Article Reviews: "Conversion of Constantine and Pagan Rome," "Western Roman Empire," and “Eastern Christianity on the Eve of Islam.”

The Conversion of Constantine
In this article, Whitney Oates reviews the book “The Conversion of Constantine and Pagan Rome,” by Andrew Alfoldi. In the book, Alfoldi speak about the theory of a genuine religious conversion of Constantine at the Battle of the Mulvian Bridge in October, 312 AD. The book also hints at Constantine progressing through 4 phases in his life, slowly ridding himself of paganism, and moving from tolerance to a thorough opposition and persecution of the religion in the final years of his life prior to his death in 337 A.D. Oates communicates the problems other scholars would find with this theory of conversion in light of the murder of Constantine’s wife and son, as well as the retention of the title of pontifex maximus. Also in this article, Oates reviews the book, “The Age of Constantine the Great,” by Jacob Burckhardt.
The Impact of the Fall of the Western Empire on the Church
In this article, various Wikipedia contributors discuss the background, dynasties, rebellions, and eventual fall of the Western Roman Empire. The time period discussed is from 259-480 AD. Also discussed in the article are the Roman Republic, tetrarchies, non-dynastic emperors, economy, and the legacy of the Western Empire. Part of that legacy included the influence of the Roman Catholic Church. The various provinces and regions within the Western Empire were slowly conquered by invading Germanic rulers, however, these rulers’ “tribes were already Christianised [sic], though most were followers of Arianism.” These rulers converted to Catholicism, gaining loyalty from the Roman populace, and enabling the Roman Catholic Church to replace many Roman institutions in the West, so that the majority of Europe was converted as well.
“Eastern Christianity on the Eve of Islam”
In this article, Dr. George Khoury explains several Christological heresies that occurred prior to the coming of Islam. Focusing in particular upon the Syrian Church, Khoury briefly discusses Arianism and Apollonarism before discussing Nestorianism and Monophysitism. Following Monophysitism, the “Jacobites” transferred the influence of Greek thought to Syria and then to Islam. Following a short discussion on Islam, Khoury closes with a brief discussion of the Armenian, Coptic-Ethiopic, Maronite, and Melkite Churches, which are independent descendents of the Monophysitic churches of Syria.



Bibliography
Oates, Whitney Jennings. 1950. "Conversion of Constantine and Pagan Rome." Theology
Today 7, no. 3: 423-427. ATLA Religion Database with ATLASerials, EBSCOhost
(accessed October 29, 2008).
Wikipedia contributors, "Western Roman Empire," Wikipedia, The Free Encyclopedia, ht
tp://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Western_Roman_Empire&oldid=248462
223 (accessed October 29, 2008).
Al-Bushra. “Eastern Christianity on the Eve of Islam.” http://www.al-bushra.org/arbhrtg/
arbxtn05.htm

Article Reviews: “Persecution in the Early Church,” “Pax Romana and the Peace of Jesus Christ,” and “The Road to Nicaea.”

“Persecution in the Early Church”
In his article, Dr. William Frend gives a recap on the first 300 years of growth and lulls in persecution with the advent of each new emperor, leading up to what he entitles the “Great Persecution.” Following 43 years of relative peace, in 303 AD, Dr. Frend describes the beginning of this persecution related to a history of opposition just below the surface of an apparent acceptance, the coup d’etat of Diocletian and appointment of his co-emperor Maximian, and subsequent appointments of Constantius and Galerius as their assistants (Caesars). Galerius’ popularity due to a victory over the Persians, and the illness of Diocletian in 304 AD led to Galerius seizing “his chance and imposed a universal obligation to sacrifice on pain of death.” Galerius and Constantius assumed the positions of Diocletian and Maximian upon their formal abdication. The “Great Persecution” ended with the Edict of Milan in 313 AD, signed by Constantine, the son and successor of Constantius, and Licinius, the successor of Galerius. Constantine defeated Licinius in 324 AD, unifying the empire under his rule and establishing Christianity as the religion of the Empire.
“Pax Romana and the Peace of Jesus Christ”
This article is a review of the book “Pax Romana and the Peace of Jesus Christ” by Klaus Wengst. The reviewer, Edgar Krentz, notes that Wengst examines Christian attitudes toward Pax Romana according to social status and geography. In the book, Wengst considers all benefits regarding the Pax Romana as evil, in spite of the majority of scholarship. Krentz notes that Wengst compares Christ to a political protestor that does not encourage rebellion, Paul as ambivalent, and Luke as an upper-class pro-Roman. It seems that in spite of these Biblical characters being attributed to different periods and geographical regions during this earliest of Church history, the gospel is spread through the empire as the Church adapts and responds to the Roman political environment.
“The Road to Nicaea”
This article, by John Anthony McGuckin, explores the reasons and path to the First Council of Nicaea in 325AD. McGuckin indicates that the Council was called over the dispute of, “one apparently simple question: in what way is Jesus divine?” The problem arose when Alexander, the Archbishop of Alexandria, held one of his common seminars with senior clergy in which he articulated the eternality of Christ in common with the Father. Arius, a senior priest of Alexander’s, argued that Christ might have existed before the rest of creation; however, that it wasn’t appropriate to believe that he shared the Father’s divine pre-existence. After gaining his parishioners in a party cause, Arius was deposed by Alexander to avoid the public fallout. Arius appealed the decision to Eusebius of Nicomedia, a powerful bishop and kinsman of the Emperor Constantine, who ultimately called the Council as a 20th anniversary of his having taken the throne in 305 AD and to solidify his rule. A majority agreement was made over the use of “homoousias” (of the same substance as) in the creed and all remaining dissenters were excommunicated and deposed.



Bibliography
Frend, William H.C. 1990. "Persecution in the early church." Christian History 1990.
Christian Periodical Index, EBSCOhost (accessed October 23, 2008). http://searc
h.ebscohost.com.ezproxy.liberty.edu:2048/login.aspx?direct=tru&db=33h&AN=33h-465DD215-B5B40315&site=ehost-live&scope=site.
Krentz, Edgar. 1989. "Pax Romana and the Peace of Jesus Christ." Currents in Theology
and Mission 16, no. 6: 459-459. ATLA Religion Database with ATLASerials,
EBSCOhost (accessed October 23, 2008). http://search.ebscohost.om.ezproxy.lib
erty.edu:2048/login.aspx?direct=tru&db=rfh&AN=ATLA0000575757&site=ehos
t-live&scope=site.
McGuckin, John Anthony. 2005. "The Road to Nicaea." Christian History and Biography
Winter 2005. Christian Periodical Index, EBSCOhost (accessed October 23, 2008
). http://search.ebscohost.com.ezproxy.liberty.edu:2048/login.aspx?direct=true&d b=33h&AN=33h-6182D2B2-0F5317A2&site=ehost-live&scope=site.

The Image of God

In their book, Across the Spectrum: Understanding Issues in Evangelical Theology, Boyd and Eddy indicate three views concerning what the imago Dei (image of God) could refer to: The Soul (the Substantival View), Our God-given authority (the Functional View), and our relationality (the Relational View). It is my conviction that this “image” refers to the human soul, and therefore I agree with the Substantival View. In defining how the imago Dei is the human soul, Boyd and Eddy comment, “the spiritual substance of humans sets them apart from all other animals as beings who are uniquely created in the imago Dei (emphasis in original).” Considering this “spiritual substance,” Boyd and Eddy describe five Biblical aspects which support this view. These five aspects are the following: “…humans are beings who shall never cease to exist spiritually…humans have the capacity to think rationally…humans possess a capacity for moral goodness…Humans can and should sense God’s Spirit calling them into relationship with him…humans possess the capacity to love.” It seems that the strongest argument to me for this view, apart from the Biblical evidence, is the essence of human beings. Boyd and Eddy remark that, “If we associate the imago Dei with something humans do rather than with who they are, then individuals who cannot or do not perform these tasks cannot be regarded as truly human (emphasis in original).” This is an excellent argument not only for supporting the Substantival View of the imago Dei, but also for supporting the sanctity of human life in our secularized post-modern culture. The first of three examples that come to mind are the 50,000,000 (fifty million) children aborted since the U.S. Supreme Court established abortion-on-demand in their infamous Roe v. Wade decision. The second example would be the value of physically/medically disabled individuals whose lives are considered below the acceptable norm. One of the saddest and most frustrating recent examples of this was the nationally-televised torturous death of Terry Schiavo by withholding both food and liquids to an alert and conscious woman because her estranged husband was waiting for the insurance money to enjoy with his adulteress companion and new family. The nation stood by and watched as Jeb Bush, several judges, Michael Schiavo, and medical doctors did nothing to stop the wicked destruction of a human life, but rather allowed the bedridden Terry to simply waste away. The third and final example is the value of the lives of mentally challenged/mentally unstable individuals. The US has seen in decades past the institutionalization of individuals with Down’s Syndrome or simple learning disabilities because they have been deemed a burden to society. Additionally, a common practice for mentally incompetent individuals who have been arrested is to simply put them in lockdown in the infirmary of the local county jail as state-run mental hospitals do not have the bed space. It is quite easy to see the complications we encounter when the value of human life and the image of God in that life is based upon either what we do (the Relational View) or how we act (the Functional View). As a final argument, Scripture tells us that, “You shall not murder.” In determining why God would command this of us, we can understand that if human beings are made in the image of God, this means to murder an individual is to profane the image of God. Therefore, if the image of God is based upon what we do or how we act, it would be illogical for God to command this. However, because the image of God is the human soul, prohibiting the destruction of that image by the sin of murder makes perfect logical sense. This is why I believe that the image of God is the human soul, because it is the only way to agree with God that human beings are of infinite value and worth, as we bear His holy image.


Boyd, Gregory A. and Eddy, Paul R. The Divine Image Debate. Across the Spectrum: Understanding Issues in Evangelical Theology. Grand Rapids: Baker Academic, 2002.
MacArthur, John F. The MacArthur Study Bible. Thomas Nelson: La Habra, 2006.

McDonald's Recants its Support for the Homosexual Agenda

After approximately five months, it appears that McDonald's has felt enough pressure from their primary market (traditional families with traditional values) that they have ended their association with the pro-homosexual activist group National Gay and Lesbian Chamber of Commerce. Richard Ellis, a McDonald's VP, resigned from the board of directors of NGLCC and his seat on the board will not be replaced. Officials have also stated that McDonald's will not be renewing their membership come December. This is a step in the right direction for the fast food giant and AFA (American Family Association) has ended their boycott.

The Charismatic Gifts Debate

In answering the question of whether or not the sign gifts are present today, I categorize myself as a cessationist. Because cessationism can mean more than one thing, my conviction resembles that of a Classical Cessationist (while the sign gifts have ceased with the office of Apostle and the closing of the canon, I do not limit God’s ability to perform independent miracles today). The other cessationist positions are Full (no more miracles at all), Concentric (while miracles [sign gifts] have ceased, they appear in unreached areas to further the Gospel), and Consistent (both sign gifts and the ministries listed in Ephesians 4 have ceased; i.e. not just apostles, but pastors, teachers, and evangelists).1 As a cessationist, I look to Scripture to verify my own personal convictions.

First, 2 Corinthians 12:12 and Ephesians 3:4-5 demonstrate that the sign gifts are associated with the office and ministry of Apostles and Prophets. This is important as only 14 men have ever held the office of Apostle according to Scripture (Luke 6:13, Acts 1:26, and 1 Corinthians 9:2). The argument that the office of Apostle continues today is not reasonable as the personal experiences of the twelve (disciples/apostles) along with Paul, in addition to the requirements for selecting a replacement for Judas Iscariot (Acts 1:22 indicates this had to be someone who was a witness of the entire ministry of Christ from John’s Baptism to the Ascension), attest to the limit of this temporary office. Additionally, Ephesians 2:20 demonstrates that the office, along with that of Prophet in the Old Covenant, is for a foundation upon which the Church is built (this would include the canon of Scripture as foundational as it was the written teaching, inspired by the Holy Spirit, of the Prophets and Apostles or someone directly related to them). So then, if the offices of Apostle and Prophet have ceased, it is reasonable to infer from Scriptural evidence affirming this point that the sign gifts associated with this office have ceased as well. As a side note, prophecy includes two things: foretelling and forthtelling. Because all orthodox Christians rightly believe that there is no new revelation, the foretelling aspect of this gift is no longer functioning. However, the forthtelling or proclamation of the Gospel will continue until the end of the age (Matthew 28:19-20).

Second, Hebrews 2:2-4 refers to signs, wonders, and miracles in the past tense as a confirmation of the message of salvation first coming through Christ and then His apostles. This passage affirms others such as 1 Corinthians 13:8-12. Here, Paul makes the point that prophecy and knowledge will be “done away,”2 while tongues will “cease.”2 Two verses later, in verse 10, Paul refers to both prophecy and knowledge as partial, being done away with at the coming of the perfect. MacArthur raises an important point here in that, “There may be a distinction made on how prophecy and knowledge come to an end, and how the gift of tongues does. This is indicated by the Gr. verb forms used.”3 Later, he points out that this difference indicates that the gift of tongues will cease by itself.3 Although the gift of tongues, along with other sign gifts, has ceased, it does not seem that the coming of the perfect described in these verses is the completion of the canon. Rather, Scripture indicates that the perfect has come when we see face to face (verse 12), and this occurs in the eternal state (Revelation 22:4).

Finally, 1 Corinthians 14:22 states that tongues is a sign for unbelievers. While the continuationist uses Paul’s emphasis upon tongues in this chapter to support their position, this is not the context of the message. Paul was communicating two things here: First, if tongues occurs at all, it should not be practiced in an unorganized or chaotic fashion; Second, prophecy is an altogether better and more desirable gift. So then, if tongues is a sign for unbelievers, and this along with the other sign gifts are associated with the office or ministry of Apostle, and the offices of both Apostle and Prophet have ceased, the sign gifts are no longer active today.

In conclusion, many detractors label cessationist congregations as either quenchers of the Spirit or not experiencing the same Spiritually-active worship as continuationist congregations. Boyd and Eddy indicate that, “All [evangelicals] believe the Holy Spirit supernaturally works in human hearts to bring people to the point of faith in Christ. All believe the Holy Spirit gives certain gifts to people to carry out ministry, such as teaching, preaching, administration, and hospitality. And all agree that God can and does at times miraculously intervene in the affairs of people.”4 I agree with this statement and believe that using Scripture to come to the conclusion that certain sign gifts have ceased with certain offices does not make one believer any less alive in the Spirit than another. God the Father, His Son Jesus Christ, and the Holy Spirit are alive and well in today’s fallen world.

---

[1] "Cessationism." Wikipedia, The Free Encyclopedia. 23 Sep 2008, 17:15 UTC. 3 Oct 2008 <http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Cessationism&oldid=240480157>.

[2] 1 Corinthians 13:8, The MacArthur Study Bible (La Habra: Thomas Nelson, 2006), 1718.

[3] John F. MacArthur, 1 Corinthians 13:8-10 Notes, The MacArthur Study Bible (La Habra: Thomas Nelson, 2006), 1719.

[4] Gregory A. Boyd and Paul R. Eddy, The Charismatic Gifts Debate, Across the Spectrum: Understanding Issues in Evangelical Theology (Grand Rapids: Baker Academic, 2002), 213.

Five Points

The issue of salvation seems to be a hotly-debated one, especially as it relates to the relationship between human responsibility and divine sovereignty. Having said this, I now go on to present the five points of Calvinism, summarized by the acronym TULIP, to which I hold and defend as the Biblical presentation of salvation.

TOTAL DEPRAVITY
“The doctrine of total depravity (also called "total inability") asserts that, as a consequence of the fall of humanity into sin, every person born into the world is enslaved to the service of sin (wikipedia.org).” There are two questions which must be answered in relation to this definition: First, how does sin affect the ability of a fallen individual to respond to the Gospel? Second, how does sin affect the free exercise of the will of said fallen individual? To answer the first question, we find that Scripture indicates that humanity has not come to Christ because they are dead in their sin (Ephesians 2:1-3). This makes sense as man’s attempt at responding affirmatively to God is hindered as his efforts are a “polluted garment (i.e. menstrual cloth - Isaiah 64:6),” enslaved to sin (John 8:34), completely corrupt (Psalm 14:3), hostile to God (Romans 8:7), etc. To put it simply, a natural rebellion against God keeps the natural man from coming to Him. Looking at the second question, we must understand the difference between the nature and the will. Both God and man can act only in accordance with their particular natures. We cannot say that God can will to do anything because He cannot will to sin. So then, unregenerate man has the freedom to will his course of action, but only that action which is not outside or beyond his particular nature. Apart from the free gift of grace from God to choose God, and thus apart from a new nature in Christ by being born-again, man is totally unable to respond to God. Until he is given a new nature in Christ, he can only freely choose to act in a manner consistent with his sin nature.

UNCONDITIONAL ELECTION
Because man can only act within his own fallen nature, it was necessary for God to elect some for Himself from before the foundation of the world (Ephesians 1:3-6). “The doctrine of unconditional election asserts that God's choice from eternity of those whom he will bring to himself is not based on foreseen virtue, merit, or faith in those people. Rather, it is unconditionally grounded in God's mercy alone (wikipedia.org).” Often, the objection is raised that this view of election makes God out to be an unfair tyrant. First, as Paul teaches us in Romans 9:20-21, we have no right as the creature to question the Creator as to His sovereign choice. Second, this objection refuses to accept that all men are responsible for their own sin and have earned an eternal damnation through their works (Romans 6:23). In true fairness, God would send all to Hell and He would receive all the glory in His perfect justice. However, because none choose Him (Romans 3:10-12), He regenerates some through the Holy Spirit enabling them to freely choose Him (in this, regeneration logically precedes justification, however, they occur simultaneously). God’s mercy and grace are demonstrated for those He has enabled to worship Him in Heaven, and again, God receives all the glory.

LIMITED ATONEMENT
As it is true that God chose the believer for Himself (1 Peter 2:9-10), so also He provided the means to satisfy His justice so that His love could be demonstrated without violating His character (Romans 5:8). Likely the most controversial point of Calvinism is the doctrine of Limited Atonement. It seems the word “limited” tends to confuse people who are not familiar with what this doctrine teaches. As Boyd and Eddy note, “Christ’s death is sufficient for all the sins of the world, but it was intended to save only those whom the Father has predestined to be saved.” That is to say, while the power of Christ’s death in the atonement is unlimited, it is applied only to the limited number of those who are saved. The Canons of Dordt also clarify this misunderstanding by communicating, “This death of God's Son is the only and entirely complete sacrifice and satisfaction for sins; it is of infinite value and worth, more than sufficient to atone for the sins of the whole world (reformed.org).” Of course, we know that many will find themselves in Hell (Matthew 7:13-14), so it seems evident from Scripture that Christ did not die for the sinners whose punishment shall be meted out for an eternal damnation (though the power of the atonement is sufficient to save them), but rather for the elect alone (as the purpose of the atonement is efficient to save them).

IRRESISTIBLE GRACE
Because it is true that God chose the believer (Ephesians 1:4) and paid for his sins (1 John 4:10), it is also true that those whom He bought will come to Him (John 6:37-39). The doctrine of Irresistible Grace is often referred to by detractors as divine arm-twisting. However, just as man in his natural state is a rebel against God, so by the enablement of his new nature he is finally able to freely choose God. Being given this new heart with new desires, the believer takes joy in the decision to follow Christ. Seeing the perversity of sin and the wrath of God to come, he gladly turns from his wickedness to the salvation of God.

PERSEVERANCE OF THE SAINTS
Finally, because God draws the believer to Himself, and he shall come, so too the security of salvation is eternal as God has completed the process Himself (John 10:27-29, Philippians 1:6, John 6:44). This does not mean that the believer never sins, but that their sin does not result in a loss of salvation (1 John 1:8-10) and through repentance and confession he is restored to a right relationship with God. As Boyd and Eddy indicate regarding the doctrine of Perseverance of the Saints, “When people have been elected by God and changed by God’s irresistible grace, they cannot fall away.” In conclusion, because man is depraved in all his parts, God necessarily chose some in Himself to save from before the foundation of the world. Because He purchased the salvation of the elect alone in Christ, they will come to Him. God, as the author and finisher of faith, keeps the elect secure in their salvation as it is not the believer’s power, but rather God’s power working in him to save him.


Bibliography

"Calvinism." Wikipedia, The Free Encyclopedia. 18 Sep 2008, 15:01 UTC. 19 Sep 2008
.

MacArthur, John F. The MacArthur Study Bible. Thomas Nelson: La Habra, 2006.

Boyd, Gregory A. and Eddy, Paul R. The Salvation Debate. Across the Spectrum:
Understanding Issues in Evangelical Theology. Grand Rapids: Baker Academic,
2002.

"Canons of Dordt.” Historic Church Documents at Reformed.org.

The Unevangelized and Hell

THE DESTINY OF THE UNEVANGELIZED
The question of what happens to those who have never heard the Gospel is one that has plagued many Christians over the centuries. It is true that in Romans 10:17 we are told, “So faith comes from hearing, and hearing through the word of Christ.” The next logical question of course would be, “If faith comes through hearing the word of Christ, then are those who never hear that word incapable of saving faith?” To answer this question, we can review such Scripture verses as Psalm 19:1-6, Isaiah 40:5, and Psalm 98:2-3 which tells us, “The Lord has made known His salvation; He has revealed His righteousness in the sight of the nations. He has remembered His steadfast love and faithfulness to the house of Israel. All the ends of the earth have seen the salvation of our God.” These verses demonstrate that all, either through general or special revelation, are aware in some capacity or another of God and His salvation. In fact, Isaiah 65:1 adds that those who have no desire to seek after God are made able through His revelation to them by stating, “I was ready to be sought by those who did not ask for Me; I was ready to be found by those who did not seek Me. I said, ‘Here am I, here am I,’ to a nation that was not called by My name.” Scripture attests to the fact that God’s salvation is made known to all men, however, our sin and the works of Satan act as blinders keeping us from the Truth. If it were not for the work of God, we would be unable to turn to Him, “as it is written: ‘None is righteous, no, not one; no one understands; no one seeks for God.’” The problem here is that modern evangelism is man-centered, based solely upon man’s choice rather than upon God’s (see Romans 9:22-33 for a correct understanding of this in relation to salvation). If we believe that man is capable of effecting his own salvation, it necessarily follows that if he has not been evangelized nor given the opportunity to effect said salvation, we can then blame God for His judgment of the individual to Hell because He has not provided an opportunity for him to hear the Gospel. This conclusion does two things: First, it refuses the fact that all men are sinners by choice and by nature. God is never unjust in punishing a sinner eternally in Hell. In fact, this is the end we all deserve and God’s love never undermines His own justice. Second, this denies the work of the Holy Spirit in salvation. Scripture attests that God the Holy Spirit convicts of sin, draws individuals to the Father, regenerates by the Spiritual Baptism of being born-again, justifies by gifting faith in Christ, etc. While human responsibility is based upon our own sinfulness which must justly be punished, God demonstrates His love through punishing that sin on the Cross in the Person of Christ. This is why Scripture teaches us in John 14:6 that, “Jesus said to him, ‘I am the way, and the truth, and the life. No one comes to the Father except through me.’” While Scripture demonstrates this a number of ways, such as recognition of the Angel of the Lord (the preincarnate Jesus Christ) as God, looking forward by faith in the promises of God through Messiah, or recognizing the divinity of Christ in the New Testament, all come to saving faith in Christ alone. Those who do not are judged in Hell for eternity on the basis of their sin, as we all deserve. Therefore, there is no such thing as someone who has never heard (at least in some way or another in the providence of God), and those who do not come to Christ do so in active rebellion against God.


THE NATURE OF HELL
Looking to Scripture which defines the doctrine of Hell, there are certain points we must consider when interpreting the text. First, we can understand that Sheol in the Old Testament was used to mean the place of the dead. This is true for both the righteous and the wicked as we can understand from verses such as Genesis 37:35 (Jacob), Psalm 16:10 (David/Christ), Proverb 5:5 (Immoral Woman), Isaiah 38:10 (Hezekiah), and Hosea 13:14 (Unrepentant Israel/Ephraim/Samaria). Second, we must understand that in Christ’s argument with the Sadducees over the resurrection (Matthew 22:23-33), He proved His point by the tense of a single verb (eiÎmið, the first person singular present indicative; a prolonged form of a primary and defective verb). Because we understand through this passage that there is life after death, and because we understand that up to this point both the righteous and the wicked were sent to Sheol (Hades in the New Testament; see Acts 2:25-28 and the cross-reference of Psalm 16:8-11), this supports the fact that both the righteous and the wicked endure after death, as opposed to the annihilation of the wicked. Christ’s illustration of the rich man and Lazarus also support this conclusion in Luke 16:19-31 by demonstrating the division in Sheol/Hades up to this point between the enduring righteous and enduring wicked. Reconciling the place of Lazarus (Abraham’s Bosom) with such verses as Ephesians 4:8-9 and Luke 23:43, we find that Abraham’s Bosom is synonymous with Paradise. Additionally, the final destination of the wicked (to include Satan, his angels/demons, the Antichrist/Beast, the False Prophet, Hades, and Death) is an everlasting (both ultimate AND enduring) Gehenna (Hell). We see this truth in verses such as Revelation 19:20, 20:10, and 20:12-15. There are several additional points we can consider to further support the enduring consciousness and punishment of the wicked in Hell. First, non-temporal terms such as eternal, unquenching, everlasting, etc. all must be consistently redefined to refer to temporal activities alone in refutation of this doctrine. Second, the popular Jewish mindset and representation of the doctrine of Hell in the Old Testament is weak as Jews do not regard Jesus Christ as their Messiah, nor do they accept the completion of revelation in the New Testament as authoritative. Thirdly, the acceptance of the doctrine of Heaven as something a “nice” God would do while refusing the doctrine of Hell as something a just God would do honors neither God’s perfectly just perfectly loving nature, nor His inspired revelation of Scripture and the teaching found within. Fourthly, a non-enduring, ultimate (as opposed to eternal) view of Hell is consistent with many cults today such as the Jehovah’s Witnesses. Finally, an annihilationist conclusion is an attack against the justice of God (e.g. No matter how horrendous a death Hitler could have experienced, his one-time annihilation could never justly reconcile the extermination of 6 million Jews during the Holocaust), but it is also an extreme detriment to evangelism, as many secular humanists and postmoderns today already believe that there is no life after death, hence, no eternal punishment for their sin.

McDonald's: From "I'm Lovin' It" to "I'm Promoting the Homosexual Agenda While Alienating My Largest Customer Base"

For those of us who are not familiar with McDonald's most recent assault on family values, the company has donated $20,000 to the anti-family activist group The National Gay and Lesbian Chamber of Commerce. This is not the first time McDonald's has acted inappropriately, but it should be their last. With the donation, a senior executive (Richard Ellis, VP of Communications) from McDonald's USA has been placed on the board of directors. Following in the pattern of previous anti-family actions such as sponsorship of the sexually-explicit San Francisco Gay Pride Parade, sponsoring training from Out & Equal™ Workplace Advocates for homosexuals on how to aggressively promote homosexuality within the company they work for, and utilizing McDonald's spokesman Bill Whitman to suggest to the Washington Post that those who oppose same-sex marriage are motivated by hate, it is no surprise that the company continues to find new means of promoting the homosexual agenda on a national avenue. Companies such as McDonald's which have become American icons of family values over the decades have seemingly lost touch with their largest customer base to adopt a new vision
of immorality which is contributing to the destruction of the moral fabric of society. It is time to put an end to the "super-sizing" of wickedness. Please join me in boycotting McDonald's (click here) until they understand that our money is not for those who hate and seek to destroy traditional families and traditional values.

The Coke and Crescent?

It looks like Coca-Cola has jumped on the bandwagon of faith...in Allah! For Ramadan this year (September 2008), it seems Coke will be releasing a can design with the internationally known symbol of Islam: The Star and Crescent. Adorning the national flags of at least 11 Islamic countries, these symbols have become part of Coca-Cola's marketing scheme to appeal to Muslims, but not any other faith group. Granted, Jews can drink "Kosher" Coke, but where is the Star of David during Chanukah? What about the Cross of Christ during Christmas? Although I think this kind of commercialization of Christendom would be both tacky and inappropriate, it still causes one to question why preference is given to Islam, particularly during the anniversary of the 9/11 attacks on the United States. Looking back to the question of Christmas, it is true that Santa Claus has been a common marketing ploy for Coca-Cola cans and bottles throughout the years. In fact, the modern-day image of Santa (particularly red and white) was popularized by Coca-Cola in the 1930's (although they did not create him nor were they the first to depict him in such a manner). These details aside, the depiction of a fat, old elf taking on the attributes of God (omniscience, omnipresence, immortality [as eternality], etc.) are no consolation to the Christian community, but rather an offense to the message of the Gospel. Sadly, none of this matters to Coca-Cola who is only out to make a buck. If you don't think this is the case, you'll have to take my word as I have worked for the company twice and held 3 different positions (in either sales or distribution). As a final point, can Muslims even drink Classic Coke? As far as I can tell, the only flavors considered Halal are Vanilla Coke, Diet Vanilla Coke, and Cherry Coke.

Gay from Birth?

The question of the debate over homosexuality between the secular and Christian world is not a question of whether or not homosexuality is genetic. We can both agree that heterosexuals have a natural inclination to be attracted to members of the opposite sex; however, this inclination does not justify the sins of fornication or adultery. This is a question of our response to a Holy God Who has communicated through both general (in nature) and special (the Bible) revelation that homosexuality is an abomination. This does not make the fornicator or the adulterer any less guilty in the eyes of God, but it does call into question our response to God. Whether an individual desires sex prior to an appropriate marriage covenant, sex in addition to an appropriate marriage covenant, sex with animals, or sex with members of the same sex, all of these have been classified as sinful attitudes/behaviors by Scripture and necessitate the need for fallen men and women to repent in obedience to their Creator. While I believe the research that has been presented thus far to be found quite wanting, even if there was an apparent "gay gene" (which I find to be incredibly unlikely considering that God created man and woman "very good"), this in no way relinquishes the responsibility of apparent homosexuals to live a life of celibacy. This raises the question of marriage itself; but again, our response to a Holy God is paramount and we find the parameters of the covenant of marriage defined and established by the Word of God. This means that marriage is reserved for one man and one woman for the duration of the life of either party. In the midst of a sinful, fallen world, God's standards seem much too high for us. The fact of the matter is, they are too high for any human being to meet. This is only a reminder of the completeness of our depraved sinfulness and the necessity for a perfect Savior in Christ Jesus.