Hey guys. I asked one of my church elders about this post and I have attached his reply below for those that are interested :)

Regarding the article and its author and my conclusions first, I have no idea what this guy’s church is like, or his background, nor does he share any of that. But his general comments and highlights paint a picture of an extremely immature “Christian” at best. He reveals his heart quite clearly in some of his comments. And he is frankly very far from the heart of Christ, plain and simple. Regardless of his church, his comments betray a deeply wayward heart that is after very wrong things. He does not sound like a worshiper of Christ as I know from the Bible. He sounds like a worshiper of the world that is weirdly attached to some kind of moralism because the “treasure behind his words” is not in sync with “supreme love and affection for Christ.”

I have never heard nor seen in all my life a godly man, young or old, speak in this manner. The arguments as written are really, really bad. A key observation and warning flag is that nowhere does he make a case from Scripture. ALL of his thoughts are built on biblically unfounded premises. That’s a very bad start.

Here are some of my detailed remarks.

“I wish my pastor spoke more about practical topics like ‘saving and investing’ or ‘how to satisfy your husband.’” This is a truly revealing statement. Jesus Himself didn’t teach like that. That should be a show stopper for a statement like this! Rather, Jesus taught all about loving the Father, how to pray, how to love in sacrifice and mercy, the glory of heaven, and to avoid the love of money and sex and lust! Jesus Himself seems to teach things this guy would find boring. The author of the post reveals that he wants Jesus to help him make a lot of money and have his wife serve him in bed! Wow. Honestly, that is truly astounding to me that he could write those words. That is a crystal clear admonition that this guy does not know Jesus or His Word at heart. Jesus had special words for people like that…

He cites a “drastic decline in male attendance…” but doesn’t provide the statistics or context regarding which kinds of church(es) he’s referring to. It’s just an extremely broad brush stroke. It’s very poorly argued. I say that because all of the churches I myself know of are to the contrary.

As I read, here are the notes I took.

* Never have I heard “erotic terms” in a worship song, ever… not even close.

* “Men are looking for a male leader - not a male lover” — that couldn’t be further from the truth. “Abide in my *love* (John 15)” “[Christ] loved me and gave himself for me.” “In this is *love*, not that we have loved God but that He loved us (1 John 4).” “God’s love has been poured into our hearts through the Holy Spirit…God shows his love for us [present tense!]… (Romans 5).”

* “Lord, you know that I love (phileo) you” (John 21) — phileo is deep brotherly love, a term of endearing affection

* Love in Scripture for God is both agape and phileo, and God requires that He be the supreme treasure of our lives (the pearl of great price, the treasure in the field that you sell in all your joy to obtain, counting everything in the world as loss because of the surpassing worth of knowing Christ Jesus, all that we may know Him). 

* God’s Word is “sweeter than honey.” David says, “I *love* the Lord.” 

* Marriage is a picture/metaphor of Christ and the church. And it is an argument from the lesser to the greater. Its purpose is to provide an object lesson. So wherever you might see in a God-honouring marriage—including intimacy, sacrificial love, romance, purity, devotion, passion—they are all part of the metaphor of an even greater glory in our *union with Christ.*

* “Lovey-dovey praise songs force a man” sounds pretty jaded and immature honestly.

* The irony of “masculine” as defined here sounds a lot *unlike* Jesus, who himself is by definition the most perfect man, and therefore the most masculine there is. He was gentle, kind, meek and lowly. He was a friend of tax collectors and sinners. He was merciful and tender and compassionate. He was in every way the meekest and most gentle and loving human that ever existed. And he LOVED his father with absolute passion and perfection. \He's also a conqueror as we can see in Revelation 19:11-16**

* Poor dress is a fault of the woman and the direction of the church. It is an issue in North America, some places more than others. But beauty is not the fault of a woman. Lust in a man is *his fault*.

* What in the world is he getting at by talking about Mormonism and eternal sex? Is he implying that eternal singing and heartfelt praise is dumb and doesn’t make sense and he’d rather get sex in eternity?

* Oh how wrong the last bullet point he cites, how very, very wrong. Missions exists because worship (supreme treasuring of Christ!) doesn’t. The purpose of missions is WORSHIP! The goal is worship through and through. It will draw those whom Jesus calls effectually. Period. Pragmatism (ratio of men to women) is not a concern for the church. Preaching the glory and beauty of Christ is the concern of a godly church. And He will draw whom He wills.

* “How does analyzing the Lord’s Prayer for 30 minutes apply to making more money at work?” This is truly astounding that he would reveal his heart so clearly. What’s more important, the greatest commandment to love God with all your heart, soul, mind, and strength or making money? Jesus taught very clearly that the love of money is a root of all kinds of evil. The author’s interest here is money over prayer. That is truly dangerous. 

In conclusion, honestly, it’s not worth reading people or sources like this. At best they’re draining as you attempt to navigate the error and false premises. At worst, they’re woefully untruthful and dangerously misleading, not teaching sound doctrine. 
I would spend time reading sound, healthy doctrine from men who don’t just spout their random thoughts filled with bad assumptions and arguments. Read from those who unfold the Scriptures and from men who *love* Christ!