Hi, I'm David Bercot, and tonight we're going to be talking about what the early Christians believed about separation from the world. Actually, the New Testament has a lot to say about separation from the world, beginning with the words of Jesus himself. He prayed concerning his followers, "I have given them your word, and the world has hated them because they are not of the world, just as I am not of the world.
I do not pray that you should take them out of the world, but that you should keep them from the evil one." That's John 17:14-15. So it should be normal that the world hates Christians, yet it's important the reason why the world hates us. Jesus said the world would hate his true disciples because they are not of the world. Now, here in the United States and in Canada, and even more so in Western Europe, the world hates conservative evangelical Christians, so-called Bible-believing Christians.
But the reason the world hates them is not particularly because they are not of the world. It's usually because of their involvement in the world, in politics, in trying to force a Christian lifestyle on non-believers. Or they hate conservative Christians because they tend to be militaristic warmongers. Or they hate us because so many professing Bible-believing Christians are hypocrites. Now, we have no reason to feel valiant or holy if the world hates us for those reasons.
The only reason it should hate authentic Christians is because they are not of the world. Now let's look at some of the other New Testament passages on this subject. James wrote, "Pure and undefiled religion before God and the Father is this: to visit orphans and widows in their trouble, and to keep oneself unspotted from the world." That's James 1:27. And again, "Adulterers and adulteresses, do you not know that friendship with the world is enmity with God?
Whoever therefore wants to be a friend of the world makes himself an enemy of God." That's James 4:4. So the two simply don't mix, Christianity and friendship with the world. We can't have both. The scriptures make that clear. Paul also wrote on the subject. He said, "Do not be conformed to this world, but be transformed by the renewing of your mind." That's Romans 12:2. Based on that passage, separation from the world is sometimes referred to as non-conformity because we're not to be conformed to this world.
Now, Christian non-conformity is quite a different thing from what the world often refers to as non-conformists. For example, when I was a teenager, the hippie movement blossomed across the United States and much of the world. And the press often referred to hippies as non-conformists. But they weren't really non-conformists. They were simply conforming to a culture that was different from mainstream society. They were certainly just as much a part of the world as anybody else.
Now let's look at what the Apostle John had to say about separation from the world. He said, "Do not love the world or the things in the world. If anyone loves the world, the love of the Father is not in him. For all that is in the world, the lust of the flesh, the lust of the eyes, and the pride of life is not of the Father, but is of the world." That's 1 John 2:15-16.
So in summary, we can say that beyond any doubt, an authentic Christian is not going to love the world or the things in it, not if he's walking with Christ. He will not be conformed to the world, but rather he will be not of the world. So if your Christianity or mine doesn't require separation from the world, it simply isn't the real thing. So the only real issue is how do separated Christians live? In what way are they different from their neighbors? Do they wear a totally different style of clothes?
Do they live in different kinds of houses? Or do they live off in remote desert regions or on mountaintops by themselves? These are all valid questions, but not all committed Christians would agree on the answers. In the end, you can label just about any form of dress, any type of entertainment, any kind of lifestyle as being worldly. Because nearly everything that we have in life developed in the world that is outside of the church, very few things do we have that were created or instituted by the church itself.
So we might validly ask questions like, "Is it worldly for a Christian to play marbles? What about volleyball? What about baseball? What about playing cards?" As I said, all of those things were invented by the world. Now, maybe the persons who started those games were all professing Christians. I don't know. As I said, just about every style of dress for men and women both have come from society at large, not from the church. So what makes one style of clothing worldly and another one suitable for Christians?
The answers aren't easy. And the sad thing is that trying to be separate from the world has probably caused more divisions and church splits among committed Christian disciples, among the people whom I refer to as Kingdom Christians, than probably anything else. And that's why it's worthwhile to look at how the early Christians lived out this principle of non-conformity or separation from the world. Now, just because they applied these principles in one way doesn't mean that we have to do exactly what they did.
On the other hand, we should keep in mind that many of the Christians who lived in the early second century had actually known the apostles, had seen how the apostles lived out these teachings. And if they didn't personally know the apostles, they certainly knew first-generation Christians who had been personally discipled by the apostles.
So they were in a far better position than we are to see exactly what the apostles meant when they said, "Don't be conformed to the world, don't love the world," how the apostles and their disciples lived these things out. When we look at what the early Christians believed in practice concerning non-conformity, we can say that this was the historic position of the church. But we can't say that about our applications unless, of course, we're following the historic precedent that they set.
Now, I'm not saying this in the sense that we have to pattern our church life exactly after the early Christians. I'm not saying we can't be more strict than they were. And I'm not saying we can't be more lenient. Their applications are not the Bible. But as I said, we can learn a lot from them. So as a starting point on what the early Christians believed about separation from the world, I want to read to you a description of the Christian life that was probably written around the year 125 AD.
And this is what it says. "Christians are distinguished from other men neither by country nor language nor the customs which they observe. For they neither inhabit cities of their own nor employ a particular form of speech nor lead a life which is marked out by any singularity.
But inhabiting Greek as well as barbarian cities, according as the lot of each of them has determined, and following the customs of the inhabitants in respect to clothing, food, and the rest of their ordinary conduct, they display to us their wonderful and confessedly striking method of life. They dwell in their own countries only as sojourners. They pass their days on earth, but they are citizens of heaven. They obey the prescribed laws, and at the same time, they surpass the laws by their lives.
They love all men, yet they are persecuted by all." Now, that description may surprise some of you. You perhaps thought that a description of the early Christians would say that they did not follow the customs of their country in regard to clothing, food, and the rest of ordinary conduct, as this writer put it. But the historic record is fairly clear that they did. At the same time, I hope you noted that this writer said that they nevertheless display to us their wonderful and confessedly striking method of life.
So they were different from the society around them. But they weren't different by wearing unique clothes or by eating different kinds of food or living by customs entirely foreign to the country in which they lived. So what I want to do this evening is to look at five areas in which Christians were separate from the world and to talk about how they were different in those five areas. And these five areas we're going to be talking about are, one, their view of wealth and materialism.
And in conjunction with that, how being separate from the world affected their employment. Secondly, we're going to look at how they were separate with regard to entertainment. What kinds of entertainment did the early Christians avoid? Third, we're going to look at their separation with regard to politics and government and even how they viewed patriotism. Fourth, we're going to look at their views of modesty and clothing.
The letter of Diognetus that we just read said that they followed the customs of society around them with regard to clothing. But does that mean that there were no differences between Christians and pagans with regard to their dress? We're going to look at that. And finally, we want to look at how the early Christians were separate from the world in the area of purity and chastity. We're going to begin by taking a look at what the early Christians said about wealth and materialism.
After all, the pursuit of wealth and riches has been considered the normal thing to do by most human societies. And that certainly was the view in the Greco-Roman world that the early Christians lived. So when a group of people came along like the Christians and said that they have no desire to gain wealth, that they don't envy the rich, well, that definitely makes them different from the world around them. And that is exactly what the early Christians did say, and it is what they practiced.
Speaking on behalf of all Christians, Tatian wrote, "I do not wish to be a king. I am not anxious to be rich. I am not impelled by an insatiable love of gain to go to sea. I do not contend for chaplets. I'm free from a mad thirst for fame. If I'm a slave, I endure servitude. If I'm free, I don't boast about my good birth." Hermas, writing in the middle of the second century, described the general attitude of Christians when he gave this exhortation to them.
He said, "You know that you who are the servants of God dwell in a strange land. For your city is far away from this one. If then you know your city in which you are to dwell, why do you here provide lands and make expensive preparations and accumulate dwellings and useless buildings? He who makes such preparations for this city cannot return again to his own. Don't you understand that all these things belong to another and are under the power of another? Therefore, take note.
As one living in a foreign land, make no further preparations for yourself than what is merely sufficient. And be ready to leave this city when the master of this city comes to cast you out for disobeying his law." And again, he advised, "Refrain from much business, and you will never sin. For those who are occupied with much business also commit many sins.
For they are distracted about their affairs, and they're not serving their Lord at all." So the basic message of early Christianity, which is exactly the same message as the apostles, is accumulate no more than you just have to, work no more than you just have to in this world. Focus your energy, your assets on the kingdom of God, store up treasures in heaven. As Lactantius wrote, "The Christian does injury to no one. He doesn't desire the property of others.
In fact, he doesn't even defend his own property if it is taken from him by force. For he knows how to patiently bear an injury inflicted upon him." Sometimes Christians think that to be separate from the world, they have to purposefully look different from everyone around them, or they have to live off by themselves in separate communities. Now, I'm not criticizing Christians who do that. I'm just saying you don't have to do that. You don't have to try to be different from the world.
If you just simply follow the teachings of Christ, you will end up being different. Just like the early Christians. For starters, give up the pursuit of wealth. Work no more hours a week than you just have to in order to support your family. Seek spiritual treasures, not earthly ones. And if you do that, you truly will be different from the world around you. You won't be conformed to the world. I want to read you a couple of passages from the early church concerning their view of work.
Sometimes Christians today glorify work. Like if you spend all of your time in secular work, that's good and fine. That's not what the early Christians said. Both these passages are from the Apostolic Constitutions. It says, "If anyone uses the pretense of his work as an excuse for neglecting worship, he is a despiser offering pretenses for his sins. Let such a person know that the trades of the faithful are our secondary employment. The worship of God is our primary vocation.
Therefore, follow your trades as you are able in order to maintain your livelihood. However, make the worship of God your main business. As the Lord said, 'Do not labor for the food that perishes, but for that which endures unto everlasting life.'" On the other hand, the early church did not tolerate laziness or living off of others when you could support yourself and your family.
The same work says, "Attend to your employment with all appropriate seriousness so that you will always have sufficient funds to support both yourselves and those who are needy. In that way, you will not burden the church of God. Some of us are fishermen, tent makers, and farmers so that we may never be idle." Solomon says, "Go to the ant you sluggard, consider her ways diligently and become wiser than she." So there was a balance. Yes, work hard, provide for yourself.
Work so that you'll have funds to provide for the needy. But don't make your occupation, your secular occupation, your main vocation. They never referred to their employment as their vocation, which came into vogue with the Reformation. Like God preordained you to be a shoemaker or something like that. So when you're doing that, you're actually doing God's will. They never elevated secular work to that level. On the other hand, they didn't despise it as something we shouldn't do. Rather, again, a balanced view.
Work hard, take care of your needs, have funds to help the needy, but then give your primary energy and time and devotion to serving the kingdom of God. Now, obviously, if God and his kingdom are the first things in your life, there are going to be certain occupations that are simply going to be unsuitable for you. One would be any occupation, any job that requires you to regularly miss worship or to put God on the back burner.
So many upper management jobs today, and you don't even have to be upper management, so many jobs, period, they want to own your life and your soul. They want to take up all of your time and your life so that God gets just a little bit what's left over. See, that's not suitable for a Christian. Likewise, there are types of employment that perhaps don't require you to miss worship or that, but by their very nature require you to compromise the teachings of Jesus Christ.
I'm going to give you a quick list of the occupations that the early Christians identified and said, "We will not baptize you if this is what you're employed in, or if you take this on as your employment after you're a Christian, you'll be put out of the church." One was any job that was involved in any way with idolatry, making idols, selling them, working in a temple, taking care of idols, things like that. Any military position.
Now, if you were already in the military and you couldn't get out, they did allow an exception that they would baptize you upon your firm commitment that you would never use the sword, you would never execute anybody, you would never take an oath, you would never do anything idolatrous. But if you wanted to join the military after you were already a Christian, you were put out of the church. You couldn't be an actor. We'll be talking a little bit more about why they excluded that.
You couldn't be a charioteer in the chariot races or a boxer or a wrestler or a gladiator, nor somebody who would train those people in their occupations. You couldn't be a sorcerer or anything to do with witchcraft. And obviously, you couldn't be a prostitute or a panderer, anyone involved in those occupations or illicit businesses. Another issue that separated the early Christians from the world around them was that of entertainment.
When your values are different from people around you, you naturally don't find certain things to be entertaining that other people do. Without trying to be different, just because they had different values and so found different things to be entertaining, the early Christians were different from the world around them. Tertullian asked them, "Why do you take offense at us?
Because we differ from you in regard to your pleasures." This really annoyed Roman society that the Christians wouldn't join in with them in their entertainment. And it's not that Christians taught that doing something for fun or enjoyment was wrong. They just couldn't enjoy the same things that the Romans did. And when you read through the early Christian writings, you find a lot of exhortations from a number of writers on this whole area of entertainment.
In fact, I've done a whole teaching CD just on that subject alone, so I won't be covering it in detail today. But one thing you won't find is a lot of church-mandated rules. Again, I'm neither criticizing nor supporting churches that have rules concerning entertainment. I'm just saying the early Christian approach was not so much the rule approach as it was to teach and exhort against this.
In other words, you generally were not put out of the church in the early centuries for attending the plays or the sporting events, but the church did teach very strongly against it. Tertullian said, "We renounce all your spectacles.
Among us, nothing is ever said, seen, or heard that has anything in common with the madness of the circus, the immodesty of the theater, the atrocities of the arena, or the useless exercise of the wrestling ground." Now, when he mentions the circus, he's not talking about clowns and that kind of thing. He's talking about the chariot races, which the Christians objected to because they were so dangerous and people were killed, and plus because of the madness in the crowds that developed from there.
Athenagoras wrote, speaking to the Romans, "Who does not reckon among the things of greatest interest the contests of gladiators and wild beasts, especially those which are given by you? But we have renounced such spectacles, believing that to see a man put to death is much the same as killing him." That same view was echoed by Theophilus. These are all second-century writers.
He said, "We are forbidden so much as to witness the shows of gladiators, lest we become partakers and abettors of murder." Of course, today, nearly everyone, even in secular society, would view the gladiator games and the killing of wild beasts in the arena as something horrible, as something awful. But back then, it was only the Christians who objected to that. But they also objected to the dramas or the plays that were put on.
And the reason the church objected to the drama was because of the subject matter of these plays. The Roman and Greek plays almost always dealt with pagan mythology, with sexual immorality of all kinds, or with murder. There was never anything good or noble in their plays. And it was for that reason that the early Christians wouldn't allow an actor to join the church. Now, today, some Christians feel that acting or drama is inherently evil, that even Christian drama would be wrong.
Well, that may or may not be the case. We really can't quote the early Christians or even the New Testament on the matter because that option didn't even exist back then. The only plays were ones that had evil themes or were connected with pagan idolatry. But anyway, here is what the early Christians had to say about the theater. Tertullian wrote, "Does it then remain for us to appeal to the pagans themselves? Let them tell us whether it's right for Christians to frequent the dramas.
Why, the rejection of these amusements is the chief sign to them that a man has adopted the Christian faith." So it was the norm for a Christian to say, "No, I'm not going to go to the stage and watch these horrible dramas." Christians didn't stand out because they had some kind of distinctive dress, but when you quit going to the plays, people began to suspect, "Hmm, I wonder if so-and-so is a Christian now.
He doesn't come to the plays anymore." Tertullian also noted, "The father who carefully protects and guards his virgin daughter's ears from every polluting word takes her to the theater himself, exposing her to all its vile words and attitudes." Cyprian noted, "In the theaters also, you will behold what may well cause you grief and shame. The horrors of parental murders and incest are unfolded in action calculated to resemble reality. Things that have now ceased to be actual deeds of vice become examples.
Adultery is learned while it is seen there on the stage. The matron who has perhaps gone to the spectacle as a modest woman returns from it immodest. What a degradation of morals it is." Okay, now we want to talk about the early Christian view of participation in government and in politics and their whole view of patriotism because this is really an area that made the early Christians stand out from the world around them. In his apology to the Romans, Tertullian said this about Christians.
He says, "All zeal in the pursuit of glory and honor is dead in us. So we have no pressing inducement to take part in your public meetings, nor is there anything more entirely foreign to us than the affairs of state. We acknowledge one all-embracing commonwealth, the world." It's hard to describe how absolutely revolutionary those words were in that time. They're still fairly revolutionary today.
This idea of instead of being loyal to your state and the people in it, that you recognize a whole world, everybody in the world are brothers and sisters. The early Christians saw themselves as all part of one kingdom, the kingdom of God. So they had no interest in the affairs of state, of the secular world around them, of the earthly governments. They already had their kingdom, and their fellow citizens were the other members of this kingdom.
Origen wrote, speaking about Celsus, who was a pagan critic of the Christians. He says, "Celsus urges us to take office in the government of the country if that is necessary for the maintenance of the laws and the support of religion." You see, again, the Romans noted that the Christians didn't take part in the affairs of state, in the maintaining of laws and that sort of thing. But this is Origen's reply.
However, we recognize in each state the existence of another national organization that was founded by the word of God. And we exhort those who are mighty in word and have blameless life to rule over churches. It is not for the purpose of escaping public duties that Christians decline public offices. Rather, it is so that they may reserve themselves for a more divine and necessary service in the church of God for the salvation of men.
So again, the early Christians saw their loyalty, their national pride in the kingdom of God. If they had special abilities, rather than saying, "Oh, we're going to become a leader in the world and try to make it better," no, we'll use these special abilities and gifts we have for the kingdom of God. We'll rule over churches, not over affairs of state.
Tertullian noted, "The Caesars too would have believed on Christ if either the Caesars had not been necessary for the world or if Christians could have been Caesars." This was in his apology, noting that Tiberius Caesar had issued a fairly strong statement in support of Christianity, stating that he perhaps would have become a Christian if a Christian could be a Caesar. But it was a given among the early church that, no, you can't do both.
Now, the early Christians didn't teach that it was wrong to work for the government. They tried to be flexible with each person's situation. The problem was that so many government positions, particularly administrative positions, would cause a Christian to have to violate one or more of Christ's teachings. Now, this was even more true in their day than it is in ours because of the joinder of the Roman state with idolatrous religion. Tertullian wrote this.
He said, "If we remember this rule to avoid idolatry, we can render service even to magistrates and rulers according to the example of the patriarchs and the other forefathers. They obeyed idolatrous kings up to the point of idolatry. Therefore, very recently, there arose a dispute as to whether a servant of God should take upon himself the administration of any dignity or power if he can keep himself through adroitness or some special grace from every type of idolatry.
For there is the example of both Joseph and Daniel who kept clean from idolatry and yet administered both dignity and power in Egypt and Babylon." He continues, "Let us suppose that it is possible for anyone to succeed in operating under the mere name of the office in whatever office it may be. Let's also suppose the following: he neither sacrifices nor lends his authority to sacrifices. He doesn't farm out sacrificial victims to others. He doesn't assign to others the care of the temples.
He doesn't look after their tributes. He doesn't give spectacles at his own or the public expense," talking about gladiator games and things like that, "nor even presides over them. He makes no proclamation or any edict for any pagan festivals. He doesn't even take oaths. Furthermore, he doesn't sit in judgment on anyone's life or character. He neither condemns nor indicts. He chains no one.
He neither imprisons nor tortures anyone." Then he concludes, "Now is it believable that all of this is possible?" See, to be a governor or to hold any kind of administrative position in the Roman Empire, these are all things that would come along with that. You would find yourself having to do things that would be wrong for you to do as an individual Christian.
And the Christians didn't feel like, "Oh, it's okay if you do it as a servant of the government." No, if it was wrong for you to do it as a Christian, it was wrong for you to do it in any other capacity because you're always a Christian. You can never set that aside. One of the underlying principles of early Christianity was that the end never justifies the means. The church believed that how something is accomplished is just as important as what is accomplished.
Overcoming evil by adopting the methods of evil was totally unacceptable to the early church. Although the Romans considered it to be a noble act to defend one's country through bloodshed, the Christians viewed it simply as sin. As Lactantius explained, "It is not virtue to be the enemy of the bad and the defender of the good. The interests of our country are invariably acquired and protected at the expense of another state or nation.
Increasing the power of the state, improving the state revenue, and extending the national boundaries are accomplished by violently taking from others. None of these things are virtuous, but are instead the abrogation of virtue. How can a man be just who injures, who hates, who despoils, and who kills? Yet those who strive to serve their country do all these things.
A man who gives into grief and anger instead of struggling with them and rushes to wherever he feels called by injustice is not upholding virtue because a person who repays injury for injury is actually imitating the person by whom he has been injured. He who imitates a wicked person can by no means be righteous." So that was the whole problem. If we're going to serve our country, they said, and it didn't matter if it was Rome or Persia or one of the German tribes, the principle was always the same.
Serving your country means doing injury to somebody else. Expanding the boundaries of the Roman Empire meant taking country away from somebody else. One of the things that made Rome so prosperous was that they despoiled other people. They conquered their country, and then they brought in all that revenue or tribute from the spoils of war.
Now, that eventually ran out once the empire quit expanding, and that's why in the later centuries, the Roman Empire had all kinds of financial problems because it had been built up on the principle of acquiring public revenue by taking it from other people. And it's no different today. You can look at the various wars of the United States. Protecting the interests of the United States has invariably meant quashing the interests of some other nation.
We think it's all right for America to be strong, but we think it's evil for somebody else to want to become a world power as well. Well, hopefully at this point, you're able to see how separation from the world worked in the early church. The early Christians didn't try to make themselves different from the society around them. It was simply the act of living out the Christian value system that made them different. And as Jesus prophesied, the world indeed did hate them because of it.
Now let's move to the area of clothing and modesty. Near the beginning of this message, I read to you from the letter of Diognetus where it stated that Christians didn't adopt a special kind of dress different from the society in which they lived. In other words, the authorities couldn't spot a Christian because they stood out as a result of their clothing. That would have made it very easy to arrest the Christians and have them all put in prison or put to death.
On the other hand, that doesn't mean that Christian principles didn't affect the clothes that Christians chose to wear. Let me read to you just a couple of examples. Clement of Alexandria wrote, "Luxurious clothing that cannot conceal the shape of the body is no more a covering. For such clothing, falling close to the body takes its form more easily. Clinging to the body as though it were the flesh, it receives its shape and outlines the woman's figure.
As a result, the whole make of the body is visible to spectators, although they cannot see the body itself." So the early Christians stressed wearing clothing that was loose, that was not form-fitting. And the pictures of various women on the walls of the catacombs bring out this very thing. What they're wearing is very loose-fitting. It entirely hides the shape of the body. Clement of Alexandria also wrote, "Let a woman wear a plain and becoming dress, but softer than what is suitable for a man.
Yet it should not be immodest or entirely steeped in luxury. And let the garments be suited to age, person, figure, nature, and pursuits." So they did allow quite a bit of flexibility. They didn't all dress exactly alike. But the principles of modesty and also of avoiding luxury, of ornate dress, were what they taught and lived by.
And this was all in accord with the injunction in the scriptures where Peter said in 1 Peter 3:3, "Do not let your adornment be outward, arranging the hair, wearing gold, or putting on fine apparel." Another writer, Theonas of Alexandria, wrote, "All of you should be elegant and tidy in person and dress. At the same time, your dress should not in any way attract attention because of its extravagance or artificiality.
Otherwise, Christian modesty may be scandalized." So the early Christian woman or man wore the same general type of garments as other people around them, but they avoided luxurious or revealing clothing. Interestingly, many of the early Christian teachers encouraged Christians to wear natural, undyed clothing. For example, Clement of Alexandria wrote, "The instructor permits us then to use simple clothing, that of a white color, as we said before.
The proper dress of the temperate man is what is plain, becoming, and clean." Now, in those days, dyed clothing cost quite a bit more than just plain, undyed, natural white clothing. However, I'm not aware of any church law that absolutely prohibited the use of dyed clothes. In fact, again, the pictures on the walls of the catacomb show various women who are modestly dressed, but they're wearing colored clothes. They're not wearing white clothing.
Okay, in summary, and I'm not going to go into a lot more detail on the subject of modesty because I've already delivered a recorded message on that very subject. We can say that Christians didn't purposefully try to look different than other people in the society in which they lived. The church allowed a measure of flexibility in dress. On the other hand, Christians didn't dress immodestly or ornately just because that was acceptable in their society.
Rather, they dressed more similar to the ordinary working people of their day. Now, in their day and in the society in which they lived, dressing modestly didn't make you stand out. Today, unfortunately, in America, for a woman to dress modestly often makes her look different just that very act. Things have changed so much since then.
Our final subject under this discussion of separation from the world, and one of the things that made Christians separate from the world around them in the early centuries and likewise today, was in the area of purity and marital fidelity. Mark Felix wrote, he said, "So far, in fact, are Christians from indulging in incestuous desire," something the pagan Romans had accused him of, "that with some Christians, even the modest mingling of the sexes causes a blush." And Tertullian wrote very similar.
He said, "To blush if he sees a virgin is as much a mark of a holy man as of a holy virgin if seen by a man." So in the early centuries, Christians avoided the loose intermingling of the sexes that is so prevalent in our society today. And yet, you know, it's a fairly recent innovation in human society. When universities first began, the universities were open only to men.
The very thought of unmarried men and women mingling together, living together away from home, even if in separate buildings, would have been unacceptable. When higher education was provided for women, the obvious solution in everyone's mind was, "You have a separate university for women. You're not going to put men and women at that young age all mingling together in a school." In fact, even in the lower grades, there were separate schools for boys and for girls.
So the idea of having co-ed colleges was something very, very new, not only with regards to devout Christians, but just human society in general. Now, feminists today try to portray that as, "Oh, well, of men looking down on women or something like that." It had nothing to do with that. It was something equal on both sides.
Men avoided being in the unchaperoned company of women, and women avoided being in the unchaperoned company of men, or in situations where they would be blended together like in a college that would leave itself for all kinds of wrong opportunities. Athenagoras wrote, "On this account too, according to age, we recognize some as sons and daughters. Others we regard as brothers and sisters. To the more advanced in life, we give the honor due to fathers and mothers.
On behalf of those then to whom we apply the names of brothers and sisters and other designations of relationship, we exercise the greatest care so that their bodies should remain undefiled and uncorrupted." The early Christians regarded themselves as brothers and sisters not only in a fraternal kind of sense, but in a sense of purity as well.
Instead of regarding a young woman or a young man as somebody to be able to flirt with or have some kind of romantic or even sexual relationship with, it was rather the idea of, "This is my sister or this is my brother, and I treat them with the honor and respect that I would give to a fleshly brother or sister." But this view of the mingling of the sexes and the view of chastity and purity set the Christians apart from the society in which they lived, particularly the Roman and Greek society.
It would have been a little different in Jewish and a lot of the Eastern societies. But in Roman society, often men and women would actually bathe together without any clothes on in the public baths. That's how far the barriers had gone to breaking down. And then the other area with regard to chastity was concerning divorce. I don't know if divorce was as prevalent in Roman society as it is today, but it was quite common. It was allowed, and it was a very frequent thing.
But Jesus said, "He who divorces his wife and marries another commits adultery, and he who marries a woman who has been divorced commits adultery." And the Christians took Jesus' words exactly on face value. As Origen wrote, "A woman is an adulteress even though she seems to be married to a man if the former husband is still living.
Likewise, also the man who seems to marry the woman who has been put away does not so much marry her as to commit adultery with her, according to the declaration of our Savior." And you'll find similar statements all throughout the early Christian writings. So again, the early Christians didn't take any particular steps to try to be different from society in this regard.
They simply followed the teachings of Jesus Christ and his apostles, and this made them different from the society around them simply because of their obedience to Jesus Christ and their views on purity and chastity and divorce. Well, this brings us to the conclusion of this message.
And as the final point, what I would like to share with you is just some of the general descriptions of the early Christians written by their apologists or by others that give a complete picture of what Christianity was all about and why they stood out as separate from the world around them. This first quote is from a work written by Aristides. It dates to about the year 125, and it says this, "The Christians, O King, went about and searched, and they have found the truth.
As I have learned from their writings, they have come nearer to truth and genuine knowledge than the rest of all the nations. For they know and trust in God, the Creator of heaven and of earth, in whom and from whom are all things. Therefore, they do not commit adultery or fornication. They do not bear false witness. They do not embezzle what is held and pledged, nor do they covet that which is not theirs. They honor father and mother and show kindness to those who are near to them.
They do not worship idols made in the likeness of man. Whatever they would not wish others to do to them, they do not do to others. They do not eat food that is consecrated to idols, for they are pure. They comfort their oppressors and make them their friends. They do good to their enemies. Their women, O King, are pure as virgins, and their daughters are modest. Their men keep themselves from every unlawful union and from all uncleanness in the hope of a reward in the world to come.
Furthermore, if any of them have male or female slaves or children, out of love towards them, they persuade them to become Christians. When they have done so, they call them brothers without any distinction. They do not worship strange gods, and they go their way in all modesty and cheerfulness. Falsehood is not found among them, and they love one another. They do not turn away their care from widows, and they deliver the orphan from anyone who treats them harshly.
He who has gives to him who has not, and this is done without boasting. When they see a stranger, they take him into their homes, and they rejoice over him as a very brother. For they do not call themselves brothers after the flesh, but brothers after the Spirit and in God. Whenever one of the poor among them passes from this world, each one of them gives heed to him according to his ability and carefully sees to his burial." I'm going to interject a comment here.
In ancient society, if you were poor and you died, well, your body was just burned or dumped somewhere. And so it was a major thing to have a society like this that would actually make certain that even the very poor among them would be given a proper burial. Let me continue now. "And if they hear that one of their number is in prison or afflicted because of the name of their Christ, all of them carefully attend to his needs. If it is possible to redeem him, they set him free.
If there are any poor and needy among them, but if they have no spare food to give, they fast two or three days in order to supply the necessary food to the needy. They follow the commandments of their Christ with much care, living justly and seriously, just as the Lord their God commanded them. Every morning and every hour, they give thanks and praise to God for his loving kindnesses to them. They give thanksgiving to him for their food and drink.
If any righteous man among them passes from this world, they rejoice and offer thanks to God. They escort his body as if he were setting out from one place to go to another nearby. And when a child has been born to any of them, they give thanks to God." Well, that sums things up so well.
You see, separation from the world again, wasn't this thing of, "I'm going to try to be very different from everyone around me and try to dress as different as I can and, like I say, adopt maybe strange food customs and live off in mountains or anything like that." No, that wasn't the early Christian approach. It was simply living by the teachings of Christ. And this made them very different from the world around them, but in a way that brings honor to Christ, not dishonor to him.
And yet the world hated them despite all of these wonderful things about them. Tertullian wrote, "We never deny the deposit placed in our hands. We never pollute the marriage bed. We deal faithfully with our wards. We give aid to the needy. We render evil for evil to no one. As for those who falsely pretend to belong to us and whom we too repudiate, let them answer for themselves. In short, does anyone have a complaint to make against us on other grounds except being a Christian?
To what else does the Christian devote himself except the affairs of his own community? It is for such a notable freedom from crime, for an honesty so great, for righteousness, for purity, for faithfulness, for truth, for the living God, that we are sentenced to the flames." Now I want to read you a description written by a Christian named Bardesanes in the area of Syria or Edessa. He said, "What will we say of the new race of us Christians whom Christ at his coming planted in every country and in every region?
Wherever we are, we are all called after the one name of Christ, Christians. On one day, the first of the week, we assemble ourselves together, and on the days of the readings, we abstain from food. The brethren in Gaul do not take males for wives, nor do those in Persia take two wives. Those were things lawful in those countries. Nor do those who are in Judea circumcise themselves. Nor do our sisters who are among the Gelli consort with strangers. Nor do the brethren in Persia take their daughters for wives.
Nor do those in Media abandon their dead or bury them alive or give them as food to the dogs. Those in Edessa do not kill their wives or their sisters if they commit impurity. Rather, they simply withdraw from them and give them over to the judgment of God. Those who are in Hatra do not stone thieves to death. In short, wherever they are and in whatever place they happen to be, the laws of various countries do not hinder them from obeying the law of their Christ.
On the other hand, sickness and health, riches and poverty, these befall them wherever they are, for such things are not within the scope of their freedom." So again, they lived like society around them unless the rules and customs of the society they lived in violated the teachings of Christ. And when they did, regardless if it was considered okay in their society, they didn't follow such things. I'd like to read to you one last one. This is from Lactantius.
This was written very close to the end of the pre-Nicene period of the church. And he's writing this to the Romans and telling them how they could find that golden age for which they sought. He said, "Lay aside every evil thought from your hearts, and that golden age will at once return to you. For you cannot attain this by any other means than by beginning to worship the true God. If only God were worshiped, there would not be dissensions and wars. For men would know that they are the sons of one God.
There would be no adulteries, debaucheries, and prostitution by women. The males also would restrain their lust. The pious and religious contributions of the rich would provide for the destitute. As I have said, there would not be these evils on the earth if there were a general observance of the law of God by common consent. How happy and how golden would be the condition of human affairs if gentleness, piety, peace, innocence, justice, temperance, and faith took up their abode throughout the world.
In short, there would be no need of so many and varying laws to rule men, for the law of God alone would be sufficient for perfect innocence. In fact, there would be no need of prisons, the swords of rulers, or the terror of punishments." That truly is what Christianity is all about. No, the world is never going to come to that golden age as perhaps Lactantius thought was possible. When Christianity became the state religion of Rome, it didn't produce this golden age.
Rather, Christians then began molding themselves after the world around them. They ceased to be separate from the world. There was no distinction between being a Christian or being a non-Christian, except perhaps where you happen to worship. But this golden age is not beyond the reach of any of us. This should describe life among Christians. If it doesn't describe life in the church that we belong to, then my counsel is, let's find a church where people can say these things. No, not perfectly.
We're still fallen people. But if these statements describe what Christians were like in the year 150 or 200 AD, there's no reason that those same statements can't describe how Christians are today, at least authentic Christians.