTOW with no position in society? Mission focus. Develop a skill or position or bank account or something that can be of use to others and then seek a worthy student.
Martial artists teach that mastering an art involves three steps: Learn It, Do It, Teach It. Christ’s example of discipleship follows the same recipe. Seek power and proficiency and however much you achieve, use it for the benefit of others. This is selfishness, not selflessness. You are learning, doing and teaching what you want for who you like. Neither Christ nor MGTOW philosophy has any use for a martyr.
It’s your life, see? Spend it however you want but SPEND IT before Death takes it away. Do this and you’ll be Christ’s ideal of a leader even if nobody follows.
Christ reiterated His above teaching with the Parable of the Shrewd Manager, Luke 16:1-9:
Jesus told his disciples: .There was a rich man whose manager was accused of wasting his possessions. So he called him in and asked him, .What is this I hear about you? Give an account of your management, because you cannot be manager any longer..
.The manager said to himself, .What shall I do now? My master is taking away my job. I’m not strong enough to dig, and I’m ashamed to beg. I know what I.ll do so that, when I lose my job here, people will welcome me into their houses..
.So he called in each one of his master’s debtors. He asked the first, .How much do you owe my master?.
..Nine hundred gallons of olive oil,. he replied.
.The manager told him, .Take your bill, sit down quickly, and make it four hundred and fifty..
.Then he asked the second, “And how much do you owe?.
..A thousand bushels of wheat,. he replied.
.He told him, .Take your bill and make it eight hundred..
.The master commended the dishonest manager because he had acted shrewdly. For the people of this world are more shrewd in dealing with their own kind than are the people of the light. I tell you, use worldly wealth to gain friends for yourselves, so that when it is gone, you will be welcomed into eternal dwellings.”
This parable bothered me for a long time. It sounded like God was endorsing criminal conduct. The correct understanding is not whether the original accusation against the manager was accurate; it was that the manager made use of the authority he had, while he had the opportunity, to improve his own situation by improving the situations of others.
Do likewise.
Overall I agree with what you said…except for this part:
‘Neither Christ nor MGTOW philosophy has any use for a martyr.’
Martyrdom is part of the deal when it comes to Christ’s disciple. It may not necessarily be a physical one…but you do have to deny yourself. And it’s a good trade…perhaps that’s how one goes from the godless way to seek power to the Godly way of seeking power.
You lost me on this part.
I don’t see the connection to martyrdom. Could you elaborate?
I agree with the rest, except that I believe Dalrock is barking up the right tree. The key to this difference between “leader” and “head” has something to do with a Christian variation of Dread game and/or Machiavellianism. I need to think on this some more. I will post if I get any insights.
Dalrock is quoting Douglas Wilson, not Glenn Stanton.
Martyrdom is an extreme form of altruism. It’s doing something for a third party in return for nothing. Not delayed gratification, not an investment, not upholding an ideal. Christianity opposes this with principles such as “the worker is worth his wage”. MGTOW, of course, is about escaping the slave plantation.
The Churchians often point to the Crucifixion as an example of martyrdom. However, Christ endured that in order to gain us followers and per Revelation, He intends to enjoy our company for eternity. He didn’t die out of any obligation to us or because some higher power than God unilaterally decreed it. He certainly didn’t get crucified for fun and games.
You must understand, the reason the Churchians (or any “Colonel”) teach men to martyr themselves is because they are false leaders. They want to loot the Church without exerting any effort and the best way to accomplish that is convincing the laity to exert effort for no reward. Thus, martyrdom is the separation of work from reward, of actions from consequences. That is a work of the devil, not of our Creator who worked six days and rested to enjoy His Creation on the seventh.
There’s a lot of martyrdom demanded of men these days.
Or as Christ put it, “For whoever wishes to save his life will lose it, but whoever loses his life for My sake, he is the one who will save it.” Matthew 10:39, Matthew 16:25, Mark 8:35, Luke 9:24, Luke 17:33, John 12:25. Christ didn’t die for nothing and we don’t abase ourselves to Christ for nothing. It’s in our best, most selfish interest to do right by Father God, even when the effort makes us miserable.
“I agree with the rest, except that I believe Dalrock is barking up the right tree.”
I agree but he and I are going in different directions with this Wilson excerpt. He’s big on the marriage & family perspective and I’m big on the lifetime bachelor perspective. That’s why I did a post here instead of a comment there.
‘Christ didn.t die for nothing and we don.t abase ourselves to Christ for nothing. ‘
We get eternal life out of it.
If churchians want martyrs so they get power, money, or wimminz…then yeah, that’s nothing.
“Dalrock is quoting Douglas Wilson, not Glenn Stanton.”
Sigh, brain fart.
Gunner,
You have a greatly nuanced concept of martyrdom. My concept of a martyr is “a person who is put to death or endures great suffering on behalf of any belief, principle, or cause”. It’s about allegiance of faith, and loyalty, and not purposes, rewards, or the lack thereof. I don’t think there needs to be an absence of a reward for a person to be an altruistic martyr.
Your example of the colonel asking his soldiers to “die for his cause” is not really an example of martyrdom. It’s an example of a desperate leader willingly sacrificing his men to save his own hide. But the colonel labels it as “martyrdom” to mask his selfishness, and deceive his men into complying with his wishes.
Could you explain why you believe that martyrdom must necessarily be without a reward?
“Could you explain why you believe that martyrdom must necessarily be without a reward?”
I don’t have a better word, thus the confusion between accepting death because it’s necessary for your purposes and accepting death because your leader took out life insurance on you.
“Your example of the colonel asking his soldiers to .die for his cause. is not really an example of martyrdom. It.s an example of a desperate leader willingly sacrificing his men to save his own hide. But the colonel labels it as .martyrdom. to mask his selfishness, and deceive his men into complying with his wishes.”
Correct.
I would call that “blind loyalty”, or being a “useful idiot”.
Exactly, and that’s why Churchianity is swiftly running out of men: they reject the notion that the Christian life is ultimately supposed to be beneficial to its practitioners. Same here: being a good leader is not about having headcount willing to die for you, it’s about making your corner of society a better place for everybody. That’s the meaning of Mark 10:42-45:
“…Jesus said to them, .You know that those who are recognized as rulers of the Gentiles lord it over them; and their great men exercise authority over them. But it is not this way among you, but whoever wishes to become great among you shall be your servant; and whoever wishes to be first among you shall be slave of all. For even the Son of Man did not come to be served, but to serve, and to give His life a ransom for many..