The New York Times ran an article a couple days ago about the growing phenomenon within conservative Evangelical churches to attract men to church by incorporating mixed martial arts viewing parties and fights. 

Sickening stuff. I have no doubt that the churches doing this are effectively churching people who wouldn’t otherwise show up to a church, but at what cost? I’m not impressed by churching people. This isn’t the first time that religious leaders have been able to spike attendance by doing something ridiculous. No, what impresses me is people living the Way of Jesus well, and this phenomenon moves in the opposite direction of that hope.

The NYT notes that pastors are using verses such as 1 Timothy 6.12, which includes the phrase “fight the good fight,” to defend their appropriation of violence. What does the verse actually say in its full context?

“But you, man of God, flee from all this, and pursue righteousness, godliness, faith, love, endurance, and gentleness. Fight the good fight of the faith…” (emphasis mine)

Ironically, the full context of the chapter is about avoiding false teachers and being willing to lay down everything in this life. So if you’re reading 1 Timothy 6 and are confused how it leads to some dudes clocking each other, you’re not alone.

I agree with the responses Dwight and Eugene offered to this situation (Eugene is also quoted in the NYT piece speaking against this fad), but would want to take my frustration even one step farther in disapproving the Fight Club mentality.

I think that leaders within restless, resurgent fundamentalism are provoking a dehumanization of their men just as they have with their women. The same off-path religion teaching men that violence equates with both developed masculinity and Christlikeness has asked its women to back away from education and contribution to society outside of a domestic setting. 

What a bizarre time to be alive. On the one hand, we are making efforts to bring economic and environmental sustainability — along with human dignity — to developing nations in the Global South by (rightly) educating and empowering their women to be viable contributors — fully human — in their societies. Meanwhile, in the affluent West, the resurgent fundamentalists are staking their identity on convincing women to narrow their scope of influence and teaching their men to find their inner fighter.

It’s Kimbo Slice meets Little House on the Prairie.

What does it say about the gospel of this restless, resurgent fundamentalism that they need to de-educate their women and make their men into fighters in order to sell people on their message? Intentionally or unintentionally, they’re having to dumb down and de-humanize people in order to keep their folk religion afloat.

What would Orthodox Christianity say to this movement? Jesus’ violence was far stronger than the weakness of human violence. Jesus was non-violent in a way that violently shook the cosmos, and to follow him is to mimic that lifestyle. He was not the brute that many of his pagan neighbors were. He was the Messiah who told Peter to put down his sword, the Savior who lowered himself — didn’t contend for himself — to the point of taking on the cross. While the crucifixion represented more than any one accomplishment or intention, it was certainly, among other things, Jesus’ response to the myth of redemptive violence.

Determining where Jesus stood in relation to the sort of violence being advocated by this MMA Christian crowd is not complex or unclear. The truth is there for the understanding. And only a religion moving away from the path of Christ would want to ignore it.