Volume 9: Issue 3 | April 2026
The Gospel and Singleness
25Now concerning virgins: I have no commandment from the Lord; yet I give judgment as one whom the Lord in His mercy has made trustworthy. 26I suppose therefore that this is good because of the present distress—that it is good for a man to remain as he is: 27Are you bound to a wife? Do not seek to be loosed. Are you loosed from a wife? Do not seek a wife. 28But even if you do marry, you have not sinned; and if a virgin marries, she has not sinned. Nevertheless such will have trouble in the flesh, but I would spare you.
29But this I say, brethren, the time is short, so that from now on even those who have wives should be as though they had none, 30those who weep as though they did not weep, those who rejoice as though they did not rejoice, those who buy as though they did not possess, 31and those who use this world as not misusing it. For the form of this world is passing away.
32But I want you to be without care. He who is unmarried cares for the things of the Lord—how he may please the Lord. 33But he who is married cares about the things of the world—how he may please his wife. 34There is a difference between a wife and a virgin. The unmarried woman cares about the things of the Lord, that she may be holy both in body and in spirit. But she who is married cares about the things of the world—how she may please her husband. 35And this I say for your own profit, not that I may put a leash on you, but for what is proper, and that you may serve the Lord without distraction.
36But if any man thinks he is behaving improperly toward his virgin, if she is past the flower of youth, and thus it must be, let him do what he wishes. He does not sin; let them marry. 37Nevertheless he who stands steadfast in his heart, having no necessity, but has power over his own will, and has so determined in his heart that he will keep his virgin, does well. 38So then he who gives her in marriage does well, but he who does not give her in marriage does better.
39A wife is bound by law as long as her husband lives; but if her husband dies, she is at liberty to be married to whom she wishes, only in the Lord. 40But she is happier if she remains as she is, according to my judgment—and I think I also have the Spirit of God.
​
– I Corinthians 7:25-40, NKJV
Context, context, context. To understand this third section of I Corinthians 7, remember what the first two sections taught. Verses 1-16 teach that people disturbing the church in Corinth were wrong. What did these “super-spirituals” teach? The soul is more important than the body, so they said, “It is not good for a man to touch a woman” (I Corinthians 7:1). Up through verse 16, Paul deals with the bad consequences this teaching. Married? No sex now! Widowed? Don’t marry again! One spouse a believer and the other not? Separate! And Paul replied: Married? Continue sexual intimacy except for short periods of time if you both agree. Widowed? Yes, marry again, only in the Lord. Spouse an unbeliever? Stay married anyway: you may save your spouse! Though if the unbeliever wants to leave, let him go. God has called us to peace.
The second section of chapter 7 is verses 17-24 and teaches this rule: “Let each one remain as they are.” Our life’s circumstances do not determine either our joy or our fate once we are in Christ. Faithfulness to our Savior does not mean changing jobs or spouses. It does not even mean getting circumcised or undoing circumcision. In whatever place we are in life, we can and should be contented.
This third section, verses 25-40, deals with people engaged to be married. An ancient interpretation of what Paul teaches is that celibacy is superior to marriage: if you can handle it, stay unmarried. John Calvin taught that. The Catholic Church teaches that. Some modern Bible commentators teach that. Is that what Paul teaches in these verses? No. Here is what the verses mean: The “super-spirituals” who are telling engaged couples that they need to break off their engagements are wrong, wrong, wrong. People should marry if they do not have the gift of celibacy. Yes, the gift of celibacy is good, but not in the ways that the “super-spirituals” think. Paul himself was unmarried when he wrote I Corinthians. It was God’s gift to him, but it is not something to impose on others as a superior state.
Of course, “in the present distress,” Paul writes in verse 26, it is better to not have the burden of a husband or wife. What was the “present distress?” We do not know. The church in Corinth knew, but we cannot even guess. However, one thing we know: Paul is not writing a general discourse on marriage. Whether it is famine or persecution, he means that in the time of that distress, one is better off unmarried. What does he write in a more general way elsewhere? “Therefore, I desire that the younger widows marry, bear children, manage the house. Give no opportunity to the adversary to speak reproachfully” (I Timothy 5:14). Ordinarily, younger widows should remarry, but in Corinth at that time, because of their “present distress” it was advantageous not to.
Well, if Paul writes only to a specific circumstance in Corinth, their “present distress,” what value does his teaching have for us today in rich, well-fed, and mostly peaceful America? There are three principles in these verses that always apply to Christians. The first is Gospel Contentment. You see that in verses 26-28. Are you engaged? Be content. Are you unengaged? Be content. But even if you are unengaged and someone comes along and you want to be engaged, you have not sinned. Not at all! The point is that you can and should be content in every circumstance. The same idea reappears in verses 36-40, and no, fathers, you should not try to stop it. The problem, remember, is that the “super-spirituals” were making circumstances the important thing in living the Christian life: better not to touch a woman! Paul replies that in this passing life, circumstances are only temporary and are not the center of Christian living.
Verses 29-31 teach a second principle, Gospel Perspective. We move now from gospel contentment to gospel perspective, and to another difficult set of verses, 29-31. “But this I say, brethren, the time is short so that from now on even those who have wives should be as though they had none.” Now that sounds radical! What’s the point? Paul is pushing against discontentment in the Corinthian church. Because of the false teaching of the super-spirituals, they were obsessed with the subject of marriage. To marry or not to marry? That was all that mattered to them. That is a question, but it is not the question for a Christian. They were forgetting what time it is. Consider what Paul says in Romans 13, “and do this knowing the time, that now it is high time to awake out of sleep, for now our salvation is nearer than when we first believed. The night is far spent; the day is at hand. Therefore, let us cast off the works of darkness and let us put on the armor of light.” What time is it? Christian, we live on the doorstep of eternity.
Some writers read Paul and say, “Paul thought Christ was going to return in the next few years.” But he does not write, “for the Lord Jesus is about to return.” He writes, “for the form of this world is passing away.” He means that being a Christian brings a fundamental change of perspective. Nothing in this world is permanent. It will all pass away.
Then he uses a rhetorical device called hyperbole, that is, exaggeration or overstatement. “From now on, even those who have wives should be as though they had none.” Does he mean that a husband can say to his wife, “Wife, I’m going out with the boys tonight. Be back in a month. Maybe. Paul says that I should live as though I did not have a wife.” Of course not! What Paul is doing is trying to remind the church in Corinth that they need to reclaim their Gospel Perspective: we already have eternal life, so nothing in this age is permanent.
Marriage is for this present time. In the new heavens and the new earth, we will not be given in marriage. We will be like the angels (see Matthew 22:30). It is the same with sorrow and suffering, so Paul continues, “Those who weep, do so as though they did not weep.” Does that mean should never cry? Of course not. In fact, we should weep with those who weep (Romans 12:15). But we don’t grieve like the world grieves, without hope (I Thessalonians 4:13). That Gospel Perspective is what Paul aims at in verses 29-31.
Finally, in verses 32-35, Paul teaches Gospel Freedom. Many commentators understand Paul to be saying, “He who is unmarried cares for the things of the Lord, how he may please the Lord. But he who is married cares about the things of the Lord, but if you are married your attention is divided and that's less wonderful.”
But what is marriage for? Yes, since sin has entered the world, marriage is a remedy for our weaknesses. However, marriage predates sin! We don’t marry to avoid sin. We marry to support each other – “Two are better than one” (Ecclesiastes 4:9-12). We marry so we can have children for the Lord (Malachi 2:15). In fact, the Lord said in the beginning, “It is not good for the man to be alone” (Genesis 2:18).
So, what does Paul intend in these verses? Remember the context: the super-spirituals are teaching that all sexual relations are bad, whether you are married or not; and the church in Corinth had become obsessed with sex, as in avoiding it altogether. Paul says to all of them, married, widowed, engaged, and single: “I want you to be without care. Here you are obsessing over all these issues, but you don't have to. In fact, don't obsess but enjoy your freedom!
What's beautiful about Paul's teaching in the entirety of this chapter is that he so wonderfully identifies both marriage and singleness as gifts. Verse 7: “each one has his own gift from God; one in this manner and another in that.” Singleness and marriage are not in competition as to which one is more spiritual. They are both gifts, and neither is superior to the other, unlike what the super-spirituals were teaching. Whatever your estate, you can serve the Lord. You have Gospel Contentment helped by Gospel Perspective giving Gospel Freedom. The super-spirituals had whipped everybody into a frenzy where they were now enslaved to discontentment and lacked perspective.
Remember what Paul wrote earlier. “You were bought at a price, do not become slaves of men” (I Cor 7:23). The super-spirituals were hawking the principles of the world and an obsession over external circumstances the same as unbelievers have. Paul replies. Be content, see things from the gospel perspective, and rejoice in the freedom you have in Christ. Christ doesn't want his servants to be enslaved again to the unbiblical expectations of men, even if they are teaching in the church.
I Corinthians 7 in the end is not primarily about marriage or remarriage or being unmarried. It is about the damage that unbiblical spirituality can do to a church. It is about contentment, perspective, and freedom. Are there super-spirituals in the church today? Are there teachers who make believers afraid of their judgment and retaliation? You bet there are, but that is for another time.
Brothers and sisters, remember that you were bought with a price (I Cor 6:20). Do not become the slaves of men and their opinions. Also, marriage is simply beautiful, but it should never be wielded, for or against, as a whip or bludgeon to make people feel more or less spiritual. Serve the Lord without distraction. If you are single and you want to get married, you do not sin. If you are married rejoice in the beauty of the gift that God has given you. Remain as you are in contentment, walking in the light of eternity, and blessing the name of God for whatever gift he brings into your life. Don't let people steal away your joy and your freedom. Their man-made rules will pass away. Serve the Lord with freedom and with joy.
– Alex Tabaka
Broomall, May 21, 2023
Toxic and Forgiving: An Introductory Word
What we think and believe drives our interpretations of events and other people, which in turn drives our words and ultimately our lives. In most of us, at least two schools of thought vie for dominance: on one hand we have Christ's teaching and example, and on the other hand, we are tempted by a self-centered psychological stew, whose pure form can be called Expressive Individualism.
These two articles, Toxic and Forgiving, were written separately, but we bring them together because they address two possible responses to conflict. One arises from the psychological stew, the other is commanded by the Lord. One isolates and destroys, the other unites and builds up. Read with care and follow the Lord of life.
– John Edgar
Toxic
But understand this, that in the last days there will come times of difficulty. For people will be lovers of self, lovers of money, proud, arrogant, abusive, disobedient to their parents, ungrateful…. – II Timothy 3:1-2
Not too long ago, “toxic” referred to poisons. Carbon monoxide is toxic. So is cyanide. How did the word “toxic” come to be applied to people?
It began in the 1980s with the California psychologist Shepherd Bliss. He claimed that with the Industrial Revolution, masculinity had turned poisonous. In the absence of traditional boy-to-man coming of age rituals, men have become either weak and feminized or hyper-masculine chauvinists. Whereas once men had cooperated with one another, now they competed viciously. Men need to be with men. Bliss began self-help retreats for men, using ideas from the Swiss psychologist Carl Jung (1875-1961). Groups in the wilderness would drum and chant in sweat lodges with the goal of men connecting with the deep inner spirituality of their masculine selves by connecting with other men.
Okay, another goofy self-care regimen of an odd sort using ancient myths and mentor-mentee relationships. But applying a word for poison to people spread. In the 1990s, the term “toxic masculinity” moved to academic and the helping professions. Uh oh! Then the #MeToo movement of the 2010s brought the term “toxic masculinity” to popular attention, with a new twist. What began as a movement by men to help men became a tool for feminists to attack men for their “toxic masculinity.” All men are potential rapists, they said. We must raise boys to be caring and empathetic, like women, able to express their emotions. The problem is the male hormone testosterone, suitable for a world of wild animals and tribal raiding but unsuited to the modern world. Never mind that measured testosterone levels have been steadily dropping in the industrialized world for the past fifty years and sperm counts for even longer.
Like toxic gas, the idea of “toxic people” spread. Now there are “toxic family members” and “toxic families;” and the popular press eagerly offers advice on how to deal with them.
April 28, 2022, Psychology Today: “5 Strategies to Cope with Toxic Family Members.” The last step? Cut all ties when you fail to change toxic behaviors – in other family members, of course, not yourself.
November 10, 2023, Time magazine: “How to Set Boundaries with Families According to Therapists,” with headings like, “If someone violates your boundary, give them a chance to course correct,” and “Prioritize your own self-care.”
December 15, 2024, Women’s Health: “HERE’S HOW (AND WHEN) TO CUT TIES WITH TOXIC FAMILY MEMBERS.” A “pros” and “cons” list about whether this family member is good for you can help you decide when to cut someone off. If you do cut someone off, get support, i.e. others to affirm your decision. In the end “you can be proud of yourself for breaking the cycle of toxicity.” What if you are the “toxic” family member? Evidently the toxic do not read Women’s Health.
The Wall Street Journal reports, “Some 10% of the U.S. population is estranged from a parent or a child at any given time.” (WSJ, 12/17/2025, p A10). The article is about mothers on social media voicing their anguish and anger. It includes the unavoidable quotation from an “expert,” a sociology professor at Cornell University, that sometimes “adult children are justified…in breaking ties with their parents, especially if they were abusive.”
By now, the idea of “toxic families” has seeped into the souls of many discontented people, with its advice to flee such families. You can try to fix things, but self-care comes first. You are priority number one.
What should Christians make of this advice? Reject it. Mock it. Everyone is infected with sin and so could perhaps be called “toxic,” including people who practice “self-care.”
The endpoint of cutting off “toxic” families and friends is isolation. In C.S. Lewis’s book, The Great Divorce, he pictures Hell as an expanding suburb, with people moving ever farther apart until they are like distant galaxies in an inflating universe. The trouble is that even if you flee to the wilderness and live like an ancient Egyptian hermit, there too, toxic you will be with you because you cannot leave behind your own poisonous thoughts and emotions!
What are the Bible’s rules for dealing with a family that you arrogantly deem “toxic?” “‘Honor your father and mother’ (this is the first commandment with a promise), ‘that it may go well with you and that you may live long in the land’” (Ephesians 6:2-3). Does God’s command to honor father and mother apply only to worthy fathers and mothers? No! Why not? No fathers or mothers are completely worthy because “all have sinned and fallen short of the glory of God” (Romans 3:23). Even if mother and father are perfect, their children might still complain and be tempted to rebel because no children are perfect either. In Jesus’s story called “The Prodigal Son,” there is nothing wrong with the father. The problem is the son; in fact, both sons, the one who runs to a far country and the one who stays at home and won’t welcome his repentant brother home. Does God permit sons or daughters, in the name of self-care, to disregard his commandment to honor father and mother? What do you think?
Many (not all) homeless people got that way, in part, by fleeing their “toxic” families, so that when financial trouble hits, they have nowhere to land but the streets. Words from the American poet Robert Frost (1874-1963) in his poem “The Death of the Hired Man” come to mind. “Home is the place where, when you have to go there, they have to take you in.” However, when you have cut a family off for years, can you still turn to them? Will you dare ask them to take you in? Going home then requires the humility of the Prodigal Son returning to his father, and even the homeless are often too proud to go home. Applying the word “toxic” to people is itself TOXIC. There are good and bad men, happy and unhappy families, good and bad fathers and mothers, good and bad children. Everyone must deal with both the good and the bad. That is how life is in our fallen world.
Advice to flee “toxic families” and never speak to them again comes from the Serpent. God’s Word teaches us to love, forgive, and bear with one another, confessing sin and repenting when necessary. How many times? “Seventy times seven” (Matthew 18:22). Fleeing “toxic” people or families is not God’s way. It is sin!
Down with the toxic word “toxic” – except when it is used for poisons like arsenic. Used for people and families, it only inflames self-righteousness, severs human connections, breaks hearts, and intensifies loneliness.
– Bill Edgar
Forgiving
People constantly wrong others, in their families, churches, friendships, workplaces, school rooms, and in public. All are sinners, which is why Paul’s letters so often include words like “forbearing one another.” There is no one who has not suffered wrong or done wrong to others. How should a Christian respond to being wronged? Is it our duty always to say, “I forgive you?” Several recent murders have been followed by a survivor saying, “I forgive the murderer,” which raises the question publicly. Here are a few of the many Bible verses about sin and forgiveness.
1. “Good sense makes one slow to anger, and it is his glory to overlook an offense” (Proverbs 19:11) Wise people do not take offense at every misstep another makes. Classroom teachers, for example, learn to practice selective deafness.
2. “If your brother sins against you, go and tell him his fault, between you and him alone. If he listens to you, you have gained your brother” (Matthew 18:15). What does Jesus mean, “Listens to you?” He means that the person who said or did something wrong says something that amounts to, “I did wrong,” and then adds something like, “I’m sorry. Please forgive me.” If someone won’t listen, Jesus continues, take someone else with you. If they still won’t admit fault and seek pardon, then tell it to the church, that is, take it to the elders for judgment. If there is still no repentance, treat the wrongdoer like a Gentile. Jesus does not say, “Forgive him anyway.”
Without repentance, sin separates people from each other. However, the Christian never seeks revenge (see #6) and refuses to hold a grudge. How does one not hold a grudge? “Love your enemies and pray for those who persecute you” (Matthew 5:44). Do it. Pray like Stephen as he was being stoned to death: “And falling to his knees he cried out with a loud voice, ‘Lord, do not hold this sin against them.’ And when he had said this, he fell asleep” (Acts 7:60). Sing certain Psalms. Years ago, a very angry young man, a new Christian, unjustly fired from his first job, passed a church and heard them singing. He went in. The congregation was singing, “God of vengeance, O Jehovah, God of vengeance O shine forth!…” (Psalm 94:1). He felt such relief: I don’t have to get even. That’s not my job. That’s God’s job. He joined that church.
What does Jesus mean, “Treat him like a Gentile?” For Jews that meant, “Treat him like someone who is not part of the People of God.” That happens in the church when the elders lead the church in excommunicating someone. How does one treat a Gentile? As a neighbor, but not as a brother in the Lord.
3. Peter continued: “Then Peter came up and said to him, ‘Lord, how often will my brother sin against me, and I forgive him? As many as seven times?’ Jesus said to him, ‘I do not say to you seven times, but seventy-seven times’” (Matthew 18:21-22). There is no limit to how often we must forgive a brother in the Lord who asks to be forgiven. That no-limit rule is especially important in families where we rub shoulders with one another daily. The number one reason for divorce is not “incompatibility,” or even adultery. It is the daily refusing to forgive, remembering wrongs, and letting grudges accumulate until one person can’t stand the other and shouts “I want out!” And these days the state makes it easier to break marriage vows than to cancel a painting contract; despite the much greater collateral damage of a divorce.
4. Jesus told a story about two debtors. The first man owed an astronomically huge debt to his master and asked to be forgiven. His master forgave him. He did not have to pay his master back. Then a second man who owed the first much less money asked to be forgiven, and the servant refused to cancel the debt. Other servants told the master what happened. The master then summoned the first debtor. Jesus ended his story this way: “And in anger his master delivered him to the jailers, until he should pay all his debt. So also my heavenly Father will do to every one of you, if you do not forgive your brother from your heart” (Matthew 18:34-35). Note that forgiveness must be genuine, from the heart. A pastor visited a couple, who often quarreled, to try to sort out yet another quarrel. He took with him an 8” by 11” sheet of paper, with these words written in large print: “Forgive your husband from the heart. Forgive your wife from the heart.” He said, “Put this on your refrigerator.” They did, and the quarrels requiring the pastor’s help became fewer.
5. “Forgive us our debts as we forgive our debtors” (Matthew 6:12). If we are unforgiving people, will God be forgiving of us? This issue is so important that Jesus put it in the prayer he taught his disciples. Many Christians pray that prayer every week in church, and if they are unforgiving people, God may one day remind them how often they prayed that prayer.
6. What if someone refuses to repent and ask forgiveness? “Repay no one evil for evil but give thought to do what is honorable in the sight of all. If possible, so far as it depends on you, live peaceably with all. Beloved, never avenge yourselves, but leave it to the wrath of God, for it is written, ‘Vengeance is mine, I will repay,’ says the Lord. To the contrary, ‘if your enemy is hungry, feed him; if he is thirsty, give him something to drink; for by so doing you will heap burning coals on his head.’ Do not be overcome by evil, but overcome evil with good” (Romans 12:17-21) Not taking revenge can seem like forgiveness – or cowardly weakness – but it is neither. It takes strength to reject hatred, and it takes faith to trust God to do justice. Furthermore, God has appointed rulers to punish evildoers (Romans 13:4). When Erika Kirk recently said that she forgave her husband’s murderer, she did not say that she did not want her husband’s murderer to stand trial. He should.
7. Do “Please forgive,” and “I forgive you” wipe away all consequences of a sin? No, not in this life, not even with God. When Nathan the prophet confronted King David with his sin, David repented. “I have sinned,” he said, making no excuses at all. But! “Nathan said to David, ‘The Lord also has put away your sin; you shall not die. Nevertheless, because by this deed you have utterly scorned the Lord, the child who is born to you shall die’” (II Samuel 12:13-14). Likewise, there should be this-world consequences imposed by the civil authorities on the murderer of Charlie Kirk.
8. What happens in a family where repentance and forgiveness are absent? It dies and falls apart. Husbands divorce wives, and wives divorce husbands. Children cut parents out of their lives. Parents deny an inheritance to children. “A house divided against itself cannot stand” (Mark 3:25). What is true of families is true also of the household of God.
9. God calls us to embrace love. “Love…is not irritable or resentful” (I Corinthians 13:5b, ESV and other translations). The resentful person says, “You always,” or “You never,” but the loving person “keeps no record of wrongs,” as I Corinthians 13:5b can also be translated (NIV and others). A remembered and rehearsed record of wrongs underlies the resentful “you always” and “you never” that tears people apart.
10. How thorough should forgetting be? Can one say, “I forgive you, but I won’t forget?” As much as our Father in heaven enables us, our forgiveness should be like his: “as far as the east is from the west, so far does he remove our transgressions from us” (Psalm 103:12). God promised that in the New Covenant, “I will forgive their iniquity, and I will remember their sin no more” (Jeremiah 31:34b). The only Mediator between God and man, the Lord Jesus Christ, has brought us that new covenant, died for our sins, so that all who repent of their sins and ask God’s forgiveness through Jesus Christ will be given eternal life. How great is that? Greater than any wrong done against us that we will ever forgive.
– Bill Edgar
Called Against My Will
When I was in Junior High, my pastor, Glenn McFarland, accepted a call to plant a church in another presbytery. After the morning service on his last day before leaving Santa Ana, California, he greeted me at the door and challenged me to consider the pastoral ministry. If I recall correctly, I stood there hanging my head; I had no interest in becoming a pastor. A significant objection was the requirement of a pastor to be a public speaker.
My brother began his seminary career at the same time as I became a freshman at Geneva College. After his graduation he had an internship in the College Hill Church across from the college so I saw him often. I remember thinking once how wonderful it must be for him to have a career that allowed him to study the Bible so much. That was great for him, but I did not want to be a pastor.
A required course at Geneva was a speech class which put me at ease speaking in front of a crowd of people. God had removed a significant objection to this calling.
When I graduated from Geneva, I did not have a job lined up. My parents had moved from Apache, Oklahoma where Dad pastored the Indian Mission to Oklahoma City where many of the Native Americans in the mission had moved. My sister’s family had recently moved from Winchester, Kansas to Albuquerque, New Mexico due to her husband’s health. They hoped to see a new work started there. I chose to go to my sister’s place to look for a job and to help with that work which never developed.
While in Albuquerque I attended a Christian Reformed Church with my sister’s family. Following the evening service on July 30, we were all invited to the home of friends from that church. The children went to another part of the house while the two couples conversed in the living room. I was left to my own thoughts as a wallflower during that conversation. At some point my thoughts included the need for pastors in the Reformed Presbyterian Church. The lady of the house interrupted my musing to ask how my job search was going. I responded that I had not found anything yet and added, “If I were a pastor in the RP Church I would have plenty of job opportunities.” Immediately I was back to being a wallflower and asked myself, “Why did I say that?”
I could not shake that thought the rest of the time there and was forced to consider that option the rest of the evening, praying much about it. By the time I went to bed I was convinced that this was God’s call on me. Two days later I was on the bus to Oklahoma City and about a week later I traveled with my parents to the 1970 National Conference. (These were not yet called international conferences.) In those days the practice was to hold the annual meeting of synod in conjunction with the conference. This provided an opportunity for me to meet with the president of the seminary to be accepted as a student and to meet with the Pacific Coast Presbytery to be taken under care as a theological student.
A week or so following the conference I was on a bus trip to Pittsburgh and on Labor Day, I attended a seminary picnic marking the start of the academic year. The next morning I began my seminary classes. God had worked events so that in less than a month and a half I would go from having no interest in becoming a pastor to starting my seminary studies.
– Bruce Martin
Don't Be a Pig
As a ring of gold in a swine’s snout, so is a lovely woman who lacks discretion. – Proverbs 11:22
Ouch! What a comparison! To an Israelite, pigs were unclean animals in two senses. First and less importantly, pigs kept by Israel’s heathen neighbors behaved like all pigs do. They ate anything, even the most foul garbage, in the most ravenously dirty way; they rooted in the ground with their snouts for food; they rolled in the mud, grew fat and ugly, and were good only to be consumed for food. Second, and more importantly, the law God gave Moses declared pigs “unclean.” He forbade Israel to eat ham or bacon because it would make the eater repulsive in his sight and unfit to worship him. Thus, when Jesus wanted to show just how low the prodigal son had fallen in his story about a wayward son, he portrayed him feeding pigs in a far away country.
Now picture a gold ring in a swine’s snout. It does not belong there, but it would still shine. Since gold is the most chemically unreactive of all metals, almost nothing will make it tarnish. Pure gold stays pure no matter how dirty it gets, needing only to be rinsed off. So an Israelite would see the gold, but not want the pig.
Beauty in a woman magnetically attracts a man’s eyes. A beautiful woman is good looking, so a man has to make a deliberate effort not to stare at her. My father-in-law had a saying: “A married man has to put blinders on.” Blinders are opaque covers that can be put on a horse's bridle to block its peripheral vision so it only sees straight ahead. A horse thus equipped should be easier to ride or drive straight down a road, undistracted. One of Job’s protestations of his righteousness was, “I made a covenant with my eyes; how then could I gaze at a virgin (Job 31:1)?”
The Bible notes female beauty, in Sarah, Rachel, Bathsheba, Esther, and others, in each case the point being that it attracted male attention and desire. But what should a man think when he sees a beautiful woman “without discretion,” or in more common English “without good sense?” He would still recognize and admire the beauty, but he had better keep his distance because a lack of good sense clashes completely with the promise of beauty. It makes such a woman completely undesirable, like a pig! What should a wise man desire in a wife? Good sense, like the wisdom, diligence, kindness, and generosity of the Proverbs 31 woman. That chapter ends on the same note as this proverb but stated in a less jarring manner: “Charm is deceitful, and beauty is vain, but a woman who fears the LORD is to be praised. Her children rise up and call her blessed; her husband also, and he praises her (Proverbs 31:30, 28).” Good sense, or discretion, matters far more in a woman – or a man, remember Absalom? – than beauty.
– Bill Edgar
Third Century:
Systematic Persecution and New Heresies
Expansion
By the year 300 A.D. Christians were about ten percent of the Roman Empire’s population, more numerous in the East than in the West, but spreading now from North Africa to Spain, northern Gaul (modern day France), and Britian. It went northeast into the Caucasus Mountains, to Armenia and Georgia. It went south deep into Egypt and Ethiopia and southeast into Arabia. To the east, small churches continued to grow, in the present-day countries of Iraq, Iran, Afghanistan, Pakistan, and India. How did the Gospel spread? Partly by missionaries and partly by merchants going along established trade routes.
By 300 A.D. Christians had the Bible in four languages, Greek, Latin, Aramaic, and Coptic, the language of Egypt. The main centers of Greek-speaking Christianity were Antioch in Syria and Alexandria in Egypt. Carthage in North Africa and Rome were Latin centers. Edessa, northeast of Antioch, was the center of Aramaic (Syriac) Christian faith. Tertullian (160-230 A.D.), and Cyprian of Carthage (d. 258 A.D.) wrote in Latin. Writing in Greek were Clement (150 – 216 A.D.) and Origen of Alexandria (185 – 253 A.D.), and Hippolytus of Rome (c. 170 – c. 236 A.D.).
At the start of the third century, the North African Christian Tertullian wrote his Apology, one of the first Christian books written in Latin. The Empire should not persecute Christians because they are good citizens, not criminals, he argued. Furthermore, they are everywhere. “We are but of yesterday, and we have filled every place among you — cities, islands, fortresses, towns, marketplaces, the very camp, tribes, companies, palace, senate, forum, — we have left nothing to you but the temples of your gods.” Where Christians were numerous, people deserted the temples.
Persecution
Plagues, famines, inflation, and political instability threatened the Roman Empire in the 200s. The army chose the emperors. In 193 A.D. there were five emperors, in 238 A.D. five again, and in 276 A.D. three. Civil war often loomed. Some historians estimate that prices rose 15,000% from 200 to 300 A.D. There was a plague from 251-266 A.D., which sharply reduced the population. At one point, 5000 people a day were dying in Rome. Cyprian described the plague in detail, so historians call it the Cyprian Plague.
Many Romans blamed the Christians for Rome’s troubles. They had forsaken the gods who made Rome great. They refused to burn incense to Caesar as a god. Thus, Christians were fed to wild animals, crucified, burnt alive, made slaves, or, if Roman citizens, they were beheaded. Tertullian mocked: “If the Tiber rises as high as the city walls, if the Nile does not send its waters up over the fields, if the heavens give no rain, if there is an earthquake, if there is famine or pestilence, straightway the cry is, ‘Away with the Christians to the lion!’”
To escape persecution, Christians often fled and hid. When they could, they trusted friendly officials to protect them. They used symbols to identify themselves, such as a fish. Ichthus, the Greek word for fish has five letters. The five letters form an acronym: they start words meaning, “Jesus Christ God’s Son Savior.” For funeral services in Rome, Christians met in below ground catacombs, where people were buried.
Christians who died for being Christians were called “martyrs,” that is “witnesses.” One martyr in the 200s was a twenty-two-year-old newly married Roman woman named Perpetua, denounced by her furious father for being baptized. While still nursing her son, she was arrested. In a diary, Perpetua described in detail the heat in her Carthaginian prison, rough treatment by the guards, and the agony of being suddenly forced to stop nursing her son. For her “stubbornness,” Perpetua was sent to an amphitheater for a heifer to attack her and amuse the crowd. When the heifer did not hurt her badly, the governor ordered a young gladiator to kill her. His trembling hands could not do it, so as she guided the young gladiator’s sword to her throat, she shouted to the crowd, “Stand fast in the faith and love one another!”
The Emperor Decius (249-251) ordered the first Empire-wide persecution. “For the safety of the empire,” every adult had to sacrifice before local magistrates. They got a certificate of loyalty for doing it. Many Christians refused and were sent to work as slaves in copper and silver mines, where conditions were brutal and lives short. Others were simply executed. Decius’s campaign ended when he died.
Aftereffects of the Decian persecution lasted a long time in Rome. An elder named Novatian said that Christians who sacrificed or bought a counterfeit certificate of sacrifice, could never be readmitted to the church. Cornelius, the recently elected bishop, disagreed. He readmitted lapsed Christians to the communion of the Church when they repented publicly. The church in Rome split, the majority with Cornelius, the Novatians the minority. Novatian churches lasted about two centuries.
Heresies
Gnosticism, with its disdain for the body and claim to higher gnosis (knowledge) continued to plague the church. The Marcionite heresy continued. However, the main Third Century heresies arose from men trying to explain Christian doctrine.
Around 215 A.D., Sabellius in Rome taught that God is one and three in this way: He is three the way a man can be father, son, and husband at the same time. Sabellianism was a kind of modalism, teaching that God appears in three modes, Father, Son, and Holy Spirit. Here is an example of modalism: the chemical compound H2O can be solid (ice), liquid (water), and gas (vapor or steam depending on temperature) when it evaporates. Present-day Oneness Pentecostals teach a kind of modalism: God is a single person named Jesus, not a trinity of three persons. Jesus is the Father in heaven, was Jesus on earth, and is now the Holy Spirit. Who did Jesus pray to in the Garden of Gethsemane? To himself!
Hippolytus, bishop of Rome, excommunicated Sabellius in 220 A.D. Tertullian observed that Sabellius’ teaching meant that God died on the cross. To combat Sabellius, Tertullian introduced the terms “substance” for God’s eternal Being, and “Person” to distinguish between Father, Son, and Holy Spirit, the three Persons of the Godhead.
Sabellianism was a heresy about God. Docetism was a heresy about Jesus. Docetism taught that Jesus was divine but not fully human. His death on a cross was only an illusion, since the divine Christ could not really die. Docetism had continuing appeal in a Roman world where the idea persisted that matter and physical bodies are evil. When Christians downplay Christ’s humanity and call him the “Son of God,” but never the “Son of Man” as Jesus often called himself, they can tend towards the Docetic heresy.
Arianism, another Third Century heresy, takes its name from Arius of Alexandria (256-336). Arius taught that Jesus Christ is the Son of God because he was the first being God created. He is not eternal. The Logos of John 1 is a created being. Today’s Jehovah’s Witnesses are Arians. Their New World Bible translates John 1:1 this way: “In the beginning the Word was, and the Word was with God, and the Word was a god.” The fight with Arianism was just beginning in the 200s.
The Christian Church defended and maintained its catholic (same teaching everywhere) character in three ways.
1) Very early, they had a short creed known as the Apostles Creed. Nearly every early Christian writer includes somewhere in his letters or books a recognizable version of this creed.
2) Apostolic Succession of elders and especially bishops helped to keep the teachers of the church sound in the faith. In every major city, the bishop traced his teaching and authority back to an Apostle. John the Apostle in Ephesus, for example, taught Polycarp bishop of Smyrna, who taught Irenaeus of Lyons, who taught Hippolytus of Rome (see II Timothy 2:2). Each city kept a list of bishops that had overseen that city’s churches (see Hebrews 13:7).
The bishops were the key to faithful teaching more than the elders as a group (see Acts 20:17, 28-30) because very soon after the Apostles, the Church imitated Rome’s hierarchical government. “Bishops” oversaw all the churches in a certain area. Deacons morphed into assistants to the bishop, some of them on their way to being bishops themselves. Sub-deacons appeared.
3) The Church distinguished sharply between the written Word of God and forgeries. It had the inspired Old Testament, in the Greek Septuagint. Unfortunately, the Septuagint included Apocryphal books written originally in Greek and not part of the Hebrew Scriptures used in Jesus’ time. As for the New Testament, the Church accepted as inspired Scripture books written either by Apostles, or Apostolic associates like Luke. They also relied on the internal witness of the Holy Spirit, witnessing that a book came from God. Long before 100 A.D., all churches read the four Gospels, Acts, Paul’s letters, and I Peter. For a time, some churches were cautious about Hebrews because of its unknown authorship, Revelation because it was hard to understand, and the short books II Peter, II and III John, James, and Jude. For a while, a few churches treated the Epistle of Barnabas, the Shepherd of Hermas, the Teaching (Didache in Greek) of the Apostles, and the Apocalypse of Peter as Scripture.
The Church rejected forgeries, such as the Protoevangelium of James, with its fanciful account of Mary’s birth, the gnostic Gospel of Thomas, and The Gospel of Mary [Magdalene].
Unfortunately, some ideas from these non-Scriptural books seeped into Christian thinking, especially ideas about the perpetual virginity of Mary. Early Christian teachers like Tertullian (160-220), Irenaeus (130-202), and Hegissipus (110-180) did not hold that doctrine. However, by 250 A.D. most church leaders did believe it. How did they explain Jesus’s brothers (Matthew 13:55-56, Mark 6:3, John 7:5, Acts 1:14, and Galatians 1:19)? They were either Joseph’s children by an earlier marriage or Jesus’s cousins. A prayer to Mary dates from 250 A.D.
The exaltation of an ever-virgin Mary bolstered the idea that while marriage is holy, life-long celibacy is more holy. This idea led to a second error. By 300 A.D., many Christians admired ascetic hermits living alone in the Egyptian desert as holy men. Church leaders mostly disapproved of men living alone, so they would later direct men to live together in monasteries.
A third mistake began about 250 A.D. Under the influence of pagan panel painting, Christian began to paint pictures of Jesus, Mary, and the saints. Soon they kneeled before them.
Lastly, the teachings of a Persian named Mani (216-276) appeared. Mani mixed Christian, gnostic, and pagan ideas in a stew about an eternal struggle between a good spiritual world of light and an evil material world of darkness. In history, light was being gradually removed from matter and returned to the kingdom of light. Manicheanism spread quickly, westwards to Rome and eastwards all the way to China. For a short time, it was the main rival of Christianity to replace paganism. Manicheanism faded out in the West by 500, in the East by 600, and in China by 800 A.D.
Conclusion
Despite heretical enemies within, and persecutions, the Christian Church in the Third Century continued to grow. In the next century, after the worst Roman persecution, it would enjoy the benefit and challenge of being legal.
– Bill Edgar
Reprint: Kidding Yourself
(Clipped from a magazine, this advertisement of a well-known reducing food is a grim reminder of human weakness:)
1. Think about dieting tomorrow.
2. Just cut out desserts.
3. Drink some low-calorie soda pop.
4. Use a sugar substitute in coffee.
5. Eat an occasional low-calorie meal.
6. Decide to starve for a day or two.
7. Buy elaborate exercising equipment.
8. Skip breakfast some days.
9. Try every fad diet that comes along.
10. Wear clothes that hide your figure.
11. Live on reducing pills.
12. Drink skim milk occasionally.
13. Simply avoid fried foods.
14. Fill up on bulky foods.
15. Etc.
16. Etc.
Commercially speaking, this bit of psychological warfare is motivated by one, and only one goal: to increase sales of the product advertised. In spite of this, we can learn something useful from the caption: "How To Kid Yourself."
Jeremiah the prophet asked: "Can the Ethiopian change his skin, or the leopard his spots? Then may ye also do good, that are accustomed to do evil." Sinners are disturbed over themselves to some degree, at times. The external marks of moral failure are always a source of shame to the drunkard, the convict, the dope addict. If only he could change these outer signs of his wretched inner failure, how wonderful it would be. If we all could overcome our besetting sins, and truly live up to our best instincts, what a happy life that would be. But how?
Most of us are inclined to follow some ineffective program of "reducing" bad habits and living a better life. By such self-effort we usually end up trying to "kid ourselves." Jeremiah said, 'The heart is deceitful above all things, and desperately wicked: who can know it?" (17:9)
Self-deception is our greatest peril as young Christians, or adults. Are we not trying to kid ourselves when we carry a grudge for years which we know is a sin against love, a serious offence that is condemned by the most terrible warnings in God's Word?
Are we not trying to kid ourselves when we nurse the tobacco habit, or drink an increasing number of social glasses in the society of our imbibing friends?
How honest dare we be with God about our true situation? How serious are we before God in taking His offered aid in changing that which needs to be changed? It is a searching exercise indeed to ask ourselves such questions.
King Saul of Israel had a Divine command to destroy Amalek. When God gave him the victory, Saul disobeyed the command to annihilate Amalek utterly. Saul and his people spared Agag, "and the best of the sheep, and of the oxen, and of the fatlings, and the lambs. . . ." When the prophet Samuel came to visit Saul, the king bravely said, "Blessed be thou of the Lord: I have performed the commandment of the Lord."
Whom was King Saul trying to kid? Was he kidding Samuel, or himself? Samuel replied to Saul's hypocritical greeting: "What meaneth then this bleating of the sheep in mine ears, and the lowing of the oxen which I hear?" King Saul met this with excuses, excuses, excuses. Again, was he trying to kid himself? Samuel swept aside the whole fragile curtain of lies and delivered a terrible sentence of excommunication against the disobedient king. His saying warns us all: "Hath the Lord as great delight in burnt offerings and sacrifices, as in obeying the voice of the Lord? Behold, to obey is better than sacrifice, and to hearken than the fat of rams. For rebellion is as the sin of witchcraft, and stubbornness is as iniquity and idolatry. (I Samuel 15:22-23a)
Are we trying to kid ourselves by playing with sin? "Be not deceived; God is not mocked: for whatsoever a man soweth, that shall he also reap. For he that soweth to his flesh shall of the flesh reap corruption; but he that soweth to the Spirit shall of the Spirit reap life everlasting."(Galatians 6:7,8.)
Are YOU trying to deceive God? Or are YOU only kidding yourself?
Samuel E. Boyle,
Covenanter Witness
3/11/1964, p 169
The 2026 Spring Meeting of Atlantic Presbytery
The Atlantic Presbytery met in Ridgefield Park on March 20-21, and the theme of our meeting was quickly established as theological students and new contacts.
After a few years of going easy on the new guys, the presbytery decided it was high time to elect one of the newer pastors as moderator. Hunter Jackson nosed out Andrew Kerr by a single vote. He groused, got up, and did a great job. That was the only close vote of the meeting.
Pastor Jackson introduced Micah Jack and recommended that he be received as a student under care (potential pastor in training). If you look carefully, you may see a pattern, since Pastor Howe brought Michael Howarth before us a few years back.
Our students under care are now James Allmond, Michael Howarth, Micah Jack, Dan Roggow, and Stephen Sutherland. Elder David Klussman is taking examinations towards being licensed for more regular preaching. Having this many students to examine is a good kind of busy. Either we are only receiving capable students, or perhaps we are going soft. All the students passed their examinations, and none of them received even a single no vote. There's always the fall meeting.
The presbytery dealt with a variety of other matters. Bill Edgar wrote a paper critiquing the work of Synod's Women Deacons committee. Presbytery endorsed the paper by a 15-4 vote and forwarded it to Synod. We discussed how to address matters of concern at Geneva College and in another presbytery.
We also learned that Coldenham (formerly Coldenham-Newburgh), is hoping to call a pastor in a few weeks. So is White Lake. Elkins Park celebrates its 175th anniversary on May 2.
Perhaps the highlight of the meeting was the arrival of a group of Chinese-speaking brothers from the Queens Borough of New York City. After some consideration, the presbytery approved the recommendation of the Ridgefield Park session and made Reformed Covenant Church a mission church of the Atlantic Presbytery. If you know Chinese-speaking Christians in Queens or Brooklyn, please point them their way. We will also examine the man presently preaching for them, as we seek to bring their situation into regular order. We are glad that we have Chinese-speaking pastors elsewhere in the country who are able and eager to help.
Please pray for Reformed Covenant Church, and also for the Oneonta Mission Church in upstate New York. Pray for the men listed above, and for the Cambridge, White Lake, and Coldenham congregations as they look for pastors. Finally, please pray earnestly for God to revive the Walton, Coldenham, and Ridgefield Park congregations.
– John Edgar
Authors in this issue
​​
Sam Boyle was a speaker at a White Lake Reunion in the 1930s before going to China as a missionary. In the 1960s, he preached frequently for Broomall RP Church when they were without a pastor.
​
Bill Edgar is a retired pastor of Broomall RPC (Philadelphia) and the author of the following books:
Chutzpah Heroes: Thirteen Stories About Underdogs with Wit and Courage
History of the Reformed Presbyterian Church of North America 1920-1980: Decade by Decade
7 Big Questions Your Life Depends On
All books are available from both Crown & Covenant and Amazon and other online vendors.
​
John Edgar is the pastor of Elkins Park RPC (Philadelphia).
​
Bruce Martin is a retired RPCNA pastor and the current clerk of Atlantic Presbytery. He is a member of Elkins Park RPC (Philadelphia).
Alex Tabaka was the pastor of Broomall RPC (Philadelphia) and is currently the pastor of the Los Angeles RPC.
​
​​
Mark Your Calendars
​
We note, for your calendars and prayer, upcoming events of interest to Atlantic Presbytery:
​​
Please contact Kyle and Violet Finley, Atlantic Youth Coordinators (atluth@gmail.com) for more information if interested in the youth events.​​​​​​​​​​
​​​
Local Presbytery Events
May 8-10
Walton RP Church (Walton, NY)
Speaker: Martin Monteith
Grades 7-12
​
St. Lawrence Theological Foundations Weekend (TFW)
May 15-17
Oswego RP Church (Oswego, NY)
Speaker: Gabriel Wingfield
11th grade - College/Career-aged youth
​
RPCNA-Wide, Summer Event
Pillar Conference​ hosted by the RPCNA's Youth Ministries Committee of Synod (YMCS).
July 2-6
Geneva College (Beaver Falls, PA)
Speaker: Gabriel Wingfield
Topic: Unshakeable Kingdom
18 - 24 year olds
​
Pillar Conference exists to form strong, committed young adults who live out their faith with depth, conviction, and purpose, becoming pillars in Christ's church for years to come. It invites 18 - 24 year-olds to see themselves not just as attendees, but as future supporters, leaders, and stabilizers of the RPCNA. You may be familiar with Pillar Conference from past years, under its previous name, the Youth Leadership Conference (YLC).
​
Registration is now open. If cost is an obstacle, please get in touch with your presbytery Youth Coordinators (Kyle and Violet Finley).
​
RPCNA Synod
June 16-19, 2026
Indiana Wesleyan University (Marion, IN)
​
Prep Week July 18 - 25, 2026 for counselors and staff
Kids & Teen July 25 - July 31, 2026 ​
White Lake Family Camp July 31 - August 7, 2026
​​​​​​
A Little Help?
The Editors do not sell individual subscriptions to A Little Strength. Our goal is to publish with as little labor and financial overhead as possible. Yet mailing paper copies to Atlantic Presbytery churches and maintaining a website aren't free. If you have found A Little Strength to be interesting and profitable,
would you consider sending a contribution?
Make your check out to Elkins Park RPC, designated for A Little Strength,
and send it to the treasurer, at the church's address:
901 Cypress Ave, Elkins Park, PA 19027.