Why Christianity? Why the Bible?

KIPPY MYERS, Ph.D.

DOCTRINAL MATTERSFAITH AND REASONFAITH AND REASON

Are religions of the world simply different expressions of the same thing? Is Christianity the counterpart to Hinduism, Islam, or Buddhism, and do these religions merely “complement” one another? Is Allah the same deity as Jehovah, and is Jehovah the same as the Hindu god, Brahman? 

There are some who think that we are all trying to get to the same place, and simply call God by different names or approach Him in different ways. Thus, in the final analysis, the different approaches are coequal, and therefore equally acceptable to God.

The brief answer to these questions is a simple “no.” These religions are not the same truth in different wrappings. We can discern why by noting some of the radical distinctions at the very heart of these religions that show how completely distinct and unrelated they are. Of course, they have things in common (they are religions, they have deities, they have holy books, etc.), but this does not mean that they are equally efficacious, any more than a book with blank pages is equal to a book filled with good information.

Let me introduce an important term— “ontology.” Ontology refers to something’s being, essence, or nature. It has to do with what makes it what it is even after being stripped of all its unnecessary elements. Hinduism, Islam, and Christianity are different ontologically. When you strip them of their coincidental characteristics and focus on what makes them distinct as religions, they are radically divergent. They are different by their very nature, even in their most basic elements. Their books, their concepts of salvation, and even their deities are wildly different from one another. Let us make a simple beginning by noting a few of their essential differences.

THE BOOKS OF WORLD RELIGIONS
DISASSOCIATE THEMSELVES FROM ONE ANOTHER

Individuals who claim to be members in good standing of one religion (whether Christian, Moslem, or Hindu) sometimes extend the hand of fellowship to those in other religions. That is, some express a willingness to accept people who remain in other religions as if they have their deity’s blessing. But for the most part, these open-armed well-wishers are viewed as heretics by the faithful followers because the holy books themselves, which form the very center of the religions, are not so accepting of one another. Can the follower be better than the “inspired” book from which he gains faith?

The Bible—For example, the New Testament clearly claims to be the only way by which a person can come to God (specifically, one must come through Jesus—John 14:6; 2 John 9; et al.). This establishes solid barriers against all who disagree with the person of Jesus depicted in the gospel accounts. Prior to New Testament times, Judaism carried the same policy. In the Old Testament, God always spoke against pagan religions and their followers. The religions of Egypt, Babylon, Assyria, Canaan, Greece, and others are roundly attacked, condemned, and described in great detail as false and devilish.

Obviously, simply calling something “god” and worshipping it does not mean that it is acceptable to the God of the Bible. Jesus said that they who worship God must do so in spirit and in truth (John 4:24). Amazing as it may seem to those who think that the God of the Bible approves of other religions, the apostles of Christ even condemned those in the Christian age who were going backward, trying to be saved by the Mosaic law, a religion that unquestionably centered on the same God as Christianity (Galatians 5:4). In addition, they even condemned their own Christian brethren if they were living wrongly (Acts 8:18-23; Galatians 2:11).

Thus, even if the different religions did comprehend the same God, worshipping the same God does not legitimize one’s religion or religious practices according to the Bible since the one true God must be worshipped properly, that is, as the Bible prescribes (Colossians 3:17). 

The Bible claims to be the uniquely acceptable religion before God, and specifically condemns any other as illegitimate. Whatever we say about Islam and Hinduism’s relationship to Christianity, we cannot say justifiably that biblical Christianity has any affiliation with them. Any superimposition of fellowship between them would be forced and unnatural.

The Koran—The Islamic holy book, the Koran (or Qur’an), claims to be the final word from God. It claims that the Bible was just a step in its direction, so the Koran is further and final revelation (Sura 4:161). Whereas the Bible says that the apostles would be led into all Truth, and although it condemns additional and different alleged revelations as false (e.g., John 16:13; Galatians 1:6-9), the Koran teaches that if a person has only the Bible, it is not enough because then he rejects the greatest prophet of all, Mohammed. Since the Islamic holy book condemns unbelievers, it condemns those who accept only the Bible.

Whereas the Bible says that Jesus was and is God and is the only way to heaven (Philippians 2:5-11; Hebrews 5:9), the Koran exalts Mohammed above Jesus. Mohammed explicitly says several times that Jesus was not God, but a prophet and apostle (Sura 5:79; 4:169, et al.). The apostle John, however, calls the teacher of this doctrine “the antichrist” and has a lot to say about his spiritual condition (1 John; 2 John; 3 John).

Speaking of misbelievers (which would most definitely include Hindus) who turn others from the path of God, the Koran says in Sura 13:34, “For them is torment in this world’s life; but surely the torment of the next is more wretched still—nor have they against God a keeper” and “the recompense of misbelievers is the Fire!” (13:35). Also, “Whosoever craves other than Islam for a religion, it shall surely not be accepted from him, and he shall, in the next world, be of those who lose” (Sura 3:79).

Mohammed claimed that his revelations came from God via a Heavenly Book from which all Zoroastrian, Jewish, and Christian revelations came. The Bible, however, teaches that God is not a God of confusion (1 Corinthians 14:33), which would be contradicted if all of these conflicting religions came from the same source. The Koran says that Moslems believe what was revealed to Jesus and the prophets, but this is incredible in light of the aforementioned facts in addition to hundreds of others left unmentioned here (Sura 3:78-79). Amazingly, Richardson says in his introduction to the Koran, “the Qur’an often contradicts itself as well as other scriptures. Allah, then, changes his mind and alters the text of the Heavenly Book accordingly (Surah 13:39).” Compare this with Jesus’ statements, “Heaven and earth shall pass away, but my word will not pass away” (Matthew 24:35), and “The Scripture cannot be broken” (John 10:35).

Hindu Writings—Contradictions between the most basic doctrines of the Bible and the Koran could be multiplied, and the Hindu Vedic literature is widely divergent from these two. As different as they are, the Bible and the Koran have more in common than either has in common with Hindu writings. Vedic materials are something altogether different. The point here is that if the major religious books condemn and contradict one another on such fundamental issues, where does anyone get the idea that they belong together? If we believe any one of them, we must disbelieve the others. They cannot be related unless severely mutilated. They clearly are mutually exclusive. Since they so clearly do not affiliate, which, if any, is the right one?

HISTORICAL EVENTS AND INDIVIDUAL EXPERIENCES

The Koran—Islam is based entirely upon the secret, private experiences of one man. Mohammed regularly went alone to a cave and said that a Revealer delivered visions to him there. He later identified this person as the angel Gabriel. Only one person allegedly saw the angel. Only one person allegedly heard a voice. Only one person allegedly saw the visions. The only way to become a Moslem, then, is to take this one man’s word for it. We must believe a man who was kicked out of his home town, became a robber baron, led a pack of thieves in attacks on caravans, and then later returned to the city and took it by force. Compare the lifestyle and character of this man with that of Jesus Whom he claims to supersede, and see who is more worthy of belief.

The Bible—In vivid contrast to this approach of having to take one man’s word for an entire religion and basing one’s eternal destiny on one person’s private visions, the Bible is rooted and grounded in objective historical events—things many thousands of people beheld. Its specific times, places, people, and events can be located in history. Archaeology, ancient history, geography, literature, etc., corroborate its details. These give the Bible the ring of authenticity, and tie it to reality outside the mind of any single person or any group of people.

Because of this, the Bible has a beginning, middle, and end. It has a flow, a progression, a unity. It is very orderly and systematic. The Koran, however, is a very disjointed collection of many small apothegms called Suras. This is because Mohammed could not write and did not intend for his revelations to be compiled into a book. Richardson’s introduction to the Koran says, “It was addressed to the ear, not to the critical eye….” However, after Mohammed died and many began to question the legitimacy of his visions, believers gathered together the leaves, potsherds, etc., on which his sayings allegedly had been copied by some of his hearers. Someone later edited them and put them in a book format. Richardson says, “Apart from its preposterous arrangement, the Qur’an is not so much a book as a collection of manifestoes, diatribes, harangues, edicts, discourses, sermons, and such-like occasional pieces. No subject is treated systematically….” It certainly does not appear to be related to an alleged Mother Book from which the Old and New Testaments also were derived. The Koran’s sum and substance is very different from Scripture as Christians know it.

Hindu Writings—The holy literature of Hinduism encompasses many volumes, and is referred to as the Vedic literature. The most widely known is the Bhagavad-Gita, a small section of the much larger section, the Mahabharata—a huge work that has influenced Hinduism profoundly. It allegedly was composed over a period of eight hundred years (400 B.C. to A.D. 400), and supposedly tells the Sanskrit history of the ancient world. But as A.C. Bhaktivedanta Swami Prabhupada says in his translation, the Gita is “the essence of Vedic knowledge.”

The high god in Hinduism is Brahman. In a sense, Brahman is the All, the infinitely embracing Everything—ultimate reality. In another sense, Brahman is a god composed of Brahma, Shiva (the one often pictured with four arms), and Vishnu. Each of these three has a basic personality and work. Brahma creates, Shiva destroys, and Vishnu preserves. Each has wives, sons (one of Shiva’s sons is the elephant-headed Ganesha), daughters, and a series of folklore-type adventures. Their consorts also are worshipped, so there is actually an indefinite number of gods. A Hindu expert will tell you that they often use the number 330,000,000 as a convenient way of describing how many are worshipped. The boundaries and eccentricities of Hinduism, therefore, are very loose, and there are many types and sects of Hindus. What ties them together seems to be their belief in Brahman and the pantheon of gods, reincarnation (the idea that after you die you are reborn into another life on Earth), karma (the law which says that if you were bad in this life you will have a difficult life in the next), and the Vedic teachings.

One of Vishnu’s avatars (incarnations) was named Krishna. He has been described as “an impetuous, violent, and erotic figure.” Krishna is the speaker and the hero of the Bhagavad-Gita, in which he is prince of a great dynasty. The Gita’s setting is a battle in which he is involved with relatives who are enemies of his kingdom. There is no way of checking whether these events actually occurred or if this is pure legend, since we have no record of the events outside the Gita itself.

Someone might respond, “But why is it better to be historical and checkable (like the Bible) than to be non-historical (like the Koran or Vedic writings)?” The real issue, of course, is that we believe we must be rational in regard to religion. Does anyone seriously suggest that we be irrational about it? If we are to be irrational, then what is the use of arguing rationally that we must be irrational? Why worry about persuading people that the major religions are all the same if it does not really matter? 

Actually, all of the world religions attempt to use reason and (with the possible exception of Buddhism) teach their adherents to use their minds in religion. Even though Buddhism tries to get its adherents to a point in meditation where they lose thought and feeling, it uses reason to teach them, to explain itself, and to get them to that point. The point is, should reason and proof be the “engine that pulls our train of life” or not? Should we not require proof for what we believe? If not, that would put us in the position of accepting every person who claimed a divine vision. The Bible both demands proof and provides it (Deuteronomy 18:20; Isaiah 41:21-24; 1 Thessalonians 5:21, et al.).

UNIQUENESS OF INCARNATION

The Bible—The Christian system centers on the fact that God has come to Earth in a physical body and made a one-time sacrifice for sin (John 1:1-14; Philippians 2:5-9). The Bible says that the salvation of mankind was accomplished only through this act and that apart from it, man would be hopelessly lost in sin (John 3:16; Ephesians 1:7, et al.). The incarnation of the Word, along with His death and resurrection, combine to form the fundamental essential truth that defines Christianity (1 Corinthians 15:1-4). Without it, Christianity would not exist.

Hindu Writings—In Hinduism, there is no requirement to escape from sin before judgment comes (Hebrews 9:27) because for the Hindu, there is no final judgment day. Rather, the Universe is eternal; we live here forever in different personalities, one lifetime after another. The goal is to gain release from being reincarnated. The incarnation and sacrifice of someone in Jerusalem plays no role at all in Hinduism. Hindus gain release from this cycle through individual observance of ritual, right thinking, and right acting. Everything we get in this life is what we deserve because of the way we lived in past lives (even though we cannot remember our past lives so as to learn to do better in the next one, we still suffer for them). If we are better in each successive life, we will climb the ladder of goodness until we finally achieve release and oneness with divinity and the Universe.

Thus, there is also no unique one-time incarnation of God because the Hindu god, Vishnu, has come in the flesh many times in a number of guises. Vishnu has visited Earth ten times as a deliverer (as Rama, Krishna, et al.). For example, the one to whom the Gita is directed is a warrior named Arjuna. One day Krishna is driving his chariot, and Arjuna says to him, “You are the Supreme Personality of Godhead, the ultimate abode, the purest, the Absolute Truth. You are the eternal, transcendental, original person, the unborn, the greatest” (10:12-14). 

In the section “Knowledge of the Absolute” Krishna says, “as the Supreme Personality of Godhead, I know everything that has happened in the past, all that is happening in the present, and all things that are yet to come” (10:26). He elsewhere comments, “This material nature is working under My direction.” Hence, he was allegedly deity in the flesh several times.

The Koran—Islam teaches that Jesus Christ was not deity, but rather one of the great prophets (see previous quotes). His death is not necessitated for redemption, and if He died on the cross at all, its purpose was definitely not to wash away our sins. Moslems believe that salvation is obtained through observance of the “five pillars” of Islam: recite the creed (which is basically, “There is no God but Allah, and Mohammed is his prophet”); pray five times daily while facing the holy city of Mecca; give alms to the poor; fast for an extended period each year; and once in your life make a pilgrimage to Mecca.

RADICALLY DIVERGENT DIVINITY

Hindus do not believe the Universe was created by God out of nothing. It is simply an eternal emanation from Brahman. It is illusory and must be escaped so that we may gain what is real, viz., oneness with the Universe and oneness with Brahman. Islam and Christianity think of this as blasphemy, for Jehovah is perfect in every way, and infinite in every attribute. A created being never could attain such a degree of being and certainly never could become God.

Hindu gods in their many thousands of representations are commonly worshipped by means of figurines and “idols” that are condemned by both Old and New Testaments (e.g., the first two of the ten commandments—Exodus 2:3-4). One of Mohammed’s primary goals was to condemn and destroy this practice.

Islam also says there is only one member of the godhead, Allah. Christianity preaches a trinity: God the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit (Matthew 28:18). Obviously, Christianity and Islam are as opposed to Hinduism on this matter as it is to them.

DECIDING WHICH IS RIGHT

From this brief introductory study it can be seen that these three religions and their books cannot be equated. But the question remains, which one should we accept? I maintain that we should accept the Bible over other religious books because no book can amass the evidence for supernatural origin that the Bible can. No other book exhibits such profound evidence for inspiration. We should accept the Bible because:

1. It claims to be from God. That in itself does not prove its claim, but the claim is something we should look for. Would God send His revelation anonymously?
2. It is based in history, not in the subjective experience of one individual. That opens it to being tested. It can be proven or disproven.
3. It contains the highest and purest moral teachings. They remain unsurpassed for their simplicity, applicability, and profundity.
4. It contains prophecies that are made and fulfilled. They surpass the possibility of human or natural powers to foresee or bring about.
5. It has a sublime unity about it in every way—doctrine, progression of thought, story line, theme, details, structure, etc.
6. It is accurate in every way—historically, geographically, scientifically, etc. As diligently as skeptics have tried for centuries, there never has been one flaw or contradiction proven to be in the Bible that would establish that it is not what it claims to be. Yet, “to err is human.”
7. It contains medical and scientific knowledge ahead of its time. The Bible did not partake of its contemporary medical and scientific ignorance.
8. It has had an immeasurably profound impact on the world and always in a positive way whenever faithfully practiced.
9. It has the best textual sources of any ancient book. That is, we can trace its history back to its beginnings more accurately, and with greater corroboration, than any major writing of the ancient world.
10. It contains a reasonable view of God, man, and truth.
11. It is indestructible. Its most powerful, rabid, and scholarly opponents have failed to do away with it.
12. It always is current. Last year the Book of the Month Club asked 2,000 of its readers what book most influenced their lives. The Bible was number one.
13. It addresses our fundamental questions about why we are the way we are, why suffering exists, where we came from, what our destiny will be, how the Universe began and how it will end, etc.
14. It fulfills our spiritual, social, psychological, and emotional needs.
15. It is incredibly brief, although it is set forth as a seminal book from the Creator. Men are notorious for their verbosity in such matters.
16. It is based on the testimony of thousands of witnesses throughout its history.
17. It portrays its heroes, flaws and all. It is unbiased in its treatment of history, unlike works of men praising their heroes.

On the other hand, the evidence for the inspiration of the Koran is based solely upon the testimony of one man, Mohammed. The same kind of “evidence” would make you a Hindu. Why accept Mohammed’s testimony and reject the Hindu testimony? Or, why accept the Hindu writings and reject the Koran? Both have essentially the same evidence in their favor. One cannot be proven to be any more legitimate than the other.

However, the preceding list includes just a few of the many very significant avenues that should be considered if a person is truly seeking to be open-minded about searching for truth among the world’s alleged books from God.

All religions are not the same. Their most basic doctrines readily contradict the others. However, there is one religion that is based upon a book that provides good reasons to be believed—unity and consistency of thought, high standards of thought and conduct, etc. Which should we believe?

[EDITOR’S NOTE: Kippy Myers holds an M.A. in philosophy and Christian apologetics from Harding Graduate School, an M.A. in philosophy from the University of Dallas, and a Ph.D. in philosophy from the University of Tennessee at Knoxville. He is an assistant professor of Bible at Freed-Hardeman University in Henderson, Tennessee.]

REPRODUCTION & DISCLAIMERS: We are happy to grant permission for this article to be reproduced in part or in its entirety, as long as our stipulations are observed.

 

How Does God Prove That He Is God?

Donnie DeBord, Ph.D.

Existence of GodNature of God

One of the striking ways God proves His existence and distinguishes Himself from all false gods is by demonstrating His perfect knowledge of the future. Nowhere is this clearer than in Isaiah 45-46, where God declares that He alone is the Lord over history, able to foretell events before they occur. While idols are powerless, and human rulers are blind to what lies ahead, God alone knows and shapes the course of history. His ability to declare the future proves that He alone is God.

God’s Challenge to the Nations

In Isaiah 45, God speaks through Isaiah to Cyrus, the Persian king, over a century before Cyrus is even born.1 The Lord declares, “I call you by your name, I name you, though you do not know me” (Isaiah 45:4, ESV). This prophecy is stunning: God identifies Cyrus long before he appears in history and declares that he will be the instrument of Israel’s deliverance. Isaiah 46 continues this theme. Here, God contrasts Himself with the idols of Babylon, which must be carried on the backs of animals (Isaiah 46:1-2). These false gods are burdensome, helpless, and mute. In contrast, the Lord declares, “I am God, and there is no other; I am God, and there is none like me, declaring the end from the beginning and from ancient times things not yet done” (Isaiah 46:9-10, ESV). 

This is a direct challenge to anyone who doubts God’s existence or God’s perfect knowledge of the future. Unlike the lifeless idols that require human hands to move them, God moves history itself. No pagan deity can do this. False gods and false conceptions of God must remain silent because they have no knowledge of the future. But the true God predicts and ensures what will happen.

Conclusion

God’s ability to declare the future is a display of His divinity. This is one reason why the prophecy of Cyrus is so significant. Cyrus does not know the God of Israel, yet he fulfills God’s will precisely as foretold. The Persian king’s actions are not outside of God’s influence but are part of His divine plan. This truth is meant to bring comfort to God’s people. If God alone knows the future, and if the future unfolds according to His purpose, then those who trust Him need not fear. The Israelites might have doubted their God, but Isaiah reminds them that their deliverance is already assured because the One who reveals the future remains Lord of the future.

The God of the Bible is God alone. He proves this through His perfect knowledge of the future. He alone declares the end from the beginning.

Endnotes

1 For evidence of the book of Isaiah being written in the 8th century B.C. (cf. Isaiah 1:1), 150 years before Cyrus of Persia lived, see Clyde M. Woods’ commentary on Isaiah; John Oswalt, The Book of Isaiah, chs 1-39; and E. J. Young, The Book of Isaiah.

REPRODUCTION & DISCLAIMERS: We are happy to grant permission for this article to be reproduced in part or in its entirety, as long as our stipulations are observed.

 

A Study of Heaven

Is heaven real? If so, how does one know?

In spite of bogus claims of having visited heaven, such as that professed by Ellen G. White of Seventh-day Adventist fame (1945, 32ff), no one has died, gone to heaven, and returned to earth to tell of the experience (cf. 2 Corinthians 12:1-10).

All we really know about heaven is what is revealed in Scripture. In thinking of the celestial realm, one might approach the subject from three perspectives: logical, historical, and biblical.

Logic and Heaven

What happens to one’s personality when he dies? There are but two possibilities: something (continued existence), or nothing (non-existence). If nothing, life is an unfathomable mystery—a senseless riddle. If something, is there a relationship between the life that now is and the something yet to come? Philosophers have long recognized the connection between a moral sense of “oughtness” and the conviction of an existence beyond death.

The French philosopher Pascal wrote: “It is certain that the mortality or immortality of the soul must make an entire difference to morality” (1941, 219). If there is no afterlife-consequence resulting from the way one lives on earth, there is no enduring motivation for the noble existence.

If there is something after death, what is the nature thereof? If that state is happiness for everyone, then what is the ultimate benefit of goodness over evil? One might as well live wickedly if eternal bliss is inevitable. If the future is entirely bad, where is the incentive for benevolent conduct? The only proposition that makes sense, that compels a life of quality, is this: there are two eternal destinies—one is blessed, the other wretched. This reality is a powerful factor in the ordering of one’s life.

History and Afterlife

There are certain thoughts that appear to be so ingrained in the human psyche that they seem innate. The idea of a superhuman power or powers, ultimately responsible for the universe and humankind, has been virtually universal throughout history.

Out of the dimness of the patriarchal age and the incredible suffering of a godly man came the conviction that there is a realm beyond death where “the wicked cease from troubling, and there the weary are at rest” (Job 3:17). The ancient Egyptians constructed their tombs in preparation for a life beyond, and our own Native Americans had their “happy hunting ground.”

Even among the scattered populations of today’s world the notion stubbornly persists that there are future rewards and punishments in the afterlife. If one assumes that the human mind is reasonably sane, he must conclude that these concepts essentially are axiomatic.

Biblical Testimony

The clearest, most certain argument for the reality of heaven is the testimony of sacred Scripture.

Since “life and immortality” have been “brought to light” through the “gospel” (2 Timothy 1:10), it is to be expected that the New Testament will contain more information on heaven than does the Old Testament. Nonetheless, there are clear allusions to the eternal reward of the faithful in the earlier revelation as well.

Abraham certainly had some concept of heaven, for Scripture notes that “he looked for the city that has the foundations, whose builder and maker is God.” The patriarchs died “in faith” and confessed that they were but pilgrims on earth. They desired a “better country,” and that place God had “prepared for them” (Hebrews 11:9-16).

Moses forsook Egypt and chose ill-treatment with Jehovah’s people, accounting the reproach of Christ greater riches than the treasures of Egypt, looking toward to “the recompense of reward” (Hebrews 11:24ff). David believed he ultimately would be with his deceased baby in a better place (2 Samuel 12:23).

It goes without saying that our Lord Jesus Christ spoke frequently of heaven. He promised that those enduring persecution would have reward in heaven (Matthew 5:10-12). He encourages us to lay up treasures in heaven that will abide (Matthew 6:19-21). In leaving earth’s environment, he promised to prepare a place where the faithful might ultimately be with him (John 14:2-3). The New Testament documents are punctuated repeatedly with promises of heaven for those devoted to Christ (cf. Philippians 3:20-21; 1 Peter 1:3-5).

The pledges of the biblical record are only as good, of course, as the credibility of the ancient book itself. Happily, the vast encyclopedic volume of solid evidence that establishes the trustworthiness of the Bible documents is entirely sufficient for the conscientious student who pursues the matter with intellectual integrity. With the passing of years, our hearts beat the more rapidly with joyful anticipation of the eternal, heavenly kingdom.

The Nature of Heaven

It is a most unfortunate circumstance that the biblical representation of heaven has been so skewed by misguided teachers whose mode of thinking is so earth-bound that heaven cannot be perceived except in terms of a material or physical environment.

From the very nature of the case, some symbolism is required to represent the non-material, spirit realm. There is a vast difference, however, between recognizing the use of symbols (such as those common to the book of Revelation) and materializing heaven itself. Let us consider several examples of how man has perverted the nature of heaven by fashioning his own concept of the final abode of the saints.

The Islamic Heaven

Mohammed’s idea of a “bedroom” heaven was crude beyond adequate expression. Noted historian Phillip Schaff described it as “a sensual paradise, with blooming gardens, fresh fountains, and an abundance of beautiful virgins” (1894, 1543).

McClintock and Strong depicted Islam’s paradise as follows:

As to the various felicities which await the pious (and of which there are about a hundred degrees), they are a wild conglomeration of Jewish, Christian, Magian, and other fancies on the subject, to which the Prophet’s own exceedingly sensual imagination has added very considerably. Feasting in the most gorgeous and delicious variety, the most costly and brilliant garments, odors and music of the most ravishing nature, and above all, the enjoyment of the Hur Al-Oyun, the black-eyed daughters of paradise, created of pure musk, and free from all the bodily weaknesses of the female sex, are held out as a reward to the commonest inhabitants of paradise, who will always remain in the full vigor of their youth and manhood (1969, 414).

A separate place is reserved for women since “they are not of a prominently spiritual nature,” and likely could not enjoy the male environment! The majority of inhabitants of hell are said to be women.

The more liberal wing of Islam attempts to smooth over the sensual and harsh nature of the “Prophet’s” teachings (Ali 1946, 1464-70), but history is what it is!

Mormonism’s Heaven

The “heaven” of Joseph Smith Jr. bears no resemblance to the biblical domain of righteous bliss. In a “vision” allegedly received February 16, 1832, Joseph Smith claimed there are three levels of heavenly “glory”: the Celestial, Terrestrial, and Telestia—supposedly corresponding to the sun, moon, and stars (1 Corinthians 15:41). Smith, who was significantly influenced by the dogma of Universalism (cf. Tanner 1987, 196ff), contended that most all of the human family eventually would inhabit one or the other of these spheres (Smith 1952, 76).

Celestial "" This realm is blessed by the presence of the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit. It is reserved for the faithful who accept the fullness of the gospel, together with those who would have done so had opportunity presented itself to them, as well as unaccountable children, and those who have entered the covenant of “celestial” marriage. Eventually all of these can evolve to the status of “gods.”

Terrestrial "" This state is inhabited by people who reject the gospel, but nonetheless are moral. It also is the abode of those who accept the gospel but do not remain faithful to the Lord. It houses as well those on whose behalf others obey the “post-mortem” plan of salvation (“baptism for the dead”). Finally, it includes the heathen who never was exposed to the truth. This sphere is blessed only by the Son and Holy Spirit.

Telestial "" There is no such word as “telestial.” It is a term coined by Smith to depict the state of those who “received not the gospel,” and—along with liars, murderers, adulterers, and whoremongers—are thrust into the “eternal fire” of hell, but who are to be rescued from torment when Christ has finished his work (a clear contradiction). Only the Holy Spirit visits this place.

Ultimately, then, there is almost no one left for true everlasting punishment in hell—only Satan, his angels, and those who knew the full gospel but committed the unpardonable sin (yet see Matthew 25:46). It is not difficult to discern that Mormonism rivals Catholicism’s idea of Purgatory. In fact, Joseph Smith came to believe there is no eternal punishment for any man (19.6).

The “Watchtower” Heaven

The Jehovah Witnesses have almost no concept of the distinction between literal and figurative language in the Bible. Accordingly, they extract two texts from highly symbolic portions of the book of Revelation (7:1ff; 14:1ff) and conclude that “the final number of the heavenly church will be 144,000, according to God’s decree” (Let God Be True 1946, 113). The balance of humanity, they contend, will live on God’s glorified earth. (For a discussion of the “heavenly 144,000” theory, see Jackson 2004, 55-58.)

The “Heaven-on-Earth” Theory

The notion that this earth will be purged by fire at the end of time and restored to a material paradise is extremely popular in the denominational community. As Presbyterian scholar Charles Hodge declared: “Earth shall become heaven” (1860, 141).

Some of the restoration pioneers advocated a similar view, amidst other eschatological (end-of-time) confusion (e.g., millennialism), and there seems to be at least a minor escalation of this theory today among some younger preachers. There are serious fallacies associated with this concept:

(1) Repeatedly, the Bible makes a clear distinction between the heaven that is reserved for the saved, and the earth (see Matthew 5:34-35; 6:10, 19-20).

(2) The proof texts upon which the “heaven-on-earth” idea are based are: Isaiah 65:17; 66:22; 2 Peter 3:13; Revelation 21:1. The fact is, each of these passages in context clearly demonstrates figurative language. In the Isaiah texts, the “new heavens” and “new earth” are symbols prefiguring the Christian dispensation (cf. 65:17 with 2:2-4; 11:6-9 and 66:22 with 2:2-4 and 66:20b).

In 2 Peter 3:13 the “new earth” cannot be the present globe, for the same context indicates that at the Lord’s return the earth shall be “burned up” or “dissolved” (vv. 10-11).

Nor can Revelation 21:1 refer to the material earth, for that will have “passed away” and be “no more.” (For a more extended discussion of this theme, see Will Heaven Be on Earth?.)

(3) There is a principle in logic which states that things equal to the same thing are equal to each other. If 2+2=4, and 3+1=4, then 2+2 and 3+1 are math equivalents.

If it is the case that the faithful are promised a place that is called “heaven,” which is distinguished from “earth,” and likewise there is an eternal realm designated as the “new heavens and new earth,” then it follows that the “new heavens and new earth” are the equivalent of heaven. The former is a figurative expression for the latter. Just as the “new heavens and new earth” of Isaiah’s prophecies foretold of a new spiritual environment, the church, even so, the “new heavens and new earth” of both Peter and John speak of a new spiritual realm—heaven.

(4) Frequently it is claimed that Romans 8:20-22 teaches a restored earth in the final order of things. This is an unfounded conclusion. The material creation in this context has been personified so as to express the keen anticipation of the consummation of earth’s affairs when its purpose has been realized.

This type of argument certainly is not without precedent in the Scriptures. In Psalm 114, the inspired writer describes the deliverance of Jehovah’s people from Egyptian bondage. In conjunction with that glorious event, various elements of the creation are depicted as cooperating with, and rejoicing at, Israel’s freedom. The sea saw it and fled, the mountains skipped as rams, the hills frolicked like little lambs, and the earth trembled.

The Old Testament is replete with this type of symbolism (cf. Psalm 96:12; 98:8; Isaiah 35:1; 55:12).

(5) Do the final two chapters of the book of Revelation represent a renovated material earth for people with physical bodies? Are there mountains, rivers, and animals, as some allege? Is Jerusalem a literal city with foundations, gates, jewels, etc.?

If one views the items mentioned in Revelation 21 in a material or physical sense, numerous problems arise. For example, if the language is literal, how can “Jerusalem” be both a “city” and a “bride”? If literalism prevails, why is Jerusalem a “city” in one verse, yet the “tabernacle” in another (vv. 2-3)? Are not these figures of speech that represent the “peoples” of God (v. 3b)? How many other things in the Apocalypse must be literalized, e.g., incense, instruments of music, horses, a serpent, dragons, harlots? (For more on this, see below.)

Here is another interesting question: if the “new earth” is to be both material and physical, as many contend, what will happen on the last day of earth’s history?

Since all dead bodies that come forth from the grave will be spiritual, and not physical (1 Corinthians 15:44), won’t the Lord, following the renovation of the earth, have to reconstitute the spiritual body, making it conform once more to the physical or material earth?

The Origin of the Theory

The fact is, this idea of “transforming” the earth had its origin in the pseudepigrapha literature of the inter-biblical period, and not in Scripture.

For instance, in the book of 1 Enoch, there is this statement: “I will transform the heaven and make it an eternal blessing; and I will transform the earth and make it a blessing” (45:4).

There are numerous other references of similar import. J. W. Roberts wrote:

Some apocalyptic writers had thought that the present earth would merely be transformed (Jubilees 1:29; Enoch 45:1), though others predicted that “the first heaven will pass away, a new heaven will appear” (Enoch 91:16). This [latter view] accords with the New Testament expectation (Matthew 5:18; 2 Peter 3:12; Hebrews 12:27), though John does not describe the process of destruction. He has said, “...earth and sky fled away, and no place was found for them” (20:11) (1974, 179).

Professor Frank Pack observed:

This new heaven and new earth is that which is spoken of by our Lord. It would appear that this is best understood as the vision of heaven itself, thought of in terms of the New Jerusalem, the heavenly city in the new heaven and the new earth (1984, 93; emphasis added).

It is a most unfortunate thing that the true Bible teaching on heaven has been so misunderstood and misdirected—by well-meaning souls in some cases, by carnal and unscrupulous manipulators in other instances. Many are so earth-oriented in their perspective that they cannot possibly envision how they might be happy eternally in a purely spiritual realm. Hence, just as some have fashioned a “god” in their own image, materialistic people construct their “heaven” of earthly elements. Both are wrong!

Atheism’s Heaven

Perhaps it would be fitting to conclude this segment with a comment on atheism’s “heaven.” It won’t take long! For atheists there is no heaven—in more ways than one.

Unbelievers assume that the totality of man is flesh; there is no soul. When the brain dies it is the cessation of a mechanical process; one’s existence ends. There is no consciousness ever again. Death supposedly is analogous to an automobile that is worn out and will never be operative henceforth.

Why then do we have funerals and cemeteries for our loved ones, but not for cars? Can a hunk of organized metal reason, express love or fear, feel guilt, or appreciate beauty? It taxes rationality to the breaking point to contend that matter is all there ever was, is, or will be with reference to a person.

If there is nothing after death, what is the difference between a Hitler, who murdered six million Jews, and the exterminator, who kills six million cockroaches?

Biblical Symbolism of Heaven

The study of heaven has been a much neglected theme. When William Shedd produced his celebrated work, Dogmatic Theology, he utilized only two pages on “heaven,” while consuming eighty-seven pages on “hell”! (1971, 664-754). Surely heaven is worthy of greater attention.

Material Symbolism

What is God like as to his essence? Jesus declared that “God is spirit” (John 4:24), but who knows what spirit is? None of us has ever seen one. We know what spirit is not. It is not flesh, bones, or blood (Luke 24:39; Matthew 16:17), i.e., physical.

In view of the inability of the human mind to fathom the “deep things of God” (1 Corinthians 2:10), the Scriptures accommodate our limitations by the use of figures of speech. One of these is called anthropomorphism (“man form”); this is describing God symbolically in human terms, e.g., eyes, ears, arms, hands (Isaiah 53:1; 59:1; Hebrews 4:13). It is a serious error to think of God the Father literally as a physical being, as our Mormon friends do (Smith, 130:22).

Similarly, heaven is a spiritual realm. The Bible, therefore, employs a variety of figures of speech to represent the grandeur of heaven, and it is a mistake to literalize these symbols. Yet such is common among well-meaning, though misguided, students.

Figures for Heaven

The Hebrew term samayim (heaven/s) is found 421 times in the Old Testament, and its corresponding Greek companion, ouranos, is employed 273 times in the New Testament. Both expressions are used in several different senses, in each case being defined by the context.

“Heaven” may refer to the realm of the birds (Genesis 1:26; Matthew 8:20) or the region of weather phenomena (Genesis 8:2; James 5:18). The term also can embrace what we call “outer space,” the arena of the planets and stars (Genesis 1:14; 22:17).

Then there is the place where the abode of God is focused—called “heaven” (Matthew 6:9), the “heaven of heavens” (Deuteronomy 10:14), or “the third heaven” (2 Corinthians 12:2).

There are many figures of speech that represent the heavenly sphere. Heaven is represented as a “city” (Hebrews 11:10) or a “country” (vv. 14-16). Jesus characterized it as both a “house” and a “place” (John 14:2). It may be depicted as a “temple” (Isaiah 6:1) or a “throne” (Matthew 5:34). It is called “glory” (1 Timothy 3:16) and a “kingdom” (2 Timothy 4:18). It is the ultimate “holy city, the new Jerusalem” (Revelation 21:2) and the garden-like Paradise of God (Revelation 2:7). It will be our eternal “home” (2 Corinthians 5:8).

The New Jerusalem

In Revelation 21:1-22:5 there is a marvelous depiction of the celestial home of God’s people. Symbolically it is represented as “a new heaven and a new earth,” “the holy city, new Jerusalem.” It is pictured as “coming down out of heaven” (21:2). The “coming down” is not to be viewed as a “spatial” movement (Jones 1971, 116), as evidenced by the subsequent repetition of the phrase (v. 10). There is the suggestion of something which partakes of the “heavenly” nature.

This section of Revelation falls into four principal segments: (a) its inhabitants, the redeemed (21:1-8); (b) its symbolic structure, in grandeur and scope (vv. 9-21); (c) its glory, safety, and sanctification (vv. 22-27); (d) the river of life (22:1-5). Let us consider these segments.

(21:1-8) – There is a merging of several figures of speech as the image of the holy city itself gives place to its inhabitants, the victorious people of God—under the picture of a bride who has been made ready for her husband. The picture of the tabernacle appears, i.e., the dwelling place of God. He is personally with his people and they belong to him. All of their sorrows and pains are vanquished. Trials give way to “all things new.”

The eternal God provides the “water of life” that will perpetually quench the thirst of the Lord’s people. The reward has not been merited, but is freely given; yet, the gift has been bestowed only to those who, by obedient faith, have “overcome” (cf. 2:7, 11, 17, 26; 3:5, 12, 21). This place and people stand in stark contrast to the vile inmates of hell.

(21:9-21) – There is now a symbolic depiction of the city. It is heavenly in nature, blessed with the glory of God himself. The city is surrounded by a wall, great and high—reflecting the concept of absolute security. The gates are ever open (v. 25); there is no threat from without; heaven’s enemies have been dealt with already (v. 8).

On the gates are written the names of the tribes of Israel and the wall is undergirded by twelve foundations upon which are the names of the twelve apostles. The number twelve likely is a figure for the full complement of the redeemed—from both Old and New Testament eras. The symbolism is clear inasmuch as there were thirteen devout apostles. Literalizing the context is inexcusable.

The heavenly “Jerusalem” is represented as vast in area (1,500 miles in each direction—width, breadth, and height). It is perfectly clear that this is not a literally restored earthly Jerusalem. Coffman has shown that if one allows 1/10th of a mile to the level for the height, that would be 15,000 levels, allowing a floor space of more than thirty-three billion square miles, “many times the total area” of our planet (1979, 484). This is another indication that heaven is not a renovated “earth.”

The cubed shape of the city is reminiscent of the Holy of Holies in the tabernacle, which was the dwelling place of God (Exodus 25:22; 1 Kings 6:20). The unparalleled beauty and value of the city are portrayed by pure gold and brilliant gems. To illustrate, the “building of the wall was like jasper,” even as “pure glass” (v. 18). The original term (iaspis) designates any opaque stone; it possibly refers to the diamond (Danker et al. 2000, 465). The term “building” (endomesis—used only here in the New Testament) can denote that which is built-in, or as we might describe it, inlaid. Here it may suggest a diamond-studded wall. As one writer noted, the “language breaks down in endeavoring to describe the radiance, the glory, the wealth, the beauty, and the magnificence of this great city” (Pack, 90).

(21:22-27) – Both the Father and the Son become the divine sanctuary in this segment. Jesus also is represented as “the Lamb,” referring, of course to his sacrifice for sin (John 1:29). The inseparable connection between the Father and the Lamb is clear testimony of the deity of the Son. Such is a strong indictment of cultists like the “Watchtower” devotees, who claim that Christ was “nothing more than a perfect man” (Let God Be True 1946, 87).

In this wondrous realm there is no “night,” hence no need for artificial illumination—or even the sun—for the splendor of heaven is that of the glory of God and the Lamb (cf. 22:5). This is another clue that this is not a renewed material universe. Mention of the “nations” (vv. 24, 26) reveals that the population is international in composition (cf. 7:9).

The sustained purity of heaven is emphasized by the fact that nothing unclean will ever enter the sacred domain (cf. 22:15). Those who glory in their carnality should take careful note. Furthermore, heaven is reserved only for those whose names are written (perfect tense, “permanently written,”[v. 27b]) in the Lamb’s book of life. These are they who, by obedience to Christ, entered his spiritual body (1 Corinthians 12:13; Galatians 3:26-27), the church (Colossians 1:18, 24), hence have been “enrolled” in heaven (Hebrews 12:23).

(22:1-5) – There is a connection between the books of Genesis and Revelation. Things that went wrong at the commencement of human history, as revealed in Genesis, are shown now to be rectified in the eternal order of heavenly things. God’s great plan has never failed in spite of the multitudes that are lost (Matthew 7:13-14; 22:14).

This section on heaven concludes with a discussion of the “river” of the “water of life,” i.e., in the imagery, it is that which sustains life eternal (cf. John 4:13-14). The water issues from God’s throne, a suggestion of divine authority. It is not that which man could initiate for himself.

All needs of the saints are provided—water to quench thirst, food from the tree of life to sustain, and perpetual health from the leaves of the tree of life. We must ever remind ourselves that these are spiritual symbols, for there is neither sickness nor death in heaven. Note that the “nations” stand healed. The nations that once made war with the Lamb have been conquered by his love (Roberts, 193).

The curse imposed in Eden has been removed forever. Those who have the Lamb’s “name” on their forehead—a symbol of identification, perhaps suggesting also their mental assent to his teaching—bask in the radiance of his face and rejoice in serving him evermore. (For comments on the balance of this chapter, see Jackson, 223ff.)

The materialistic approach of many with regard to heaven—with its supposed literal buildings, streets, physical bodies, marriages, animals, etc.—that has consumed the sectarian community and is making in-roads in the church, is disturbing. It cannot but make one wonder how some people could ever expect to enjoy heaven once they are confronted with the reality that there will be no shopping malls, golf courses, fishing streams, or hunting seasons. No Monday Night Football or the legion of other material pursuits that utterly consume the attention of far too many professing disciples of the Lord. When baseball is thrilling, yet Bible study, prayer, and worship services are dull, the biblical heaven is lightyears from the heart.

Some Facts about Heaven

But what will heaven be like from a personal point of view? What are some of the qualities that will reward the believer who remains faithful, perhaps even in the face of pain and death? (Revelation 2:10). What makes our ultimate “home” so precious?

Blissful Rest

John wrote: “Blessed are the dead who die in the Lord. From henceforth, yes says the Spirit, that they may rest from their labors; for their works follow with them” (Revelation 14:13). Note the following: “Blessed” (makarios) is a New Testament term that always describes people. It carries the idea of happiness, a state of bliss (cf. Matthew 5:3ff; John 13:17). It is the hope of every child of God (Titus 2:13).

This bliss is a present reality that extends into eternity. It is promised to those who die “in the Lord.” One cannot die in the Lord who has lived out of the Lord. The happiness is accompanied by “rest” from “labor,” a term that signifies work to the point of exhaustion—a condition that scarcely describes some members of the church. The rest is entered only by diligence (Hebrews 4:11).

The Reward of Reaping

The agricultural motif of sowing and reaping abounds in Scripture. Several principles of this symbol are: One reaps only the kind he has sown, whether for good or bad (Galatians 6:7-8). The harvest is more abundant than the quantity of the seed sown. The sower must be patient, for he will reap in due season if he does not faint—a warning about possible apostasy (v. 9).

Elsewhere the Lord provided other glimpses. In one of his parables he has a father say to his boy, “Son, go work today in the vineyard” (Matthew 21:28). There is an object of the command—the son; an obligation—work; the urgency—today; and the designated place—in the vineyard. There will be a glorious reward in heaven, but such will be realized only by obedient service.

A Realm of Righteousness

Heaven will be thrilling indeed because of the absolute goodness that characterizes it continuously. It will be inhabited by the Holy Godhead (Revelation 4:8), holy angels (Luke 9:26), and the “just” (i.e., justified) ones who have been made perfect (Hebrews 12:23).

There will be no police or prisons, and no “most-wanted.” The pristine environment will be bereft of pimps, prostitutes, and porn-shops. There will be no sniffers, puffers, or drug-shooters who are “high” on “substance.” Heaven will be void of all those renegades who have entered the bowels of everlasting hell (Matthew 25:41-46; 2 Thessalonians 1:7-9; Revelation 14:9-12; 21:8; 22:15).

A Region of Responsibility

Some may be alarmed to learn that heaven will not be a place of mere recreation and retirement, though an atmosphere of constant supreme joy will prevail. One writer, who has depicted heaven as a material kingdom on earth, crudely literalizes by describing it as a place of “partying,” with amazing food and fine wine, along with music and dancing. (Lebhar 2006, 297). But the paradise of God will be a place of responsible service.

John declares that in heaven God’s “servants shall serve him” (Revelation 22:3b) and such will be continuous (cf. 7:15). From our presently jaded vantage point, it is difficult to imagine that the thrill of serving God will be so consuming one will never grow weary of it. How this challenges our dull minds!

In one of his parables, Jesus told of ten servants who were entrusted by their master with money to invest in trading. When they were finally called to account, each was rewarded with responsibility in direct proportion to the manner in which he had utilized his preparatory ability (Luke 19:16-19). This seems to clearly indicate varying levels of responsibility in the heavenly administrations (cf. 2 Timothy 2:12; Revelation 3:21; 22:5).

Reunion and Recognition

When faithful Abraham died, he “was gathered to his people” (Genesis 25:8). This cannot refer to the interment of his body, for his people were buried in Mesopotamia; but he was interred in Canaan. The phrase must allude to a reunion with faithful ancestral patriarchs. Both Jacob and David expected to be reunited with loved ones. The former anticipated going “to [his] son,” Joseph, whom he perceived to be dead at this time (Genesis 37:35). Clearly David expected to see his sweet child in the afterlife (2 Samuel 12:23).

Jesus told of many who “shall come from the east and the west [an allusion to the Gentiles], and shall sit down with Abraham, and Isaac, and Jacob in the kingdom of heaven” (Matthew 8:11). As noted earlier, heaven will embrace an international conglomerate of saints. Such a promise implies an awareness of fulfillment when finally realized. Will we know Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob? Certainly. Will Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob know Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob? There is clear recognition of kinsmen here.

The problem is frequently posed: “If I will know my loved ones who are in heaven, I certainly will know that some of them are not there! In that event, how could I possibly be happy?” Three things may be said about that. First, God will “fix” all potential problems; this is expressed in the promise that the Lord “will wipe away every tear from their eyes” (Revelation 7:17; cf. 21:4). Second, with a tremendously heightened sense of spirituality, we will not view loved ones who died in rebellion to God with the same jaundiced vision we now have. Third, if the Lord himself can be happy (see “blessed” [makarios], “happy” – 1 Timothy 1:11; 6:15), with his greater love for humanity than any of us has, we should be confident that the joy of heaven will eclipse any and all sadness of this life’s remembrances.

The Reliability of Our Hope

Since the Bible occasionally speaks of the prospect of heaven as a “hope,” some are inclined to assign a rather weak meaning to “hope,”—as, for example, “I hope to strike it rich some day.” That is not the significance of biblical hope. Genuine hope includes both a “desire” for something and a “confident expectation,” or “solid assurance,” of the goal to be attained (Mounce 2006, 340).

In Paul’s magnificent defense of the gospel before the Roman governor Felix, he argued his case upon the hope that “there shall be a resurrection both of the just and unjust” (Acts 24:15; cf. 23:6). Elsewhere, the apostle contends for the validity of the general resurrection on the basis of the historical certainty of Christ’s resurrection.

In 1 Corinthians 15, Paul affirms that Jesus “was raised on the third day according to the scriptures” (v. 3). He introduces a string of witnesses to the risen Lord, not the least of which was a company of some five hundred people on one occasion, of whom most were still alive for examination (v. 6). He stakes the entire credibility of the Christian message upon Jesus’ resurrection; upon that foundation our faith and hope are based (vv. 16-19). Thus, our hope of eternal life (i.e., heaven) is grounded in that resurrection. Is, then, the resurrection narrative credible?

Simon Greenleaf (1783-1853), one of the founders of the Harvard Law School, was a world class legal scholar. His multi-volume work, A Treatise on the Law of Evidence, is considered one of the classics of judicial literature.

Greenleaf also produced a profound volume titled, The Testimony of the Evangelists Examined by the Rules of Evidence Administered in Courts of Justice. Therein he forcefully demonstrated that the Gospel records pass the test of historical-legal credibility with flying colors. Christ was raised; there will be a general resurrection, and the righteous will enter heaven (John 5:28-29).

Oh the wonder of heaven! What confident anticipation undergirds the Christian’s hope. Prepare for your eternal home!

SOURCES

• Ali, A. Yusuf. 1946. The Holy Qur’an – Translation and Commentary. Islamic Propagation Centre International.
• Coffman, James Burton. 1979. Commentary on Revelation. Abilene, TX: ACU Press.
• Danker, F. W. et al. 2000. A Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago.
• Greenleaf, Simon. 1903. The Testimony of the Evangelists Examined by the Rules of Evidence Administered in Courts of Justice. Newark, NJ: Soney & Sage.
• Hodge, Charles. 1860. An Exposition of the Second Epistle to the Corinthians. New York, NY: Robert Carter & Brothers.
• Jackson, Wayne. 2004. Revelation: Jesus Christ’s Final Message of Hope. Stockton, CA: Courier Publications.
• Jones, Russell B. 1971. The Triumphant Christ and His Church – An Exposition of the Revelation. Birmingham, AL: Banner Press.
• Lebhar, S. G. 2006. New Dictionary of Christian Apologetics. Campbell Campbell-Jack, Gavin McGrath, eds. Downers Grove, IL: Inter-Varsity Press.
• Let God Be True. 1946. Brooklyn, NY: Watchtower Bible and Tract Society.
• McClintock, John and James Strong. 1969. Cyclopedia of Biblical, Theological, & Ecclesiastical Literature. Grand Rapids, MI: Baker.
• Mounce, William D. 2006. Complete Expository Dictionary of Old & New Testament Words. Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan.
• Pack, Frank. 1984. The Message of the Revelation. Vol. 2. Abilene, TX: Biblical Research Press.
• Pascal, Blaise. 1941. Pensees. New York, NY: Random House.
• Roberts, J. W. 1974. The Revelation to John. Austin, TX: Sweet Publishing Co.
• Schaff, Phillip. 1894. Schaff-Herzog Encyclopedia of Religious Knowledge. Vol. 3. New York, NY: Fung & Wagnalls.
• Shedd, William. 1971. Dogmatic Theology. Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan.
• Smith, Joseph, Jr. 1952. Doctrine and Covenants. Salt Lake City, UT: Church of the Latter-day Saints.
• Tanner, Jerald and Sandra. 1987. Mormonism—Shadow or Reality. Salt Lake City, UT: Lighthouse Ministry.
• White, Ellen G. 1945. Early Writings. Washington, D.C.: Review & Herald.

MORE ARTICLES LIKE THIS ONE

Is the Mormon Church the Restored Church?

The Christian Priesthood

False Ideas Regarding Death

Will Heaven Be on Earth?

Three Prayers of Thanksgiving

Mormon Doctrine: Baptism for the Dead

False Ideas about God

What Is the Morning Star of Revelation 2:28?

A Divine Platform for Christian Unity

What Happens To A Person At Death?