Theology of Hope Amidst the World’s Fears

Fear is a social phenomenon that develops in people facing a crisis, such as a pandemic. For instance, the entire world is currently exposed to Covid-19 pandemic, causing great fear. In the Bible, Jesus’ disciples were terrified of sinking in their boat during a storm. Although these two scenarios are different, the response is the same. Fear produces stress and anxiety disorders when not appropriately managed. This paper examines the causes of fear and how they can be addressed. Specifically, the study involves determining the cause of fear and proposing a strategy based on Hope, as described by Erich in the book Revolution of Hope which positively correlates with building fortitude and endurance. Surrendering or persisting is a dialectical choice, though theology fear does not give chances. Instead, Humans only survive by depending on God. This research was involved literature reviews by utilizing reference sources, including books, journal articles, and other scientific content.

The Pericope Adulterae (John 7:53–8:11): Jesus’ Answer, an Offer of Life to Suffering Women

This article explores a probable motivation for the insertion of the Pericope Adulterae (John 7:53–8:11) in the Gospel of John in consideration of the motive of ‘living/life’ used by the gospel writer. Using John 8:12 as the starting point of this investigation, the article focuses on the warning to the Israelites against idolatry with specific attention to the warning against worshiping the sun, the moon, and the stars (Deuteronomy 4:15–20). It also deals with the Feast of Tabernacles, which is the direct context in which Jesus declared that he is the light of the world. The water ceremony also plays a central role in understanding the bigger picture that unfolds, as well as the Early Church’s struggle against heretical Christological teachings of who Jesus was with regard to his human nature and his divine nature.

Nourishment in Paradise and After Resurrection: Double Creation According to Gregory of Nyssa

Gregory of Nyssa (cca 335–cca 395), one of the three Cappadocian Fathers, introduces the creation of human beings on the basis of Genesis 1:26–27 and interprets these two biblical verses as a ‘double creation’—the first of which is ‘in the image of God’ (Genesis 1:26) and secondly as male or female (Genesis 1:27). His concept of ‘double creation’ is obviously inspired by Philo of Alexandria, a first-century Jewish philosopher, but Gregory points out the condition of human beings before and after committing the sin, in contrast to Philo’s conception. While Philo distinguishes between the first and the second creation of the entirety of nature, Gregory only relates the double creation to humans. Thus plants as nourishment for humans, according to Genesis, must be matched with the second creation of humans. In the resurrection, when the ‘first creation’ of human nature will be reached, human beings with their restored bodies will only feed on immaterial, spiritual food—the Word of God.

On Roach’s Presuppositional Response to Licona’s New Historiographical Approach

In a recent article, William C. Roach (2019) offers a presuppositional critique, which is inspired by Carl F. H. Henry, of Michael R. Licona’s (2010) so-called New Historiographical Approach (NHA) to defending the resurrection. More precisely, Roach attempts to defend six key theses, namely, that (1) the NHA is an evidentialist approach, (2) the NHA is a deductive argument, (3) the NHA is an insufficient approach, (4) believers and unbelievers share no common ground, (5) the NHA does not embrace a correspondence theory of truth, and (6) the presupposition of divine revelation is necessary for apologetics. We respond to each of Roach’s arguments, respectively.

Molinism’s Value in Easing Mistrust of God Stemming From Suffering and Divine Silence

One issue that sometimes produces mistrust of God in the life of a Christian is God’s perceived silence when He allows a trial to enter the believer’s life—especially when the believer has been faithfully praying that God would not allow it and there is no evident reason why God would not answer this prayer. This paper examines the nature of trust and some key reasons why it is difficult to trust God. It then argues that accepting the truth of human libertarian freedom and divine middle knowledge provides a powerful basis for thinking that God has meticulous providential control over the world without implicating God in evil, and this can help believers to trust God when they face trials and wrestle with His silence and apparent unresponsiveness to prayer.

A Critical Examination of the Church’s Reception of Emperor Constantine’s Edict of Milan of AD 313

Since its enactment in AD 313, the Edict of Milan (sometimes referred to as ‘the Edict of Toleration’), an edict that freed Christianity from empire-wide persecution, Constantine’s declaration has received a significant amount of attention within Christendom. Most of the discussion has centered on Constantine’s conversion, the precursor to the actual edict (whether the conversion was real or insincere, as some have suggested), with many suggesting that Constantine was acting more as a politician than a Christian. While this line of inquiry is legitimate, perhaps a better approach to the question may be more helpful to present-day Christians. That is, while it is logical to deduce that every prudent politician will ignore the largest religious movement in his/her time at his/her own peril, Christians of every age will be better served if they critically evaluate their reception of each and every major policy that is clearly aimed at their benefit. With this background, this paper will attempt to critically examine the reception of Constantine’s edict by the Church in the years immediately following its enactment. Two early exhibits will be brought to bear here: the Donatist controversy and the Arian controversy. In so doing, the thesis that while Christians had every reason to celebrate the enactment of the edict, down the road, an uncritical adoption of the emperor’s policies and favors towards the church opened a door for an unhealthy marriage between earthly powers and the church that proved detrimental in the ensuing years, will be defended. As such, the Church’s reception of the Edict of Milan continues to be a lesson to Christians of every age in their relationship with the political leadership of their time.

A Refutation of Several Muslim Apologetic Arguments and a Powerful Argument Against God’s Authorship of the Quran

Having spent many years researching the best apologetics Christian philosophers could offer, I recently started examining Muslim apologetics. Focussing on the arguments for the Islamic God’s existence by popular Muslim apologist Hamza Andreas Tzortzis, I conclude that they are terrible, and are not of the same quality as the best arguments for the truth of Christianity. Furthermore, I converted one of these into a powerful argument against mainstream Islamic/Quranic theism, which can be utilised by atheists and Christians alike; and just about anybody else

Islamism, Political Islam, and the Need for Critique

This article is about Islamism (or political Islam) as a challenge for contemporary liberal democracies. Islamism is portrayed as an ideology that favors one specific religion as supreme and that is a threat to freedom of speech. The author makes a plea for distinguishing a. the religion of Islam, b. Muslims as a group, and c. the political ideology of Islamism. Regarding the dangers of Islamism, some sociological research about the convictions of Muslims is discussed (Koopmans, Esposito) and the most recent case from the European Court of Human Rights in Strasbourg—E.S. v. Austria (2018: 38450/12)—is analysed, which renders all criticism of Islam and Islamism difficult, if not impossible.

Doubting the Quran, the Hadith, and Muhammad’s Splitting of the Moon: A Probabilistic Refutation of One of Islam’s Most Striking Miraculous Claims

Having spent many years engaging with Christian claims about miracles, especially the purported resurrection of Jesus, I now shift attention to Islamic miracle claims, the most striking of which seems to me to be Muhammad’s alleged splitting of the moon. I explain, in a Bayesian fashion, why this almost certainly did not happen.

Why Much of the Liberal Left Can Now be Termed ‘Regressive’: Discourses on Trump, Immigration, and Islam

We find much of the discourse from the soi disant progressive politicians, media and academy to be misinformed, hypocritical, and even regressive. This applies to discussions about politicians such as President Donald Trump and Hillary Clinton, and especially concerns the issues of Islam and immigration. We argue that much of the contemporary liberal left appears to be more intolerant, more Orwellian, than its traditional rivals on the right [while recognising that there are differences between those who describe themselves as ‘liberals’ or ‘leftists’, including moderate left, centre left, far left etc., we have decided to use the portmanteau ‘liberal left’ as this equates to the more generally agreed upon signifier ‘progressive’].