The Evolution Of Evolution

Suppose, just suppose human life as we know it were to end on planet earth today. While your imagination is working imagine creatures with superior intelligence to us do exist in deep outer space. On one of their space voyages they visit the late great planet earth in what would be our year 4001. Their landing sight is Manhattan.

Not only is there one space mission in 4001 to earth but two. The second lands in the deepest part of the Amazon jungle inhabited today by a primitive tribe willfully cut off from modern society.

Can you imagine their consternation when they return to their home base and report on how humans lived on planet earth in the 21st Century? With only those two samples they would have conflicting concepts. Press the issue further. Suppose the sample specimens were of Homo Sapiens and a bonobo chimpanzee. What conclusion might they reach as to which form of life was superior? What the norm?

Presently there are paleontologists at work experiencing similar conflicts. Since 1974 when a partial skeleton called “Lucy” was found by Richard Leakey in Ethiopia, it has been generally accepted as the oldest known human ancestor by evolutionists. Now Richard’s widow, Meave, has found Kenyanthropus platyops. Mrs. Leakey has concluded her find, not that of her late husband, is the true ancestor on mankind. However, she goes even further and says neither her find nor Lucy is necessarily “the one.” She asserts, “I and many others believe Lucy needs to be replaced, but I’m not sure Kenyanthropus is the one,” says Rick Potts of the Smithsonian Institution’s Museum of Natural History. He further concluded, “What is clear is that human evolution is much more complicated than we thought.”

Science often changes. If you don’t believe that read a science text book written in 1940, or for that matter 1990.

Now play “What If” and project into the future. Suppose within a few years it is verified that carbon dating is valid up to about 7000 years but no more, as many believe. Contributing to this conclusion are specimens within specimens that are carbon dated as younger than the outer ones. What if, at that time a new specimen is found that looks exactly like modern New Yorkers? Rewrite!

Whole theories have been concluded from an artists concept based on a fragment of a skeleton. That is not science. A number of these theories once taught as scientific fact have been disputed by more current paleontologists. Many of the new breed are still evolutionists but they have better more recent data and are honest enough to correct the errors of their predecessors.

The science is young and susceptible to error. Many in the field know that the science itself is evolving. The grief is that some second or third echelon of educators pick up on these inconclusive evidences and teach them as the ultimate fact. The jury is still out on the subject. Leakey and Potts are to be commended on consenting to this in their statements.

All concepts of origins are faith based. A rule of science is for a principle to be acceptable as a science it must be observable and reproducible. Neither creationists nor evolutionists can do either. Both are faith based. That is why many persons with advanced scientific degrees still hold to the concept of creation as viable.

What if in 4001 a space ship lands and its occupants read a 1922 science text. That sampling would be evidence too limited to reach a valid conclusion related to the advanced culture on earth in 2004. The same principle is applicable in the field of paleontology today. As they keep digging there will be many rewrites and perhaps ultimately conclude:

“In the beginning God…”

[Source of some of this data: USATODAY.com, March 22. 2001, Tim Friend]

Eternal Security Of Believers

Approximately 100 Scripture verses affirm the fact that once a person is saved they are saved for all eternity.

There are a few “gray area” passages that persons tend to relate to as proof this isn’t true.

A basic principle of Bible interpretation is when you come to a verse you do not know what it means go to a verse that speaks on the same topic you do understand and interpret the one of unknown meaning in light of what is known.

Pivotal to this topic is John 3:16 and the little word “hath,” meaning “once and for all.” The meaning is obvious. That being the standard all difficult passages should be interpreted in light of it.

Another verse with clear meaning is Romans 8: 35, “Who shall separate us from the love of God….” After listing possibilities the conclusion is “nothing.” Absolutely nothing.

John 5: 24: “Most assuredly, I say to you, he who hears My word and believes in Him who sent Me has everlasting life, and shall not come into judgment, but is passed from death into life.”

Key words are “everlasting” and “is passed.” The latter is aorist tense which means “has once and for all passed.”

Jesus said, “My sheep hear My voice, and I know them … and I give them eternal life, and they shall never perish; neither shall anyone snatch them out of My hand” (John 10:28).

Operative expressions in this verse are “eternal life,” and “they shall never perish.”

“Never” translates the Greek word which means literally “not ever at any time.” In the Greek text it is a strong declarative negative used for emphasis meaning it just doesn’t happen; they just don’t perish —- ever.

John 1:7 notes, “As many as received Him, to them He gave the right to become children of God, even to those who believe in His name.”

When He gives a gift He doesn’t take it back. Once we “become the children of God” when we do things unbecoming of God’s children, we don’t un-become His child.

That brings us to a couple of “gray passages:”

Romans 9:13 – 18 is such. Verse 13 says God loved Jacob and hated Esau. Verse 13, “love” and “hate” pose the two extremes. God’s “love” is an expression referring to His choice of Jacob. He chose Jacob because of his faith.

He “hated” Esau because of his rejection. His hate did not precede Esau’s rejection; it was caused by it. “Hate” does not mean to be emotionally angry with him but simply speaks of God rejecting the one who previously, freely chose to reject Him. Esau rejected God’s plan. Though God loved the man, He hated what he stood for–the rejection of God’s divine plan. If God had approved of Esau’s rejection, He would have been disapproving of His own plan. This He could not do, so He had to reject Esau. (Vss. 14 – 18)

Again a debater’s question is posed in verse 14 that deserves a strong negative answer, “God forbid!”

Moses and Pharaoh are used as examples. Had God shown only justice, Israel and everyone else would have been doomed.

Moses is sighted as an example of God’s mercy and compassionate forgiveness. Because of God’s grace, Moses responded in faith and was blessed. This is God’s mercy.

Other than Moses, there was no one of that era to whom God gave as full a revelation, as He did Pharaoh. Moses responded to the revelation in faith. Pharaoh responded by becoming God’s open adversary. Even in spite of this, God’s divine purpose was fulfilled through him.

Pharaoh was like a belligerent, obstinate child who when punished grows even more rebellious. The harder the punishment the stronger the rebellious resistance. In the case of Pharaoh the more of His will God revealed to Pharaoh, the more he resented and resisted it. Technically what God did in revealing His will was the occasion of the Egyptian leader’s heart being hardened. The cause of the hardening was Pharaoh’s own willful, sinful rejection.

God did not arbitrarily harden Pharaoh’s heart. Pharaoh’s sinful nature did this. God’s word to Pharaoh resulted in the hardness of his heart, which was already present, being shown. Moses and Pharaoh are used to tell of God’s mercy and justice.

Hebrews 6: 4-6 is another “gray passage.”

“For it is impossible for those who were once enlightened, and have tasted the heavenly gift, and have become partakers of the Holy Spirit, and have tasted the good word of God, and the powers of the age to come, if they fall away, to renew them again to repentance, since they crucify again for themselves the Son of God, and put Him to an open shame ” (Hebrews 6: 4-6).

Note the obvious. “If” a person could be saved and lost no one can “renew them again to repentance.” That precludes being saved and lost, saved and lost, saved and lost, etc.

The little word “If” is the basis for understanding. In the Greek language there are four cases. The one used here gives the following meaning to the word “If.”

“If a person could be saved and lost, if he could, but he can’t, but if he could, he couldn’t be saved again.”

Now use your imagination and draw the following on the chalkboard of your mind or better still get paper and pencil and draw it out to keep.

In the upper right hand corner of the page write the reference John 1:12: “As many as received Him, to them He gave the right to become children of God, even to those who believe in His name.” “To become” is the aorist tense which means “at a point in time, divorced from time, and perpetuated into eternity to once and for all become.” That point in time is when the individual trust Christ as Savior.

To visualize this draw a large circle.

In the middle of the circle put an “X.” Make it look good; it represents the believer, one who has been saved.

As the “X” is in the circle so the believer is in Christ.

On the outside top of the circle write the word “Relationship.” As the “X’ is in the circle so the believer is in relationship with Christ. The believer has become the child of God.

Believers do things unbecoming of children of God. What happens then? Is their salvation lost? NO!

Now, inside the circle draw a square so that the “X” is in the middle of it. On the top outside of the square write the word “Fellowship.” When a believer is doing God’s will, living according to the Scripture, being filled with the Spirit he or she is in “Fellowship” with God. There and only there is a person truly happy, fulfilled, and productive.

To envision what happens when a Christian sins place a large dot outside the square but still inside the circle. This represents the believer who has sinned. At this point the believer’s fellowship with God is broken but not the relationship. Communion with God is broken but not the union. They are still God’s child, though His disobedient child.

It is in this state believers are most unhappy and unproductive. They have placed themselves in a position to merit God’s discipline. Hebrews 12: 6, “Whom the Lord loves He chastens, and scourges every son whom He receives.”

The words “discipline” and “disciple”come from the same root meaning “to train.” Because God loves His children He trains them using chastening and scourging as two techniques. Chasten refers to light discipline and scourge to sever discipline.

The purpose is to direct persons back into “Fellowship.”

First, digress and put a check outside the circle. It represents an unsaved person. Such a person is not the world’s most unhappy individual. Satan will give such a person “kicks” lest they realize a need and turn to Christ. The world’s most unhappy person is represented by the dot in the circle but outside the square; the Christian out of fellowship.

God’s discipline is intended to train the believer to return to “Fellowship.”

I John 1:9 tells how. “If we confess our sins, He is faithful and just to forgive us our sins and to cleanse us from all unrighteousness.”

“If” means it is optional. “We” means it is personal. No one can do it for us. “Confess” means to agree with God about it, acknowledge it is sin, repent, and ask forgiveness. In that moment the believer is back in fellowship.

It is called spiritual rebound. It means to get back on the mark. There is where God wants believers because He knows it is the state in which they have the optimum joy of their salvation and are most fulfilled.

Where are you now? Which represents you? Is it the check mark, the dot or the “X?”
For your joy and the Lord’s glory be certain it is the “X.”

Eternity Illustrated

Do you ever think much about eternity? It is said death is one of the three most thought about topics in America. My source didn’t indicate what the other two are. However, if we think so often about death eternity must be some where up near the top of topics.

Modern physics, aided by Einstein’s Theory of Relativity, gives a few hints of the reality of eternity. A weight, a clock, and a ruler can be used to illustrate this.

Here on earth a one pound object weighs one pound because of the gravitational pull on it. On the moon where there is a different gravitational pull it would weigh three ounces. Remember how our astronauts bounded around on the moon so effortlessly?

If that same object could be placed on the surface of the sun without being burned up it would weigh twenty-eight pounds. Considering that the sun burns four tons of its mass per second our weight wouldn’t last.

The same object has a relative different weight.

A ruler can be used to illustrate mass. Mass, that is the density or size of an object, also varies depending on speed. The size of a car varies depending on its speed. Driving at 50 miles an hour a car is three-ten-millionths of an inch shorter. If you don’t believe it try measuring it.

If it were possible to travel at 90% of the speed of light, that is 167,000 miles per second, a car would be half its length. Your body mass would likewise change.

Parenthetically, I just thought of it, but if you could travel 90% of the speed of light on the moon you would have a great weight and mass control program.

Time is the third factor. Take a voyage to the star Sirus which is nine light years away. If you traveled at 99.99999% of the speed of light the following would happen. Your friends here on earth would have to wait 18 years for you to make the round trip. Upon returning your watch and body clock would indicate you had been gone 12 hours. You would be twelve hours older and your friends eighteen years. Now, there is an anti-aging program.

If you could accelerate just a bit and reach the speed of light time would stand still. That time warp would be called eternity.

Not having observed any of these principles it is hard to comprehend them. Likewise, not yet having experienced eternity it is hard to conceive of it. If eternity is a reality and we are immortal that means there never will be a time we won’t be. We ought to give that a lot of thought. As a matter of fact it should be number one on our list of most frequent thoughts.

Must we light a candle to see the sun?

Compute the evidence of you being a non-organic being living in an organic body from which your spirit will someday exit and enter the realm of eternity. Envision that.

There is a government sponsored add related to travel overseas that warns: “Know before you go.”

Knowing they are going, millions have found insight into this realm in their Christian faith.

Early Secular Writings Regarding Christ

TACITUS: (55-117) A.D.)
Cornelius Tactitus is regarded as the greatest historian of ancient Rome. Writing on the reign of Nero, Tacitus alludes to the death of Christ and to the existence of Christians in Rome.
“Consequently, to get rid of the report, Nero fastened the guilt and inflicted the most exquisite tortures on a class hated for their abominations, called Christians by the populace. Christus, from whom the name had its origin, suffered the extreme penalty during the reign of Tiberius at the hands of on of our procurators, Pontius Pilatus, and a most mischievous superstition, thus checked for the moment, again broke out not only in Judea, the first source of the evil, but even in Rome, where all things hideous and shameful from every part of the word find their center and become popular.”

PLINY THE YOUNGER: (112 A.D.)
Pliny was governor of Bithynia in Asia Minor who wrote a letter to Trajan regarding how to deal with Christians who worshiped Christ. These letters concern an episode which marks the first time the Roman government acknowledged Christianity as a religion separate from Judaism, and set a precedent for the massive persecution of Christians that takes place in the second and third centuries.
“They (the Christians) were in the habit of meeting on a certain fixed day before it was light, when they sand in alternate verses a hymn to Christ, as to god, and bound themselves by a solemn oath not to any wicked deeds, not to commit any fraud, theft or adultery, never to falsify their word, nor to deny any trust when they should be call to deliver it up, after which it was their custom to separate, and then reassemble to partake of food —but food of an ordinary but and innocent kind.”

BABYLONIAN TALMUD: (Completed in the 6th Century A.D.)
The Babylonian Talmud is a Rabbinic commentary of the Jewish scriptures (Tanach: Old Testament). They are a look into what is a hostile source was saying about Jesus. They could not deny the miracles but claimed that it was sorcery rather than admit to what was a known fact.
“ On the eve of the Passover Yeshu was hanged. For forty days before the execution took place, a herald went forth and cried, “He is going forth to be stoned because He has practiced sorcery (an admission of his miracles) and enticed Israel to apostasy. Any one who can say anything in his favor let him come forward and plead on his behalf. But since nothing was brought forward in his favor he was hanged on the even of the Passover.”
The Babylonian Talmud, vol. III, Sanhedrin 43a

LUCIAN: (120-180 A.D.)
a Greek satirist that spoke scornfully of Christ and Christians, affirming that they were real and historical people, never saying that they were fictional characters.
“The Christians, you know, worship a man to this day — the distinguished personage who introduced their novel rites, and was crucified on that account….You see, these misguided creatures start with the general conviction that they are immortal for all time, which explains the contempt of death and voluntary self-devotion which are so common among them; and then it was impressed on them by their original lawgiver that they are all brothers, from the moment that they are converted, and deny the gods of Greece, and worship the crucified sage, and live after his laws. All this they take quite on faith, with the result that they despise all worldly goods alike, regarding them merely as common property.”
Lucian, The Death of Peregrine. 11-13.

LETTER OF MARA BARSARAPION: (73 A.D.)
Mara Bar-Serapion was a Syrian who lived in the first century A.D. He wrote a letter to his son Serapion that mentions the Jews who killed their King. The letter is now in the possession of the British Museum.
“What benefit did the Athenians obtain by putting Socrates to death? Famine and plague came upon them as judgment for their crime. Or, the people of Samos for burning Pythagoras? In one moment their country was covered with sand. Or the Jews by murdering their wise king?…After that their kingdom was abolished. God rightly avenged these men…The wise king…Lived on in the teachings he enacted.”

THALLUS: (52 A.D.)
One of the first secular writers that mentioned Christ. Thallus wrote a history of the Eastern Mediterranean world from the Trojan War to his own time. Unfortunately, his writings are only found as citations by others. Julius Africanus, a Christian who wrote about AD 221 mentioned Thallus’ account of an eclipse of the sun (Luke 23:44-45).
“On the whole world there pressed a most fearful darkness; and the rocks were rent by an earthquake, and many places in Judea and other districts were thrown down. This darkness Thallus, in the third book of his History, calls, as appears to me without reason, an eclipse of the sun.”
Julius Africanus, Chronography, 18:1.

PHLEGON: (1st Century)
A secular historian wrote a history named, “Chronicles.” This original work has been lost, Julius Africanus preserved a small fragment in his writings. Phlegon mentions the eclipse (Matthew 27:45) during the crucifixion of Jesus.
“During the time of Tiberius Caesar an eclipse of the sun occurred during the full moon.”
Africanus, Chronography, 18:1.

SUETONIUS: (69-140 A.D.)
A Roman historian and annalist of the Imperial House under the Emperor Hadrian. He refers to Christ and Christians and the “disturbances” caused by them, namely not worshipping idols and loving all, including their tormentors.
“Because the Jews at Rome caused constant disturbances at the instigation of Chrestus [Christ], he [Claudius] expelled them from the city [Rome].” Acts 18:2, which took place in 49 A.D.
Life of Claudius, 25:4.

In another work Suetonius wrote about the fire which devastated Rome in 64 A.D. under the reign of Nero. Nero blamed the Christians and exacted a heavy punishment upon them, among them covering them with pitch and burning them alive in his gardens.
“Nero inflicted punishment on the Christians, a sect given to a new and mischievous religious belief.”
Lives of the Caesars, 26.2

TOLEDOTH YESHU: (6 Century)
This is a derogatory version of the life of Jesus, growing out of the response of the Jewish community to Christianity. The tradition presented here is most commonly dated to approximately the 6th century CE. The text it self is closer to the 14th century.
Mentions the empty tomb and that the Jewish leaders found it empty. That Jesus was crucified on the eve of the Passover and that He claimed to be God. That Jesus performed sorcery, he healed, and that he taught Rabbis. All of this from a hostile source, with the references above it is a historical fact that Jesus did miracles. His enemies could not refute it, rather they explained it away as sorcery!

CELSUS: (2nd Century)
Criticizes the Gospels, unknowingly reinforces the authors and the content, he alludes to 80 different quotes in the Bible. Admits that the miracles of Jesus were generally believed in the 2nd century.

JULIAN THE APOSTATE: (332-363 A.D.)
Emperor of Rome mentions the Gospels, miracles and other facts about Jesus. Julian had struggled to end the power of Christians in the Roman Empire. Since the day fifty years earlier that Constantine conquered in the sign of the cross, Christian influence had steadily grown. As Julian lay dying from a mortal wound he made the following remark:

“As he bled, the dying emperor groaned, “You have conquered, O Galilean,” referring to Jesus Christ.

CLEMENT OF ROME: (100 A.D.)
Clement affirms the Resurrection, Gospels and that Jesus was sent to earth by God to take away our sins.
“Clement was the fourth bishop of Rome, the first being Peter. Did he know Peter and Paul? It is completely possible that those two Spirit-filled men taught him. Clement even wrote a letter to the Corinthian church that echoed the teachings of the apostles.”

IGNATIUS OF ANTIOCH: (50-107 A.D.)
Disciple of the apostles Peter, Paul, and John, who was martyred for his faith in Jesus. He was obviously convinced that Jesus really had lived and that Jesus was all that the apostles has said He was.
“…nearness to the sword is nearness to God; to be among the wild beasts is to be in the arms of God; only let it be in the name of Jesus Christ. I endure all things that I may suffer together with him, since he who became perfect man strengthens me…We have not only to be called Christians, but to be Christians.”
While the emperor Trajan was on a visit to Asia Minor, he arrested Ignatius. When the bishop confessed his faith in Christ, the Emperor sent him in chains to Rome to die. He was hustled to the arena at once and thrown to two fierce lions who immediately devoured him.

QUADRATUS: (125 A.D.)
Bishop of Athens and a disciple of the apostles. Church historian Eusebius has preserved the only work that we have from Quadratus.
“The deeds of our Savior were always before you, for they were true miracles; those that were healed, those that were raised from the dead, who were seen, not only when healed and when raised, but were always present. They remained living a long time, not only whilst our Lord was on earth, but likewise when he had left the earth. So that some of them have also lived in our times.”
Eusebius, IV, III

EPISTLE OF BARNABAS: (130-38 A.D.)
Mentions the Resurrection, miracles, content of the Gospels and the crucifixion of Jesus.

ARISTIDES: (138-161 A.D.)
Aristides was a second-century Christian believer and philosopher from Athens. This portion of his defense of Christianity was addressed to the Roman Emperor Antonius Pius, who reigned from 138-161 A.D.
“The Son of the most high God, revealed by the Holy Spirit, descended from heaven, born of a Hebrew Virgin. His flesh he received from the Virgin, and he revealed himself in the human nature as the Son of God. In his goodness which brought the glad tidings, he has won the whole world by his life-giving preaching…He selected twelve apostles and taught the whole world by his mediatorial, light-giving truth.
And he was crucified, being pierced with nails by the Jews; and he rose from the dead and ascended to heaven. He sent the apostles into all the world and instructed all by divine miracles full of wisdom. Their preaching bears blossoms and fruits to this day, and calls the whole world to illumination.”
Carey, “Aristides,” 68.

JUSTIN MARTYR: (106-167 A.D.)
Justin Martyr is regarded as one of the greatest early Christian apologists. He was born around 100 A.D and was beheaded for his faith in Jesus in 167 A.D. He mentions as facts many things about Jesus and Christianity, such as: The Magi (wise men who brought gifts from Arabia), King Herod, His crucifixion, His garments parted among the Roman soldiers, the apostles leaving him on the night of his arrest, his fulfilled prophecies, His resurrection and His ascending into heaven among many others. These quotes can be found in his debate with Trypho the Jew.

HEGESIPPUS: (2 Century)
Eusebius draws the conclusion that Hegesippus was a Jew that wrote five books called, “Memoirs.” Only fragments remain of his original work in the writings of Eusebius. They show that Hegesippus traveled extensively trying to determine if the stories of Jesus and the apostles were true. He found that they were accurate, even in the troubled church in Corinth.
“The Corinthian church continued in the true doctrine until Primus became bishop. I mixed with them on my voyage to Rome and spent several days with the Corinthians, during which we were refreshed with the true doctrine. On arrival at Rome I pieced together the succession down to Anicetus, whose deacon was Eleutherus, Anicetus being succeeded by Soter and he by Eleutherus. In every line of bishops and in every city things accord with the preaching of the Law, the Prophets, and the Lord.”
Eusebius, The History of the Church, 9.22.2.

TRAJAN: (53-117 A.D.)
Trajan is a Roman Emperor who wrote a letter [see letter] in response to the Governor of Asia Minor, Pliny the Younger. Pliny needed advice in dealing with “Christians” who renounced their belief in Jesus due to fear of torture and execution.

MACROBIUS: (4th-5th Century)
Pascal (Pensees) mentions a quote of Augustus Caesar as an evidence to the murder of the 7-20 male babies (this is based on the population of Bethlehem in 4-6 B.C., which was 700-1,000 people) by King Herod in Bethlehem (Matthew 2:16).
King Herod heard that a king was to be born and his fear and mental instability caused him to kill these male children under two years of age. King Herod killed his Wife, mother in law, and three sons. This is in character with his life of murder and paranoia. King Herod’s reign was described by his enemies as, “He stole to the throne like a fox, ruled like a tiger, and died like a dog.”
Saturnalia, lib. 2, ch.4.

HADRIAN: (106-167 A.D.)
Justin Martyr quotes this Roman Emperor’s letter to Minucius Fundanus, proconsul of Asia Minor. This letter deals with accusations from pagans against the Christians.
“I have received the letter addressed to me by your predecessor Serenius Granianus, a most illustrious man; and this communication I am unwilling to pass over in silence, lest innocent persons be disturbed, and occasion be given to the informers for practicing villainy. Accordingly, if the inhabitants of your province will so far sustain this petition of theirs as to accuse the Christians in some court of law, I do not prohibit them from doing so.
But I will not suffer them to make use of mere entreaties and outcries. For it is far more just, if any one desires to make an accusation, that you give judgment upon it. If, therefore, any one makes the accusation, and furnishes proof that the said men do anything contrary to the laws, you shall adjudge punishments in proportion to the offences.
And this, by Hercules; you shall give special heed to, that if any man shall, through mere calumny, bring an accusation against any of these persons, you shall award to him more severe punishments in proportion to his wickedness.”
Justin Martyr, The First Apology, Chapters, 68-69.

JUVENAL: (55 AD-127 AD)
Juvenal makes a reference of the tortures of Christians by Nero in Rome.
“But just describe Tigellinus and you will blaze amid those faggots in which men, with their throats tightly gripped, stand and burn and smoke, and you trace a broad furrow through the middle of the arena.”
Satires, 1, lines 147-157.

SENECA: (3 B.C.-65 A.D.)
Seneca mentions the cruelties that Nero imposes upon Christians.
“The other kind of evil comes, so to speak, in the form of a huge parade. Surrounding it is a retinue of swords and fire and chains and a mob of beasts to be let loose upon the disemboweled entrails of men. Picture to yourself under his head the prison, the cross, the rack, the hook, and the stake which they drive straight through a man until it protrudes from his throat. Think of human limbs torn apart by chariots driven in opposite directions, of the terrible shirt smeared and interwoven with inflammable materials, and of all the other contrivances devised by cruelty, in addition to those which I have mentioned!”
Epistulae Morales, Epistle 14, “On the Reasons for Withdrawing from the World.”

HIEROCLES: (AD 284-305)
A quote by Eusebius preserves some of the text of this lost work of Hierocles, Philalethes or Lover of Truth. In this quote, Hierocles condemns Peter and Paul as sorcerers. Again, their miracles could not be denied, rather they claimed that they used sorcery.
“And this point is also worth noticing, that whereas the tales of Jesus have been vamped up by Peter and Paul and a few others of the kind,–men who were liars and devoid of education and wizards.”
Eusebius, The Treatise of Eusebius, ch. 2.

ANTONIUS PIUS: (86 AD to 161 AD)
A letter from the Roman Emperor Antoninus Pius to the general assembly in Asia Minor. This letter says that the officials in Aisa Minor were getting upset at the Christians in their province, and that no changes are to be made in Antoninus’ method of dealing with them.
“The Emperor Caesar Titus AElius Adrianus Antoninus Augustus Pius, Supreme Pontiff, in the fifteenth year of his tribuneship, Consul for the third time, Father of the fatherland, to the Common Assembly of Asia, greeting: I should have thought that the gods themselves would see to it that such offenders should not escape.
For if they had the power, they themselves would much rather punish those who refuse to worship them; but it is you who bring trouble on these persons, and accuse as the opinion of atheists that which they hold, and lay to their charge certain other things which we are unable to prove.
But it would be advantageous to them that they should be thought to die for that of which they are accused, and they conquer you by being lavish of their lives rather than yield that obedience which you require of them. And regarding the earthquakes which have already happened and are now occurring, it is not seemly that you remind us of them, losing heart whenever they occur, and thus set your conduct in contrast with that of these men; for they have much greater confidence towards God than you yourselves have.
And you, indeed, seem at such times to ignore the gods, and you neglect the temples, and make no recognition of the worship of God. And hence you are jealous of those who do serve Him, and persecute them to the death.
Concerning such persons, some others also of the governors of provinces wrote to my most divine father; to whom he replied that they should not at all disturb such persons, unless they were found to be attempting anything against the Roman government. And to myself many have sent intimations regarding such persons, to whom I also replied in pursuance of my father’s judgment.
But if any one has a matter to bring against any person of this class, merely as such a person, let the accused be acquitted of the charge, even though he should be found to be such an one; but let the accuser he amenable to justice.”
Justin Martyr, The First Apology, ch. 70.

Divorce And Remarriage

There is no more challenging topic on which to write than divorce. Theology and sociology often clash on this. It is a sensitive emotional issue.

Very, very few people believe in divorce. Those who believe in it least of all are often persons having experienced it. They know the complexity and pain involved. They know the feeling of failure, loneliness, and often a sense of moral impropriety.

Joseph Epstein, social science researcher on divorce, says, “To go through a divorce is still, no matter how smooth the procedure, no matter how “civilized’ the conduct of the parties involved, no matter how much money is available to cushion the fall, a very special private hell.”

Author Paul Bohanan points out there is no such thing as A divorce. There is (1) the emotional divorce, (2) the legal divorce, (3) the economic divorce, (4) the co-parental divorce, (5) the community divorce, (6) the psychic [personal identity] divorce, and (7) the spiritual divorce.

Some persons are cavalier about divorce. If their spouse isn’t making them “happy” it is time to cop out. They see it as an escape hatch to happiness. It isn’t. One large study survey compares unhappy spouses who divorce or separate with unhappy spouses who stay in their marriages. In general unhappy spouses who divorced or separated were not happier five years later than those who stayed in their unhappy marriages. Two-thirds of unhappy spouses who stayed married ended up happily married five years later.

Some spouses are victims of spousal abuse which may include neglect, physical beatings, financial bondage, or sexual degradation. They may not believe in nor want a divorce. Neither do we believe in being run over by Mack trucks but it happens. In spite of efforts to avoid it there are some persons who strive to preserve the marriage who still suffer divorce.

In the secular world divorce is the accepted norm. In the realm of Bible principles it isn’t. However, in trying to aid in divorce recovery it often appears the practice is acceptable. Though it isn’t the support of those who have experienced it is most commendable.

There is little difference in the church and non-church community in the divorce rate. About 25% of people in North America have been though at least one divorce. Among churchgoers who claim to be born-again the figure is actually higher: 27%.

God said, “He hates divorce…” (Malachi 2: 16). Like God, we should love spiritually restored divorcees and yet not approve of divorce.

Divorcees need to be understanding at this point also. They should not be condemning of persons who do not approve of un-Biblical divorce. Some who love and support divorcees the most are persons who do not approve of un-Biblical divorce.

Two situations deserve special attention. There may be marriages when it is virtually impossible to live with an abusive spouse. It is safer to live apart. Such separation should be considered temporary and the person open to reconciliation.

I Corinthians 7: 10, 11 speaks to this type situation. “A wife must not be separated from her husband. But if she does, she must remain unmarried or else be reconciled to her husband.” This affords only two options: remain single or be reconciled.

When persons who have divorced and married another person become convinced divorce and remarriage are wrong they sometimes question what to do. Should they divorce again? No. Two wrongs don’t make a right. Seek the Lord forgiveness, confess sin, seek His mercy, and commit yourself and your marriage for Him to us. Remembering His grace is freely given but at great expense to Him. Don’t impose on it.

There are two cases in which the Bible allows divorce. Persons considering a divorce should not rationalize their case and try to pretend it is in one of those categories when it isn’t. They do not encourage divorce but do permit it in these instances. The first is when one spouse is guilty of sexual unfaithfulness (Matthew 5: 32; 19:9). The other is when a non-Christian spouse abandons a spouse who is a Christian (I Corinthians 7: 12-16). In both of these instances divorce is a result of sin, but such divorces are not sinful.