The World Hated Me First

If the world hates you, you know that it has hated Me before it hated you. If you were of the world, the world would love its own. But you are not of the world, since I chose you out of the world, and so the world hates you. (John 15:18–19)

Last month  I wrote a post on the conflict of postmodern thought with natural law. As I have thought more about the subject in light of current events (Alt-Right vs. Antifa, tearing down monuments, college students demanding the cancellation of invited speakers or the removal of faculty, etc.) While the outbreaks do not appear to be the voice of a national majority, the groups are finding a local or regional voice, specific to their situations. While these outbreaks are localized, they are united in mindset—take every measure to promote, establish, and maintain the groups beliefs. Rejecting any modicum of civility, they manifest them themselves in competing factions of pagan tribalism. Intent on promoting their respective goals, the groups create syncretistic bonds long enough to win the engagement and continue tribal pursuits, often times turning on former allies.

While the politicians and media attempt to dissect the rancor from a worldly perspective, we who follow the Bible understand the issue: they have wholeheartedly rejected our God and His Christ. Mind you, the outrage against our Lord is not some mild indifference, rather the rancor is manifest in wholesale attacks on Christians by making inroads in legislation, then using the judicial system to force the outliers into conformity. It is here that we might ask the same questions put forth by Arnobius of Sicca (ad c. 255–330) in his work Against the Pagans (II.1–2):

If you think it no dishonor to answer when asked a question, explain to us and say what is the cause, what the reason, that you pursue Christ with so bitter hostility? or what offenses you remember which He did, that at the mention of His name you are roused to bursts of mad and savage fury?

In other words, what did Jesus ever do to you to cause such a response? Arnobius offered some possible objections:

• Did He ever, in claiming for Himself power as king, fill the whole world with bands of the fiercest soldiers?
• Did He destroy nations at peace, putting an end to some, and compelling others to submit to His yoke and serve Him?
• Did He ever, excited by grasping avarice, claim as His own by right all that wealth to have abundance of which men strive eagerly?
• Did He ever, transported with lustful passions, break down by force the barriers of purity, or stealthily lie in wait for other men’s wives?
• Did He ever, puffed up with haughty arrogance, inflict at random injuries and insults, without any distinction of persons?

What was the great wickedness that Christ had foisted on the world? He extended “the light of life to all” and showed to them “things concerning salvation, that He prepared for you a path to heaven, and the immortality for which you long.” The horror of it all, that Christ should freely offer Himself as the way to the Father. But the issue was the exclusivity of His claim.

The Roman empire had built within it a polytheistic worship system that the citizenry felt needed to be maintained. In like manner, postmodernism asserts that any norm is acceptable if the society, culture, or tribe in which one identifies accepts that norm as its own for a common good. With a multiplicity of worship practices, the empire needed to ensure the diversity of gods and worship practices. In similar fashion, the U.S. is being required to maintain the same level of diversity to accommodate the new tribalism. The exclusivity of the cross is offensive to those wishing to honor the gods sexual perversion, abortion, racism, etc.

Arnobius went on to ask if Christ should be denounced because He was the rightful One to whom homage was given:

Is He then denounced as the destroyer of religion and promoter of impiety, who brought true religion into the world, who opened the gates of piety to men blind and verily living in impiety, and pointed out to whom they should bow themselves? Or is there any truer religion—one more serviceable, powerful, and right—than to have learned to know the supreme God, to know how to pray to God Supreme, who alone is the source and fountain of all good, the creator, founder, and framer of all that endures, by whom all things on earth and all in heaven are quickened, and filled with the stir of life, and without whom there would assuredly be nothing to bear any name, and have any substance?

The short answer was: of course not. Who else would be worthy since He made known the way to the one, true God? And yet there is the problem. The world does not know, nor wants to know, the One who laid down His life that they might live, because it means they were wrong. What seemed to be the normal course of things was actually the way of death and destruction, but through the Lord Jesus, there is life.

The world will continue to hate Christ and His church because we are a constant reminder that there is One who convicts of sin, righteous, and judgment; and there is coming a day when all will be judged, both good and bad. Let us hold fast in the face of a culture desiring to quell the message of the cross.

What's Natural for You

I remember a product from my youth that ran commercials reminding us that “natural means what’s natural for you.” While the slogan might be useful to advertise a dietary supplement, social progressives are using the same philosophy to promote alternate lifestyles. Postmodern thought has so infiltrated humanity that we are now believing, practicing, and crusading for any number of social constructs having no objective basis but are deemed appropriate because individuals have decided they should be. In an increasing effort to eliminate differences and level societal patterns, an individual can have any belief system whatsoever. The current trend is the enablement and promotion of gender fluidity. No longer content to remain content with binary constructs, individuals are seeking to assign themselves other designations with which they have affinity. The only acceptable caveat, then, is that the belief cannot interfere with the collective belief system for that cultural group. While the intent to have a society and culture that allows individuality and equality seems laudable, attempts to deconstruct natural phenomena leads to chaos, not contentment.

The physical world functions steadily according to a definite set of parameters. Every person born into that world has preset DNA and chromosome characteristics inherited from a man and woman, again according to preexisting physical parameters and functions. In addition, each person learns to interact with like beings in relationships defined by type: family, gender, locale, etc. Eventually, we interact with objects and nonhuman beings so as to understand strengths, weaknesses, limits, and dangers for our general welfare and that of others. The one constant in these interactions is the nature of the world: everything operates according to its design and function. True, there is variety within design and function, however the physical limitations prevent us from operating outside those parameters. Knowledge and experience of these designs and functions allows individuals and societal groups to continue, grow, and aspire to workable goals.

When we attempt to change the operation of either design or function, we lose the ability to interact and function. Postmodernism makes such an attempt by espousing deconstruction of norms in order to allow societal shifts. Consider this portion of Lewis Carroll’s Through the Looking Glass as Alice tries to understand Humpty Dumpty’s use of a word:

Humpty Dumpty and Alice

    “I don’t know what you mean by ‘glory,’ ” Alice said.
    Humpty Dumpty smiled contemptuously. “Of course you don’t—till I tell you. I meant ‘there’s a nice knock-down argument for you!’ ”
    “But ‘glory’ doesn’t mean ‘a nice knock-down argument’,” Alice objected.
    “When I use a word,” Humpty Dumpty said, in rather a scornful tone, “it means just what I choose it to mean—neither more nor less.”
    “The question is,” said Alice, “whether you can make words mean so many different things.”
    “The question is,” said Humpty Dumpty, “which is to be master—that’s all.”

This instructive interchange helps to illuminate the fundamental question: Is the standard derived from the established construct or societal, even personal, use? While deconstruction attempts to level the societal norms, the logical progression has been to elevate individual desires above the societal and force acceptance via the postmodern method, effectively deconstructing deconstructionism. As long as an overarching semblance of cohesion exists among individuals, society can continue, however, the inevitable result of this trend will be a chaotic amalgam akin to that described by Arnobius of Sicca (c. 255–330 AD):

All these various opinions cannot be true, but it is not possible to discover on which side is the error, so powerfully is each sustained by argument. And yet not only do these opinions differ from each other, but they are self-contradictory. Such would not be the case if human curiosity could attain to anything certain, or if after having, as it is believed, discovered anything certain, it could obtain universal assent to it. It is the height of presumption to pretend to possess any certainty or to aspire to it, since truth itself can be refuted, or that may be accepted as real, which has no existence, as in cases of mental hallucination. (Against the Pagans, II.57)

Twelve hundred years later, the Lutheran reformers would similarly point out the self-contradiction of the celibacy of priests being promulgated by the Church of Rome.

Therefore it is ridiculous for the adversaries to prate that marriage was commanded in the beginning, but is not now. This is the same as if they would say: Formerly, when men were born, they brought with them sex; now they do not. Formerly, when they were born, they brought with them natural right; now they do not. No craftsman could produce anything more crafty than these absurdities, which were devised to elude a right of nature. (Augsburg Confession, Apology XXIII.10)

Yet, this self-contradiction is the state of that collective mindset which currently seeks to redefine definitions and relationships solely from selfishness and pride. Once understood for mutual edification, intimate relational bonds have been sexualized and individualized, devaluing and destroying their natural place and function. Family units built on a natural attraction of man and woman with the desire for offspring has dissolved into any group that desires to be together—again ultimately for selfish ends. Children, once the natural desire and outcome of a committed man and woman, are prevented from occurring or killed, when deemed necessary, for the good of the adults. And while these fall within the realm of natural phenomena, adults and children now are eschewing established gender definitions to be known according to self-defined terms; or they are refusing their natural physiology by seeking out means to live as the opposite gender. This mindset has focused on what might feed the basest of personal desires without consequence, albeit in an increasingly bizarre manner. Whereas ancient or primitive cultures may have allowed concubines or polygamy to satisfy desire, the current impetus appears to be self-determination, even self-deification. In essence they are saying, “I am god of my body: nature be damned.”

Those seeking to fulfill their desires through unnatural means are doomed to failure. While the pleasure or satisfaction may last for a time, detrimental consequences are inevitable. Long-term participation in unnatural sexual activities has been directly linked to the increased transmission of specific bacteria and viruses. As the degree of deviancy increases, so does the severity of the health concern (HIV, Hepatitis, and a disproportionate increase in STD among same-sex couples); finally, attempts to change gender through pharmaceutical and surgical means carries both the short-term risk of these procedures, but also the unknown and unpredicted long-term effects. If this was not enough, the mindset that these unions are intended solely for personal pleasure brings with it the need to prevent the natural outcome of childbirth. Pregnancy prevention has been problematic as medical solutions have led to unexpected health concerns and complications when children were later desired. Coupled with this is the yet ongoing practice of aborting unwanted children. The result has been a gradual depopulation of American society. By giving way to our basest desires, we are slowly bringing about our demise.

So What Exactly Is Natural for You?

I have spoken of a natural order of things as made manifest by observable phenomena, inferences, and deduction; and this order, with its manifestations, is in accord with the opening chapters of Genesis. Therein, God is described as the Creator of an ordered and systematic world with caretakers given specific duties and mandates for that creation. And all of this He considered very good (Ge 1:31). Only after Adam rebelled do we see corruption enter in. Generation after generation pursued greater degrees of decadence and abomination in a continual cycle of self-destruction, yet God held His creation together as a continual witness that He was present (Ro 1:19–20).

Yet mankind distorted what was natural, seeking to chase after lust rather than the Creator. To this attitude Cyril of Jerusalem had poignant remarks:

There is nothing polluted in the human frame except a man defile this with fornication and adultery. He who formed Adam formed Eve also, and male and female were formed by God’s hands. None of the members of the body as formed from the beginning is polluted. Let the mouths of all heretics be stopped who slander their bodies, or rather Him who formed them. (Catechetical Lectures XII.26)

What our Lord had intended for our good, derived through natural means, was and is being subverted and polluted, yet it remains as a reminder that the vehicle which humanity is using to its own ruin still remains as a testament to His faithfulness. Teachers pollute and slander what our God gave us in these beautifully made bodies; yet, what is being demeaned, devalued, and deconstructed into a new reality is still the very thing our Lord uses to show Himself.

In our natural state, we were to take care of the world and be in communion with God. We failed, and continue to fail, miserably. Only by the work of Jesus, the Christ and Son of God, to pay for our sin and we might be made righteous. In one sense, things go on as they are with our sin working against us and God. Yet, in another sense, there is for those baptized into Christ, an anticipated new natural in the final resurrection with the new heavens and new earth.

Why the Rage?

Why do the nations rage
    and the peoples plot in vain?
The kings of the earth set themselves,
    and the rulers take counsel together,
    against the Lᴏʀᴅ and against his Anointed, saying,
“Let us burst their bonds apart
    and cast away their cords from us.”  (Psa 2:1-3)

As diverse as this world is, there is a definite unifying goal to which mankind is progressing.  Certainly, the tactics endorsed or implemented by the multitudinous nations and people groups vary, however they move with a singular purpose toward the elimination of biblical Christianity and the incarnate Christ by which it is named.  ISIS and other groups foment terror and murder in the name of Allah to eradicate the “stain” infecting Islamic countries.  In more civilized fashion, public interest groups apply political pressure and curry favor with the intent of marginalizing Christians and impeding the free proclamation of the gospel.  None of these events are news to the believer, since Jesus warned of this very thing.

Behold, I am sending you out as sheep in the midst of wolves, so be wise as serpents and innocent as doves.  Beware of men, for they will deliver you over to courts and flog you in their synagogues, and you will be dragged before governors and kings for my sake, to bear witness before them and the Gentiles.… A disciple is not above his teacher, nor a servant above his master.  It is enough for the disciple to be like his teacher, and the servant like his master.  If they have called the master of the house Beelzebul, how much more will they malign those of his household.  (Mt 10:16-18, 24-25)

While we Americans are not accustomed to such open hostility, believers have been targeted over multiple generations in multitude places.  The early centuries of the church were especially difficult with both the ruling political and religious entities targeting the faithful.  Some became especially vociferous, as Arnobius of Sicca relates in Against the Pagans.

Christ alone you would tear in pieces, you would rend asunder, if you could do so to a god.  Indeed, were it allowed, Him alone you would gnaw with bloody mouths, and break His bones in pieces, and devour Him like beasts of the field.  For what that He has done, tell, I pray you, for what crime?  What has He done to turn aside the course of justice, and rouse you to hatred made fierce by maddening torments?  Is it because He declared that He was sent by the only true King to be your soul’s guardian, and to bring to you the immortality which you believe that you already possess, relying on the assertions of a few men?  (I.64)

The fierce attitude that he describes is shocking, but it was not the first against Christians as related in the canonical writings of Luke.

But he, full of the Holy Spirit, gazed into heaven and saw the glory of God, and Jesus standing at the right hand of God.  And he said, “Behold, I see the heavens opened, and the Son of Man standing at the right hand of God.”  But they cried out with a loud voice and stopped their ears and rushed together at him.  Then they cast him out of the city and stoned him.  And the witnesses laid down their garments at the feet of a young man named Saul.  (Acts 7:55-58)

And Paul went in, as was his custom, and on three Sabbath days he reasoned with them from the Scriptures, explaining and proving that it was necessary for the Christ to suffer and to rise from the dead, and saying, “This Jesus, whom I proclaim to you, is the Christ.”  And some of them were persuaded and joined Paul and Silas, as did a great many of the devout Greeks and not a few of the leading women.  But the Jews were jealous, and taking some wicked men of the rabble, they formed a mob, set the city in an uproar, and attacked the house of Jason, seeking to bring them out to the crowd.  (Acts 17:2-5)

Both Romans and Jews were intent on silencing the new sect for two major reasons.  For the Jews, this Man who claimed to be God would need to be recognized as the Messiah of God and be followed without reservation.  This the religious rulers were not willing to do en masse since such a move would mean relinquishing the sphere of influence and control built up over the years.[1]  Pagan religious authorities also resisted the Christians with their foreign concept of one God who died for His creation and was purportedly resurrected.  In a bit of irony, these two factions both appealed to Roman authorities to quell the movement spreading throughout the empire, proposing that the Pax Romana was being or would soon be threatened.

But What of Tolerance?
As has been noticed in recent American history, those who promote themselves as the most inclusive wage the most virulent opposition when faced with the truth.  An honest, candid inquiry into the facts of a matter, in accord with the virtues espoused, should bring the inquirers to the point of either demonstrating the fraudulent nature of the claims or claimants or appreciation and admiration for those qualities benefiting all mankind.  One might think that a late third-century polytheistic religious culture would be tolerant or accepting of this rather unique Jesus put forth by the Christians.  Arnobius writes that He should at least receive a fair listen.

But even if you were assured that He spoke falsely, that He even held out hopes without the slightest foundation, not even in this case do I see any reason that you should hate and condemn Him with bitter reproaches.  Indeed, if you were kind and gentle in spirit, you ought to esteem Him even for this alone, that He promised to you things which you might well wish and hope for; that He was the bearer of good news; that His message was such as to trouble no one’s mind, but rather to fill all with less anxious expectation.  (I.64)

Not wanting the cure for spiritual distress, indeed spiritual death, philosophizers and moralizers seek a humanistic solution for the problem, refusing to consider that they are unable to determine and address their condition.  Believing their spiritual needs can be met by intellectual or experiential stimuli, they reject the sure cure.  Arnobius points out that if the people received a visitor who was able to cure physical ills via medicinal potions, that one would be welcomed with open arms and given the greatest respect.

Oh ungrateful and impious age, prepared for its own destruction by its extraordinary obstinacy!  If there had come to you a physician from lands far distant and unknown to you before, offering some medicine to ward off from you altogether every kind of disease and sickness, would you not all eagerly hasten to him?  Would you not with every kind of flattery and honor receive him into your houses and treat him kindly?  Would you not wish that that kind of medicine should be quite sure, and should be genuine, which promised that even to the utmost limits of life you should be free from such countless bodily distresses?  And though it were a doubtful matter, you would yet entrust yourselves to him, nor would you hesitate to drink the unknown dose, induced by the hope of health set before you and by the love of safety.  (I.65)

If one is willing to trust himself to an unknown physician for bodily ills, why not trust the Physician of the soul who alone can heal the deadly malady of sin common to all humanity?  Instead of rushing to the light of God’s grace demonstrated on the cross, mankind turns away from that outrageous, scandalous display of redemptive love.  Rather than dealing with the claims of Jesus found in the gospel accounts, people remain consoled by the familiar, protective cloak of selfishness, covering the canker infesting their being rather than acknowledge the need.  Thinking it better to stop their eyes and ears from the truth, they pull down their hats and hoods to shield themselves from the One having eyes “like flames of fire” (Rev 1:14).  Arnobius continues:

Christ shone out and appeared to us as the herald of utmost important news, bringing an omen of prosperity, and a message of salvation[2] to those who believe.  What, I pray you, is this cruelty, what such barbarity?  Indeed rather, to speak more truly, what is this scornful pride, not only to harass the messenger and bearer of so great a gift with taunting words, but even to assail Him with fierce hostility, and with all the weapons which can be showered upon Him, and with all modes of destruction?  Are His words displeasing, and are you offended when you hear them?  Count them as but a soothsayer’s empty tales.  Does He speak very stupidly, and promise foolish gifts?  Laugh with scorn as wise men, and leave Him in His folly to be tossed about among His errors.  (I.65)

What great injustice had been done to mankind to engender such a vehement reaction?  Only exposing the great need of a Savior by willingly being the sacrifice for sin and destroying death itself in the process.  Had he accomplished any less, we perchance would have accepted Him with open arms, showing Himself to be something less than what and whom He truly was; but because He dared meet our need, rather than let us fumble for our own way to peace and immortality, this Jesus still needs to be handed over to lawless men for execution (Acts 2:23) and His followers persecuted or martyred into silence (Rev 6:9).

What is this fierceness, to repeat what has been said more than once?  What is the passion, so murderous, to declare implacable hostility towards one who has done nothing to deserve it at your hands; to wish, if it were allowed you, to tear Him limb from limb, who not only did no man any harm, but with uniform kindness[3] told His enemies what salvation was being brought to them from God Supreme, what must be done that they might escape destruction and obtain an immortality which they knew not of?  And when the strange and unheard-of things which were held out staggered the minds of those who heard Him, and made them hesitate to believe, though Lord of every power and Destroyer of death itself [2 Ti 1:10] He suffered His human form to be slain, that from the result[4] they might know that the hopes which they had long entertained about the soul’s salvation were safe and that in no other way could they avoid the danger of death.  (I.65)

The message of the cross is folly to those who are dying (1 Co 1:18), yet Jesus’ death and resurrection remain as the clearest attestation of all that is wrong with this world and how it was made right.  Men still pursue solutions to the world’s ills through pursuits of their own making; and even when they are self-contradictory or guarantee mutually destructive ends, still those plans are followed to their inevitable conclusions or averted at the last for an equally disastrous course—whatever avoids Christ and the cross.  As illogical as it may seem, this activity will only increase at an increasing rate until our Lord returns.  Until that time, we are called to endure the fiery trials that test us.  Let us rejoice in the suffering, not that we seek the grief as a road to higher spirituality, but knowing we go through it to show the Holy Spirit’s working in us as the elect of God (1 Pe 4:12-19).

[1]  Readers, no doubt, will notice parallels between the Sanhedrin of Jesus’ day and modern politicians.

[2]  Salus means to have health or wholeness.  Here it is directed toward the health and wholeness of both body and spirit.

[3]  I.e., to friends and foes alike.

[4]  I.e., from His resurrection, which showed that death’s power was broken by Him.

Gentle and Lowly in Heart

Take my yoke upon you, and learn from me, for I am gentle and lowly in heart, and you will find rest for your souls.  (Mt 11:29)

He was oppressed, and he was afflicted,
    yet he opened not his mouth;
like a lamb that is led to the slaughter,
    and like a sheep that before its shearers is silent,
    so he opened not his mouth.
By oppression and judgment he was taken away;
    and as for his generation, who considered
that he was cut off out of the land of the living,
    stricken for the transgression of my people?
And they made his grave with the wicked
    and with a rich man in his death,
although he had done no violence,
    and there was no deceit in his mouth.  (Isa 53:7-9)

The reader of Isaiah 53 cannot help but stop in rapt attention and wonder that someone would willingly suffer and die for my corrupt nature without raising objections or claiming personal rights, but here such a person is described causing many to wonder, “Has such a man ever existed?  Could we hope that he might be real?”  Yes, such a man does exist, and as self-sacrificing as the Isaiah passage paints the circumstances, we do not really understand that the plan behind the sacrifice was more than we could conceive.  Arnobius of Sicca described it this way in Against the Pagans (I.63):

Do you then see that if He had determined that none should do Him violence, He should have striven to the utmost to keep off from Him His enemies, even by directing His power against them?  Could not He, then, who had restored their sight to the blind, make His enemies blind if it were necessary?  Was it hard or troublesome for Him to make them weak, who had given strength to the feeble?  Did He who bade the lame walk, not know how to take from them all power to move their limbs, by making their sinews stiff?  Would it have been difficult for Him who drew the dead from their tombs to inflict death on whom He would?

Every good that Jesus had done to man could have been reversed in some way to come upon those torturing and killing Him, yet He chose otherwise.  He had within Himself the capability to stop the proceedings, having the source of power and authority in His hands.

During the arrest –

Do you think that I cannot appeal to my Father, and he will at once send me more than twelve legions of angels?  (Matt 26:53)

  

Before Pilate –

So Pilate said to him, “You will not speak to me?  Do you not know that I have authority to release you and authority to crucify you?”  Jesus answered him, “You would have no authority over me at all unless it had been given you from above. (John 19:10-11)

Jesus withheld that power to serve ends beyond comprehension (Rom 11:33), which had been readied since the foundations of the earth.  Arnobius tried to relate this as he continued:

But because reason required that those things which had been foreordained should take place here in the world itself and in no other fashion than was done, He, with gentleness passing understanding and belief, regarding as but childish trifles the wrongs which men did Him, submitted to the violence of savage and most hardened robbers.  Nor did He think it worthwhile to take account of what their temerity had aimed at, if He only showed to His disciples what they ought to expect from Him.

Not only did Jesus follow through with the plan of redemption that led to the cross, He did it in such a way that we take note and emulate His humility in obedience (Phil 2:3-4; 1 Pet 2:21-23).

There remains a problem for all in that we deal with the sin nature.  The standard for holy life is set: “Be holy as I am holy;” but no one can attain this of personal volition.  We enter this world dead to spiritual things.  The apostle Paul points to the problem sin has worked in our lives: “None is righteous, no, not one; no one understands; no one seeks for God” (Rom 3:10-11).  God gave the Law to demonstrate both His holy character and our sinfulness.  Sin is fully revealed, crushing us in our inability to keep it.  But that was the point.  Our sin needed to be made evident in order for God’s grace to be made known through the Jesus.  In his own words, Arnobius described to the pagans the same problem:

 For when many things about the perils of souls, and on the other hand, many evils about their tendency to vice, the Introducer, Master, and Teacher directed His laws and ordinances to the end of fitting duties, did He not destroy the arrogance of the proud?  Did He not quench the flames of passion?  Did He not check the craving of greed?  Did He not wrest the weapons from their hands, and rend from them all the sources of every form of corruption?  To conclude, was He not Himself gentle, peaceful, easily approached, friendly when addressed?  Was He not sympathetic to every human misery and to all in any way afflicted with troubles and physical ailments and diseases?  Did He not, pitying them with His unparalleled kindness, return and restore them to health?

How did the Savior conduct Himself upon coming into the world?

Behold, my servant whom I have chosen,
    my beloved with whom my soul is well pleased.
I will put my Spirit upon him,
    and he will proclaim justice to the Gentiles.
He will not quarrel or cry aloud,
    nor will anyone hear his voice in the streets;
a bruised reed he will not break,
    and a smoldering wick he will not quench,
until he brings justice to victory;
    and in his name the Gentiles will hope.  (Mt 12:18-21; cf. Is 42:1-3)

His endgame was to draw men unto repentance through His kindness (Rom 2:4) in the proclamation of the gospel.  Yet He was rejected, and our Lord allowed Himself to be crucified by sinful men.  Sinful men continue today to reject the gospel as it goes forth through His disciples.  The healing, life-giving message of free grace won by the Giver of life is still rejected.  No, those who refuse would rather kill both the message and the messenger than receive the gift that leads to eternal life.

We press on, then, sharing the gospel and doing good for our neighbors, looking always to the prize of the upward call in Christ Jesus, longing to hear, “Well done, good and faithful servant.… Enter into the joy of your master.”

He Spoke. You Weren't Listening

And the Word became flesh and dwelt among us, and we have seen his glory, glory as of the only Son from the Father, full of grace and truth.… No one has ever seen God; the only God, who is at the Father’s side, he has made him known.  (John 1:14, 18)

“But,” say my opponents, “if Christ was God, why did He appear in human shape, and why was He cut off by death after the manner of men?”

Could that power which is invisible, and which has no bodily substance, have come upon earth and adapted itself to the world and mixed in human society, otherwise than by taking to itself some covering of a more solid substance, which might bear the gaze of the eyes, and on which the look of the least observant might fix itself?  For what mortal is there who could have seen Him, who could have distinguished Him, if He had decreed to come upon the earth such as He is in His own primitive nature, and such as He has chosen to be in His own proper character and divinity?  Therefore, He took upon Himself the form of man; and under the likeness of our race He enclosed His power, so that He could be seen and carefully regarded, might speak and teach, and without encroaching on the sovereignty and government of the King Supreme, might carry out all those objects for the accomplishment of which He had come into the world.

“What, then,” says my opponent, “could not the Supreme Ruler have brought about those things which He had ordained to be done in the world, without feigning Himself a man?”

If it were necessary to do as you say, He perhaps would have done so—because it was not necessary, He acted otherwise.  The reasons why He chose to do it in this way, and did not choose to do it in that, are unknown, being involved in so great obscurity, and comprehensible by scarcely any.  You might perhaps have understood if you were not already prepared not to understand them and were not boldly preparing yourself for unbelief before what you sought to know and to hear was explained to you.

Arnobius of Sicca, Against the Pagans, I.60-61

Even Creation Was Confused

Now from the sixth hour there was darkness over all the land until the ninth hour.… And behold, the curtain of the temple was torn in two, from top to bottom.  And the earth shook, and the rocks were split.  (Matthew 27:45, 51)

It was now about the sixth hour, and there was darkness over the whole land until the ninth hour, while the sun’s light failed.  And the curtain of the temple was torn in two.  (Luke 23:44-45)

Cease in your ignorance to receive such great deeds with abusive language, which will in no wise injure Him who did them, but which will bring danger to yourselves—danger, I say, by no means small, but one dealing with matters of great, yes, even the greatest importance, since beyond a doubt the soul is a precious thing, and nothing can be found dearer to a man than himself.  There was nothing magical, as you suppose, nothing human, deceitful, or crafty in Christ; no deception lurked in Him, although you smile in derision, as usual, and though you split with roars of laughter.  He was God on high, God in His inmost nature, God from unknown realms, and was sent by God the Ruler of all as a Savior, whom neither the sun itself, nor any stars, if they have powers of perception, nor the rulers and princes of the world, nor the great gods, or those who, feigning themselves so, terrify the whole human race, were able to know or to guess whence and who He was.  And rightly so.  But when, freed from the body, which He carried about as but a very small part of Himself, He allowed Himself to be seen, and let it be known how great He was, all the elements of the universe bewildered by the strange events were thrown into confusion.  An earthquake shook the world, the sea was heaved up from its depths, the heaven was shrouded in darkness, the sun’s fiery blaze was checked, and his heat became moderate.   For what else could occur when He who before now was reckoned to be one of us was recognized to be God?

Arnobius of Sicca, Against the Pagans I.53

How Great Is Our God!

Men of Israel, hear these words: Jesus of Nazareth, a man attested to you by God with mighty works and wonders and signs that God did through him in your midst, as you yourselves know—this Jesus, delivered up according to the definite plan and foreknowledge of God, you crucified and killed by the hands of lawless men.  God raised him up, loosing the pangs of death, because it was not possible for him to be held by it.… This Jesus God raised up, and of that we all are witnesses.  Being therefore exalted at the right hand of God, and having received from the Father the promise of the Holy Spirit, he has poured out this that you yourselves are seeing and hearing.  For David did not ascend into the heavens, but he himself says,

     The Lord said to my Lord,
     Sit at my right hand,
         until I make your enemies your footstool.

Let all the house of Israel therefore know for certain that God has made him both Lord and Christ, this Jesus whom you crucified.  (Ac 2:22-24, 32-36)

Was He one of us, who, after His body had been laid in the tomb, manifested Himself in open day to countless numbers of men; who spoke to them, and listened to them; who taught them, reproved and admonished them; who, lest they should imagine that they were deceived by unsubstantial fancies, showed Himself once, a second time, even frequently, in familiar conversation; who appears even now to righteous men of unpolluted mind who love Him, not in airy dreams, but in a form of pure simplicity; whose name, when heard, puts to flight evil spirits, imposes silence on soothsayers, prevents men from consulting the soothsayers, causes the efforts of arrogant magicians to be frustrated, not by the dread of His name, as you allege, but by the free exercise of a greater power?

These facts set forth in holy summation we have put forward, not on the supposition that the greatness of the Agent was to be seen in these miracles alone.  For however great these things be, how excessively petty and trifling will they be found to be, if it shall be revealed from what realms He has come, of what God He is the minister!  But with regard to the acts which were done by Him, they were performed, indeed, not that He might boast Himself into empty ostentation, but that hardened and unbelieving men might be assured that what was professed was not deceptive, and that they might now learn to imagine, from the beneficence of His works, what a true God was.

Arnobius of Sicca, Against the Pagans I.46-47

But He's Just a Man

The “historical Jesus” has been sought after for many years.  Whether John Dominic Crossan, Elaine Pagels, Bart Ehrman, Reza Aslan, or Jesus Seminar conferees, critics have dismissed the gospel accounts as a well-meant effort to colorfully promote what was a celebrity rabbi life who met an untimely death.  Why anyone would think the gospel accounts are mythical, inflated, or otherwise altered beyond credibility, is beyond me.  The skeptics argue something like the pagans of Arnobius’ day:

“You worship,” says my opponent, “one who was born a mere human being.”*

Those pagans might have had an excuse for such a comment, not having a copy of the Scriptures readily available.  The so-called Bible scholars I mention at the opening are not ignorant of the facts.  They have read the primary documents and have willfully ignored the obvious statements from the gospel accounts themselves.  Each gospel writer gives internal evidence for his planned purpose in writing.

Luke and John give clear reasons for their accounts.  The careful doctor recounts the history in two parts, introducing the accounts as thoroughly investigated beyond contestation, while the aged apostle plainly states the thesis near the end of his work.

Luke 1:1-4	Acts 1:1-3	John 20:30-31
Inasmuch as many have undertaken to compile a narrative of the things that have been accomplished among us, just as those who from the beginning were eyewitnesses and ministers of the word have delivered them to us, it seemed good to me also, having followed all things closely for some time past, to write an orderly account for you, most excellent Theophilus, that you may have certainty concerning the things you have been taught.	In the first book, O Theophilus, I have dealt with all that Jesus began to do and teach, until the day when he was taken up, after he had given commands through the Holy Spirit to the apostles whom he had chosen.  He presented himself alive to them after his suffering by many proofs, appearing to them during forty days and speaking about the kingdom of God.	Now Jesus did many other signs in the presence of the disciples, which are not written in this book; but these are written so that you may believe that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God, and that by believing you may have life in his name.

The other two writers are not quite as direct in their purposes, however linguistic clues abound, beginning with their openings.  First, Matthew’s opening:

The book of the genealogy of Jesus Christ, the son of David, the son of Abraham.  (Matthew 1:1)

With this summary statement, Matthew seeks to place his account in a direct line with promises found in the Abrahamic and Davidic covenants.  In order to solidify this intent, he establishes the requisite bloodline through a genealogy (Mt 1:2-17), prophetic fulfillment of the birth and surrounding events (Mt 1:18-23), and finally, the anointing of the Holy Spirit by which God places His seal on Jesus (Mt 3:1-17).  These give a proper foundation for the remainder of the book which establishes Jesus’ person, ministry, redemptive work on the cross, and final commission to His apostles.

Mark’s thesis statement also comes at the very beginning.

The beginning of the gospel of Jesus Christ, the Son of God.  (Mark 1:1)

At first reading, one might see this merely as an introductory statement, however a close examination shows that the writer emphasizes the gospel as pivotal throughout.  Note the uses in relation to Jesus.

Beginning of His ministry

Now after John was arrested, Jesus came into Galilee, proclaiming the gospel of God, and saying, “The time is fulfilled, and the kingdom of God is at hand; repent and believe in the gospel.”  (Mr 1:14-15)

  

Mid-ministry

For whoever would save his life will lose it, but whoever loses his life for my sake and the gospel’s will save it.  (Mr 8:35)

  

Jesus said, “Truly, I say to you, there is no one who has left house or brothers or sisters or mother or father or children or lands, for my sake and for the gospel, who will not receive a hundredfold now in this time, houses and brothers and sisters and mothers and children and lands, with persecutions, and in the age to come eternal life.”  (Mr 10:29-30)

  

End of ministry teaching on the Eschaton

And the gospel must first be proclaimed to all nations.  (Mr 13:10)

  

Anointing before crucifixion

And truly, I say to you, wherever the gospel is proclaimed in the whole world, what she has done will be told in memory of her.  (Mr 14:9)

  

Final commission

And he said to them, “Go into all the world and proclaim the gospel to the whole creation.”  (Mr 16:15)

In the above examples, the gospel writers were careful to craft their accounts accurately in order to undergird the unwritten, eyewitness accounts and faithfully acknowledge the prophecies pointing to His birth, life, and death.  The idea that there might be a concoction of ideas to consider a man being himself deity and his works as from self-originating divinity is absurd.  Not even the pagans would go this far.

Arnobius addressed the pagan objection of Jesus’ person this way:

Even if that [mere humanity] were true, as has been already said in former passages, yet, in consideration of the many liberal gifts which He has bestowed on us, He ought to be called and be addressed as God.  But since He is God in reality and without any shadow of doubt, do you think that we will deny that He is worshiped by us with all the fervor we are capable of, and assumed as the guardian of our body?

The apologist did not reason that Jesus was less than God, as will be seen below, but wished to address the objection according to their understanding.  Many in the pantheon of gods, had been mere humans but were accorded a divine status after death based on prior works.  Instead he reasoned that the works of Christ were of such a nature, that to deny a status of divinity in relation to the false gods would be a travesty.  And since He is indeed God, how much more worship is deemed appropriate.

After deflecting objections to both His method of execution and person as being base and unworthy of divine consideration, Arnobius anticipated a fit of incredulity from his opponents.

“Is that Christ of yours a god, then?” some raving, wrathful, and excited man will say.

Lest the reader think that the retort is actually an acknowledgement of the Lord’s stature, this is more along the line of: “Do you actually think He’s good enough to qualify?”  The pagans had regard for their gods, and regardless of which they worshiped, qualification to that august group needed to be properly vetted.  How could someone who died the death of a traitorous criminal qualify, regardless of the goodness of his deeds?  That would be unthinkable.

Arnobius’ response?  He is greater than their gods to the greatest degree.

We will reply: God and God of the inner powers; and—what may still further torture unbelievers with the most bitter pains—He was sent to us by the King Supreme for the greatest of purposes.  My opponent, becoming more mad and more frantic, will perhaps ask whether the matter can be proved, as we allege.  There is no greater proof than the credibility of the acts done by Him, than the unusual quality of the miracles† He exhibited, than the conquest and the dissolution of all those deadly ordinances which peoples and tribes saw executed in the light of day, with no objecting voice; and even they whose ancient laws or whose country’s laws He shows to be full of vanity and of the most senseless superstition dare not allege these things to be false.

Not only is Christ very God of what is seen, but also of all that is unseen, working in the hidden places, where no man can fathom or understand, for the greatest purposes.  Being very God, He was sent into this world by the Almighty One, proving Himself: first, through mighty deeds which were not performed in secret but in the light of day, so that none could object; and second, by His teaching against which none could contend.

We see that the questions surrounding Jesus’ origin, life, and teaching are no different in 1700 years.  In order to undermine the force of sin, righteousness, and judgment, mankind seeks to undermine the clear reading of Scripture and mold it according to their own ideas of truth.  The best response is to affirm what our Lord said and did for a fallen, sinful world, with hopes that the opposition might respond of Jesus, “No one ever spoke like this man!” (Jn 7:46) and believe.


*  All quotes from Arnobius are taken from Against the Pagans, I.42.
†  Translated as “virtues” in the Ante-Nicene Fathers, the word virtutes is used in Scripture for miracles and is comparable to “by virtue of.”

Living in Light of That Day

If the work that anyone has built on the foundation survives, he will receive a reward.  (1 Cor 3:14)

Recently, O blindness, I worshiped images produced from the furnace, gods made on anvils and by hammers, the bones of elephants, paintings, wreaths on aged trees.  Whenever I looked on an anointed stone daubed with olive oil, as if some power resided in it I worshiped it; I addressed myself to it and begged blessings from a senseless stock.  And these very gods of whose existence I had convinced myself, I treated with gross insults, when I believed them to be wood, stone, and bones, or imagined that they dwelt in the substance of such objects.  Now, having been led into the paths of truth by so great a Teacher, I know what all these things are, I entertain honorable thoughts concerning those which are worthy, I offer no insult to any divine name; and what is due to each, whether inferior or superior, I assign with clearly-defined gradations, and on distinct authority.  Is Christ, then, not to be regarded by us as God?  And is He, who in other respects may be deemed the very greatest, not to be honored with divine worship, from whom we have already received while alive so great gifts, and from whom we expect greater ones when “the Day” comes?

Arnobius of Sicca, Against the Pagans I.39

He Is Worthy of Our Praise

Now to him who is able to do far more abundantly than all that we ask or think, according to the power at work within us, to him be glory in the church and in Christ Jesus throughout all generations, forever and ever.  Amen.  (Eph 3:20-21)

But in the meantime let us grant, in submission to your ideas, that Christ was one of us—similar in mind, soul, body, weakness, and condition; is He not worthy to be called and to be esteemed God by us, in consideration of His bounties, so numerous as they are?  For if you have placed in the assembly of the gods [those deities who discovered natural items and uses]—with how great distinctions is He to be honored by us, who, by instilling His truth into our hearts, has freed us from great errors; who, when we were straying everywhere, as if blind and without a guide, withdrew us from precipitous and devious paths, and set our feet on more smooth places; who has pointed out what is especially profitable and salutary for the human race; who has shown us what God is, who He is, how great and how good; who has permitted and taught us to conceive and to understand, as far as our limited capacity can, His profound and inexpressible depths; who, in His great kindness, has caused it to be known by what founder, by what Creator, this world was established and made; who has explained the nature of its origin and essential substance, never before imagined in the conceptions of any; whence life-giving warmth is added to the rays of the sun; why the moon, forever in her motions, is believed to alternate her light and her obscurity from intelligent causes; what is the origin of animals, what rules regulate seeds; who designed man himself, who fashioned him, or from what kind of material did He compact the very build of bodies; what the perceptions are; what the soul, and whether it flew to us of its own accord, or whether it was generated and brought into existence with our bodies themselves; whether it sojourns with us, partaking of death, or whether it is gifted with an endless immortality; what condition awaits us when we shall have separated from our bodies relaxed in death; whether we shall see or have no recollection of our former sensations or of past memories; who has restrained our arrogance, and has caused our necks, uplifted with pride, to acknowledge the measure of their weakness; who hath shown that we are creatures imperfectly formed, that we trust in vain expectations, that we understand nothing thoroughly, that we know nothing, and that we do not see those things which are placed before our eyes; who has guided us from false superstitions to the true religion,—a blessing which exceeds and transcends all His other gifts; who has raised our thoughts to heaven from brutish statues formed of the vilest clay, and has caused us to hold conversation of thanksgiving and prayer with the Lord of the universe.

Arnobius of Sicca, Against the Pagans I.38

Pray for the Persecutors Too

If the world hates you, know that it has hated me before it hated you.  If you were of the world, the world would love you as its own; but because you are not of the world, but I chose you out of the world, therefore the world hates you.  Remember the word that I said to you: “A servant is not greater than his master.”  If they persecuted me, they will also persecute you.  If they kept my word, they will also keep yours.  But all these things they will do to you on account of my name, because they do not know him who sent me.  (John 15:18-21)

O greatest, O Supreme Creator of things invisible!  O You who are Yourself unseen, and who are incomprehensible!  You are worthy, You art truly worthy—if only mortal tongue may speak of You—that all breathing and intelligent nature should never cease to feel and to return thanks; that it should throughout the whole of life fall on bended knee, and offer supplication with never-ceasing prayers.  For You are the first cause; in You created things exist, and You are the space in which rest the foundations of all things, whatever they be.  You are infinite, unbegotten, immortal, enduring forever, God alone, whom no bodily shape may represent, no outline delineate; of virtues inexpressible, of greatness indefinable; unrestricted as to locality, movement, and condition, concerning whom nothing can be clearly expressed by the significance of man’s words.  That You may be understood, we must be silent; and that erring conjecture may track You through the shady cloud, no word must be uttered.  Grant pardon, O King Supreme, to those who persecute Your servants; and in virtue of Your kind nature, forgive those who fly from the worship of Your name and the observance of Your religion.

Arnobius of Sicca, Against the Pagans I.31

Give Me a Soapbox!

Praise the Lᴏʀᴅ!

I will give thanks to the Lᴏʀᴅ with my whole heart,
    in the company of the upright, in the congregation.
Great are the works of the Lᴏʀᴅ,
    studied by all who delight in them.
Full of splendor and majesty is his work,
    and his righteousness endures forever.
He has caused his wondrous works to be remembered;
    the Lᴏʀᴅ is gracious and merciful.  (Ps 111:1-4)

Would that it were allowed me to deliver this argument with the whole world formed, as it were, into one assembly, and to be placed in the hearing of all the human race!  Are we therefore judged guilty before you with an impious religion, and because we approach the Head and Pillar of the universe with worshipful service, are we to be considered—to use the terms employed by you in reproaching us—as undesirable godless?  And who would more properly bear the odium of these names than he who either knows, or inquires after, or believes any other god rather than this God of ours?

Do we not owe to Him this first, that we exist, that we are said to be men, that, being either sent forth from Him, or having fallen from Him, we are confined in the darkness of this body?*  Does it not come from Him that we walk, that we breathe and live, and by the very power of living, does He not cause us to exist and to move with the activity of animated being?  Do the causes not emanate from Him, through which our health is sustained by the bountiful supply of various pleasures?  Whose is that world in which you live, or who has authorized you to retain its produce and its possession?  Who has given that common light, enabling us to see distinctly all things lying beneath it, to handle them, and to examine them?  Who has ordained that the fires of the sun should exist for the growth of things, lest elements pregnant with life should be listless by settling down in a stupor of inactivity?

Arnobius of Sicca, Against the Pagans I.29

Cultural Pressure: Stand or Fall?

On April 7th, syndicated columnist Leonard Pitts wrote a piece proclaiming that conservatives have lost the culture war on same-sex couples and are foolish for continuing to push “discriminatory” religious freedom laws.  We, as a society, have allegedly become more enlightened concerning same-sex relationships, and conservatives need to get over themselves.

Somebody needs to sit them down and explain that when you have taken an execrable stand and been repudiated for it as decisively as the right has been, you only have two options: Change your stand, or shut your mouth.  At this point, either one will do.

Major organizations—media, professional bodies, corporations—approve the agenda, so it must be correct.  Now go away.  As Americans, we are not accustomed to this, because there had formally been a free exchange of ideas in this country.  Open, and often heated, debate among individuals, but increasingly, the West has eschewed individualism for a populist or fascist collectivism.  But this is really nothing new.

During the early centuries of the Church, the prevailing political and religious organizations were condemning and abusing Christians, because they refused to accept or approve of decadent cultural norms.  These early believers were met with opposition like that related by Arnobius of Sicca in Against the Pagans wherein the Christians are accused of practices contrary to society:

You follow profane religious systems, and you practice rites unheard-of throughout the entire world. (I.25)

The opponents in ancient Rome, just like Leonard Pitts, could not understand why there might be a segment of society that would be openly opposed to the generally accepted position.  They cannot fathom standards higher than those being practiced in their philosophically-advanced culture, yet their philosophies just do not grasp the truth.

What do you, O men, endowed with reason, dare to assert?  What do you dare to prate of?  What do you try to bring forward in the recklessness of unguarded speech?  To adore the Supreme God, as the Lord of all things that be, as occupying the highest place among all exalted ones; to pray to Him with respectful submission in our distresses; to cling to Him with all our senses, so to speak; to love Him, to look up to Him with faith—is this an accursed and unholy religion, full of impiety and of sacrilege, polluting through the superstition of its newness the ceremonies established in olden times? (I.25)

In other words, he is asking: “Are you saying that to put God above all in worship and life is polluting the established norms of society?”  The inferred answer is yes, because those ideas society idolizes were not being given their due, therefore pressure needed to be exerted to bring these Christ cult into line or silence it altogether.  Sounds oddly familiar to our modern world, does it not?

Christians are not called to worship or appease the world: we are to speak of Christ crucified.  Arnobius made the case that we are doing what is good, proper, and acceptable before our Lord:

We Christians are nothing else than worshipers of the Supreme King and Head, under our Master, Christ.  If you examine carefully, you will find that nothing else is implied in that religion.  This is the sum of all that we do; this is the proposed end and limit of sacred duties.  Before Him we all prostrate ourselves, according to our custom; Him we adore in joint prayers; from Him we beg things just and honorable, and worthy of His ear.  Not that He needs our supplications, or loves to see the homage of so many thousands laid at His feet.  This is our benefit, and has a regard to our advantage.  For since we are prone to err, and to yield to various lusts and appetites through the fault of our innate weakness, He allows Himself at all times to be comprehended in our thoughts, that while we entreat Him and strive to merit His bounties, we may receive a desire for purity, and may free ourselves from every stain by the removal of all our shortcomings. (I.27)

Arnobius lays out in straightforward terms the disciple’s duty of worship and obedience, plus the privilege, as sinners, to come before God seeking His bountiful provision of mercy and goodness that we might grow in grace.  To do otherwise would be unsafe, even foolish.

The level of Christian commitment would have been understood and praised by pagans of the time, but the object of adoration and resulting life change were not.  As followers of Christ lived before the world, they witnessed of Him in the course of everyday conversations of life with the level of freedom being dictated by the circumstance.  By necessity a culture clash ensued among worldviews.  The collective mindset, rooted in polytheism as it was, would have accepted Christianity if the Christ they adored would have been been offered in henotheistic fashion, but its virtuous exclusivity ran contrary to not only all religious forms, but also as the political and philosophical that had been interwoven to accommodate the masses.  Measures were enacted to either squelch Christianity or rid the empire of its adherents and return the populace to the status quo.

The same collective plans and mindset are working within Western Civilization, so that the Church, once held in high regard for being a beacon of truth, must battle cultural onslaughts from many factions, both internal and external.  Those outside the church are increasingly fighting for normalization of relationships once considered aberrant.  Tolerance and diversity have transformed from being positions of disagreement to cultural weapons to ensure the masses are in lockstep.  Open hostility with extreme measures are applauded as proper tactics to battle so-called “discrimination” of whichever cause or person might be receiving objections to their sin.

Those inside the church recognize that something needs to be done, but have decided that the most effective tactic is to appease the culture.  Mainline Protestants began doing this decades ago, and as they continue to align with the world, their numbers showing a 50% reduction in membership since 1960.  Evangelical and Confessional groups are somewhat better off, but even here there is trouble afoot as well-meaning pastors insist on changing the format, preferring an entertainment-driven experience to solemnity.  (Consider some thoughts by Glenn Chatfield on his experience and reaction.)  In addition, sermons have been changed to be relevant (i.e., they no longer mention sin or the need of a Savior).  Rick Warren and Andy Stanley have given up on preaching truth and are now preaching nonsense (Warren’s Imagination Doctrine) or appeasement (Stanley’s Brand New).

If Christians live out their calling, culture will be affected: people will notice.  (Pastor Jordan Cooper has a few thoughts on this.)  Our attempts may be met with sincere questions, more hostility, or both.  Arnobius was writing when Christians were persecuted.  Beginning with the highest positions of government, these Jesus followers were to be run out, killed, or forced to recant—all for the common good.  Today, our society is moving that direction.  Rather than capitulate, hold fast (Heb 10:23) and stand firm (2 Th 2:15; 1 Pe 5:12).

The More Things Change …

The saying is trustworthy and deserving of full acceptance, that Christ Jesus came into the world to save sinners, of whom I am the foremost.  (1 Tim 1:15)

While reading more of Arnobius of Sicca, I was struck by a comment he makes about pagan reaction to Christianity:

These are your ideas, these are your sentiments, impiously conceived, and more impiously believed.  No, rather, to speak out more truly, the diviners, the dream interpreters, the soothsayers, the prophets, and the custodians of shrines, ever vain, have devised these fables.  For they, fearing that their own arts be brought to nothing, and that they may extort but paltry fees from the devotees, now few and infrequent, whenever they have found you to be willing that their craft should come into disrepute, cry aloud:

“The gods are neglected, and in the temples there is now a very thin attendance.  Former ceremonies are exposed to derision, and the time-honored rites of institutions once sacred have sunk before the superstitions of new religions.  Justly is the human race afflicted by so many pressing calamities, justly is it racked by the hardships of so many toils.  And men—a senseless race—being unable, from their inborn blindness, to see even that which is placed in open light, dare to assert in their frenzy what you in your sane mind do not blush to believe.”

The Case against the Pagans, I.24

Wait a minute!  Am I reading of early fourth-century pagans against Christians, or am I reading the transcript from a twenty-first-century news show discussing politics and economics?  The objections and underlying arguments are nearly identical: speculative prognostication is challenged, and in an effort to secure funding, the pundits cry out in a shrill voice that the truth-tellers are spewing superstitious nonsense—this in an effort to maintain income for pontificating ideas based more on predilection than fact.

Or could be I reading of a response from a recent church body gathering that has chosen to adhere more to cultural norms than scripture and have decided to distance themselves from those troglodytes who actually believe that the Bible means what it says?  The same shrill tone, reasoning, and conclusions can be found in an effort to maintain the shoddy foundation and rickety infrastructure upholding the organization.

Whether in politics, economics, or the church, why would people vigorously oppose the truth?  It is because they love the lie and the system upholding it.  In order to properly build God’s house, the apostle Paul relied on the foundation given him, Jesus Christ (1 Cor 3:10-11), to lay a foundation for the assembly in Corinth.  To the church in Ephesus, he referred to Jesus as the cornerstone by which the foundational Church offices would be properly aligned and the structure joined together (Eph 2:19-21).  All attempts to reshape or refine the scandal of the gospel to make it palatable leave the life and work of Christ as no more than exemplary human drama or the zenith of spiritual achievement.  Whatever creative way Jesus may be presented which removes the sin problem leaves us with nice guy, not the Savior we need.

Jesus came into the world to save sinners.  We do not want to admit the need, but when we do and believe on Him, there is reconciliation between God and us and rest in knowing that we are accepted in the beloved.  May we keep that message central.

Blame and Suffering

Christians are increasingly being marginalized in an attempt to silence the truth of man’s sinfulness and need of the Savior.  How do I know that this is the reason?  First, though I am a sinner saved by grace, my defensive reaction when confronted belies a knowledge to the truth; and second, the general public is surprised that Christians would not at least “live and let live.” while the most virulent attacks come from those who are most aggressive in the promotion of their personal sins.  The apostle Peter warned that the world would be surprised that we do not join in with the same level of “sensuality, passions, drunkenness, orgies, drinking parties, and lawless idolatry” (1 Pet 4:3-4) for which we are maligned.

We should not be surprised that simply expressing opinions on matters of morality brings out the worst.  The apostle Paul tells us that we are: “the aroma of Christ to God among those who are being saved and among those who are perishing, to one a fragrance from death to death, to the other a fragrance from life to life” (2 Cor 2:15-16).  Christ-likeness is exuded from the Holy Spirit working through in our activities as ambassadors for Christ.  In a sense, Christians have “grown up” from childish and selfish longing and now “ live for the rest of the time in the flesh no longer for human passions but for the will of God” (1 Pet 4:2).

In order to increase the intensity level of the attack, unbelievers have blamed Christians for any number of societal ills.  Over the centuries, the Church has been accused of inciting political upheaval, economic decline, flood, drought, famine, infestation, pestilence, war, and even climate change.  Fourth-century apologist Arnobius of Sicca relates these very arguments from his day: “But pestilences,” say my opponents, “and droughts, wars, famines, locusts, mice, and hailstones, and other hurtful things, by which the property of men is assailed...are brought upon us” (The Case Against the Pagans, I.3).  Who knew we yielded such influence?  Today, the attack is often more nuanced, though no less intentional.  So-called global warming can be considered an indirect assault since the the blame is placed on industrialized nations wherein Christianity has had the greatest influence and created an atmosphere of mankind operating freely for mutual benefit, while acknowledging the necessity of self-imposed biblical moral strictures.

Battles involving Al Qaeda and Islamic State have renewed writers to postulate once again that religion is the cause of war, rather than looking deeper—and Christianity gets blamed.  Arnobius has already retorted, “Wait a minute.  Things are more stable because of us.”

Although you allege that those wars which you speak of were excited through hatred of our religion, it would not be difficult to prove, that after the name of Christ was heard in the world, not only were they not increased, but they were even in great measure diminished by the restraining of furious passions.  For since we, a numerous band of men as we are, have learned from His teaching and His laws that evil ought not to be repaid with evil, that it is better to suffer wrong than to inflict it, that we should rather shed our own blood than stain our hands and our conscience with that of another, an ungrateful world is now for a long period enjoying a benefit from Christ, inasmuch as by His means the rage of savage ferocity has been softened, and has begun to withhold hostile hands from the blood of a fellow-creature.

The Case Against the Pagans, I.6

He concludes that if all would turn from their “pride and arrogance of enlightenment” and adhere to God's admonitions life would be more tranquil between nations.  Tertullian, writing to Roman authorities one hundred years prior, agreed and pointed to the true culprit—sinful man:

[A]s the result of their willing ignorance of the Teacher of righteousness, the Judge and Avenger of sin, all vices and crimes grew and flourished.  But had men sought, they would have come to know the glorious object of their seeking; and knowledge would have produced obedience, and obedience would have found a gracious instead of an angry God.  They ought then to see that the very same God is angry with them now as in ancient times, before Christians were so much as spoken of.  It was His blessings they enjoyed—created before they made any of their deities: and why can they not take it in, that their evils come from the Being whose goodness they have failed to recognize?  They suffer at the hands of Him to whom they have been ungrateful.  And, for all that is said, if we compare the calamities of former times, they fall on us more lightly now, since God gave Christians to the world; for from that time virtue put some restraint on the world’s wickedness, and men began to pray for the averting of God’s wrath.

Apology, 40

Fallen people look for any excuse to shift blame for their conduct, thinking that if they would be left alone, everything would work out.  This cannot be either at an individual or societal level.  This world is worsening in the downward slide, and Christians receive both the blame and unjust punishment for pointing out the obvious.  And just as the apostles were promised by Jesus in the Upper Room that they would be killed as an act of divine service (John 16:2), so believers in this country will feel an increasing pressure and attack.

We are at enmity with God because of our sin nature, yet peace and contentment are found in a Savior who willing died to redeem and reconcile us.  In the face of affliction, He is our rest and solace.

Beloved, do not be surprised at the fiery trial when it comes upon you to test you, as though something strange were happening to you.  But rejoice insofar as you share Christ’s sufferings, that you may also rejoice and be glad when his glory is revealed.  If you are insulted for the name of Christ, you are blessed, because the Spirit of glory and of God rests upon you.  (1 Pet 4:12-14)

Yes, we will assuredly suffer, but we can assuredly rest in our Lord.

Christians Must Speak Forth the Truth

But even if you should suffer for righteousness’ sake, you will be blessed.  Have no fear of them, nor be troubled, but in your hearts regard Christ the Lord as holy, always being prepared to make a defense to anyone who asks you for a reason for the hope that is in you; yet do it with gentleness and respect, having a good conscience, so that, when you are slandered, those who revile your good behavior in Christ may be put to shame.  (1 Pet 3:14-16)

An observer paying a modicum of attention will have noted the polarization of ideologies across the country.  With palpable increase, sections of society are wrestling over issues with a “winner-take-all” approach over matters that had not mattered to the populace or were not deemed acceptable in a civilized society.  Proponents, rather than engaging in debate, are now pressing points of interest on specific issues for tactical advantage, creating angst through emotional manipulation and garnering favor for a position.  The rallying point is the societal or political need deemed best for a sub-group, sometimes as standalone causes, but more usually as one of multiple divergent thrusts seeking to gain wide acceptance and celebration of personal liberty regardless of societal effects.

Those causes that become enmeshed into the fabric of society become viewed as a norm of existence, being placed on par with natural law.  People learn how to adjust to the system, even turning it to an advantage.  Power and authority are legitimized, and laws enacted to defend and promote acceptance however irrational the defense might be.  Leaders prop up their causes and engage in syncretistic alliances on multiple fronts, arguing sometimes contradictory causes in a phenomenal feat of juggling prowess lest one fail and a “domino effect” befall the remainder, while followers are swept up in the emotion of the movement.  Such an approach to gain single-issue favor can be effective in securing short-term goals, however the argumentation of the proponents quickly devolves to aping key phrases in a self-defeating string of argumentation or assaulting opponents through ad hominem attacks, all of which demonstrates that the rationale for the cause is pure self-interest: this is what we want.

In spite of all the effort to force transformation, there remains a contingent who recognizes the Emperor’s New Clothes for what they are.  Those, who know the facts and can reasonably articulate disagreement, break with status quo, turn to follow the truth, and are instantly castigated for not adhering to popular opinion and practice.  Through the past 20 centuries, Christians have played the role of societal critic, resulting in heaps of blame received for many ills that befell mankind: civil unrest, disease, drought, flood, etc. were considered the result of those who refused to bow to the authority of the deity du jour and their established representatives.  The change in worldview sets the believer apart from those around.  They become noticed and alternatively respected or feared for their stand.  Whichever is the case, the reaction is certain and immediate.  Repercussions have varied from genial discussion to open threats and hostile attacks.

As I have stated, none of this is new.  The third-century apologist Arnobius of Sicca noticed how those who worshiped the Roman pantheon of gods were holding Christians like himself responsible for the troubles in North Africa.  He opens his work:

I have discovered some who deem themselves very wise in their opinions, acting as if they were possessed* and announcing with all the authority of an oracle,† that from the time when the Christian people began to exist in the world the universe has gone to ruin, that the human race has been visited with ills of many kinds, that even the very gods, abandoning their accustomed charge, in virtue of which they were wont in former days to regard with interest our affairs, have been driven from the regions of earth.  I have resolved, so far as my capacity and my humble power of language will allow, to oppose public prejudice, and to refute calumnious accusations.  For, on the one hand, those persons may imagine that they are declaring some weighty matter, when they are merely gossiping common rumors;‡ and on the other, if we refrain from such a contest, they may suppose that they have won a cause because our view is lost by its inherent demerits, when rather the defenders abandoned their view through silence.

I would not deny that the charge is a most serious one, and that we fully deserve the hatred attached to public enemies,§ if it should be apparent that we are the reason by which the universe has deviated from its laws, the gods have been driven far away, and such swarms of miseries have been inflicted on mankind.

The Case Against the Pagans, I.1

Some points to note:

1. The seriousness of the accusations.  In effect, the people were blaming Jesus Christ as causing the problems when their own sin or natural consequence of sin was working in the world.  Arnobius does not cast off these accusations as meaningless or trivial.
2. The need for a response.  Christians cannot remain silent in the face of accusations. Whether or not the political or religious atmosphere is considered safe, the name of the Lord Jesus Christ must be upheld.  Arnobius lived during the reign of Diocletian, who was openly hostile to the Christian sect.  Many died in martyrdom for not worshiping the pagan gods, but standing firm for Christ.
3. Ability is not an issue.  A defense of the gospel does not depend on the ability of the believer to articulate the faith.  While Arnobius was a rhetorician by vocation, he did not feel up to the task of properly responding as he should.  He presented his response as God had enabled.  This does not mean that Christians are to remain willfully ignorant of what Scripture teaches, but lack of thorough understanding does not disqualify the believer from responding.

Opponents of the Most High will use any means possible to enhance their arguments through whatever political maneuvering or religious gesticulation makes a point and raises the issue so that others will join the accusatory chorus and shout down what is true and right.  Christians need to remain reasoned and reasonable to effectively make their case for the gospel.


*  Referring to the appearance of the ancient seers when under the influence of the deity.  The meaning is, that they make their emphatic assertions with all the mad raving and gesticulation of a seer under the influence of the god.
†  Declare a matter with boldness and authority, as if most certain and undoubted.
‡  Rumors arising from the ignorance of the common people.
§  The Christians were regarded as “public enemies” and were so called.

Keep It Simple

There have always been church leaders and teachers who desire the attention of men, honing their rhetorical skills to influence people, but this is not what they were called to do, as Paul stated of himself:

And I, when I came to you, brothers, did not come proclaiming to you the testimony of God with lofty speech or wisdom.  For I decided to know nothing among you except Jesus Christ and him crucified. (1 Cor 2:1-2)

Arnobius of Sicca recognized this same distinction and rightly related that fine speech accomplishes nothing in spiritual matters, but we are to communicate the truth plainly and apply it as balm to the sick soul.

Let that pomposity of style and strictly regulated diction be reserved for public assemblies, for lawsuits, for the forum and the courts of justice, and by all means be handed over to those who, striving after the soothing influences of pleasant sensations, bestow all their care upon the splendor of language.

But when we are discussing matters far removed from mere display, we should consider what is said, not with what charm it is said, nor how it tickles the ears, but what benefits it brings on the hearers, especially since we know that some even who devoted themselves to philosophy, not only disregarded refinement of style, but also purposely adopted a common plainness when they might have spoken with greater elegance and richness, lest perhaps they might impair the stern gravity of speech and revel rather in a pretentious show of sophistry.  For indeed it demonstrates a worthless heart to seek enjoyment in matters of importance; and when you have to deal with those who are sick and diseased, to pour into their ears pleasurable sounds, instead of applying a remedy to their wounds.

From Case against the Pagans, I.59

Post Hoc, Ergo Poppycock

There is a logical fallacy known in Latin as post hoc, ergo propter hoc—literally translated "after this, therefore because of this."  It is joining two or more unrelated events and deducing that the outcome was a direct result of the predecessors, regardless of the improbability.  For example, my work load increased significantly as Tropical Storm Isaac has gained in intensity and proximity to our southern shores, therefore Isaac is to blame for all I need to produce.  In actuality, the increase is from the regular program cycle, not the weather.

This faulty reasoning is commonplace, especially among the superstitious, who are ever seeking omens and signs to determine future actions and decisions.  Arnobius of Sicca recounts that Roman pagan lore related one such occurrence in which the historians recorded that a pestilence of some kind had beset the people.  The had been seeking help from their gods when a ship arrived having a large serpent aboard which was able to escape from the ship and quickly hide itself from view.  Taking this as a good omen, the people undertook to build temples to Aesculapius and give sacrifices so that "the plague-stricken people grew strong and recovered, and the pestilence fled before the soundness of health which arose" (Case against the Pagans, 44).  One can identify with a grateful people who would seek to give credit to anything or anyone who might be deserving to stem the tide of disease.  The serpent's mode of transportation and combined size, speed, and guile were considered to be overwhelming evidence that this was a deity giving health to the people.

Can today's Christian, wishing to properly serve his or her God, be entrapped in a similar self-made conclusion?  This happens more often than we like to admit.  I have heard or read numerous accounts, even in my own assembly, of people searching for the Lord's direction concerning the future or some weighty issue and relating how God gave what amounted to be a special revelation—or an inkling of one—based on a verse out of context, followed by an unrelated encouraging word from a friend or pastor, and later being presented with an opportunity to help or serve in some area.  Suddenly, that person has purpose for starting a ministry or church based on some feeling of the Lord's leading.  The believer so intently wants to be led, that the idea is pursued without basis of fact.  Neither are whole assemblies and their leaders immune to this.

Excursus:  Someone might be wondering at this point, "Doesn't the Holy Spirit lead this way?  He did with the apostle Paul."  God had a specific purpose for his redemptive purposes in getting the gospel to the civilized world, and that was communicated by a clear word from the Lord himself, not an impression.  We cannot attribute circumstances of biblical saints to our lives without a clear "thus says the Lord."

How does one handle the believer or assembly who has gone chasing after an ill-advised outcome?  Arnobius unraveled the cause-and-effect conclusion by looking at the circumstances individually starting with the deity's serpentine characteristics.

That Aesculapius … is contained within the form and outline of a serpent, crawling along the earth … and that he may be able to go forward, he draws on the last part of his body by the efforts of the first. And as we read that he used food also, by which bodily existence is kept up, he has a large gullet, … a belly to receive it, and a place where he may digest the flesh which he has eaten and devoured, that blood may be given to his body, and his strength reinvigorated; he has also a draft, by which the filth is got rid of, freeing his body from a disagreeable burden. (VII.44-45)

And then,

if it crawled as a serpent, … if, being made of fleshly substance, it lay stretched out to a slippery length; if it had a head and tail, a back covered with scales, diversified by spots of various colors; if it had a mouth bristling with fangs, and ready to bite, what else can we say than that it was of earthly origin, although of immense and excessive size. (VII.46)

In essence, if it looks like a duck and quacks like a duck, it must be a duck.  Yet the true pagan believer was not be undone by such clear logic, thinking the god merely took the form of a serpent in order to work among the people.  Divine beings can suddenly and easily remove themselves from mortal eyes, which the serpent accomplished, thus adding to the evidence.

But if he was not a god, why, after he left the ship, and crawled to the island in the Tiber, did he immediately become invisible, and cease to be seen as before? (VII.46)

Arnobius did not dispute the disappearance but the means ascribed to the ability.  Surely, it was by some natural means amid the din from the serpent's discovery.

Can we, then, know whether there was there anything in the way under cover of which it hid itself, or some opening, or some caverns and vaults, caused by huge masses being heaped up irregularly, into which it hurried, evading the gaze of the beholders?  For what if it leaped across the river?  What if it swam across it?  What if it hid itself in the dense forests?* (VII.46)

Lastly, the people bring forth what was considered their most effective point: look at the results.

But if that snake was not a present deity why, after its arrival, was the violence of the plague overcome, and health restored to the Roman people? (VII.47)

This last point is the default of those who run out of arguments.  No amount of truth invalidates experience: it happened.  Even this is faulty, because their history clearly demonstrated that disease greatly affected them in later years, and no cure was found.  The people were relying on the memory of one particular occasion rather than looking at the faithfulness of the supposed god.  Their memories were specific, compartmentalized, and manipulated.

Notice that the solution is to objectively examine the circumstances according to a standard.  In the case of the pagan, this was to examine how the serpent's appearance related to natural laws and animal characteristics, and that the cessation of the plague was a natural reversal back to health. 

For the Christian, there must be an examination of the supposed leadings, events, circumstances, etc. against God's revealed word and his commands to us.  Again, this must be addressed objectively.  One cannot approach scripture with an attitude of "this is what I feel the Bible says."  The passages must be examined in context for their clear teaching to weigh against subjective indicators working within the individual or group.  For this to be most effective, the Bible must be taught regularly in a way that brings out what God intended to say through the author.

Will mistakes be made along the way?  Yes, but we are called to hold fast to the certainty of what has been faithfully delivered to us in holy writ.


* Some exaggeration is noted as Arnobius suggests leaping the river, but he does not want the purported size to be an impediment to his response.  He is choosing his battles to win the main point.