---

 

GET MARRIED, STAY MARRIED, RAISE A FAMILY

 

---

 

It's a well-known fact in sociology, history, and politics that lifelong faithful marriage is the foundation for a stable and lasting society. But many today choose to ignore this fact in order to indulge their lusts. In her article "Protestants Against the Pill," Katelyn Walls Shelton relates what some traditional Protestants are rediscovering in the doctrine of the Early Church.

Her article explores a growing trend of Protestant women rejecting hormonal birth control and embracing Natural Family Planning (NFP) and an "embodied faith." It features interviews with women like Kelsey Meyers, who found NFP helped her understand her body better, and Chaney Gooley, who objects to contraception on theological grounds and its potential abortifacient effects. The article highlights the historical shift in Christian views on contraception, with a move away from the traditional Catholic stance of prohibition, as well as the redefinition of "pregnancy".

Ben Jefferies, an Anglican priest, supports a more nuanced approach, potentially allowing barrier methods under certain circumstances, but generally advocating for abstinence. Brooks Anderson, a birth doula, shares her journey with NFP, drawing on her personal experiences with her parents and her own views on honoring both the female body and God's design for marriage. The article suggests NFP fosters deeper relationships with God, husbands, and one's own body, challenging the notion of keeping faith separate from sexuality. Why then, have so many, even among professing Christians, fallen into sexual immorality? Duh!? It's the Pill! In the 1960s, the Pill opened the floodgates, encouraging promiscuity, leading to unwed mothers and broken homes.

Sexually liberal people and leftists today are in the habit of calling traditional Christians and political conservatives "patriarchal," "Nazis," "Fascists," and calling Hitler and Putin "Christians." This is simply blame shifting and a total reversal of historical fact. I majored in Central and East European Studies and lived over there for 20+ years, so I'm well-informed about their social and political history. In reality, the story of Hitler and Putin is much more complex and nuanced. They may have called themselves "Christians" but actually their ideology is much more secular, socialist, sexually promiscuous, and neo-pagan. Most people, though, don't bother to learn the historical facts and instead rely on sloganeering and sound-bites to rationalize their immorality.

"Nazi" is the German abbreviation for "NAzionalsoZIalismus" (national socialism). In 1932 when Hitler came to power, he called himself "a Christian; not a Catholic, not a Lutheran, but a German Christian" (in other words his nationalism came before religion). He imprisoned or killed many Lutherans and Catholics who opposed his rule. In 1963 while stationed in Germany in the army, I joined "The Fellowship Within the State [Lutheran] Church," the group – including Dietrich Bonhoeffer – that had resisted Hitler, so I'm very aware of what went on with Christians during WW2.

Similarly, by the early 1930s in the USSR under Stalin the ideal of the "Communist International" (Comintern) had morphed into a rebranded socialist-nationalist Russian imperialism. Hundreds of thousands of Christians were sent to the gulags or murdered. Orthodoxy in the USSR was taken over by a pseudo-Patriarch after Patriarch Tikhon was starved to death while under house arrest, Protestants there were forced to report to the KGB about everyone attending their churches, and children were forbidden to attend church or receive a Christian upbringing.

I knew personally some people whose parents helped Lenin during the 1917 Revolution but later denounced the Bolsheviks, others whose children were driven insane by harassment in elementary school, or whose parents had their homes and cows confiscated, leaving them with only the clothes on their backs. I've translated the gulag memoirs of Christian prisoners and I've gotten a few of them out of the gulags and into the West.

Few people know or want to recall that Hitler and Stalin were allies in their 1938 invasion of Poland, each taking 1/2 of Poland: an alliance of nationalist socialism and socialist nationalism. Only in June 1941, two years after that, did Hitler launch "Operation Barbarossa," invading the USSR, taking the Ukraine, besieging Leningrad and Moscow, and almost conquering the USSR, which lost over a million people. It was the German "Reich" ("Empire" in English) against the Soviet Empire: two imperial systems. However, neo-socialists in the West prefer to ignore the fact that both were socialist empires. But why? Why do they try to conflate conservatives in the West with Nazis and Fascists?

Here's why: It is "guilt projection" – shifting the blame for their immorality by falsely accusing conservative Christians of political sins. Meanwhile, our society crumbles. When a culture approves of sexual activity before marriage, researchers have found that monogamy, belief in God, and rational thinking tend to disappear within three generations.

They do this in order to mask the hidden agenda. Denigrating chastity before marriage and continence in marriage is part of the neo-marxist "Critical Theory" (Bible higher criticism, sexual criticism, racial criticism), the long-range plan to destroy the foundations of Christian society by infiltrating the movie and music industries, the educational system, the mainstream news media, and the political structure, leading to chaos, insurrection. and revolution. Look it up!

Also, read the article "Why Sexual Morality May be Far More Important than You Ever Thought" by Kirk Durston, in which he quotes from the 1934 book Sex and Culture by Oxford social anthropologist (and atheist) J.D. Unwin, 600 pages distilled from a lifetime of historical research on sexual behavior. He describes three premarital types:

Complete sexual freedom – no prenuptial restraints at all
Irregular or occasional restraint – cultural regulations require an occasional period of abstinence
Strict Chastity – remain a virgin until married.

Then he lists four postnuptial categories:

Modified monogamy: one spouse at a time, but association can be terminated by either party.
Modified polygamy: men can have more than one wife, but a wife is free to leave her husband.
Absolute monogamy: only one spouse permitted for life (or until death in some cultures).
Absolute polygamy: men can have more than one wife, but wives must “confine their sexual qualities (i.e., activity) to their husband for the whole of their lives.”

Here are a few of his most significant findings:

Effect of sexual constraints: Increased sexual constraints, either pre- or post-nuptial, always led to increased flourishing of a culture. Conversely, increased sexual freedom always led to the collapse of a culture three generations later.

Single most influential factor: Surprisingly, the data revealed that the single most important correlation with the flourishing of a culture was whether pre-nuptial chastity was required or not. It had a very significant effect either way.

Highest flourishing of culture: The most powerful combination was pre-nuptial chastity coupled with “absolute monogamy”. Rationalist cultures that retained this combination for at least three generations exceeded all other cultures in every area, including literature, art, science, furniture, architecture, engineering, and agriculture. Only three out of the eighty-six cultures studied ever attained this level.

Effect of abandoning prenuptial chastity: When strict prenuptial chastity was no longer the norm, absolute monogamy, deism, and rational thinking also disappeared within three generations.

Total sexual freedom: If total sexual freedom was embraced by a culture, that culture collapsed within three generations to the lowest state of flourishing – which Unwin describes as “inert” and at a “dead level of conception” and is characterized by people who have little interest in much else other than their own wants and needs. At this level, the culture is usually conquered or taken over by another culture with greater social energy.

Time lag: If there is a decrease in sexual constraints, the full effect of that change is not realized until the third generation. Then that society devolves into chaos.

Why has Western society embarked on such a self-destructive course? Please see my article "Family Values: the Foundation of Society."

And what must be done about it? "Walk in love, even as Christ also loved you, and gave himself up for us, an offering and a sacrifice to God for a sweet-smelling fragrance. But sexual immorality, and all uncleanness, or covetousness, let it not even be mentioned among you, as becomes saints; nor filthiness, nor foolish talking, nor jesting, which are not appropriate; but rather giving of thanks. Know this for sure, that no sexually immoral person, nor unclean person, nor covetous man, who is an idolater, has any inheritance in the Kingdom of Christ and God... But as the Church is subject to Christ, so let the wives also be to their own husbands in everything. Husbands, love your wives, even as Christ also loved the church, and gave himself up for it'" (Ephesians 5:2-5, 24-25). This is the foundation of a stable society.

 

---

 

You can read the rest of our newsletter at https://agape-restoration-society.org/ARC-News/a-n_2025-10-11.htm, and share it! Also, create your own blog or website for less than $4 per month!

---

 

TIME TO COOL DOWN

 

---

 

Yes, we're into autumn now – the temperature is cooling down. With all the political violence recently – murders and attempted murders – it's also Time to Cool Down politically: take several deep breaths, relax, and let those boiling brain cells cool. What kickstarted this topic in my thinking was a U.S. DOJ report that began: "Militant, nationalistic, white supremacist violent extremism has increased in the United States. In fact, the number of far-right attacks continues to outpace all other types of terrorism and domestic violent extremism. Since 1990, far-right extremists have committed far more ideologically motivated homicides than far-left or radical Islamist extremists...."

This didn't sound quite right, and this U.S. DOJ report had been taken down in January 2025, but other sources recovered a copy (click the above photo). Where did this seemingly official-sounding government report get its statistics from and what were the specific events it referred to? These statistics didn't seem to match up with the descriptions of many violent incidents that I have been reading over the years. As I studied the report, I found lots of footnotes to further articles by the report's authors, but no descriptions of specific categories of violence.

For example, under previous administrations, freedom of speech when protesting peacefully against abortion has been criminalized under the FACE (Freedom of Access to Clinic Entrances) Act, so that people who are simply on public sidewalks holding posters stating "Abortion takes a human life," "Abortion is not healthcare," (both obviously and objectively true) and praying silently on the street or sidewalk, or not even saying a word, just recording these peaceful protests on a smartphone, have been arrested and sentenced to prison time.

Parents speaking up at school board meetings about their children being taught gay and transgender ideology have been arrested as "domestic terrorists" and given heavy prison sentences. Sometimes each person arrested at pro-life demonstrations and given a different-length sentence was counted as a unique act of terrorism or domestic violent extremism. This could easily skew the count of "far-right attacks" mentioned in the beginning of my article. Why?

For many on the Left, especially in universities, "speech is violence" when they disagree with opposing views. When some Christian or conservative students were bold enough to speak or display literature in public opposing Antifa or LGBTQ+ issues, their free speech was accused of commiting acts of violence and they were attacked by a literally violent staff member... with a machete! Even "misgendering people can be considered an 'act of violence.'”

Legally, "hate speech" is defined as "credible threats of physical harm to people based on their race, ethnicity, national origin, religion, sex, gender identity, sexual orientation, age, disability or medical condition." Rude, profane, cursing or other mean-spirited speech by either Left or Right is technically and legally not "hate speech." But the expression "hate speech" is often misused to describe free speech that others strongly disagree with. For example...

The 2024 book Hate Speech and Political Violence: Far-Right Rhetoric from the Tea Party to the Insurrection repeatedly uses the words "weaponized communication" when referring to "angry and often violent rhetoric" of politically conservative people (implying that words are violence), even though their words did not contain "credible threats of physical harm to people" – merely loud, angry, or crude speech, or perhaps just ordinary speech that the Left disagrees with. Notice how "angry and often violent rhetoric" and the book's title itself blurs the distinction between the legal definition of "hate speech" and simply speech the Left disagrees with.

Another example: the article "Hate speech is political violence" by Kaia Monaco, Managing Editor of UNews at Saint Louis University, also blurs the line between the legal definition of "hate speech" and merely disagreed-with free speech. She says that some people will excuse their hateful speech as "my personal opinion." Then she writes – "An opinion should not argue that some people are more deserving of rights – including the right to live – than others. A different viewpoint should not assert that one group of people has more cognitive ability than another. A conflicting belief should not dehumanize those who disagree. These are not opinions, viewpoints or different beliefs, this is hate speech." So she says calling a person stupid is "hate speech."

We all need to be very careful about using such expressions as "hate speech," calling ICE "the Gestapo," or the President's supporters "Nazis" and him "Hitler" ...and for him to reply: "I hate them!" – especially in view of recent politically-motivated killings of businesspeople, politicians, and public speakers on both sides of the aisle. Using such terms only turns up the heat, enflaming more mentally unstable young men to take violent actions. Accusing other persons of "hate speech" if they disagree with us or are simply rude and crude can inflame the conversation further – it's Time to Cool Down!

And late night comedians need to be warned by their networks and their own script writers that making knowingly false statements over the airwaves is a violation of FCC rules for holding a broadcast license. "Freedom of speech" does not mean you are free to lie deliberately over the air.

Recently I sent the following email to a certain conservative writer, referring to Ephesians 4:29; Colossians 3:8 and 4:6 – "As a fellow Orthodox Christian..., I urge you to 'not let any filthy communication come out of your mouth.' Instead, 'Let your speech always be gracious, seasoned with salt, so that you may know how you ought to answer each person.' As a professional wordsmith, you can certainly find better, more constructive and gracious words than using curse words and profanity. Remember, you've identified yourself as an Orthodox Christian. Is profanity and cursing the way you want people to think of our faith?"

We, especially as Christians, in these troubled times, should avoid not only legally-defined "hate speech" but also any speech that is unkind, demeaning, profane, or full of cursing!

---

You can read the rest of our newsletter at https://agape-restoration-society.org/ARC-News/a-n_2025-09-27.htm, and share it! Also, create your own website for less than $4 per month!

---

 

WHAT IS "SECULAR3"?

 

---

 

[NOTE: I wrote most of this article the week before the reporting of the senseless murder of Iryna Zarutska by a deranged career criminal with a grudge against white people, and the assassination of Charlie Kirk – a 31-year-old father of two little children who devoted his life to peaceful, civil debate about the ills of modern American society. These awful events underscore the urgency of this article.]

Sacred | Secular. Is this an either/or question, or a both-and question? Our modern mindset leads us to think of it as either/or, either sacred or secular. But is that the way we should approach this hugely important issue? Perhaps both-and is better. The article "Three Meanings of ‘Secular'’' explains what "secular" has come to mean in the present day. This threefold concept is based on the book A Secular Age by Charles Taylor, a British scholar, published by Harvard University's Belknap Press. This probably sounds rather stuffy and intellectual, so I've done a little research on it in order to attempt here to boil it down into just several paragraphs. Let's begin –

Secular3 refers to a concept formulated by philosopher Charles Taylor, describing a society where religious belief is no longer assumed or mandatory, but is one among many possible worldviews – this is sometimes called "Taylorian secularity" or "secularity 3". Charles Taylor identifies three meanings of secularity:

Secular1: Religion's reduced role in public institutions.

Secular2: Decline in personal religious belief or practice.

Secular3: A cultural condition where belief in religion is no longer automatic and must be consciously chosen – everyone is aware of religious and non-religious alternatives and must actively select their own worldview, making belief itself "fragile" in comparison to earlier eras.

(If this whets your curiosity, for a 4-page review of Taylor's 776-page A Secular Age, click HERE.)

Importance of Secular3:
Secular3 does not mean a society is non-religious; religious belief may still be widespread, but belief is always held alongside an array of viable, competing options: doubt and lack of certainty.

This condition changes how people experience faith – beliefs are adopted more as personal choices within a diverse marketplace of possibilities, rather than inherited communal certainties.

Secular3 underlies much of contemporary Western society, affecting how individuals relate to morality, meaning, and tradition.

     Summary Table: Secularity Types

Secular Type	Core Focus	Social Condition
Secular1	Public institutions and laws	Separation of church and state
Secular2	Individual belief and practice	Decline in personal religious adherence
Secular3	Separation of church and state	All beliefs are optional and chosen among competing alternatives

Secular3 is widely referenced in philosophy, sociology, and discussions of modern Western culture to explain how individuals and societies negotiate religion and meaning in pluralistic contexts. What are some examples of historical events of the ancient, medieval, secular1. secular2, and secular3 eras?

The Ancient Era:
1445 BC: Moses received the Ten Commandments
508 BC: Institution of Athenian democracy
323 BC: Death of Alexander the Great, leading to the Hellenistic Era, one worldwide Greco-Roman empire
These events happened in an era of widely-accepted awareness of God or gods, and demons, the spiritual and material are intertwined.

The Medieval Era:
1066: Norman Conquest of England
1215: Magna Carta signed, limiting royal authority in England
1320: Completion of Dante’s Divine Comedy – a protest against abritrary aristocratic authority
These events indicate the widespread acceptance of the Christian idea of God's omnipresence – an "enchanted" universe accepted as true and self-evident reality.

Secular1:
Later Medieval Europe: The distinction between clergy (sacred) and laypeople (secular) – monks and priests worked in the church (spiritual), while rulers, merchants, and farmers performed secular (earthly) roles
11th–12th centuries: Investiture Controversy – Church and monarchy disputed who had authority to appoint church officials, symbolizing the shifting boundary between sacred (heavenly) and secular (earthly) power.
1517: Martin Luther nailed his 95 Theses to the church door in Wittenberg, Germany, starting the Protestant Reformation, leading to the birth of atheism – the notion that one's own subjective conscience and rationality are more authoritative than the shared knowledge and experience of the Church.
1637: Rene Descartes, wrote "Cogito, ergo sum" – "I think, therefore I am," introducing the idea that the external world depends on one's inner subjective rationality. In this era we see the beginning of separation between heaven and earth, sacred and secular, reality and perception.

Secular2:
1776: The American Revolution: revolt against the divine right of kings; instead, the rights of the individual
1787-89: The U.S. Constitution and tThe Bill of Rights – "We the People," establishing freedom of speech and freedom of religious confession, formalizing the idea that people can believe whatever they choose.
1789–1799: The French Revolution: revolt against Catholicism, abolishing church privileges, nationalizing church property, and establishing secular (non-religious, even anti-religious) laws and institutions in France, a significant step toward modern secularism and atheism.
19th century: The Industrial Revolution: science and technology replace human and animal power with machines.

Secular3:
1917: The Bolshevik Revolution: the revolt against Orthodoxy, establishing a man-made, godless alternate utopia.
The modern condition is where belief in religion is just one option among many, creating widespread uncertainty in any one worldview. But there can only be one dominant religion/worldview in any society, otherwise it begins to fall apart.
Extreme skepticism; question and criticize every formerly-accepted truth – critical race theory, critical gender theory, even the reality of the physical universe. Nihilism, anarchy, chaos. But there is still a widely-accepted belief that science and technology can solve all our problems.
Whatever a person believes to be reality may be enforcable by law: if a male believes he is a female, you must call him "she/her." Watch the "Modernity is a Heresy" video, a lead-up to the podcaster's forthcoming book Against the Machine.
Modernity considers belief in one God and revealed truth to be arrogance or chutzpa, and isolates socially those "fanatics" who believe in such things as an objective reality. This underscores the need for establishing solid Christian communities in order to "hold fast to our confession" –

"For I am not ashamed of the gospel of Christ, for it is the power of God for salvation for everyone who believes; for the Jew first, and also for the Greek. For in it is revealed God's righteousness from faith to faith. As it is written, 'But the righteous shall live by faith.' For the wrath of God is revealed from heaven against all ungodliness and unrighteousness of men, who suppress the truth in unrighteousness, because that which is known of God is revealed in them, for God revealed it to them. For the invisible things of him since the creation of the world are clearly seen, being perceived through the things that are made, even his everlasting power and divinity; that they may be without excuse. Because, knowing God, they didn't glorify him as God, neither gave thanks, but became vain in their reasoning, and their senseless heart was darkened" (Romans 1:16-21).

The result: read the articles Annunciation School and the Cost of Denying Reality and The Enemy We Don't Believe In and A 'Je Suis Charlie' Apocalypse.

How does all this relate to our liberty and duty to confess Christ openly before mankind? We must declare that real, objective reality and truth exist, they are not merely sujective "private realities" or "you have your truth and I have mine." The foundation for this is the Incarnation: God, the absolute reality beyond finite human rationality and knowledge, has revealed Himself in human flesh. He is now visible, tangible, and personally knowable; even after His ascension into heaven, He is really, spiritually present now in His Body, the Church. Reliable records of this are found in Holy Scripture and Holy Tradition. But then the question of the reliable interpretation of Scripture – its meaning – arises:

2 Peter 1:20-21 states – "No Scripture is of private interpretation," and then it explains why: for, or because, holy men of God spoke (and wrote) as they were moved by the Holy Spirit. The connecting word "for" shows a relationship between the writing and the interpretation of Scripture: just as it takes holy men to write Scripture, so also it takes holy men (plural) to interpret Scripture. Those individuals, lone wolves, who implicitly claim authority in themselves to be the absolute judge over Scripture interpretation, are sadly mistaken. Neither pope nor patriarch nor any other individual is absolute or infallible. Those infinite attributes can only belong to God. That is why it takes an Ecumenical Council of godly men to agree on what is true and binding for the whole Church. One patriarch or pope or bishop alone or just a few of them can make mistakes, none are inerrant or infallible, nor is one person's opinion of Scripture's meaning or that of a few. "It is written, 'you are gods,' but you will die like men" (Psalm 82:6-7). Only God is God.

And in the end, God will have the final say:
"For the mystery of lawlessness already works. Only there is one who restrains now, until he is taken out of the way. Then the lawless one will be revealed, whom the Lord will kill with the breath of his mouth, and bring to nothing by the brightness of his coming; even he whose coming is according to the working of Satan with all power and signs and lying wonders, and with all deception of wickedness for those who are being lost, because they didn't receive the love of the truth, that they might be saved. Because of this, God sends them a strong delusion, that they should believe a lie; that they all might be judged who didn't believe the truth, but had pleasure in unrighteousness" (2 Thessalonians 2:7-12).

You can read the rest of our newsletter at https://agape-restoration-society.org/ARC-News/a-n_2025-09-13.htm, and share it! Also, create your own website for less than $2 per month!

---

 

WE ARE COWORKERS TOGETHER WITH GOD

 

---

 

[This is a reprint of my Feb. 18, 2017 article] St. Paul wrote: "For we are God's fellow workers. You are God's planting, God's building" (1 Cor. 3:9). The Greek word for "coworkers" or "fellow workers" is "synergoi" and for "working together" is "synergeo" - often used in the New Testament as workers or working together with God:

"They went out, and preached everywhere, the Lord working with them, and confirming the word by the signs that followed. Amen" (Mark 16:20).

"Working together with Him [Christ], then, we appeal to you not to receive the grace of God in vain" (2 Cor. 6:1).

"and we sent Timothy, our brother and God's coworker in the gospel of Christ, to establish and exhort you in your faith" (1 Thes. 3:2).

"For by grace you have been saved through faith, and that not of yourselves; it is the gift of God, not of works, that no one would boast. For we are his workmanship, created in Christ Jesus for good works, which God prepared beforehand that we would walk in them" (Eph 2:8-10).

The Early Church's teaching on "Synergy" is just what the above verses describe: God's grace working in all human beings, enabling us to freely choose to work together with Him and do good works. God's love and grace toward all mankind is the overriding theme of the Apostles, the New Testament, and the Early Church:

"Go, and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit" (Mat. 28:19).

"He was not the light, but was sent that he might testify about the light, the true light that enlightens everyone was coming into the world" (John 1:8-9).

"For God so loved the world, that He gave His one and only Son, that whoever believes in Him should not perish, but have eternal life" (John 3:16).

"Praise the Lord, all you Gentiles! Let all the peoples praise Him" (Rom. 15:11).

"For the grace of God has appeared, bringing salvation to all people" (Titus 2:11).

"The Lord is not slow concerning His promise, as some count slowness; but is patient with us, not wishing that any should perish, but that all should come to repentance" (2 Pet. 3:9).

Synergy seems to strike the right balance between God's sovereignty and mankind's liberty/responsibility. The Augustinian-Calvinist doctrine of predestination and God's sovereignty obliterates our liberty, we are not morally responsible for our actions because our freedom to do good or evil is merely a mirage. God's sovereignty and predestination of all events, the salvation of the elect and damnation of the unelect, are predetermined. And just as people prefer to think they will win the Megabucks lottery rather than being struck by lightning when there's less chance of the former than the latter, many prefer to believe they are among the elect.

Thus whatever they do is OK, because they've convinced themselves they are among those chosen for eternal salvation, they have "eternal security" - a guaranteed ticket to heaven! This idea of "limited atonement" - that Christ died only for the elect - leads directly to a totalitarian mindset, excusing one's own actions while accusing those of the "damned" or "deplorables." In his Predestination Paradise of Geneva, John Calvin had his opponents executed: obviously, they were predestined for it, so disposing of them must be God's will! We see a similar mindset of "only we are the enlightened ones" with Marxists and Islamic terrorists, promising to build their paradise on earth, which excuses their violent elimination of all opposed.

How different is the original Church's doctrine of Synergy! It promises that God's grace is for all mankind: "He [Christ] died for all, that those who live should no longer live for themselves, but for Him who for their sakes died and rose again" (2 Cor. 5:15). Here we see the implication of human responsibility: because He died for all, we should no longer live for ourselves, satisfying our fleshly passions. We struggle against the passions all our lives.

It may seem contradictory that both are true: God is sovereign, and mankind is also free and responsible. Einstein was puzzled over "Spooky Action at a Distance" - a seeming contradiction to his discovery that nothing can travel faster than the speed of light. And yet, experiments now seem to prove that quantum particles can communicate instantaneously over vast distances of hundreds of lightyears. The article even mentions how it applies to human freedom. We are like tiny little quanta in the universe, floating around in an indeterminate state until we are observed by God, and known only by Him.

There is a Sunday during Lent called "Meatfare Sunday" for Orthodox Christians, when "we commemorate the inexorable Second Coming of Christ. The holy fathers have ordained that it be observed after the second parable of the Prodigal Son, so that no one who has learned from it of God's love of for mankind will live in laziness, saying, 'God loves mankind, and when I am separated from Him by sin, I will nevertheless be restored.' This terrible Day of Judgment is now commemorated, so that through fear of death and the expectation of future torment, those who live in laziness may be encouraged to strive for the virtues, not only trusting in the love of God, but also realizing that He is the righteous Judge, who will judge all men according to their deeds." We begin the Lenten period of repentance by saying farewell to meat for the seven weeks of Lent. The Christian life should be one of continual repentance because we cannot know if we are among the elect. Only those who "persevere to the end" (Mat. 24:13) will be saved.

Everyone will have a fair opportunity to hear and respond to the pure, unadulterated Gospel of Christ. But that also means that everyone is responsible to respond to the Gospel. This is not Universalism! How must we respond? Not by words only, but by faith that results in works: How to Care For Orphans and Widows and Building Christian Communities.

It is high time to swing into action, not whiling away our days doing the same old stuff. It's time to repent and change our ways. There might not be much time left!

You can read the rest of our newsletter at https://agape-restoration-society.org/ARC-News/a-n_2025-08-30.htm, and share it! Also, create your own website for less than $2 per month!

---

 

AI IS NOT YOUR FRIEND

 

---

 

The article "AI Is Not Your Friend" by Fr. Jonathan Tobias is a very well expressed and thoughtful take on the rising tide of news about Artificial Intelligence, or AI. The author points out the fallacy of people thinking that AI possesses personhood and can have personal, caring and loving relationships with people. Other writers state that AI is like a "marble machine" in which gravity sends marbles into various buckets, or it's billions and billions of tiny switches programmed to act like human thinking, but it's not really human. The "AI Is Not Your Friend" article says AI is just a tool, like a spoon that can be used to stir a cup of tea, or for making meth. My comment to the article was as follows:

"When a person signs up for an account with an AI service, he/she enters name, email address and perhaps other information. The AI can then look up several hundreds of data points (personal characteristics) about that person as well as their internet browsing history, then tailor responses to that person's AI queries so that it appears that the AI is an intimate friend who knows all about the person. And the AI companies must sell this information to the government upon demand. But AI is just a machine that is trained to do exactly this: to make people think that it is benign and all-knowing. In reality, AI is just an idol made by human hands.

"As St. Paul wrote, an idol is nothing in itself, but to those who choose to believe it is a god or a demon, to them it is (1 Cor. 8:4-7). For them, an evil entity may actually inhabit the machine. For mature Christians, however, the power of the evil one has been broken. We have read accounts of several people who have been led astray, into insanity and even suicide because of AI. When many, many people choose to believe this deception that AI is a super-human entity, it may eventually lead to mass hysteria against Christians who testify that Jesus Christ alone is the true, visible icon of the invisible God (Acts 19:27-34)."

Billions and billions of dollars are being poured into huge computer complexes to process ever larger and larger "large language models" in the U.S. and around the world. This isn't being done for charity, as a gift to mankind: it's being done for profit, to form (or rather, deform) the way people think, to direct the way they spend their money. If babies, children and adults die, it's just an unavoidable side effect. Proverbs 1:10-16 warns Christians against joining with the killing of innocent and gullible people for financial gain:

"My son, if sinners entice you, do not consent. If they say, 'Come with us, let's lay in wait for blood; let's lurk secretly for the innocent without cause; Let's swallow them up alive like Sheol, and whole, like those who go down into the pit. We'll find all sorts of valuable wealth. We'll fill our houses with spoil. You shall cast your lot among us. We'll all have a common purse.' My son, do not walk in the way with them. Keep your foot from their path, For their feet run to evil. They hurry to shed blood."

For a deeper dive into the worldview behind AI, consider two podcasts by Dr. Zach Porciu: "Techno-Paganism Ep.3: The Science of Idol-Making" and "Techno-Paganism Ep.4: New Religions, Same Gods" in which he explains that from ancient times people have been making false gods, and now some are actually making a religion out of AI, a seemingly-real god that can talk, walk and seems to even think, but even better that humans can.

Another Christian writer has decided to form an online group called something like "Writers against AI," but he hadn't settled on that title and asked for suggestions, so I replied only half-jokingly: "Writers agAInst" – you see, it's because AI is already embedded in so much of what we do online, whether writing articles using Grammarly to catch logic, syntax and spelling errors, or sending emails, or researching topics on Google, or summarizing articles, or just plain shopping for groceries at Walmart.com. Resistance is futile!

Forbe's online featured this article – "The Silent Arrival Of AGI: Civilization Is Changing, And We Haven’t Noticed." It begins – "Artificial general intelligence is not something we are waiting for; rather, it is something we are already experiencing. The shift is not theatrical. There will be no public unveiling or dramatic singularity. The reality is quieter, more gradual and far more impactful. AGI is arriving like a tide, not a lightning strike."

The above article uses the term "Artificial general intelligence" or AGI, meaning AI that is human-like or better in all fields of human knowledge. Like a slowly rising tide, AI is already being built into almost every aspect of our modern society. More and more companies and public services use AI for various tasks, both menial and complex. I've used AI to solve website programming problems that I was baffled with, to write a short story for children, and make illustrations. Yes, AI can make pictures and videos that are virtually indistinguishable from those of real people... and evil people are already doing this with the intent to deceive others. So be very careful about what you read and see online and on television: it may not be real at all! I've watched various videos on YouTube that purport to be reporting on the war in Ukraine: it's hard to separate fact from fiction.

One last article, "The Truth About How Close Are We to AGI [2026?]" by the pseudonym "Sir Turing." The real Alan Turing died in 1954, but "was an English mathematician, computer scientist, logician, cryptanalyst, philosopher and theoretical biologist. He was highly influential in the development of theoretical computer science, providing a formalisation of the concepts of algorithm and computation with the Turing machine, which can be considered a model of a general-purpose computer" per Wikipedia. The so-called "Turing Test" is a computing system exhibiting such human-like intelligence that a skilled person can't distinguish it from a real human. So this article, obviously written by AI, lists bullet points, bold headings, and several paragraphs of explanation about how close we are to AGI. Or maybe we're already there...! The article paints a rosy picture, but consider the source: it's written to convince you that it's benign.

You can read the rest of our newsletter at https://agape-restoration-society.org/ARC-News/a-n_2025-08-16.htm, and share it! Also, create your own website for less than $2 per month!

---

 

FROM CHRISTENDOM TO NIHILISM

 

---

 

This photo and the PDF file "From Christendom to Nihilism" linked to it are from secular sources, but they accurately describe the devolution of Western society over the past 1,500 years. The Renaissance with its turn to a more human-centered outlook provided the soil for the Protestant Reformation and the Enlightenment which followed shortly after.

The eight steps shown here going down from Christendom to Nihilism and the 21st Century Institutional Decay and Existential Crisis are expanded in greater detail in the 2-page PDF so that you can understand how we got from there to here, the present state of relativism, materialism, and skepticism.

Other excellent resources on this topic are the over 100 "Paradise and Utopia" podcasts on Ancient Faith Radio that cover the same 1,500 years from the establishing of Christendom to the present. If you click the "Oldest" button there, you'll be able to start lisening to each podcast from the very first to the latest.

But by clicking the "Newest" buttion you'll find the "Communist World Building III: The Great Terror" podcast, a description of the horrific results of abandoning Paradise in search of an earthly Utiopia, resulting in nihilism: Stalin murdered tens of millions of his own people during his "Great Terror" of the 1930s. Click the "Download audio" button to listen to each podcast so you can stop it when you need to and restart it later. or click on the 3 dots to download a podcast.

The podcast speaker, Fr. John Strickland, is an Orthodox priest and university professor in southern California. He's also the author of five books on these themes that go into much greater depth and detail. These books cover much more ground than all of his podcasts.

Our last issue of ARC-News, "MAY SCIENTISTS CONSIDER UNSCIENTIFIC EXPLANATIONS?" quoted Psalm 53:1 – "The fool has said in his heart, 'There is no God.' They are perverted and have committed abominable transgressions. There is no one who does good."

That Psalm continues: "God looks down from heaven on the children of men, to see if there are any who understood, who seek after God. Every one of them has gone back. They have become filthy together. There is no one who does good, no, not one. Have the workers of iniquity no knowledge, who eat up my people as they eat bread, and don't call on God?" Even if mankind says "There is no God," He doesn't cease to exist. He sees from heaven how mankind has become perverted, filthy, lacks rational understanding and true knowledge. They have filled their minds with nonsense.

To say "There is no God" is in itself a contradiction, a nonsense statement: the person saying it is making an absolute statement that there are absolutely no absolutes. This is the essential contradiction of today's relativism: making "Everything is relative, and that's the absolute truth!" You see now that the presupposition of the existence of truth vs. error is axiomatic, it's a necessary hypothesis in order to even begin to think rationally. Without it, the only reasons for existence are either pleasure-seeking or the quest for power.

If you read the PDF, you'll see that the Renaissance was a time of rediscovery of classical humanism, emphasizing human potential and beauty, drawing from Greek and Roman sources. This was because when the Muslim Turks conquered the Byzantine Empire in the 15th century, many highly-educated Greeks fled to Rome, bringing their culture with them. Recall how the Apostle Paul, when he came to Athens and stood on the Areopagus (Mars Hill) he beheld all sorts of statues of the pagan gods and one statue "to the Unknown God." He told the crowd of "classical humanists" – pagan philosophers – "As I passed along, and observed the objects of your worship, I found also an altar with this inscription: 'TO AN UNKNOWN GOD.' What therefore you worship in ignorance, this I announce to you." (Acts 17:23). Paul went on to insist that there can only be one true God, one Absolute. But the Renaissance went full-circle, returning to the multiplicity of pagan gods, including one "just in case we missed" that they don't yet know about.

Read the article "Incompleteness Theorems Point to a Hidden Realm" (PDF), as a 5.5" x 8.5"- formatted 8-page booklet, or get it as a 8.5" x 11" PDF, 4 pages. The actual nature of the reality in which we live is that a “hidden realm" must exist behind the common-sense realm of "local realism." Both science and mathematics depend on axiomatic principles which are outside of these disciplines. Particle physics has led us to understand that everything in the material universe is incomplete and indeterminate – there are no fixed truths, no firm reality in the material realm. So in order for science and mathematics to be true, they must presuppose this “hidden realm" that we must accept as axiomatic, otherwise the material world makes no sense in itself.

The universe has a hidden logical structure without which it could not exist: astrophysicists call it "dark matter" or "dark energy" – something they can't see or measure but that makes up 95% of the universe. This brings to mind the phrases: "Now faith is the substance of things hoped for, the evidence of things not seen.... By faith we understand that the worlds were framed by the Word [the Logos] of God" (Hebrews 11:1 and 3) and "By Him were all things created, in the heavens and on the earth, things visible and things invisible, whether thrones or dominions or principalities or powers; all things have been created through Him, and for Him. He is before all things, and in Him [the Logos] all things are held together" (Colossians 1:16-17).

To say there are multiple absolutes is just as nonsensical as saying there are absolutely no absolutes. There must be just one. Most people today, however, don't trouble their little minds with such thoughts, they simply live with a sense of despair that they try to mask by indulging in the pursuit of pleasure, either physical or digital – continually scrolling through endless visual stimulation. This all points to the need to stop dabbling and start fixing our minds and whole lives on the one true Absolute Whe has revealed Himself in Jesus Christ, God incarnate.

You can read the rest of our newsletter at https://agape-restoration-society.org/ARC-News/a-n_2025-08-02.htm, and share it!

---

 

MAY SCIENTISTS CONSIDER UNSCIENTIFIC EXPLANATIONS?

 

---

 

The article "Are Scientists Allowed to Consider Unscientific Explanations?" by Daniel Witt in a recent issue of Evolution News resonates powerfully with Psalm 53:1 – "The fool has said in his heart, 'There is no God.' They are perverted and have committed abominable transgressions. There is no one who does good." Consider these four points:

1. The Limits of Naturalism and the Voice of the "Fool"

The article argues that if science rigidly excludes “unscientific” explanations – especially those pointing beyond natural causation – it cannot truly say that natural explanations are sufficient, only that they are assumed as the boundary lines of science. This highlights a dilemma:

Imagine a geologist visiting a particularly interesting geological site. But when he arrives, he finds "that the site has been ruined. Most of the ground has been torn up by some sort of tractor, and there are wheel tracks everywhere. If the geologist is not allowed to consider the possibility that vandals have tampered with his site [because that is outside the realm of geology], then he cannot declare that vandals did not tamper with the site." Or are real estate developers starting a new housing project?

Similarly, Psalm 53:1 states: "The fool has said in his heart, 'There is no God.'" The psalmist calls the denial of God a statement not of open investigation, but of a closed, hard-hearted foolishness – akin to the dogmatic naturalism the article criticizes. Denying the possibility of divine agency, the fool excludes a type of causation a priori – just like enforcing the rule "no unscientific explanations permitted."

2. Theology vs. Scientific Humility

Daniel Witt writes that Intelligent Design theorists refrain from naming God in technical scientific work, not out of dishonesty, but to respect the limits of what science can demonstrate. This humility acknowledges that science can delimit natural mechanisms but cannot affirm or deny anything outside that scope. Geology can't explain whether the intention behind the tracks in the soil was destructive or constructive.

Psalm 53:1 echoes this: by labeling those who "say in their heart ‘there is no God’" as fools, it condemns not just disbelief, but the arrogance of claiming complete knowledge. The psalmist insists that moral corruption springs from that arrogance: "They are perverted and have committed abominable transgressions." So Witt's call for methodological openness mirrors biblical wisdom: true intellectual humility avoids both dogmatic naturalism and rash theological claims, recognizing ultimately that we are finite beings before infinite mysteries.

3. Ethical Consequences of Excluding God

The article warns that strict naturalism is "ultimately unproductive" for explaining phenomena that might not fit natural laws. It suggests that ignoring other investigative paths prevents us from knowing where science ends – and from perceiving deeper realities, such as a constructive intention by an intelligent designer. Likewise, Psalm 53:1 links denial of God directly to moral failure: "There is no one who does good." Denying transcendence doesn’t only distort truth – it impoverishes ethics. The article’s suggestion – that a worldview excluding God will struggle to confront or detect phenomena beyond natural causation – echoes the psalmist's prophetic insight that such denial correlates with widespread moral darkness.

4. Toward a Broader Investigative Methodology

Witt proposes broadening the scientific toolkit – to consider origins that might lie outside strict natural laws. This doesn’t dismantle science; it equips us to confront puzzles like biological complexity, the origin of information and fine-tuning built into the universe, and consciousness – domains where methodological naturalism often hits hard limits. Psalm 53:1’s denunciation of "no one who does good" also invites us to look deeper – not just at what we can explain, but at the moral and existential foundations of human life. A restricted view of reality yields a restricted moral vision.

Conclusion: Theology and Science in Dialogue

* Both the Psalm and the article critique a hardened exclusionism: Witt challenges closed-door science; the psalmist challenges closed minds toward God.
* Scientific humility parallels spiritual wisdom: recognizing limits protects us from the sin of both scientism and pride.
* Moral ruin and epistemic blindness go hand in hand: denying God – or denying any but natural causes – distorts truth and deforms character.
* A fuller methodology is a fuller vision: openness to both natural and beyond-natural explanation enriches our understanding of the cosmos and our place within it.

In sum, the Evolution News article can be seen as a modern echo of ancient biblical wisdom: both contend that claiming all is natural is a fracture both of thought and heart – and that recognizing something beyond ourselves is key to both insight and integrity.

Science is the search for truth and a rational understanding of the universe. All knowledge begins with this hypothesis that the cosmos can be understood. Many people today, however, think that faith is just the opposite: irrational – "blind faith." But Hebrews 11:3 states – "By faith, we understand that the universe has been framed by the Word of God, so that what is seen has not been made out of things which are visible." Faith is the fundamental hypothesis that the universe makes sense, that it's not simply a jumbled chaos. Faith provides the basis to understand that a constructive, loving Intelligence created us and everything in the universe.

You can read the rest of our newsletter at https://agape-restoration-society.org/ARC-News/a-n_2025-07-19.htm, and share it! Also, create your own blog or website for less than $2 per month!