Quo Vadis by Henryk Sienkiewicz (1895)

Dana says: I think this is the first book I ever read that upon finishing the last page I immediately wanted to start over again on page one. A captivating story, well written, with a lot to think about. A fascinating look into Rome and the early Christians. My favorite aspect of the book was the conversion of the main character and the way he changes over the course of the book. I also found myself really loving the character of Petronius and wanting to stop and pray for his salvation!  I enjoyed all aspects of this book minus the ridiculous Roman Catholic agenda that is artifically stuck into the story.  This is a small part of the story and the author was a Roman Catholic so I don't blame him but I also don't buy it.   Anyway, this is definitely in my top ten fiction books of all time list.  Highly recommended.

Matt says: I think this certainly qualified as an epic. It is vast, historic and personal. The historical aspect of the book, getting a dramatized vision of life under Nero was my favorite part. The way the Roman's lived, their dying "spirituality," the degradation of humanity all made the world ripe for Christianity. I've often wandered why Christ came when he did, not earlier or later in history, which seems to be so obvious once Roman society is so vividly described. I enjoyed all of the characters. I think the story was artful. The emotional outpourings of love were a little too much for my taste. I would 100% recommend this book for anyone interested in Rome in the 1st century and the spread of Christianity under it.

By This Standard: The authority of God's law today - Greg Bahnsen

First the housekeeping complaints: this is one of the most poorly edited books I've read. I'm fairly sure it was self-published or just not read by the editor. I would recommend reading this book but not this version, or just be prepared for random periods and hyphens to break up the flow of your reading.

Now, am I converted to Theonomy? No. I am more aware of the difficulties associated with both sides of the argument. Most of the book is leveled at those who outright reject the Law which I think is an unfair characterization of "non-theonomic" reformed folk. The Holy Spirit teaches us to love the law and it guides us in obedience and righteousness. The rub comes with the application of the political use of the law and its penal sanctions. To make a compelling argument for Theonomy one needs to define the applicable laws (moral vs. religious vs. ceremonial) without grey zones. Is blaspheme a moral offense? Yes a thousand times! Do we put to death blasphemers as was prescribed in the OT? No, nor should we. Do we put to death adulterers? No, and if adultery is lust in the heart then we would all be guilty. It turns a bit Pharisaical because it deals with the letter of the law (some laws) and neglects the bigger purpose of the law (to drive us to Christ).

I see the problem that civil laws then become arbitrarily legislated. I do believe that civil law is founded only on the immutable Word of God. How I can reconcile all this I haven't quite worked out.