Book Review: “The Intentional Father: A Practical Guide to Raise Sons of Courage and Character”
By: Doug Ponder
Editor’s Note: The following review appears in the Spring 2025 issue of Eikon.
Jon Tyson. The Intentional Father: A Practical Guide to Raise Sons of Courage and Character. Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Books, 2021.
As a pastor to many men and a father to four sons, I was eager to read Jon Tyson’s The Intentional Father: A Practical Guide to Raise Sons of Courage and Character . Tyson knows that “our culture has done a terrible job raising young men, and there is a huge need for formational instruction that will help fathers, and other guardians of young men, intentionally bring their sons from boyhood into manhood” (15).[1] He also knows that fathers matter: “The role of fatherhood is one of the most overlooked yet crucial roles in our society” (19). As Nancy Pearcey has shown in her book, The Toxic War on Masculinity, fathers matter to such an extent that “the greatest risk factor for violence and antisocial behavior in boys is growing up without a father’s presence in their lives.”[2]
Of course, it does little good if a father is present while being detached or uninvolved. To be a shaping force for good, Tyson insists that a good father is one who “sees parenting as central to his call before God and does it with all of his might” (33). This is the eponymous “intentional father,” a man who not only models masculinity in his life but also takes deliberate steps to guide his son from boyhood into manhood.
To succeed in this vital undertaking, Tyson recommends several principles and practices that he implemented over many years with his own son. He encourages every father to envision the day when his son(s) will leave the house for good, considering what values and skills he wants his son to take with him. He also asks the reader to reflect on the strengths and weaknesses of his own father, giving him a clear picture of what (not) to aim for. Above all, Tyson exhorts fathers to spend lots of structured time with their sons in order to instill values, form character, and teach all that is necessary for “being good at being a man” (161).
Tyson doesn’t hover 30,000 feet above the ground at the level of abstract principles. He lays out exactly how he guided his son toward manhood through studying Scripture every morning, reading books together, taking special trips, watching films that model positive masculinity, and developing specific skills, like how to have a conversation, how to ask a girl out on a date, how to apply for a job, etc. I found myself nodding in agreement at many points throughout the book as I read about various things I have done with my own sons. But Tyson still taught this middle-aged dog some new tricks, and his book provided a welcome occasion to take inventory of my life and discern places where I could be even more intentional (Phil 3:12). In my estimation, the book’s greatest strength is its passionate call for fathers to take an active role in shaping the lives of their sons, coupled with many practical examples of steps that can be taken toward that end.
Yet no book is without its weaknesses, including The Intentional Father. First of all, Tyson’s use of Scripture is shockingly scarce for a book aimed at helping sons become more like Jesus (37). I counted one citation of Scripture in the first half of the book — a passing reference to Malachi 4:6 in which the Hebrew word for “fathers” is bewilderingly changed to “parents.” (If fathers matter as much as Tyson claims they do, why neuter verses that would seem to lend support to his argument?)
What made Tyson’s sparse citation of Scripture even more curious was his frequent use of quotes from a wide array of non-Christian sources, including troubling figures like new age panentheist Richard Rohr. To be sure, all truth is God’s truth. And I don’t fault a man for quoting non-Christians, as Paul himself did from time to time (Acts 17:28). But it’s a bad look, to say the least, when an author quotes men with darkened minds (Eph 4:18) far more often than those who were carried along by the Spirit of God (1 Pet.1:21). If the Lord cares about men (and he does), then surely Tyson could have found more verses that speak to fathers and sons in the pages of holy writ.
Another troubling element of the book involves several questionable suggestions that Tyson strongly encourages his readers to adopt. Some are of debatable benefit (a “gap year” between high school and college), while others are out of reach for all but the most financially well off (Tyson took several extended trips with his son to far flung places for many weeks at a time). Yet some of the recommended practices are bizarre, even spiritually dangerous. For example, Tyson “baptized” his son into manhood in the icy waters of the North Atlantic, and he encourages fathers to sacramentalize their son’s thirteenth birthday in similar fashion. He and his son also trekked the Camino de Santiago (the Way of St. James), famous among Catholic mystics who believe the 500-mile pilgrimage promotes spiritual renewal and self-discovery. In addition to lacking scriptural support, such practices appeal to the baser parts of the human heart, which is always searching for liturgy-like formalities (2 Tim. 3:5), as if these things mattered more than an ordinary Christian life (Deut 6:4–25).[3]
Perhaps the greatest weakness of the book, however, is one that strikes at the heart of what Tyson aims to accomplish. Namely, his definition of what it means to be a man is insufficiently masculine. To begin with, the vast majority of Tyson’s examples of “broken” masculinity are the abusive kinds found in “toxic masculinity” discourse.[4] To counter this one-sided picture of masculine failure, Tyson says that “true masculinity… has the strength to smash hierarchies, stand up for those on the margins, and lead men into lives where they are stopping abuse from happening” (26).[5] Though stopping abuse is, indeed, one of the duties incumbent on the sex endowed with greater strength (1 Pet 3:7), one could be forgiven for thinking Tyson’s definition of masculinity was taken straight from the latest progressive talking points.
A few pages later, he offers a better definition: “a man is an image bearer and son of God entrusted with power and the responsibility to create, cultivate, care, and defend, for God’s glory and the good of others” (37). There’s nothing objectionable in that, but Tyson has taken the wind out of his sails before he even put them up, stating that most of the content of his book will “apply to young women as well as men” (36).[6] One is left wondering if the author thinks that sons and daughters need precisely the same formation. Yet if that is so, has he really written a book about raising sons?
To be clear, Tyson knows “there are distinct differences between men and women” (42). But he seems hesitant to spell out what those differences are, especially in regards to differing vocations and points of emphasis seen throughout the Scriptures.[7] I suspect this hesitancy stems from Tyson’s egalitarian convictions (he leads a church with several women who serve as pastors, including some who serve as teaching pastors). These seem to hinder his ability to affirm the full range of sexual asymmetry according to the design of God.
Time would fail me to mention other weaknesses of the book, like the concerning way Tyson speaks about disordered sexuality[8] and his ardent devotion to personality tests as the key to self-knowledge,[9] so I’ll leave those thoughts to readers of footnotes (may their tribe increase).
In the final analysis, I think The Intentional Father is a good book, but not a great one, for it is saddled with some of the modern baggage that the present generation of boys must shed if they are to become the kind of men the world desperately needs. Even so, I think discerning dads who consider Tyson’s advice with humble self-reflection, godly resolve, and a healthy dose of discernment are sure to bless their sons in manifold ways. Let us pray that they do so. We need all the intentional fathers we can get.
[1] Indeed, a crisis of masculinity has been brewing for so long now that even secular publications have taken note. Consider the following titles found in notable publications: “The Boys Are Not All Right” writes Michael Ian Black in the New York Times. “What’s the Matter with Men?” wonders Idrees Kahloon for The New Yorker. Writing for Vox, Sean Illing asks the same question in search of an answer: “What’s the matter with men – and how do we fix it?”
[2] Nancy Pearcey, The Toxic War on Masculinity: How Christianity Reconciles the Sexes (Grand Rapids, MI: Baker, 2023), 193, emphasis original. Note that here Pearcey is summarizing a growing body of evidence that shows the active presence of a benevolent father to be the most consistent predictor of a boy’s physical, financial, legal, and spiritual wellbeing.
[3] This emphasis on quasi sacraments of manhood was especially frustrating, given that Tyson faithfully practiced so many of the ordinary means of grace with his son. And I strongly suspect that it was the regular “little” things that he did which had the greatest impact on his son’s life, instead of the extraordinary experiences that he emphasizes so much.
[4] Tyson does approvingly quote Robert Lewis, who writes, “A man accepts responsibility, rejects passivity, leads courageously, and lives for the greater reward” (Raising a Modern-Day Knight: A Father’s Role in Guiding His Son to Authentic Manhood, Carol Stream, IL: Tyndall, 200y, loc. 836 of 2506, Kindle). But Tyson’s warnings against masculine passivity are far, far fewer than those he levels against masculine abuse. This gives the reader the impression that men are much more prone to the latter rather than the former, despite the fact that abdication (not abuse) was the sin of Adam in the garden that plunged humanity into ruin.
[5] Defining masculinity as the ability to “smash hierarchies” is problematic on many levels. For some hierarchies are simply part of God’s design, such as the authority of humans over animals (Gen.1:28). Indeed, when hierarchy is properly defined as ordered relationships, then a kind of hierarchy would seem to apply to male-female relationships (1 Cor 11:3, 8–9), especially in marriage (Eph 5:22–25) and the church (1 Tim 2:11–12).
[6] To expand on this point, consider the following: Tyson elsewhere says, “My goal is to help our sons become like Jesus” (37). I want this, too (what Christian father doesn’t?). But aren’t daughters also called to be conformed to the image of Christ (Rom 8:29)? If so, then what sets men apart from women? Why did God make two sexes instead of one? These are questions Tyson never fully answers.
[7] Consider, for example, how the apostles speak differently about men and women in places like 1 Corinthians 11:2–16, 1 Corinthians 14:26–35, Ephesians 5:22–33, 1 Timothy 2:8–15, 1 Timothy 5:1–16, Titus 2:1–8, and 1 Peter 3:1–7, all of which reflect the differences that Moses first highlights in Genesis 2–3. For more on these differences, see Doug Ponder, “The Harmonious Asymmetry of the Sexes,” Eikon: A Journal for Biblical Anthropology 6.1 (Spring 2024): 28–40.
[8] Specifically, Tyson claims that questions about “gay” sons and “transgender boys” are “difficult, complicated questions” and that “the most important thing… is to love and pour into your son” (41). Setting aside the fact that the church across the ages has not found these questions to be all that “complicated,” an essential part of loving others includes exhorting them to embrace, rather than reject, the good designs of God (Gen. 1:26–31; Matt. 19:4–6). And doing so is not “the condemnation of the Pharisees,” as Tyson implies later in the book (157).
[9] Tyson writes, “Our approach was simple, and it boiled down to this: Nate took any and every personality and skills test I could get my hands on. That’s it” (196). That’s it? That’s the thing our sons most need to become the men that God created them to be? One wonders how any father in history ever raised his son(s) before the advent of personality tests, which are barely a century old. For a fuller critique of the tragically common misuse of personality tests, see Doug Ponder, “The Problem with Personality Tests,” Clear Truth Media, February 27, 2025, https://cleartruthmedia.com/s/501/the-problem-with-personality-tests.
