Evangelism Lesson 1

In this video I share some examples from Scripture of what evangelism looks like. Not every believer is called to replicate Peter, Paul, or Billy Graham but we are all called to share Jesus Christ with others. It really is not that hard. I pray this video helps you understand how effective you can be, even if you are not a biblical scholar.

 

Evangelism

Jesus instructed His followers to proclaim His gospel message, commonly referred to as the Great Commission; however, many Christians feel inadequate or fear rejection. This message is the first in a series I plan to do on how to evangelize biblically and have the confidence to do so.       

Persecution of the church in the USA

It appears that many in the church (in the U.S.) seem to believe that we will not see suffering or persecution prior to the rapture. What if we are wrong? In the following video, I share my thoughts on this matter.     

Redefining the Family

Family dynamics vary slightly in appearance from one culture to another but the basic family unit has traditionally consisted of a father, mother, and children. In time past, the father was generally responsible for the education and spiritual development of his family. In recent years, the role of the father has typically been viewed as the provider and protector while the mother has managed the home, to include the primary care of the children. Currently, there is an effort to redefine the family in modern society. This paper will explore a redefining of the family, primarily where the father’s role is diminished or he is absent and how that affects the children and society in general.       

For the Christian, family is more than a social construct. The Bible contains not only God’s instructions for the individual’s life but also includes His familial order and the boundaries. God is social by nature and He created man in His image; therefore man is social (Gen. 1:27). The book of Genesis records the creation of the universe, including man. He did this in six progressive, twenty-four hour days and at the conclusion of each creative day, He stated that His creation was good. The first mention of something that was not good was for the man to be alone; thus, God created woman (Gen. 2:18). After God made a suitable mate for the man, He commanded them to “be fruitful and multiply” (Gen. 1:28). This was His plan for populating the earth and set a precedent for the family. Until recently, this plan has been followed, even within communities that have never heard of the God of the Bible. It appears that there is an inherent knowledge of the natural order of things. When the natural order is corrupted, the system begins to fall apart. 

Divorce can wreak havoc on families and children in particular. According to Richard Behrman and Linda Quinn, there is, “related and crucial concern about the effects of divorce on children's emotional and psychological well-being, and on their successful development and transition to adulthood.”[1] They do note that not all children respond alike and much of the healing or transition can be affected by the way, in which the parents handle the divorce. They write, “Variables that are believed to account for children's adjustment to divorce include the amount and nature of involvement of the noncustodial parent, the custodial parent's adjustment to divorce and his or her parenting skills, interparental conflict before and after divorce, economic hardship, and other life stresses (for example, moving, changing schools, parental remarriage).”[2]

The absence of the father in the home is a major blow to the spiritual health of the family and Satan knows this. If he can remove the father, his job of destroying the lives of the children is almost complete. There are various reasons why the father may not be in the home. Death, divorce, and mothers choosing to parent alone are a few examples.

Many judges and court officials have taken a biased approach and typically award custody of children to the mother simply because they feel the mother is best suited to care for the children, even in cases where the mother has a less than stellar or stable history. Numerous studies have shown a clearly biased opinion towards fathers but according to some experts, this may be changing. Few would probably argue that a child, especially a very young child, needs its mother but many argue that the father is un-necessary to the welfare of the child.

Dennis Vatsis sees this as a problem and, in his article Throwaway, based on his book Throwaway Dads, claims that fathers are at a severe disadvantage in court cases deciding custody issues and writes, “There is a societal and cultural dynamic for the gender discrimination experienced by fathers within the domestic relations arena.[3] According to research included in the article (by a special task force commissioned by the Michigan Supreme Court), judges typically made their decision to grant custody to the mother based on the ‘tender years doctrine’ which supposed that the mother could best meet the needs of the child, especially younger children. This was largely due to the time when the father began working away from the home and the mother typically stayed at home. As Vatsis points out, today’s culture sees women just as active working outside of the home but this old way of thinking by the court still persists.[4] 

Vatsis argues that a child deserves the benefit of having access to both parents. Unless one parent is proven a threat to the welfare of the child, he advocates joint custody but as he points out, too many judges disagree. In his closing remarks, he states:

The United States and Michigan constitutions each provide that no one shall be deprived of the equal protection of the law. The Fourteenth Amendment of the United States Constitution explicitly provides that no state shall deprive a person of life, liberty, or property without due process of law, or deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the law. Yet fathers in Michigan are being denied equal protection and due process and are being deprived of custodial rights to their children. Equal justice under the law is an illusory legal concept in the domestic relations arena. This gender bias against fathers has to be addressed for the benefit of not only the disenfranchised father, but principally for the children who deserve to have not one, but both parents actively involved in parenting.[5]

 

Michigan is not the only state to fall short in its war against fatherhood. Unfortunately, the idea that the father is not important in the life of his child seems to be the trend in many states.

            Surprisingly, some feminist groups have joined father’s rights groups to denounce this bias against fathers but they say it goes beyond bias against fathers. Cynthia McNeely writes that the courts largely view the father and mother in a stereotypical way, fathers as unnecessary and mothers as weak and dependant on a man to support them. She also blames the court for undermining the family when she writes, “This state-instituted romantic paternalization of mothers, combined with the narrowed view of the role of fathers, is largely responsible for the wholesale destruction of the post-divorce, father-child relationship.”[6] She continues, “Consequently, the state creates increased psychological, educational, behavioral, and health disorders for children, and crime and violence for society.”[7]   

The Bible is not silent on the role or importance of the father. In Deuteronomy, fathers are instructed to teach their children about the Lord and remind them of what He had done for them (Deut. 4:9,10. 6:4-9). Solomon, considered by many biblical scholars to be the wisest man to ever live, sought to instruct his son when he wrote the book of Proverbs (Prov. 1:8,9). The father is to be the spiritual leader of the home and, according to Randy Stinson and Timothy Jones, “The father was the key to the family, and a son was a future leader.”[8]

Stinson and Jones explain the correlation of the trinity and compare them to the roles within the family. They point out the headship of the Father and the submissive roles of the Son and the Holy Spirit. The Son submits to the Father and the Holy Spirit submits to the Father and the Son, yet each share in equality. The roles of the family are similar in that the wife is to submit to her husband and the children are to submit to their father and mother.[9] Stinson and Jones also point out that the father has a unique role as the spiritual leader and write, “Husbands and fathers bear responsibility for the Christian nurture of their households-a responsibility that differs from that of their wives and from other members of the household.”[10]

Kenda Creasy Dean, an Associate Professor of Youth, Church, and Culture at Princeton Theological Seminary, played a key role in The National Study of Youth and Religion that sought to find answers to why young people appear to be apathetic to church and faith in general. While the study found common problems related to youth programs, the church in general, believability of the Scriptures, etc., the main reason identified was the lack of faith demonstrated in the home. The respondents simply adopted the belief and faith practices of their parents. She states, “We must assume that the solution lies not in beefing up congregational youth programs or making worship more ‘cool’ and attractive, but in modeling the kind of mature, passionate faith we say we want young people to have.”[11]

In another study, conducted by Ken Ham and Brit Beemer, their results were similar. While many parents and churches blame the universities for leading their children astray, these survey results drew a different conclusion. The majority of those youths who attended church prior to college and never came back were slowly slipping away before they graduated from high school, ninety percent of them. Between junior high and high school, these kids were already gone.[12]

In a postmodern culture, sex outside of marriage is accepted, even applauded. Sex dominates television and the movies; it is even used by advertisers to sell cars and hamburgers. American public schools teach “sex education” and “safety” rather than abstinence, even unsafe and unhealthy practices. Numerous unmarried young women become pregnant through one nightstands or casual sexual encounters and have no desire to seek a relationship with the child’s father. Some opt to abort while others choose to become a single parent. Many feminists promote the idea that men are merely sperm donors and are not necessary for child rearing but ironically, they fight for the rights of two men to adopt children claiming that they can provide an equally loving and nurturing environment as a single mother or two mothers.

There has not been a great deal of study to support or deny this claim but at least one study has shown that this is not the case. Dr. Mark Regnerus, a sociologist at the University of Texas in Austin, conducted a study that provided substantial proof that contradicts this notion. His study concluded that children raised in a home with homosexual parents fared worse than those children raised in homes with heterosexual parents; even worse than homes where divorce had occurred.[13]   

With the problem of fatherless children and fathers who are content to entrust there sacred responsibility of teaching their children to others, most churches, especially those in the inner city, have adopted programs in the church to meet the growing need for spiritual training. Unfortunately, “in many cases, churches are focusing on family ministry as a reaction to dismal retention statistics.[14]

The Christian family, comprised of a father, mother, and child/children, is the best model for: (1) carrying out God’s plan for populating the earth, (2) producing Godly offspring, and (3) maintaining a Godly society. However, it must be noted that even during Israel’s years of wandering through the desert, the people strayed despite the leadership of Moses and a strict adherence to the law. No plan, no amount of laws, or the enforcement of such can guarantee a Godly society but it can produce the most conducive environment for it.        

The Bible says that a man is to leave his family and join himself to his wife so that they become one flesh (Gen. 2:24; Mat. 19:5). Sadly, many today want all of the benefits of marriage and may sincerely believe that they are in love, only to abandon the relationship when times become difficult. When considering the practical application of this verse, there is clinical proof to support staying together may be the better choice:  

In a study released in 2002, Waite and five colleagues analyzed data from the University of Wisconsin’s National Survey of Family and Households. They discovered that adults who said they were unhappily married in the late 1980’s and got divorced were on average still unhappy or even less happy when interviewed five years later as compared to those who stayed in their marriages. Most of those who stayed in their marriages had on average moved past the bad times and reached a happier stage. After controlling for race, age, gender, and income, the researchers found that divorce usually did not reduce symptoms of depression, raise self-esteem, or increase a sense of mastery over one’s life. The general conclusion is that divorce does not make unhappy married people any happier. Therefore, people who stay in an unhappy marriage are at least as well off as those who divorce.[15]

While many argue for nontraditional-family lifestyles, the evidence is clear. A home where a father and mother love one another and commit to one another is the most suitable environment for raising happy, healthy children. Both Christian and secular studies show this to be the case. Those who truly love children should put the best interests of the child above their own desires to have a family if they live outside the boundaries that are most conducive to healthy child rearing.

Without absolute truth, of which the Bible clearly advocates, modern society is easily led into believing that there is no standard or absolute moral code for behavior. This attitude of postmodern thought suggests that individual choice trumps any other type of behavior including God's design for marriage. This mentality suggest that people can do what they want, make of life what they will, and break all the rules without any thought to the consequences of their actions. The problem with this mentality is that when people do whatever they want, someone else has to pay.

When adults adopt lifestyles that veer outside of biblical and conventional wisdom, it creates an unhealthy environment for not only the adults but the children as well. Satan seeks to destroy the family. When the family is redefined, Satan wins. Thus, divorce as well as cohabitation; homosexua1 marriage or other modern definitions of marriage destroy the very foundation of Biblical marriage and family. Children that are raised in any environment outside of the God-ordained family unit, which includes the husband and wife model, will suffer to some degree. Furthermore, as spiritual leader, provider, and protector, the father plays a vital role to the psychological, spiritual, and physical health of the family. When you remove the father from his God-given role, the family stands unguarded, and is open to Satan’s attack. The result is evidenced clearly; broken families make broken societies. 

Bibliography

Balswick, Jack O. and Judith K. Balswick. The Family: A Christian Perspective on the Contemporary Home. Grand Rapids: Baker Academic, 3^rd ed. 2007.

Behrman, Richard E., and Linda S. Quinn. "Children and Divorce: Overview and Analysis." The Future of Children: 4, no. 1 (1994). Accessed May 5, 2015. http://futureofchildren.org/publications/journals/article/index.xml?journalid=63&articleid=407§ionid=2773.

Carey, Benedict. "Debate on a Study Examining Gay Parents." The New York Times. Accessed April 19, 2015. http://www.nytimes.com/2012/06/12/health/study-examines-effect-of-having-a-gay-parent.html?_r=0.

Dean, Kenda Creasy. Almost Christian: What The Faith Of Our Teenagers Is Telling The American Church. New York: Oxford University Press, 2010.

Ham, Ken, Britt Beemer, and Todd Hillard. Already Gone: Why Your Kids Will Quit Church and What You Can Do To Stop It. Green Forest, AR: Master Books, 2009.

McNeely, Cynthia A. "Lagging Behind the Times: Parenthood, Custody, and Gender Bias in the Family Court." Florida State Law Review 25 (n.d.): 891-956. http://archive.law.fsu.edu/journals/lawreview/downloads/254/mcneely.pdf.

Stinson, Randy, and Timothy P. Jones, eds. Trained in the Fear of God: Family Ministry in Theological, Historical, and Practical Perspective. Grand Rapids: Kregel Publications, 2011.

Vatsis, Dennis G. "Throwaway Dads [article]." Michigan Bar Journal no. 9 (2001): 54. HeinOnline,     EBSCOhost (accessed May 2, 2015).
 

---

[1]. Richard E. Behrman and Linda S. Quinn, "Children and Divorce: Overview and Analysis," The Future of Children: 4, no. 1 (1994), Accessed April 4, 2015, http://futureofchildren.org/publications/ 

journals/article/index.xml?journalid=63&articleid=407§ionid=2773. 

[2]. Ibid.

 

[3]. Dennis G. Vatsis, "Throwaway Dads [article]," Michigan Bar Journal no. 9 (2001): 54, HeinOnline, EBSCOhost  (accessed May 2, 2015) 56.

[4]. Ibid., 56

[5]. Ibid. 58.

[6]. Cynthia A. McNeeley, "Lagging Behind the Times: Parenthood, Custody, and Gender Bias in the Family Court," Florida State Law Review 25 (n.d.): 891-956, http://archive.law.fsu.edu/journals/lawreview/downloads/254/mcneely.pdf.,

[7]. Ibid.

[8]. Randy Stinson, and Timothy P. Jones, eds., Trained in the Fear of God: Family Ministry in Theological, Historical, and Practical Perspective, (Grand Rapids: Kregel Publications, 2011) 38. 

[9].  Ibid., 68.                       

[10]. Ibid., 68.

[11]. Kenda Creasy Dean, Almost Christian: What The Faith Of Our Teenagers Is Telling The American Church, (New York: Oxford University Press, 2010) 3,4.

[12]. Ken Ham, Britt Beemer, and Todd Hillard, Already Gone: Why Your Kids Will Quit Church and What You Can Do To Stop It, (Green Forest, AR: Master Books, 2009) 31-2. 

[13]. Benedict Carey, "Debate on a Study Examining Gay Parents," The New York Times, Accessed April 19, 2015, http://www.nytimes.com/2012/06/12/health/study-examines-effect-of-having-a-gay-parent.html?_r=0.

[14]. Randy Stinson, and Timothy P. Jones, eds., 18.  

[15].  Jack O. Balswick, and Judith K. Balswick, The Family: A Christian Perspective on the Contemporary Home, (Grand Rapids: Baker Academic, 3^rd ed., 2007) 299.

Worldview: Secular Humanism vs. Christianity

Secular Humanism

Origin –

Secular humanism is largely based on the belief that there is no God (or gods) and thus, the answer to the origin of man must be found elsewhere. This worldview attacks the question by looking to science. A popular theory dealing with the origin of the universe is known as the Big Bang Theory. While there is no concrete evidence to support this notion, it is believed that the universe was basically condensed in an unknown density and temperature that began to expand around 14 billion years ago.[1] This supposedly led to the formation of proteins and atoms and eventually the formation of proteins and then life. No design, no direction, just random chance. Another theory, known as The Panspermia Theory, consists of life from another universe traveling to earth and spreading spores that eventually became human life forms. Here, there is no explanation as to the origin of said life forms.[2]

Identity -

Since humanists believe man evolved from primordial slime, man has no basis on which to elevate himself above animals or any other life form. Man is simply the most intelligent of the animal world. This reasoning has led to some extreme views including the attitude towards abortion and euthanasia. [3] It also led to Hitler’s attempted extermination of the Jews during World War II. 

Meaning/Purpose -

Since man, according to humanists, is simply a highly developed state of evolutionary process, he has no meaning or purpose. There is nothing outside of himself that gives him relevance. Some may argue man’s value but this is nothing more than philosophical opinion.

Morality -

There are no absolutes, according to many humanists; therefore, morality is determined by the individual person or his society. This idea is commonly referred to as relativism and it is not fixed; therefore, it is subject to change.[4] Carl Jung stated, “Without freedom there can be no morality.”[5] This would mean that moral decisions imposed by government institutions would not be morality if the citizenry had no choice in the matter. Consider Hitler killing Jews because he claimed they were inferior. The German people had to make a conscious, moral decision on whether this was right or not. It is also interesting that in the battle over homosexual marriage today, many who support it claim the moral high ground, commonly referred to as tolerance, but fail to offer this right equally to those who oppose it, regardless of their reasons. According to Jung, this cannot be a moral position. Without an absolute standard, it would seem that morality is nothing more than a construct of human imagination.   

Destiny -

If there is no God or universal cause, when man dies, he ceases to be.

Most humanists seem to be okay with this concept but in all honesty, do they ever ask, what if? When they look at their spouse, children, and grandchildren, do they consider, if God does exist, that their loved ones will go to hell based on their ideals? Perhaps their acceptance of nothingness after death is palatable because they are free to live their lives in whatever way they choose without having to question being accountable to a holy and righteous God.  

Christianity

Origin –

The Christian, or perhaps better stated traditional Christianity, believes all of creation comes from God. John said, “He” (Jesus) “was in the beginning with God. All things were made through Him, and without Him nothing was made that was made. In Him was life, and the life was the light of men” (John 1:2-4, NKJV). Genesis chapters 1 and 2 document the creation but secular humanists dispute the claims of Scripture and argue that science refutes the biblical account and proves it wrong. Many Christians have bought into this notion and mix evolution and an old earth view with the biblical account. There is much scientific evidence that supports the biblical account but it is important to remember, for the Christian, God’s Word is the final authority. Charles Darwin, in the Origen of Species, admits that if every living thing evolved from something else, there should be huge amounts of fossil evidence to demonstrate the transitional stages but this is not the case. He admitted that this lack of evidence was the strongest case against his Theory of Evolution.[6] Many secular scientists today are acknowledging that science does actually support creation and Scripture, leading many to become creationists.  

Identity -

The Christian obtains identity or worth because of his relationship to God, “Then God said, ‘Let Us make man in Our image, according to Our likeness; let them have dominion over the fish of the sea, over the birds of the air, and over the cattle, over all the earth and over every creeping thing that creeps on the earth’” (Gen. 1:26, NKJV). God gives man worth and demonstrates the value He places on us by taking on human flesh and suffering and dying so that we will not be eternally separated from Him (Rom. 5:8). A Holy God suffering and dying for sinful, fallen man. That says we have immeasurable worth to the Creator of everything that exists. The humanist would have us believe we are no better than animals or plants. They would have us reject our Creator and live our lives in rebellion to the One who loves us and died for us. No one likes an ungrateful child. To reject God is the epitome of ungratefulness. At the same time, many secularists rally to treat animals with dignity and value while trumpeting a woman’s right to abortion on demand. Life is sacred to God and He clearly instructs us not to murder. The humanist mindset, whether they realize it or not, is in complete rebellion against Holy God.

Meaning/Purpose -

When God created man, He chose to make him steward over His creation (Gen. 1:26). It was also His desire that mankind worship Him and fellowship with Him (Deut. 10:12-13). For the humanist, since he has no higher power to serve or answer to, his life is whatever he desires. If mankind has no relevance, why should he not seek to make himself happy? Since there is no one to answer to, if his ambitions come at the expense of others, what difference does it make? Even so, it is only fare to say that there are many humanists who seek to do good. Some give to charitable organizations while others seek to save lives (e.g. doctors, firemen, policemen), try to be good neighbors or serve others in another capacity. At best, their efforts are motivated by a desire to make them feel good about themselves. If there is no gain or judgment after death, what benefit is there?        

Morality –

According to Mirriam-Webster, secular humanism can be defined as, “a system of values and beliefs that are opposed to the values and beliefs of traditional religions” or, “humanistic philosophy viewed as a nontheistic religion antagonistic to traditional religion.”[7] While I respect Mirriam-Webster, this may not be an entirely accurate description. Many humanists share the Christian beliefs that murder, adultery, stealing, and lying are wrong. Perhaps the biggest difference here is how they come to share these beliefs and values. The Christian bases his views on Scripture while the humanist may simply conform to excepted societal beliefs and behaviors. Apart from these age old beliefs, a difference of opinion does seem to emerge. In regard to sexual morality or other moral issues, the humanist tends to move left of Christianity.   

Destiny –

In his gospel, John wrote, “For God so loved the world that He gave His only begotten Son, that whoever believes in Him should not perish but have everlasting life” (John 3:16). Earlier, David wrote, “For the Lord knows the way of the righteous, but the way of the ungodly shall perish” (Ps.1:6, NKJV). Throughout Scripture, God promises that those who receive Him, trusting in Christ, will spend eternity with Him after death. The humanist has no such hope. Whether he believes in hell or not, his rejection of the Messiah will lead him there.

Bibliography

DeWitt, David A. Unraveling the Origins Controversy. Lynchburg: Creation Curriculum, 2007.

Joshi, Sonali. "Origen of Life: The Panspermia Theory." Helix Magazine. https://helix.northwestern.edu/article/origin-life-panspermia-theory.

Mirriam-Webster. Accessed February 20, 2015. http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/secular%20humanism.

Morris, Tom. Philosophy for Dummies. Indianapolis: Wiley Publishing, Inc., 1999.

Weider, Lew, Ben Gutierrez. Consider. Virginia Beach: Academx Publishing Services, 2013.

---

[1]. David A. DeWitt, Unraveling the Origins Controversy, (Lynchburg: Creation Curriculum, 2007), 144.   

[2]. Sonali S. Joshi, "Origen of Life: The Panspermia Theory," Helix Magazine, https://helix.northwestern.edu/article/origin-life-panspermia-theory.

[3]. Lew Weider, Ben Gutierrez, Consider, (Virginia Beach: Academx Publishing Services, 2013), 66.   

[4]. Ibid., 71.

[5]. Tom Morris, Philosophy for Dummies, (Indianapolis: Wiley Publishing, Inc., 1999), 125.

[6]. David A. DeWitt, Unraveling the Origins Controversy, (Lynchburg: Creation Curriculum, 2007), 157.    

[7]. Mirriam-Webster. Accessed February 20, 2015. http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/secular%20humanism.

What is a worldview?

Worldview is used to describe how a person sees their world. Through this lens, a person makes decisions on every aspect of his/her life. A Christian will (should) base their choices on Biblical concepts while a humanist will most likely choose what is expedient to him or her (this may not always hold true). Our worldview encompasses how we answer basic questions such as: 1) origin of life, 2) identity, 3) meaning, 4) morality, and 5) destiny.[1]

The Question of Origin –

A Christian worldview supports the idea that God created the world and man (Gen. 1:1, 26-28). In fact, God created everything that was created (Col. 1:16). The creative process involved the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit (Eph. 3:9; Col.1:15-17). A commonly held belief is that God created ex nihilo, which means, “out of nothing.”[2] There are some differences of opinion among believers however. Some, known as old earth creationists, have allowed secular theories to influence their way of thinking and rather than accepting the biblical account, they believe God created the universe but He did so millions or billions of years ago. Many hold to the idea that He may have used evolutionary processes but this clearly conflicts with Scripture. In the Genesis account, the writer states each day ended after the morning and evening (Gen. 1:5, 8, 13, 19, 23, 31). This stands in contrast to the day-age theory, a belief that there may have been long spans of time between the days of creation. God did not use evolution to bring about humanity or anything else; He created every thing in love with perfection.

The Question of Identity –

In all of God’s creation, man stands alone as Scripture tells us that we are made in His image (Gen. 1:26-7). God’s intent was that mankind would be stewards of the earth and populate it (Gen. 1:26-8). According to John, there will be a day when believers will be like Christ, having a resurrected body and a sinless nature (1 John 3:2).    

The Question of Meaning/Purpose –

Man’s purpose is to know and worship God (Deut. 6:5; Mat. 22:37). God is love and as such, He desires fellowship with man. Peter wrote that it was not God’s will that anyone would be lost but that all might be saved and spend eternity with Him (2 Pet. 3:9). Lew Weider and Ben Gutierrez cite John 17:3, which states that we would know the Father and the Son, Jesus Christ.[3]

The Question of Morality –

God’s Word tells us what is morally and ethically sound. We can study the nature of God and through reading and studying His Word, we can be transformed more into His likeness. David said by reading God’s Word, he would have the ability to refrain from living an overtly sinful life (Ps. 119:10-12)   Not only this, man has an inner knowledge of right and wrong. Paul addresses this in Romans 2:12-16 and says that some, who did not have God’s written law, still obeyed it because it was written in their heart. Almost all people groups believe murder, rape, stealing, and lying are wrong. They know this because God has placed it in their heart.   

The Question of Destiny -

The Christian (excluding inclusivists and others who hold false doctrines) believes that man will spend eternity in one of two places, heaven or hell. Those who receive Christ will spend eternity with Him in heaven (John 3:16, 14:2Eph. 1:13,14). There is no other way to salvation; Jesus is the only way to heaven (Acts 4:12; Rom. 1:16). Jesus also spoke of hell as being a real place (Mat. 5:21-30). He told a story about two men, one rich and the other poor. Both men died and Jesus referred to Lazarus, the poor man, as receiving reward while the rich man suffered in torment (Luke 16:19-31). Despite what others may say, Jesus did not speak metaphorically but intended His audience to understand that hell is real. From the mouth of God we have sufficient evidence to know that all men will go to one or the other.   

From a biblical worldview, how should we think about, treat, and speak to others?

In the book of Exodus, God gave Moses the Ten Commandments. The first four concern man’s responsibility to God and the next six instruct man on how to treat one another (Ex. 20:3-17). Jesus said that we are to love others, even our enemies (Mat. 5:43-48). When He was beaten, spat on, and nailed to the cross, Jesus still loved (Mat. 26:67, 27-31; Luke 23:34). Throughout Scripture, God is shown to be absolute love. He blesses those who receive Him as well as those who do not (Mat. 5:45). If God loves us, in our fallen state, and asks us to love others, how can we not obey?   

Bibliography

Weider, Lew, Ben Gutierrez. Consider. Virginia Beach: Academx Publishing Services, 2013.

---

[1]. Lew Weider, Ben Gutierrez, Consider, (Virginia Beach: Academx Publishing Services, 2013) 304.64-73.

[2]. Ibid., 65.

[3]. Ibid., 70.