two questions about #1 – was their reaction toward the particular form of entertainment that gladiator fighting represented or was it against entertainment as such? secondly, what does this mean if you like to watch UFC?

Great question Pete. I’ve wrestled with this very thing. What I can find is that they thought such entertainment did two things- 1) It damaged the imago dei because it tended towards the kingdom of darkness in the further marring of humanity created in God’s image, 2) It defiled the spectators since their bloodlust was not in step with the heart of Christ to restore.

When we defile image bearers by attempting to further destory their image and we move in step with further pain and suffering which is charateristic of Satans agenda rather than Christ’s, we place ourselves on a slippery slope.

This is really hard for me since my entire history is one of fighting and competing in this way. But, I have to continually ask myself if my past or personal interests are in step with the gospel. I’ve been bothered by this for the last several months and am still working through it. I’ve heard many apologies for such an activity and could probably muster up one myself, but for several reasons they just don’t settle my conscience.

I may post more on this. I’ve done some reading on Augustine and Tertullian as they’ve commented on the Gladitorial events. Perhaps I’ll put a post together drawing out their view and applying it to our current fascination with UFC.

Thanks for writing brother.

thanks for the response…I appreciate your reflections on this as well as your willingness to wrestle with stuff so close to your own heart.

keep fighting, brother.

[...] David Fairchild has a very interesting post detailing the 10 marks of the early church that stood it apart from the prevailing culture of the pagan Roman empire of the time. 1- They refused to attend blood thirsty entertainment. 2- They did not serve in the military to support Caesar’s wars of conquest, which made them appear weak. 3- They were against abortion and infanticide. 4- They empowered women by showing their value and dignity. 5- They were against sex outside of marriage. 6- They were against homosexual relationships. 7- They were exceptionally generous with their resources. 8- They were radically for the poor. 9- They mixed races and social classes in ways that were considered scandalous. 10- They believed only Christ was the way to salvation. [...]

Blogspotting: 10 Marks of the Early Church…

Rodney Stark and other sociologists tell us there were 10 values of early Christians that stood in stark (no pun intended) contrast to the pluralistic pagan culture of Rome. Let’s prayferfully think through these values and match them to the witness …

[...] Source: David Fairchild » 博客文章 » 10 Marks of the Early Church [...]

Beautifully and eloquently said, David. Bravo and Amen!

Bob Pratico
Sojourn Huntsville

[...] [...]

[...] After finishing that post, I took a look around at the rest of his posts and one quickly caught my eye: 10 Marks of the Early Church. I’ve read a number of books on the early church, including books written by the Ante-Nicene fathers, but I don’t think I’ve come across a better summary than this. Here they are: • 1- They refused to attend blood thirsty entertainment. They wouldn’t go to gladiatorial events because they believed it defiled humans who were created in the image of God. This made them appear to be anti-social. Tertullian and Augustine both write about these events in a negative light. • 2- They did not serve in the military to support Caesar’s wars of conquest, which made them appear weak. • 3- They were against abortion and infanticide. In this culture, both were considered acceptable. To throw your baby out on the dung heap if you didn’t want it was not taboo. • 4- They empowered women by showing their value and dignity in places of learning and service which had previously been exclusively for men. Christians held women in high regard and treasured them rather than viewing them as just a step above expendable children and servants. • 5- They were against sex outside of marriage. This fidelity was considered odd and against culture. Sex was viewed as nothing more than a desire like eating or sleeping. Christians held a high view of the bed and kept it pure and would not engage in sex outside of marriage. • 6- They were against homosexual relationships. This was odd in a time when same sex practice was not frowned upon. • 7- They were exceptionally generous with their resources. They shared what they had with one another and welcomed others in with a hospitality that was unparalleled. • 8- They were radically for the poor. In a time when the poor and downtrodden were viewed as getting what they deserved, they were aggressively committed to loving and serving people in the margins of society. • 9- They mixed races and social classes in ways that were unseen in their gatherings, and for it they were considered scandalous. • 10- They believed only Christ was the way to salvation. This was in a time when everyone had a god and could believe something entirely different and it was totally acceptable to be polytheists and pluralistic. Christians dared claim that Jesus was the only way and refused to bend to other gods. [...]

[...] Read all 10 Marks of the Early Church (guess which two I don’t feel like discussing because I think they are more complex than soundbites?). [...]

This is great stuff… I haven’t come across this in a list form before.

Here’s my struggle, though – I admire the early Church on many levels and believe its practices are to be emulated. I always have to remind myself of context, though, for if I was to look at David’s reign, for instance, I’d participate in war as a tool of my faith.

That’s one struggle with being a 21st Century Christian. I have the luxury of being a man of peace because others before me used war. I will continue to propogate a love for my enemies as Jesus does and the early Church did… but if someone were to come into my house tonight to kill my family I’d grab my sword.

I like that list you gave there of the Early Church. For the most part the Anabaptists have constantly tried obeying teachings like that which we see from scripture. Of that list the one we might struggle with the most is empowering women.

“If we held the values 1-Refused bloodthirsty sports, 2-Refused militarism, 4-Empowered women, 9-Mixed races and classes, and 10-Were radically for the poor, we would be considered liberal by conservative ideology.”

I find this deeply offensive. I attend a Southern Baptist Church (not a bastion of liberalism by any measure) and I can tell you we hold to all of these values stridently. I think you are falling prey to what our opponents say about us rather than the truth.