Jonathan’s Impact

What difference can one life make? Let’s talk about it on Deeper Waters.

The author of James reminds us that we are but a vapor that lasts for a moment. Nevertheless, a vapor can make a difference. It can provide a moment of heat for a world. Some of us live lives not realizing the future that awaits us. We do not realize that we will have left this world either dragging it down or making it better. People will remember us after we are gone. We will either leave them for the better or the worse. The question is not “Will we make an impression?” The question is “What kind of impression will we make?”

Many of us believe we will have a long life. As it stands, I have lived on this Earth for 32 years now. My wife has lived for 22 years. We are fortunate for those years. My grandmother died two years ago as her time had come. My own parents are around the age of 60 at the moment. I live next door to an aunt and uncle that I have known from birth who are my grandmother’s sister and her husband. I can think about when I was about to have surgery shortly before I turned 16, my youth minister at the time was having his first child and now she is a little past the age I was at that time. I look on Facebook and see people I went to school with and realize how much has changed.

How much time do I have? I do not know. Being a husband now, it is something I think about often. How long will I be around to provide for my wife? In some ways, I realize it is harder for me since I am nearly 10 years older than she is. Still, I want to make the most of the time that I have left. I look sometimes at all the books I want to read and all the subjects that I want to learn and realize there is so much. One thing you learn in apologetics after awhile, as is most likely in any field of knowledge, is not what you know, but how much you don’t know. You can look and wonder if you will reach your goal and if you do, then what? What all does it mean? Will you have left this world having made a difference?

What if I told you you had seventeen years to live? What would that mean to you? Many of us as youth would think such a thought preposterous. We are young and invincible. No one really makes a plan to die early like that, but the sad reality is that several do. There are tragedies in this world. We seem to realize that such events in an ideal world would not happen, but they do. This world is not ideal. That is why we must all make an effort to make it better.

Jonathan Dileo was one who did.

What is Jonathan’s story? Jonathan was a happy kid who loved Christ and Christian apologetics. He was a great fan of William Lane Craig. I got to know him through TheologyWeb where he was a beloved member. In my position, I often served as a mentor type for men growing up in the field and have sought to be that. It is not just my hope to teach them how to be good apologists, but even more so, I want to teach them how they are to be good men. Jonathan and I formed a fast friendship.

At one point in his school, his class had readings of “Tuesdays With Morrie.” They were stories about a man talking to another, Morrie, who was dying, and gaining his wisdom. The students were told to find a wiser person they considered a Morrie and talk with them for an hour at a time on various topics. I was very surprised one day when Jonathan messaged me on AIM and asked me to be his Morrie. It was a thrill and when that time came, I dropped everything and focused for an hour. We talked about so many different topics. Love, death, the perfect day. I got to see Jonathan’s reports and thoroughly enjoyed them.

Then tragedy came.

Jonathan was found to have a cancerous brain tumor.

Four months later, he was gone.

I won’t deny to you, I feel a great sadness rising up inside of me as I write this. Jonathan was a bright light and then that light was extinguished.

Or was it?

As said, a vapor can leave a bit of heat. Some of us leave more behind than we realize.

Before he died, Jonathan was visited by the Make-A-Wish foundation and asked to make a wish. Let’s be honest. Most of us would want to meet a celebrity or go to Disneyworld or be in the audience of a TV show or something like that.

Most of us are just selfish like that.

Jonathan wasn’t.

Jonathan had already done mission work.

Jonathan’s wish was for a water system to be built for the Mbuya Nehanda Children’s home, an orphanage in Melfort Zimbabwe.

That vapor is still giving off its heat.

The world is a bit warmer because of it.

Today, his parents have set up “Jonathan’s Impact”, a ministry dedicated to fulfiling the dream of Jonathan. The irrigation system he wanted is up and running, but more is being done to make sure that orphanage, and I’m sure several more, have what they need. Today, many children are able to have growing crops and good water because of the dying wish of Jonathan.

Today, lives all over the world are changed because of one boy’s wish.

Today, I am changed by remembering his impact and wanting to make sure I leave the impact.

Today, I hope you will be changed the same way.

I often wonder about where those who have gone on are exactly right now. Sometimes I think they could be on Earth, but more walking on another plane of existence as it were where they see fully through the presence of God. Living in my grandmother’s old house, I often wonder if she could be watching my wife and I sometimes. Sometimes, when I think about this, I wonder if Jonathan is. He knew I deeply wanted to get married and I wonder if he knows now and is happy. I wonder if I can make the impact that Jonathan did and it took him a short time to do it.

Why did he make that impact? He did something many of us, including myself, have a hard time doing. He didn’t focus on himself. (Something incredibly hard to do in the world of the Aspie, though it could be this is much harder for others than I realize)

My own wife does know that there are times I talk about Jonathan, someone she knows very much about, and I just have to have a hug from her then. He was my friend, and I miss him. I still talk to his dad regularly on the phone. He even sent my wife and I flowers for our first anniversary. He is a great guy still fighting on hard. I admire his ability to keep going despite such a tragic loss that is the nightmare of any parent.

Like all ministries, what I do here is supported by donations. I do hope for your support, but also please add another ministry to your list and tell others about it. Jonathan’s Impact is one that should be felt everywhere. At the end, I will include a link to this where you too can find out more.

And as for you Jonathan, I do miss you greatly and I look forward to seeing you again someday.

In Christ,
Nick Peters

http://jonathansimpact.org/

The Great Reversal

Are we going backwards, or forwards? Let’s talk about it on Deeper Waters.

I once had a job as an arcade attendant. On my breaks, I would often play some of the games I was watching as when times were slow, we had our regulars come in and we would watch them play games. One game that was our most popular was Tekken and all the sequels and such of it and when I played the game, I was quite good at reversals. For those who don’t know, Tekken is a kind of street fighting game like Street Fighter and Mortal Kombat. Only certain characters could do reversals and it would involve stopping your opponent in his attack and instead taking him down with one of your own.

It was an effective way to deal with an opponent and would follow with my taunt of “Bad X” with X being whatever character they were playing.

What about the resurrection of Jesus? If anything would count as a reversal, it would have been that. We need to step back and realize the shock that took place on the cross. The cross was not just a painful way to die. It was a shameful way to die! Consider for instance today we have the idea of Darwin Awards. In these awards, someone wins the prize when they die from some act of idiocy on their own part. Their death is said to further improve the gene pool. When reading the Darwins, one can quickly be amazed at how dumb humanity can be.

In a crucifixion, one sees a death of a person who is totally rejected by society and told in no uncertain terms “Do not be like this person.” For the Jew, such a person was a blasphemer to YHWH since they were hung on a tree. For the Greeks, they were dying a form of death that is not even one that will be mentioned in polite company. This is not the way any king of any type would die. Yet when it comes to Jesus, we contend that this is exactly how Jesus died. In fact, this is unavoidable! Throughout the NT, one finds references to the cross or the crucifixion of Jesus. That which should have been the ultimate embarrassment and death knell of Christianity became their proclamation.

Throughout the gospels, we find dark powers at work against Jesus using the Pharisees, Sadducees, and chief priests. We are told that satan enters into Judas for the final betrayal. All along, the plan had been that if Jesus wants to come here and the devil sees that, well let’s just see what happens to the plans of God when He dies. The idea was that this would bring the ultimate shame to God and destroy any plan that He had. The reality was that this was what was expected all along.

Then, at the moment of the greatest conquest, we get the ultimate reversal.

My wife often corrects me when I say something about this in a message. It is not that the world was turned upside-down at that point. It was turned right-side up. We are on the up and up now. We have reached the climax point and now we’re moving towards the denouement. We have reached the crescendo in the symphony and now we’re moving towards the conclusion. Shame has been turned into honor. Death itself is being undone. Creation is being restored. The gospel of the Kingdom is spreading.

Today, we live so much in the time that has seen Christianity that I doubt any of us fully understand what the change is that Christianity has brought to us. Many think that if you remove Christianity from the society and all other religion, that it will improve, but I will contend that nations where this is tried for the time being still have a latent Christianity in the background with its moral framework and when that finally is forgotten, we will see the real face of atheism emerge from that.

When Christ comes and brings about the Kingdom of God on Earth, nothing remains the same. We are living in the age of the reversal and we can expect that as we spread the Kingdom, we will only see more of this reversal taking place. Let us go and turn the world from a state of shame and death to a state of honor and glory.

In Christ,
Nick Peters

Biden On Abortion

Is Biden’s answer to the abortion question a good defense of the pro-choice position? Let’s talk about it on Deeper Waters.

Like many of you last night, I watched the vice-presidential debate and I was definitely pleased to hear the abortion question come up. Thankfully, Ryan did not get interrupted during what I thought was an excellent answer. Ryan got to the facts of what abortion is, which is the main question to answer. Then we turned to Biden, who like Ryan, is Catholic. Biden gave an answer that I’m sure many Christians thought would be difficult to argue against. Is it really a good response? Let’s find out.

Biden: My religion defines who I am. And I’ve been a practicing Catholic my whole life. And it has particularly informed my social doctrine. Catholic social doctrine talks about taking care of those who — who can’t take care of themselves, people who need help.

Response: Of course, we would not have much problem with this. Granted, I am not a Catholic, but by and large, we would not have problems as Christians even if we’re not Catholics with the idea that we should help others who cannot take care of themselves. The difference is I would include babies in the womb at this point.

Biden: With regard to — with regard to abortion, I accept my church’s position on abortion as a — what we call de fide. Life begins at conception. That’s the church’s judgment. I accept it in my personal life.

Reply: Here is the key point. Biden has just said life begins at conception, which is exactly what Ryan had said earlier. This is the opinion of the RCC as well. Biden says that he accepts it personally.

Biden: But I refuse to impose it on equally devout Christians and Muslims and Jews and — I just refuse to impose that on others, unlike my friend here, the congressman.

Reply: For many, this sounds so good and non-judgmental and tolerant, which is what we’re taught to be. “I personally am against abortion, but I’m not going to limit your freedom to do that.”

And hey, we don’t want anyone imposing their worldview on us. Right? We don’t want to live in a theocracy or anything like that do we? What could we have against this?

Biden’s problem is that his view is imposing. Let’s look at this with what he says next.

Biden: I — I do not believe that — that we have a right to tell other people that women, they — they can’t control their body. It’s a decision between them and their doctor, in my view. And the Supreme Court — I’m not going to interfere with that.

Reply: Once again, this fits with our modern milleu, but it assumes at the start that the life in the woman is her body, which is just its first major problem. If that life in there is something that might depend on the woman but is itself not part of the woman, then it is not the woman’s body. It is another body that is growing inside of the body of the woman.

We also do a number of times tell women they can’t control their body. If a woman goes out and strips nude in a public place, we will arrest her. It’s her body, but she is not allowed to publicly expose herself. If a woman gets drunk and tries to drive, we will arrest her for what she is doing with her own body. The idea that if someone does something with their own body then it is automatically justifiable is simply false.

Now by and large, we do let people do what they want with their own bodies, but only until they endanger the freedom of another. You have the right to free speech, but that does not mean you can use it to walk into a crowded theater and yell “Fire!” or make a threat on the life of a government official. Recently someone on Twitter, for instance, said they would assassinate Mitt Romney. While they later said it was a joke, one suspects the Secret Service might not be laughing.

Biden’s position is in fact imposing. He is imposing the idea on people that the baby in the womb is included in the woman’s body and is not a separate body. For the sake of argument, he could be right about that. That needs to be argued. If this is a life, as Biden himself has said, then Biden is essentially saying that he believes this is a new life that has come into existence and he is opposed to abortion, but he will not stop it if a woman wants to do that, even though, as said, it is a new life.

Would the same apply to a toddler? Would Biden be personally against killing a toddler, but if a woman wants to do that to her toddler, well that’s her right? As has been said, there is nothing magical about the birth canal that suddenly makes the baby a new life. The question we could ask Biden is at what point does it become wrong to kill the life and why is it at that point since you hold that life begins at conception?

We also all impose our views on another person to an extent. Every law is the imposition of someone’s view. If I’m out driving, I cannot suddenly drive on the left side of the road here in America and respond to the police officer with “Don’t impose your views of driving on me!” Every law is built on some moral basis and it is declared that a society is better if it follows that moral basis than if it does not.

What are we saying about abortion? We are making a statement about life in relation to abortion. There are people who are saying to give out contraception so there will be fewer abortions and if it is not given, we will keep having sex and you will be responsible for the abortions.

No. We’re not. We’re not responsible for what someone else does. If someone wants to avoid pregnancy, then there are contraceptives out there they can use. There are natural family planning routes as well one can take for those who do not support contraception. However, if you have sex when it is prone to bring about pregnancy and you get pregnant, the person responsible is you and the person you had sex with. (This is assuming a natural case and not the case of something like rape) If you choose to abort, you are not forced to. You choose to. (All things being equal. I know there are sad cases where a husband or boyfriend or some other figure forces an abortion.) This is simply emotional blackmail.

What needs to be asked is if this is the kind of behavior we want to promote? Do we want to promote the idea that sex is a natural act just like any other act and can be done with most anyone and anywhere, or do we want to promote the idea that sex, while a natural act, is a sacred act that is reserved for those who have given the highest level of trust to one another? Do we want to say it should happen in marriage so that children born can be raised by their biological mother and father in a stable and committed relationship?

Biden’s own position has him doing an imposition on the baby especially. The baby is denied the right to exist in this world in the name of supposed freedom of the mother. We would not allow the killing of a toddler or a young child for that reason. Why do we allow it for abortion?

The rest of what Biden says is more into political aspects I will not get into. I simply wish to point out that Biden’s argument does not work. If life begins at conception, as Biden says, then Biden is saying he thinks the taking of innocent life should be legal. This is not a position a Christian should take. It would be interesting to see if they have not spoken out already what the RCC happens to think of Biden’s position. It could be someone might not be allowed to partake of the Eucharist.

In Christ,
Nick Peters

A Mormon in the White House?

Should Christians be concerned about a Romney presidency? Let’s talk about it on Deeper Waters.

A friend at church asked me to write about this topic. I am not writing about this as someone in politics but as an apologist dealing with the issues of Mormonism. I really don’t write on politics as politics in this blog, but I do comment on moral issues that can show up in politics. I understand the concern of many Christians. There are some that have a great fear with a Mormon like Romney getting into the White House. Let’s address that then.

First off, I will unequivocally state that in my view Mormons are not Christians. We have essential differences on the nature of God, the nature of Christ, and the nature of salvation. This does not mean that there is no common ground between us. For those of us who are thankful that we won the Prop 8 battle in California, it has been said, and I agree, that we could not have won that battle if the Mormons had also not taken part in it. On numerous moral and political issues, Christians and Mormons can work side by side.

Many of us know this because while we disagree with Mormons, they tend to be very good people to us. I’ve only met one to this day I can think of that really rubbed me the wrong way. When I lived with a roommate in Charlotte, we went out of our way to witness to the Mormons when they came by. We’d stop and get pizza for them and some gatorades and have them enjoy a meal with us. We even went out to eat one time with them. There was a time they weren’t showing up for some reason and I called them and they said they didn’t have good transportation. I asked where they were and came and got them myself. That had the added bonus of having them a captive audience in my car while I got to share the real gospel with them. One of them became friends with us on Facebook when his missionary journey ended. One Mormon we suspect was on the verge of conversion when they switched him out and we wonder to this day if we will see him in eternity. Hopefully someone will finish the work we started.

Therefore, my claim is clear. I am not going to claim Mitt Romney is a Christian. That does not mean I think he is a bad person overall. I just say that I do not trust him on religious issues. Thankfully, as I’ve told people before, I am not electing a pope or a priest. I am electing a president. What issues is it the president is supposed to reside over in our country? Let’s take a look.

The president is to make sure that our country is kept safe. In our day and age, we know that there are forces that would like to see America fall. We’ve already seen it from Muslims such as happened on 9/11 in both 2001 and this year. There is much strife going on in the Middle East and it could wind up coming our way. N. Korea could one day build a weapon that could be capable of reaching us as well. Could Communism still be a threat. Wouldn’t surprise me.

Keep in mind when I speak of these threats, as devout readers of this blog will know, I am not speaking of a “Last Days” scenario with asking if this will be the president that will be the antichrist. That’s been thought about every president in recent history. I greatly admire Reagan and I know there were several who said he was the antichrist. After all, his name was Ronald Wilson Reagan. 6 letters in each name! 666! Reagan was the beast!

Well, no.

So when I write this, I do not have any fear about Romney being “The Antichrist” any more than I had or have fears about Obama being “The Antichrist” or any other world figure for that matter.

Oh but Nick! Don’t you know about the White Horse prophecy?

Yes. I do. It’s the idea that when the Constitution is hanging on a thread, the Mormon church will rush in and save the day. Then, the Mormons will control the government.

Some might think Mormons want to do that, but is it really feasible is the question? An expert in counter-cult apologetics has even informed me that he doesn’t think this will happen since the LDS church is crowing about the Romney candidacy. The truth is that Mormons, like Jehovah’s Witnesses, are in a much more precarious position today because of the internet. The information that their church would not let them get is now readily available for anyone to see.

To be fair, some would say that about Christians. The difference is many of us already know about said information and have responses to it. Also, we do not want to shield the church from this information. We instead want them to know about it and know what to say to it. This is not the same in the case of Mormons and Jehovah’s Witnesses. Granted however that there are a few in those camps who will go out and interact with the other side.

A Mormon presidency would bring Mormonism out into the open even more and in many ways, I consider that a good thing. Consider what I have said about the new atheists. I thank God for them. They are bringing the discussion of what Christianity is out into the open and doing their side a great harm with having people think that their arguments are just so destructive to Christians, not realizing the majority of us just laugh about them. I hope the new atheists add to their number of published books and keep it up. We’ll keep writing scholarly books that show the mistakes and errors and let their side deal with what they’ve done.

If we can start talking to Mormons more and witnessing to them, then that is all the better. I also think that if ever some group tried to force itself on the Constitution, we would not have to worry since this country has already had one revolution and could have a second. The Mormon church would be taking a huge risk to make a move like that and it is doubtful whether they would ever want to attempt it.

Another issue for us today that a president deals with is the economy. I do happen to think from an economic perspective that Romney’s ideas do work better. I recommend for people reading a book like Henry Hazlitt’s “Economics in One Lesson.” (If you can only read one book on economics, read that one.) From a Christian perspective, one can read the book of Ronald Nash “Poverty and Wealth.”

What about health-care? For those of us who want to do away with Obamacare, then we do need to support Romney. He’s said he will repeal it and the voters definitely expect that. For those who want to speak about pre-existing conditions, My Mrs. and I both have pre-existing conditions. Since moving, I had to go see my old doctor so the health insurance company could know that my Asperger’s is not a problem for my insurance.

Some might disagree, but this is a question that we have to ask. Which candidate is better equipped to help grow our economy?

Moral issues certainly play a part in how we vote and that was the main reason voters were voting in 2004. There are a number of issues we have coming up. The debate over redefining marriage is going on. Obama has already said his view is in support of doing that. Abortion is another major issue. We can be thankful that Mormons stand with us by and large on these issues. We need to especially get into the Supreme Court people who will support our views. Hugh Hewitt, a conservative radio talk show host, has said the most important rule is to be able to count to 5. I would even vote for a pro-choice Republican if I thought he’d put someone conservative on the Supreme Court who is more likely to overturn Roe V. Wade.

What we have to ask is not “Who believes like me the most in religion?”, but “Who is more capable of doing the job?”

If there is one area we should be concerned about, it’s that Christians unfortunately are not producing the best candidates. Christians are shying away from politics when we shouldn’t. There are several brilliant Christian minds that could make a difference in the world if we will allow them to do so.

I can end this no better I think than the way Bill McKeever and Eric Johnson of the Mormon Research Ministry did in their article from the Christian Research Institute. (Link below) It’s from 2008 but still valid.

It doesn’t appear that Romney’s Mormonism is causing many evangelical Christian leaders to oppose his candidacy. In fact, one group of Christians has even jumped on his bandwagon by hosting an Internet site (www.evangelicalsformitt.org). Perhaps University of Notre Dame sociologist Christian Smith summarized the precarious position of many when he said (Los Angeles Times, October 15, 2006), “Some evangelicals may think that Mormons are going to hell, but at the same time, they might think that it wouldn’t be too bad to have one in elected office.”

In Christ,
Nick Peters

Bill McKeever and Eric Johnson’s article can be found .

The New Age Has Come

Does it involve Eastern thinking? Kind of. Let’s talk about it on Deeper Waters.

We’re talking about the difference the resurrection makes and one aspect we’re looking at today is that the new age has come. Now when we hear about the new age, we often think of those in the east. In a sense, we are correct. However, to talk about the true new age movement, we need to stop long before we get to areas like India. We need to stop at the Middle East. The modern new age movement has us going back to the old lie of “You shall be as gods.” The real new age movement began in the area of Jerusalem. Our modern movement is simply behind on the times and living with an old view that has been replaced.

Many Jews believed in a coming age of the Messiah that would have the reign of the Messiah. There are many references in the Bible that some think refer to the end of the world but in reality, they refer to the end of the age. For instance, in the Olivet Discourse, Jesus is not giving signs of the end of the world. Instead, he is giving signs that the age is coming to an end. What would be the next age? It would be the age that has the ruling of the Messiah. The Jews had something else wrong. Jesus would not be ruling in Jerusalem creating just another earthly monarchy. Instead, he would be ruling from Heaven by the side of the Father over all the Earth and His kingdom would be spreading. (This is something we will be touching on later on.)

This means that everything has changed. When Paul converts on the road to Damascus, he does not just have a worldview where the idea of “Jesus is not the Messiah” has changed to “Jesus is the Messiah.” He has to change his view on creation, Israel, the Law, righteousness, justification, forgiveness, the Messiah, suffering, etc. The reason for this is that the action of God in history was central to Jewish thought and they based their identities on it. They spoke of God who brought them out of Egypt. They spoke of God who rescued them from exile. The next new movement then would be to speak of God who acted in Christ.

Picture it as if you had a set of beliefs that could be seen as a spider web. Suppose one of your beliefs is “The grocery store is 20 miles from my house.” Then, you do some measurements in your car with your odometer and realize that the store is actually 18 miles away. Okay. That’s a small belief that you can change and it doesn’t affect you too much. You realize your math was off and that’s that. Now suppose instead that you come to the conclusion “The grocery store never even existed.” This is a belief that would more likely have you check into the mental hospital wondering what was wrong with you.

It’s the same today with people who often apostasize from Christianity and don’t change their worldview much. If you leave the faith, the degree to which your worldview changes is the degree to which Christianity affected your worldview prior. If it played a small part, it will not change your worldview as much. If it played a major part, you will have to totally change everything that you see in your worldview. This is something that explains how serious the situation was for Paul. Everything changed.

If the resurrection of Jesus does not change everything, then something is wrong.

Now to be fair, this could be more difficult for us in America since we have grown up in a society where Christian theism has always been in the background at least and we live in an age where the resurrection has normally been seen as the reality. We can find it hard to appreciate how different the world was before Christianity came along. This is why we need to often drop our modern Americentric understanding of the world and try to see how it was before Christ came. It’s also why we should be doing reading in other areas relevant to biblical studies.

For now, let us rejoice. The new age has come, the age of Christ. Hopefully the modern new age movement will learn to keep up with the times.

In Christ,
Nick Peters

The Resurrection and Joy

Do we have reason to rejoice? Let’s talk about it on Deeper Waters.

We’ve been looking at the resurrection lately and what a difference it makes for the Christian. For tonight, I think of what N.T. Wright has said about comparing Judaism of the day before Christ to the time of Christianity. The Jews lived in a time of hope. It was the question of if God was going to come and bring about the promises that He said He would do. Would God conquer their enemies? Would God rescue His people? When would God fulfill His end of the covenant?

Nothing wrong with that of course. In the time before Christianity, one could have joy of being a member of the community of God, but it still was looking forward to something important. One was still in bondage. As we know from John 8, Christ did come to set us free and that was what we had really been waiting for. Christ did not come for a patch of land. He did not come for one group of people. He came first of all for God. He came to do the will of the Father. He came second for the world. He was not interested in a land but the planet. He was not interested in a group of people but every tribe and nation.

That hasn’t changed.

Now the Jews and their land was the means to that. For the Jews, everything revolved around the Temple. Consider it if you will a gateway between Heaven and Earth. This is the best analogy I can think of, but some of us who grew up in the gaming sphere know about a scene where someone enters a place like a temple and ends up finding a gateway that leads to the place where the really good being or the really evil being lives. It is the idea that there are two worlds and this one place is the connection point between both worlds.

I want to be sure that you know I am not saying God lives in another dimension as it were and that that place is physical. I do not think that as God is not physical. I am saying that there was a place that He did make His presence known especially for the Jews and that was in the temple. As long as the temple was there, YHWH was there. God did not reveal Himself to everyone but made a plan to reveal Himself to everyone starting with a particular people in a particlar place.

For we Christians, this hope has been fulfilled and it was fulfilled in Christ. Now our lives are to be dominated by joy. I plan to get into this more in future blogs but let’s consider some points. First off, we have the ultimate reversal. When Christ resurrects, what happens is that death itself starts to work backwards. Christ is the first one to experience this but we are told that not only we, but all of creation will experience that resurrection. (There is nothing conclusive about animals in the new world, but the thought of something like this would be one of my main inclinations to think that God will redeem the animal life of His creation as well.)

Second, we have been set free. The Jews wondered when they would be set free from Rome, but their goals were too small. God was not coming to set them free from Rome but to set them free from sin. The problem is we Christians often make the same mistake. It is not that our wishes for our lives are too great for God to fulfill. They are often way too small. In Luke 12:32, we are told that God has given us the Kingdom for instance. It is quite amazing how much we ask for forgetting we have the Kingdom. We think that God does not give us anything when in reality, He has given us everything, namely Himself. What more can He give?

Finally, this means that we are forgiven. This is something else I will expound on later and I thank a good Christian friend for pointing this out to me in a similar sermon he did on the resurrection. It had the interesting thought experiment in it of imagining what it would be like to live in a world without forgiveness. None of us would want to live in that world, but to an extent, we all act like we do, though we don’t do so as seriously. We think of some sin that is so heinous to us that we cannot imagine that God would ever forgive it, all the while going through our lives committing X number of sins regularly that are smaller sins but still thinking “It’s no big deal.” If there is no forgiveness, there is no sin that is “No big deal.” If there is forgiveness, every sin is also in its own way a big deal when you consider the price that it took to grant that forgiveness. In the first world, we say mercy is not great enough. In the second, we try to say our sin is not great enough.

Consider this then as an entryway into a subset on the resurrection at this point and how the resurrection leads to Christian joy. I hope you’ll continue coming along. Also, for those interested, I am looking into upgrading the blog site talking to some people who know a lot more about this than I. I already know about the issue with the date of the blog entries. Feel free to let me know about anything else you’d like addressed.

In Christ,
Nick Peters

The Resurrection And Sex

Can there be any connection between these two? Let’s talk about it on Deeper Waters.

Generally today, if you talk about religion, you won’t get people’s attention too much. However, once sex enters the picture, people are suddenly interested. At a job I once worked at, I came into the break room one day reading the book “Smart Sex: Lifelong Love In A Hook-Up World” by Jennifer Roback Morse. The books I’d read hadn’t got too much attention but suddenly that day the talk in there was “Nick’s reading a book about sex!”

So what does the resurrection then have to do with the national obsession?

The first place is that as we learned recently, our bodies matter. That means that what you do with the body matters. Paul tells us about this in 1 Cor. 6. Some people were of the mindset that the body will pass away so it does not matter. What you do sexually is not much different from what you eat. Paul is aghast at the very notion! He tells the Corinthians that their bodies are part of the body of Christ. How can one join Christ with a prostitute?

In other words, in the resurrection, one’s whole being is to be caught up in the identity of Christ. It is not just that you give Christ your soul, spirit, what have you, and then your body doesn’t really matter. Your body matters because Christ rose in His body and your body is to rise one day and to be transformed to be fully like His body. Your body should be being prepared for that day just as your soul, spirit, etc. are being prepared. (I use different terminology since I’m sure people have different beliefs on the nature of man in that area. I do not wish to argue for any one at this point)

If your body is to be the body of Christ, you are not to join them with a prostitute. It is important to notice that right after this, Paul does go on to address questions on marriage and despite what some people say, he is not a prude. He does not condemn the coming together of the man and woman. In fact, he says that the husband and wife should only withhold themselves from one another by mutual consent and then to devote themselves to prayer and come back quickly lest they be led astray. In other words, Paul knows how strong the desire is between husband and wife and he does not condemn that desire.

Even more radically, he says that a man’s body belongs to his wife. Of course, that goes the other way as well, but such a thought would have been unheard of in Paul’s time. It was the man alone who were in charge. Now I do hold to the position that a man does lead his household, but the man does not live for himself alone. The man is to live for his wife and that includes living bodily. His sexual energies are to be spent on her.

Just shortly before writing this, I was even debating this with someone who was telling me I should not worry about fantasizing and looking elsewhere. Faithfulness should be a choice and not an obligation. If you are married, faithfulness is an obligation you have chosen. It is not an added bonus. It is essential to your marriage. What good is it for you to say “I have remained sexually faithful to my spouse” in your body, but have not done so in your mind and fantasy life?

Does this take hard work? Absolutely, especially for us men who tend to look for many partners by nature. When we are out together, the Mrs. knows that I will regularly look away at times just so I can make sure that my mind stays pure. I have to be very careful with what I watch on TV and if a program is getting to be too showy at one scene, I can look away or else just cover my eyes at that point. Faithfulness is a choice, it is an obligation, it is a battle, and it is totally worth it.

The resurrection also shows us that sex is not to be avoided as a punishment like the Gnostics would have thought. There is no harm in bringing new life into the world. This does not mean that every married couple will do so or even want to do so, but it certainly means that the Gnostics were wrong in their position. Even those Christian couples who choose to not have children would not say that other couples are ipso facto wrong for wanting to do so.

It also means that since this is part of the creation, and since God is in the business of re-creating through the resurrection, a point we will get to lately, we should celebrate the good gift that He has given. Christians are not to be prudes about sex. There is a time and place to talk about it of course, but we Christians have often acted like we cannot say anything about it. The reality is the non-Christian world has a message about sex just as much as we do and if we do not share our message, then a questioning world will only get one message and it is a message they will be quite eager to hear and obey.

If anything, we should be leading the world in this just as we should in environmentalism. I am not saying we go to results alone, but if the message is true from Christ, the results should be good. If we are the ones that uphold sex as the good gift of the creator, then we should be the ones who treasure and value it the most and treat it as the sacred activity that it really is. We often can watch TV and movies thinking the world is really getting in some exciting sex. Would that they heard about what goes on in our marriages and thought “Dang. The Christians really know how to get the most out of sex.”

If the body is good, then what is done with the body in marriage is also good when done rightly. (No. I am not talking about technique here, although I am not objecting to that) Keep in mind however that this requires more than just the physical aspect of sex. It has been said that sex begins in the kitchen. What this means is that a marriage that enjoys God’s gift of sex should be shown in all aspects of that marriage. It should be the case that the husband is seeking to love and honor the wife in all ways and the wife is seeking to honor and respect the husband in all ways. (Men appreciate more the language of respect than love. Vice-versa for women)

We dare not have the idea that we are just to have sex and not worry about everything else. Being a faithful spouse as has been said is more than just something that happens in one room of the house. It’s more than just something that happens in the house. Being a good spouse is something that takes place wherever one is and no matter how far away the other person might be at the time. If I, for instance, am one day speaking at a conference while my wife is home for some reason, and though I cannot call her or receive a call from her at the time, I am still to be a good spouse just as she is to be to me.

For those of us today who are concerned about defending true marriage and seeing what the world has done to it, let me say as I’ve said several times before, that if we complain about the way the world is treating marriage, I firmly believe it is because the church led the way. We dropped our guard and made our own justifications and what a shock that the world around us followed suit. (For those who wonder about how the new atheists abandoned rationality as another example, it is also because the church abandoned its intellectual grounds first)

Perhaps the world will treat marriage more seriously when the church does the same thing?

For now, celebrate sex as if the body matters, because it does, and your body and the body of your spouse are good things. Both of you will enjoy resurrected life together some day. You might as well enjoy your life together right now!

In Christ,
Nick Peters

What’s A Body To Do?

If matter matters, what about my body? Let’s talk about it on Deeper Waters.

Last time, we talked about the existence of matter itself and how the resurrection makes a difference. Recently, I had Jehovah’s Witnesses at my door as you can read about in a recent post. One statement that they made was that Jesus laid down his body. Why would he pick it up again?

Well why wouldn’t he?

What we are told is that our resurrection will be like that of Jesus’s and if we will rise again bodily, then that means that Jesus rose again bodily. Now I was told “Why couldn’t it not be instead like that of Lazarus?” Why? Because the Scriptures do not say we rise like Lazarus, but that we rise like Jesus. We rise in a body that is immortal and will not die again. Lazarus rose only to die again.

Now some of us might think that 1 Cor. 15 rules against that since it contrasts between the physical body and the spiritual body. It really doesn’t. Even a skeptical NT scholar like Dale Martin says that to think of the translation as physical is really a bad one. The better idea is to think of the force that dominates. Is it going to be the desires of the flesh that dominates or is it going to be the power of the Spirit that dominates?

What about flesh and blood? Quite likely, this is an idiom that refers to perishable sinful nature. This means our bodies as we have them now are unfit for Heaven, but it does not follow from that that all bodies are unfit for Heaven.

So what does this mean for us overall? Let’s suppose that we go on from here and assume that this is a physical body that is rising up. What does this say about our bodies right now?

When Jesus rose again, the idea was that the body was something that you would want to escape. It was a prison. Hence, some Gnostic cults were against sexual activity. After all, why imprison another soul in a body? In a culture that was like this, the resurrection would have been seen as nonsensical. Why on Earth would someone want to live again in their body? The body was meant to be temporal. To be set free from the body was the ultimate healing. At the end of Plato’s “Phaedo”, Socrates orders an offering to be given to Asclepius. Why? Asclepius was a Greek god of healing and Socrates was experiencing death, release from the body, the ultimate healing.

The Christians did not see it that way because Jesus rose in the body. That meant ipso facto that the body was a good thing. God was not going to allow death to have a victory over the human body and He had set about a way to make sure that death would not spell the end. Indeed, someone who is without a body is compared in Scripture to someone who is naked. (2 Cor. 5) We are not angels. We are meant to be bodied. (Yes. When you have a Christian loved one die, God does not get another angel. You will never be an angel, and that is just fine.)

This then means that like the environment, what you do with your body matters. For instance, before my marriage, as an Aspie, I had a very limited diet. Now in a sense, it still is of course, but it has expanded as I’m wanting to be one who leads my family for a long time. In the past before the marriage, it was pizza every night. Some of you might wonder about my being overweight with that. The reality is I eat less overall and tend to be active. I weigh about 120.

We do not treat our body lightly for the same reason we do not neglect the environment. I do realize I still have a way to go, but we are all on the path of sanctification. Not all of us are health guru types. Our body is not just excess baggage for us. It is an important aspect of who we are. It is not an accident that we live in a body. We are meant to experience the world as bodied creatures.

Christians are unique in that we are believers of resurrection to a bodied life. We believe that this body is good and that God will raise it up again, which is one reason we bury our dead. Of course, God is capable of re-creating bodies, so that someone who dies in an animal attack and gets their body ground up, or in an explosion or something of that sort, can be resurrected. That is no problem. It does not mean the matter will have to be identical either. Not all our questions are answered explicitly in Scripture, but we know that it is not beyond the power of God.

Since our bodies matter, does that have any impact on ethics? There are such in the Pauline epistles, but we will discuss that next time.

In Christ,
Nick Peters

Matter Matters

So does it matter what we think about matter? Let’s talk about it on Deeper Waters.

We’ve been doing a study on the difference that the resurrection of Christ makes. Note that in this study I am assuming that the resurrection is true. There are other times that I have answered the question of the resurrection, but for now, rather than give an apologetic, it is simply to point out that there is much more that the resurrection means for us than what we take from it. It certainly means we are forgiven and have eternal life, but we are missing far more than we realize with our approach to the resurrection.

In the Greek world, there was already growing a movement against matter that later comes out more in the Gnostic heresy. From a Platonic perspective, this world was the world of change and the good and perfect world was the unchanging world of the forms. For the Gnostics, matter was a creation of an evil god and it was the role of Jesus to free us from the material world and take us to our real dwellings.

Thankfully, we are past this in the church today. We never have any ideas in the church that the world is going to go away and that we’ll all live forever in an immaterial Heaven. Oh? You mean we still have that kind of belief. Of course, most Christians would realize that we are in Heaven bodily after the resurrection, but many times that line is blurred. I think of the time I heard a pastor speaking at a sermon about a friend who had died and how the next day, he knew his friend was walking on those streets of gold.

Now we can quibble about how we will interpret the description in Heaven in Revelation and if it’s literal or not. (I say not) However, the point to make is that his friend was not walking on those streets of gold if they were real. Why? It is because the body of his friend was still in the ground and until the resurrection took place, his body would remain in the ground. I advise pastors doing a funeral to simply say that the Christian who has died is in the presence of Jesus. Don’t talk about the body being up there. It is not and will not be until the final resurrection.

What we need to realize is that in the resurrection, we get the realization coming in that the creation of the world was not an accident. It was not a plan B. It was not that God’s angelic world didn’t hold up since the devil rebelled so he figured he’d just try with another world altogether. No. This world was part of the plan all along. In fact, it would seem odd for God to create a world of even less perfect creatures than the angels and say “Maybe they’ll do better.”

My wife happens to be a great lover of nature and she is right when she tells me that it is a shame that the New Age movement outdoes us it seems in environmentalism. Christians can too often write off proper care for the environment. Now I am not in any way saying to go out and be a tree hugger or join PETA or something of that sort. I happen to think man is to be in charge of the environment and master and use it, but he is also to have a respect for it as the creation of God.

When we do our environmental duty, perhaps we could go out singing the hymn of “This Is My Father’s World.” It is created for us to use, but not to abuse. We are the caretakers of the creation acting on the behalf of God. It is certainly the case that while we do not worship the creation, we should be the ones doing such a job taking care of it that we put the New Age movement to shame. It is not a sin for the Christian to love the world God created. In fact, I would say it is a sin for him to not do so.

When God resurrects Jesus from the dead, we find that He is really saying that the other side is wrong. This is a good world. It is a good world because Christ rose in a material body. Does the fact that He rose in a body say anything about our bodies? We’ll save that for next time.

In Christ,
Nick Peters

Why I Am A Gamer

Why enjoy a hobby that has so much violence? Let’s talk about it on Deeper Waters.

The following blog entry is also a guest blog entry at NearEmmaus. Brian LePort who runs it started asking questions about football of all things and whether there are any theological questions. Now to be honest, I don’t care a bit about football. I watch the Super Bowl for the same reason several of you probably do. I want to see the commercials! The only sport I could ever get into any at all is Braves baseball. Yet I saw the question about football being violent and thought from a different perspective that I could handle that.

Why? Not because I like football, but because from as far back as I can remember, I’ve had a great interest in video games. For me, it started with realizing my parents had something called a ColecoVision (Some of you remember those I’m sure). My favorite game on it was not a fighting game but a puzzle game called Ladybug. (I would love to be able to download this game on the Wii today!) I could often reach level 100 on the game. I had it mastered from an early age. (It’s not as easy to do on the computer)

Being in Elementary School, I realized I needed to get a Nintendo soon and so like many others, I grew up playing games like Super Mario Brothers and the Legend of Zelda. Link of the Zelda series was a hero of mine growing up. I still remember taking a Nintendo Power magazine to the place I’d get my hair cut. In it, I showed a picture of Link from Zelda II and said that I wanted my hair to look like that.

And before too long, people at my school knew who was the main expert on video games. While there are puzzle games and some adventure games I still enjoy, far and long the games I enjoy the most are RPGs. I prefer Final Fantasy, Dragon Quest, Kingdom Hearts, etc. A notable exception could be multi-player games such as how in Charlotte I got together with friends every Sunday night to play Super Smash Brothers Brawl. When I visit my in-laws, we can play the Wii Sports or Mario Kart Wii. I also like to play the old classic games.

Now with puzzle games we don’t really have much problem of course. That my Dad and I can still play Dr. Mario today is not really a problem to anyone. What about a game where you get a sword and cut through monsters? Isn’t that violent?

Why yes. Yes it is.

Now note in this that for me, I don’t play games that have gratuitous violence. There are limits for me. I do not really like to see the sight of blood that much. I could take something such as playing Goldeneye on the 64 and seeing the blood come down when my character died, but to see someone get shot at regularly and have blood come gushing out would not be something that I want to see. Just yesterday my wife and I watched “Flags of our Fathers” and I had to cover my eyes a number of times because I can’t stand the blood. Watching “House M.D.” can be difficult and I have no idea how I got through the first season of Dexter. This could also be a question of conscience, which many of this is. Note that if someone reads this and still has hesitations and really doesn’t think they should play the games I play, that is just fine with me. I have no problem there. Let us follow a Romans 14 perspective and see this as a matter of conscience. Of course, if you have a real objection, then bring it.

Yet if we are to say that something is to be rejected because it contains violence, then frankly we Christians will have to reject the Bible as well which has much violence in it, something that we need to accept. God is a holy God and those who go against Him are dealt with in accordance with what they do wrong, and sometimes His instrument for doing that is human beings. This still goes on today. Romans 13 speaks about government being such a force that bears the sword. Yes. There are times violence is necessary.

Why?

It would be nice if we all lived in a world where everyone would sit down to peace conferences and be willing to do all that was necessary, but because we are still in the flesh, such is not going on. There are people who will want to get whatever they want and who cares about anyone else? There will be people who do not follow the rules of others and go forward on their own authority seeking to stomp on anyone who gets in their way.

But are we not told that blessed are the peacemakers?

Those familiar with Westerns know that Wyatt Earp referred to his gun as the peacemaker. Let’s suppose I had been out somewhere and came home and heard my wife screaming inside. I go in and find some man attacking her and getting a weapon, I manage to kill her assailant. In doing this, I have become a peacemaker the way Earp said his gun was. The person who I dealt with was someone who was violating the peace. By eliminating him, I have restored the peace that he shattered.

“But Jesus told us to love our enemies! Should we kill them?”

Most of us would not consider it loving to lock someone behind bars in a destitute situation for years or to charge a really hefty fine for something. This is what we do however! Why? Because love does not mean everyone gets to do what they want without any consequences whatsoever. Now some have argued that Jesus would forgive people. Yes he would. So should we. However, there is a difference between private and public forgiveness. Someone can privately receive forgiveness for what they’ve done, but they still owe a debt to society and that debt is to be repaid. For an example, David in the sin of Bathsheba was privately forgiven, but his son still died. Forgiveness does not automatically mean there are no consequences. In fact, the Christian narrative should remind us that all actions we do have consequences.

If someone is out there actively doing evil, you can be sure that they are NOT seeking forgiveness. They are not in a state of repentance. I hold that Christians should always be willing to forgive, but they are not to offer forgiveness until the person comes to them and asks for forgiveness. Some might think that is not a good attitude to have, but why think that when that is the exact position God Himself holds?

Yet are we not to turn the other cheek?

Jesus’s statement was about an event in the private setting that constituted a simple insult. The idea was to end the cycle of retaliation before it starts. It says absolutely nothing about physical danger. It is not being like Christ to do nothing while someone inflicts serious injury on innocent people. If you are insulted, it can be a mark of character to simply not choose to retaliate in private. In public, matters are different. While it can be questioned whether Edmund Burke said it, I can easily agree with the idea that “All that is needed for evil to prosper is for good men to do nothing.” If we sit back and do nothing in the face of evil, let us not be surprised that evil flourishes.

So what about the gaming area since you are the one doing the activity?

And I have no qualms about it. Note for instance that in many games today, one is fighting monsters who are not rational human beings and seek only destruction. (Never mind in these worlds for some reason they all breed like rabbits and are all deadset on destroying you and your party) There are times you fight people, but again, this is in a public forum with fighting those who wish to do evil and are not repentance. There are times in RPGs where you can be given the choice to let a character go who seems repentant.

We also should realize that a game must be considered in the world that it is in. We can look and say that on Earth it would not be like this, but then on Earth we don’t have dragons flying around us and imps breeding everywhere. In this world, if one does not fight evil villains, then the good of the whole world will suffer and we must seek to bring about the good of the world and not just that of an individual.

Of course, we must be sure we are fighting for the good of the world. Are we doing that? If someone is going on a quest and slaying monsters but they’re only doing that so they can get to the hapless village and destroy it, then it would be apparent that while they could be doing good on the way, their overall approach is not good and is therefore something that should be condemned.

Now what about football with all of this? It’s also important to consider that men by nature do tend to enjoy violent activities. That’s the way we are. We’re warriors at heart. Men like something to fight for. One of the reasons I believe marriage can domesticate a man for instance is that it gives him something he can fight for. Many of us men would hopefully be ready for action immediately if someone were to do something that would endanger our wives. We have this instinct to protect and fight born into us. We grow up with toy guns and swords and all manner of activity like this.

What we need to ask is what are we going to do with all this aggression and energy that we can have? Football could be a fine outlet for some people, though I would advise them to be extremely careful. Several older people today suffer greatly because of injuries they got when playing football while young. Of course, on a field, one should only use enough force to take down an opponent. (Don’t expect technical terms from me on football. I couldn’t tell you) I do understand that there are such things as unnecessary roughness in a sport like football. It can be necessary to knock down your opponent. It does not mean it is necessary to pummel him on the ground to keep him down.

Of course, every Christian will have to examine themselves. My great concern for us gamers is not that we will become violent people, but that we will spend too much time with our hobby. I make it a point for instance that when game time comes here, I usually listen to an MP3 at the same time so I can at least be educating myself as well. (Somehow, I don’t think this would work in a football game) Of course, that doesn’t hold if I’m playing a multi-player game with friends in which it’s just fun fellowship. Now if you really have serious qualms about this and you’re not even sure why, you can examine those, but you do not have to partake of something. This is the freedom of the Christian.

As we observe our freedom, let us be careful about how we approach another person’s freedom. What you might find questionable they could have no problem for and let each be fully convinced in his own mind.

In Christ,
Nick Peters