Discussion Questions

Tertullian says the Christian “contest lies against…institutions…authority of tradition…man-made laws…worldly wise…antiquity…customs”; what picture of God and His authority is assumed in that statement, and where do you feel that same “contest” most sharply today? JumpstartAnother way to ask: When Tertullian says Christians must fight against tradition, man-made rules, and “worldly wisdom,” what does that show about how he sees God’s authority? Where do you feel that same conflict most today?

The chapter argues it would have been “far easier to justify divorce in Roman society than in our society today,” yet early Christians still limited divorce (and possibly remarriage); what does Origen’s claim—“neither government nor any other power” can separate what God joined—imply about how Christians should treat civil law, personal happiness, and pastoral compassion? JumpstartAnother way to ask: If divorce was easier to defend in Roman times, why did early Christians still restrict it? What does Origen’s idea that no human power can break what God joined mean for how we treat civil law, personal happiness, and caring for people in hard situations?

The author notes evangelicals once rejected divorce for “incompatibility,” but now match the world’s divorce rate; what specific cultural shifts (not changes in Scripture) do you think moved the “conservative block,” and how have those shifts quietly reshaped what churches consider “biblical” or “reasonable”? JumpstartAnother way to ask: What changes in culture (not in the Bible) do you think led many evangelicals to accept “incompatibility” divorce and end up with the same divorce rate as everyone else? How have those changes quietly shifted what churches call “biblical” or “reasonable”?

Early Christians called abortion “murder” and grounded it in God’s care for the fetus as a “created being”; how does their reasoning challenge common modern Christian ways of arguing about abortion (politically, pragmatically, or by “hard cases”), and what does it reveal about how they believed God evaluates hidden, private sins? JumpstartAnother way to ask: Early Christians called abortion “murder” because they believed God cares for the unborn child as His creation. How does that challenge the way Christians today often argue about abortion—through politics, what “works,” or hard cases—and what does it say about how God sees private sins?

The chapter praises evangelicals for opposing abortion but then asks whether that stance is truly independent of conservative politics; what would it look like—practically and socially—for the church to hold a moral line even after the conservative mainstream abandons it, and what topics today might be the next “divorce” in that sense? JumpstartAnother way to ask: If evangelicals oppose abortion, how can we tell whether that belief is really separate from conservative politics? What would it look like for the church to keep a moral stand even after the political right drops it, and what issue today might become the next “divorce”?

Clement criticizes luxury and also clothing that “cannot conceal the shape of the body,” yet the church “did not try to legislate” specific clothing; how do you hold non-negotiable principles of modesty and simplicity without turning them into either legalistic rules or meaningless suggestions? JumpstartAnother way to ask: Clement warns against luxury and clothes that show off the body, but the church didn’t make strict dress rules. How can we hold firm to modesty and simplicity without turning them into harsh rules or empty advice?

The discussion of mixed nude bathing—and the author’s swimsuit comparison—presses the question of what “modesty” actually means; where do you personally feel the pull to let current norms define what is “revealing,” and how would you explain “godly culture” to someone who insists modesty is purely cultural? JumpstartAnother way to ask: If modesty is more than just “whatever culture says,” where do you feel tempted to let today’s standards decide what counts as revealing? How would you explain “godly culture” to someone who says modesty is only cultural?

Tertullian asks, “How can it be right to look at the things that are wrong to do?” and the author confesses letting PG-13 standards decide for him; what parts of your entertainment choices are effectively outsourced to rating systems, peer expectations, or the “conservative community,” and what concrete standards would early Christians likely find inconsistent with discipleship? JumpstartAnother way to ask: Tertullian asks why it’s okay to watch things that would be wrong to do, and the author admits relying on PG-13 labels. Where do you let ratings, friends, or your church group choose your entertainment for you, and what standards would early Christians likely say don’t fit following Jesus?

Lactantius argues that enjoying legally sanctioned killing “pollutes” the conscience and that God forbids even “violence deemed lawful by men”; how does that logic confront modern Christian comfort with violent entertainment, violent sports, or even forms of state violence, and where do you find yourself resisting his conclusion? JumpstartAnother way to ask: Lactantius says enjoying legal killing damages the conscience and that God forbids even “lawful” violence. How does that challenge Christians today who are okay with violent movies, violent sports, or some kinds of government violence, and where do you push back on his view?

The chapter ends by saying early Christians’ “normal” lifestyle was markedly different and asks what power they had that we lack; based on the examples in this chapter (divorce, abortion, modesty, entertainment, class distinctions, and church order), what practices, beliefs about God, or communal pressures seem to have produced that independence from culture—and what would you have to change to recover it? JumpstartAnother way to ask: Early Christians lived in ways that looked very different from the norm—why were they able to do that? From topics like divorce, abortion, modesty, entertainment, class, and church life, what beliefs or church pressures helped them resist culture, and what would you need to change to live that way now?