The 72-hour Rule

Should we wait before we comment? Let’s plunge into the Deeper Waters and find out.

Sometimes in the world of major news networks and the internet where everyone is wanting to break the story first, we can rush to conclusions. This is especially the case in the age of iPhones when everyone practically has a video camera with them. There can be details that come out later that change a story.

A few months or so ago here in Atlanta, there was a news story about an Uber Eats driver that shot and killed a customer. When I first heard the story, my initial reaction was murder. Then I found out that this driver had the customer near him and the customer was reaching for his pockets and making a threat about what he was going to do to the driver. The driver then shot and drove off. He also turned himself into the police later.

Now I understand that Uber Eats drivers aren’t supposed to carry guns, but I honestly don’t blame the guy. If I was going to see strangers regularly, I might want to carry some form of protection as well. We also can say we don’t know what this guy would do, but the police follow the same procedure. That’s why when I get pulled over for something like speeding, I always tell the police, “I’m just getting my wallet.” They don’t know.

Over the weekend, we also had such a story break out about a Catholic boy and a Native American veteran. Based on a short clip when the story broke, the boy was immediately being condemned as a villain for going after this Native American. No doubt, there were panels being formed on news stations discussing what we could do about problems like racism today and how the youth of our nation are and probably some digs at Catholicism.

Then more of the video came out.

Whoops! I understand that even CNN has said they got this one wrong. Everyone rushed to judgment and not all the facts were in. We all had to say something immediately. Now, there’s nothing wrong with forming an opinion, but make it a tentative opinion.

I even had a friend on Facebook last night who had apparently bought into the idea of the ten-second clip and yet so many good people were trying to explain the reality of the whole story. It wasn’t helping at all. Later on, when I made a comment, I got unfriended as did another friend. My position was one that I have said before. If evidence will not change a person’s mind, their opinion is not based on evidence.

This is especially so in our political climate. I don’t care if you’re someone who thinks Obama was the best thing since sliced bread or if you think Trump is. If I saw people sharing false stories about Obama, I called them out for it despite how much I did not care for the guy. If we want to take down our opponents, let’s do it in truth and not in lies.

The idea of the 72-hour rule was one I saw someone else share, but I think it’s a good principle. Before you come down hard on an issue, wait 72 hours at least. See what unknown facts could come out. Let the case be examined better. Rush judgments can leave egg on your face.

Not only that, this boy and his family have received death threats because of a rush to judgment, One would hope that we would all agree that that is uncalled for, but today, I am not sure. Either way, this boy has received attacks he never should have because of hasty judgments.

Those of us in apologetics need to remember that we are always supposed to be people of truth in everything. We are supposed to be diligent researchers and seeking to find out what is true. We can have opinions, but let’s not make them rock solid. Give things time and then you can speak and have less chance of egg on your face.

In Christ,
Nick Peters

Deeper Waters Podcast 1/19/2019: John Ferrer

What’s coming up? Let’s plunge into the Deeper Waters and find out.

Abortion is often seen as a way of protecting women. Women have to be equal, so let’s protect their rights! What if it isn’t? What if abortion is the exact opposite? What if abortion is really a war against women?

What if we went further and said that abortion is one of the worst evils being done in our world today? As a commenter on my Facebook page said about this topic, he can’t believe that he has to go out and defend life. Many of us today are shocked that we have to do this.

What if there’s also more to the debate than just personhood? We can focus so much on the question of if the unborn are persons or not. Could it be that our energies could be better focused elsewhere than on this topic?

Our guest tomorrow holds to these positions. He’s done a number of debates on the topic of abortion and has extensive research on it. We’re going to be talking with him about all of this. His name is John Ferrer.

So who is he?

* SES – MDiv Apologetics w/ emphasis in Languages
* SWBTS – ThM & PhD – Philosophy of Religion, w/ Ethics minor
* Dissertation – “Body Ethics” (a study of our ethical responsibilities in, to, and through our bodies).
* Publishings with Christian Research JournalSalvo Magazine, Christian Apologetics JournalJournal of the International Society of Christian Apologetics, and others.
* Debates with Matt Dillahunty of “The Atheist Experience,” and with David Smalley of “Dogma Debate.”
* I have teaching experience with Texas Wesleyan University, Tarrant County College, Pantego Christian Academy.
* I host two teaching websites: IntelligentChristianFaith.com and AbortionHistoryMuseum.com.
* Currently I’m a teaching fellow with Equal Rights Institute, a pro-life training group in Concord, NC.
* I also volunteer with Pella ProLife and Central College Students for Life.

We’ll be talking with him about many of these experiences and about why he’s involved in the pro-life cause. Why should we care so much about the topic of abortion? What is his experience like getting to debate with Matt Dillahunty and David Smalley?

We’ll also be talking about the current work that he is doing in the area of abortion and apologetics and the abortion history museum. What is the history of abortion? Does it really kick off in 1the 1970’s or is there a whole lot more that we need to know about beforehand? We can also discuss about the question of bodily ethics and ask how abortion relates and what it is we are supposed to be doing with our bodies?

I hope you’ll be listening in. Very soon we will be updating the podcast feed to get some new December episodes up and then we can start looking at episodes in January about the topic of abortion. Please consider going on iTunes and leaving a positive review of the Deeper Waters Podcast. I really love to see what you guys think and to realize how much you enjoy listening to the show.

In Christ,
Nick Peters

Deeper Waters Podcast 1/12/2019: George Brahm

What’s coming up? Let’s plunge into the Deeper Waters and find out.

One of the rules of debate often is that whoever controls the meaning of the words has an advantage in the debate. It’s why in a number of debates I’m involved in, I try to be very careful with my words. I will say “redefining marriage” instead of “same-sex marriage” for instance to not even begin to concede an inch of what I think is inaccurate.

So it is in abortion debates. To be fair, both sides tend to do this as I think it’s really human nature. Yet we do need to be aware of what our opponents are doing. Are any word games being played that we should know about that can harm our endeavors to save the lives of the unborn?

We also need to learn metaphysics for this, which is another area of word games. Too often, our opponents define metaphysics as simply being nonsense. What is metaphysics really? Does everyone have a metaphysical viewpoint or is it just Christians? Is a lot of this stuff a bunch of nonsense that ancient philosophers might have believed, but it is no longer sustainable in a modern scientific worldview?

To discuss these matters, I have brought on someone new. I decided to bring someone who is climbing up the apologetics ladder and I want to give some more exposure to like others have been doing and are doing for me on my climb. I have seen some of his writings on the topic and they are quite good. Not only that, he also affirms the virgin birth, which I do affirm. His name is George Brahm.

So who is he?

According to his bio:

George Brahm is an undergraduate student of philosophy based in Canada. He focuses on metaphysics and the philosophy of language, with additional interests in bioethics, political philosophy, and the philosophy of religion. His current research focuses on the relationship between time and personal identity. (And he affirms the virgin birth.) (Which I also affirm)

So we’ll be talking about the concept of abortion and how it relates to the debates above. What evidence do we really have that the unborn is a human person and should be allowed to live? How can we best phrase the issues to be most persuasive in the public square? When our intellectual opponents are speaking, what do we need to be on the watch for? Hopefully, we will all learn from this the behaviors we should be using in order to make a better case for the pro-life position in the marketplace of ideas.

I know that it’s being slow to get new episodes up, but that is being worked on. I hope you will be patient as there is a lot going on here at the time. Please do be watching for it as I am doing what I can to make sure they come up. Also, please go on iTunes and leave a positive review for the Deeper Waters Podcast since I really love to see them all.

In Christ,
Nick Peters

Deeper Waters Podcast 1/5/2019: Rebekah Valerius

What’s coming up? Let’s plunge into the Deeper Waters and find out.

January is here and now it’s time to talk about abortion again. It’s the topic that puts to death thousands of babies every year and this in the name of women’s rights. Generally, it’s thought that if you’re a woman, you should obviously support this movement. Shouldn’t you be free to express your own autonomy and reproductive rights? Didn’t former president Obama say once that he didn’t want his daughters to be punished with a baby?

What if this isn’t always the case? What if sometimes women actually don’t want to jump on the abortion bandwagon? How are they to be seen? Are they traitors to the cause? Could it be that they’re actually the true feminists out there? Could it be that maybe having an abortion is not something that a woman should do, but something that a woman should resist?

My guest is an apologist who speaks on the issues of women and abortion. She is definitely of the opinion that women should not be in support of abortion. She is also living this out as a homeschooling mother of two and a wife. She will be with us this Saturday to talk about issues relating to women and abortion. Her name is Rebekah Valerius.

So who is she?

According to her bio:

Rebekah Valerius is a student in the MA Cultural Apologetics program at Houston Baptist University and has a BS in Biochemistry. She is a wife and homeschooling mother of two.

So why would a woman supposedly be going against her tribe and saying that women should not seek abortion? Does this mean that she wants women to be the slaves of men? Isn’t this really a very anti-woman position to take and is this just joining in and supporting the patriarchy as it’s called?

Or are there instead good reasons why women should really not be for abortion? Does it really have anything to do with women per se? Is the issue not so much the nature of woman as it is the nature of abortion? What is it about abortion that has Rebekah saying that women should not have them?

And then what if they have? We hear stories about women living in judgment and depression because they did have an abortion. Is an abortion a game over for a woman? Should she live the rest of her life with a cloud hanging over her head? What grace can be given to a woman who has had an abortion? (Let’s keep in mind also that not just women live with this. I have known men in my lifetime who have regret over the issue of abortion and helping to pay for one.)

I hope you’ll be joining me for this episode of the Deeper Waters Podcast. I really am working on getting back into the regular shows after so much that has been going on over here. Please be patient with any delay in bringing the best in Christian apologetics to you.

In Christ,
Nick Peters

The Agenda Project’s Ad

What does a baby deserve? Let’s plunge into the Deeper Waters and find out.

So Agenda Project has an ad that has been making rounds lately. It has a cute little baby smiling and giggling as babies do. All along words regularly pop up on the screen. I could tell you more, but hey, why not take less than a minute and watch the ad yourself?

At the start when watching, I was wondering what the point of this ad was. We are told the baby deserves to be wanted. The baby deserves to be loved. Yes. Who would dispute that? Then the third one, at least for me, gives a chill. She deserves to be a choice.

To deserve according to the dictionary means to be worthy of. With that, then we can say with the meme on the internet at the three things this baby deserves, one of them is not like the other. Something in the list just really doesn’t belong.

Is the ad saying that if the baby is not loved and not wanted supposedly, she should be a choice? But then that doesn’t fit. If she is not loved and not wanted, why change the last one then to “She is a choice.”? If she is loved and she is wanted, why should she be a choice?

Let’s also acknowledge something. Abortion activists have been telling us that this is not a baby for so long. What is in the womb is a fetus. This ad dispels the myth. Now some abortion advocates are, at last, acknowledging that these are babies. Good on them at least for that! It’s still wicked and evil, but hopefully, confession is the path to recovery.

Sadly, I’m skeptical of that. I think groups like Planned Parenthood know very well that these are babies. They just don’t care. The problem with these babies is that they may deserve to be loved and wanted, and they are, but they also get in the way of our sex lives and our careers and well, we can’t have that now can we?

This ad is also unclear. This is a baby that is not in the womb. Does this mean that infanticide is now okay? Is the baby always a choice? Can she be a choice when she is outside of the womb?

I have no intention of holding back. Abortion is just an evil practice. When we read our Old Testaments and read about the Canaanites that Israel drove out, we need to realize we are worse than they were. They sacrificed their children to be sure, but usually, they did it for something like the good of the harvest for the community. When we do it, we do it at the altar of convenience.

Years ago I was at an apologetics conference where Chuck Colson was speaking and he said that if you are a Christian who supports abortion, you really need to check on the status of your faith. He got a standing ovation and sadly that surprised him because usually, that statement was quite controversial. Perhaps it is, but I agree with it.

Perhaps in the future, more abortions activists might be even more straightforward. We can hope. My fear is that if they are, our society would have reached such a place of immorality that they still won’t care.

In Christ,
Nick Peters

Should Babies With Disabilities Be Aborted?

Who gets to live? Let’s plunge into the Deeper Waters and find out.

Yesterday I saw on the Unbelievable forum on Facebook a post about abortion and if children with disabilities should be aborted. Naturally, autism showed up on the list. Seeing that, I knew I had to say something.

Wanted to comment here. I’m a devout Christian, an apologist with my own ministry and podcast, a college graduate, and a moderator here. I don’t say this in my capacity as a moderator but just to point out that I do what I can to contribute to the world.

And oh yes. I’m on the autism spectrum. I have Aspergers. Not only am I on it, but my wife is on it as well. My wife of eight years that is.

I am so thankful both of us were raised by Christian parents that never saw abortion as an option. I enjoy my life and I consider it a gift that I get to live life everyday. I realize we are high-functioning compared to others, but no one else really gets to determine if I will have joy in my life but me and no one else should decide for me if my life is or isn’t worth living.

I also don’t really like the term birth defect. It’s like those of us with a disability had something go wrong in manufacturing. Honestly, if a cure for Aspergers came out tomorrow, I wouldn’t take it. My differences do cause me some handicaps, but they also give me an advantage in how I think many times. I happily accept who I am and enjoy it.

I was told that wouldn’t some be better if they didn’t have a condition like spina bifida? In some ways, no doubt yes, but isn’t this a slippery slope to be going down? We are the ones who will determine who can enjoy their life and who cannot? Do we think it’s good to treat life in such a cheap way?

Now of course, there are ways that you can live your life that are bad. No one is denying that. There is most anything wrong you can do with something that is good. Sadly, the very good news of the Gospel has often been used for evil.

But if you want to see if something is good, you start with the something itself. Is life a good? Is it any wonder we have so many cases of suicide and such today when life is described in these terms? You can’t be happy unless you have perfect health or look perfect or have the best career or have so much money in the bank?

Nothing wrong with having any of those things. If you have them, give thanks. I know my wife gives thanks that she married a man who has such great good looks for example. (Yes. I know. If she reads this she will be rolling her eyes) Yet even if we have any of these things, if something happens to them at any time, does our life automatically become not worth living?

It’s interesting to me that so many people that have this position are atheists. Don’t tell me there are no moral implications that can follow from atheism. To be fair, many atheists are staunchly pro-life. I am thankful for them. However, you can be a consistent atheist and be staunchly pro-abortion and that is a concern for me. I do not see how you can be a devout Christian and be pro-abortion or if you will, pro-choice. Sorry Chelsea Clinton, but your position is the one that is entirely out of lines with Christianity.

From the womb to the tomb, life is sacred. Every human being regardless of power or money or fame has as much value to their life as the child just conceived in the womb. All of them equally partake of the Image of God. All of them are meant to reflect Him in some way and show who He is.

Abortion is an evil. Let’s stomp it out the best we can.

In Christ,
Nick Peters

 

Lysistrata 2018

What can we learn about a sex strike? Let’s plunge into the Deeper Waters and find out.

As a historian of the New Testament, I think it’s important to learn about what was going on in the Greek word. One play in Greek history I enjoyed was Lysistrata. In it, the women of the communities are upset that their men are going to war and leaving them at home. They decide to work together and have a sex strike. The men wind up going berserk due to the lack of sex with their wives. It is a hilarious work to read.

Apparently, some people today are thinking this is a good idea with the possibility that Trump could place a conservative judge on the Supreme Court and Roe v. Wade could be in danger. There is a movement with the hashtag of Lysistrata2018. The idea is to not have sex with any man that would support the undoing of Roe v. Wade.

There you have it! Feminists are now encouraging abstinence! It’s about time!

It’s really also an exercise in futility. For one thing, Trump has not really been one to keel over and bow to the desires of his critics. When I hear a protest going on, I really have to ask “Do they think they’re accomplishing anything?” It’s the idea that if you get a mob together, the mob should have the power to make sure that they get what they want. Most of us watching aren’t swayed. Well, that’s not accurate. We are. We’re more swayed to agree with our current opinion.

Also, keep in mind that a large number of evangelicals voted for Trump. Many of those evangelicals are also pro-life. Pro-life people are not likely to be in a serious relationship with someone who is pro-choice and even if they are, if we’re Christians, we’re supposed to be waiting until we’re married to have sex anyway.

And Christian men, do you seriously want to date a girl who is open to abortion? This is a woman who could kill the children the two of you conceive together and yes, she can do it without your consent. There are a number of fathers out there who never got to see their children because the mothers had an abortion behind their back.

So what does this mean? It means that the women are holding back from the men who are not willing to make commitments to them in marriage and who will have sex with them without it. In other words, they are holding back from men who are already willing to use them for sex. These are the very men that the feminist movement has railed against. Feminism has often said that women should be loved for more than sex, which is entirely true, but many feminists defend the very actions that allow them to be used for sex and the very people that will use them for sex.

If you really want to be a true feminist, be pro-life. If anything is feminine, it is what makes a woman unique from a man. A woman is unique because she is the only one who can give birth. This doesn’t mean that a woman has to be a mother to be a woman, but it does mean that this is a unique difference. There are many more, but this one is true without exception. Women have babies. Men do not. (I know about the transgender claims. I do not consider someone to be a woman just because they alter their body.)

If anything, right now the Lysistrata movement is showing why these people are not taken seriously. Now of course in marriage, the situation is different. Between a married husband and wife, I do not think withholding is a good policy. The marriage bed is meant to build up intimacy and the relationship. There are some exceptions that I could be open to, such as a spouse having a porn habit that they refuse to repent of or seek help for or a spouse who is abusive.

As for me, I just plan on sitting back and watching this kind of thing happen more and more. It is almost as if the left is becoming a parody of itself, if it hasn’t reached that point already. A bunch of women having a sex strike will not put a liberal on the court. If anything, it will make Trump want to pick the most conservative judge he can find.

We’re entering an interesting time in our history. We’ll just watch and see what happens. Either way, the church needs to keep being the church.

In Christ,
Nick Peters

 

Book Plunge: The Bible Doesn’t Say That!

What do I think of Joel Hoffman’s book published by Thomas Dunne? Let’s Plunge into the Deeper Waters and find out!

Someone sent me an email about this book wanting me to look through it and shred it. I ordered it at the library and went through and really, there is some stuff in here that is pretty good. The author is right that the Bible does not condone slavery for instance, which is a breath of fresh air to hear since so many people get that one wrong. Some passages are quite interesting and there is much to learn from this.

One obvious downside from the book unfortunately is the lack of notes. There are none whatsoever. Other scholars are not referenced. There is no way of knowing where exactly Dr. Hoffman gets his information from. Sure, he holds a Ph.D., but that doesn’t stand alone. One is not infallible for having one.

So if there were any sections I would want to comment on, most notably would be the one on the Bible and homosexuality. Does the Bible say homosexual practice is a sin? According to Hoffman, no. One wishes we could have moved past the arguments by now such as mixed fabrics and such. Hoffman realizes the passages in Leviticus are sandwiched between bestiality and incest, but that doesn’t seem to matter.

Hoffman also looks at Romans 1 and says Paul doesn’t say the behavior that the people were doing was wrong. It was just the result of what happened. God punished people with unnatural sex, but we don’t know what the term unnatural actually means.

In reality, we do. Paul uses language from Genesis 1 quite regularly such as speaking of the creator and using terms male and female. This is all a way of saying Paul has Genesis 1 in mind without explicitly saying such. Paul says that from what is seen, everyone knows that there is a God. It is a denial of the vertical reality to instead worship idols and the creation. The best example of a denial of reality on the horizontal level Paul can come up with is homosexual behavior. Male and female go together and belong together.

Nowhere in this does Hoffman interact with Matthew 19 and Jesus talking about marriage Himself. Note that Jesus does not just go to Genesis 2:24, but He also goes to Genesis 1:26-27 where it talks about mankind being created male and female. That is the foundation.

Hoffman does say elsewhere in the book that the Bible never condemns polygamy. Explicitly, this is so, but it warns of the danger of it and when polygamy takes place, it leads to problems. Polygamy was a borderline practice that was allowed for the time being, but did not represent the ideal. Genesis 1 and 2 have the ideal. One man and one woman for life.

Hoffman then says we should consider that there are people who could only find companionship with the same sex and they didn’t know about homosexuality like we do today. I highly question both. The latter is quite simple. They knew about homosexual behavior. Just read the Symposium and see that some people are paired up with the same sex. This isn’t new.

For the former, we have this strange idea that the only way you can find love is through sex. Yet even between men and women, this is not so. I love my mother, my sister, my aunt, and my mother-in-law. There is no thought of sex there at all. I share a special love with my wife and that is the relationship that my sexual thought is supposed to go to.

The idea is that to have true companionship, one must have sex, and this is false. Who is the homosexual supposed to love? The same person as everyone else. His neighbor. That does not have to be sexualized. There are plenty of people who live fine and happy lives without having sex. Those of us who are married should realize the Bible’s prescription that we do have regular sex, but those who are not if they are submitting to Christ will accept a lifestyle of celibacy until they get married.

I also want to look at abortion. The passage used is Exodus 21. Nowhere does he go to Psalm 139. Nowhere does he go to Jeremiah 1:5. Nowhere does he go to Luke 1 with John the Baptist leaping in the womb.

Even still at Exodus 21, the passage doesn’t work. The man is not trying to kill the child. He is doing something on accident and the death penalty is not there for accidental death. Even in the cases of it happening, the man could always go to a city of refuge and stay there.

Hoffman also concludes the whole book saying there are no miracles in the Bible. Miracles are extra-scientific after all. It is true that they have wonders, but Hoffman describes wonders as freedom from slavery or a sense of the divine or beauty or family or anything like that. These are wondrous things, but not acts of God directly every time.

It also doesn’t mean we have to give up miracles as they are understood. We can have both. Can I not appreciate the former things while still holding that God acts in the world? I see no reason I cannot.

Hoffman’s book again is a hit and a miss. Some things are good, but some things are not. A reader could gain some wheat and let the chaff go its own way.

In Christ,
Nick Peters

 

 

Book Plunge: Love Thy Body

What do I think of Nancy Pearcey’s book published by Baker Books? Let’s plunge into the Deeper Waters and find out.

Nancy Pearcey’s book is a must-read. It is a nuclear missile of sorts going into secularism and a powerful argument that needs to be dealt with. At the same time, it’s a simple argument. It starts with a basic premise that all of us can immediately see and goes from there.

That premise is your body is something that shows who you are. If you want to know how you look publicly to the world, all of it comes through your body. We might say we live in a world that values the body. After all, you can find fitness videos to no end at the video store and there are TV programs about weight loss and everything else related to the body.

It can still be that we don’t really value the body that much. We can idolize it without really understanding it. Do we really care about the body itself or about the image we portray with the body? Is the body something truly good in its own right?

Pearcey uses this claim to get to arguments about numerous areas. You will find the hook-up culture, living together before marriage, abortion, pornography, homosexuality, and transgenderism addressed in this. All of this leads to giving more power to the state. If only she had written about something that people are talking about today….

Pearcey says that in each of these items, we are making a false statement about the body. Sex is a powerful expression two people make with their bodies for one another. It is really giving all that you can to another person. We speak about it as a grand finale. We go all the way. We hit a home run. We score.

Instead, our culture often reduces sex to just a hobby. We have this idea that you can have sex with no strings attached, but you can’t. Your body knows what you’re doing and that’s why bonding chemicals are released during the act of sex, including chemicals for a man. Your body is forming a bond with this other person in the act of sex.

Porn does the same kind of thing training your body to respond to a lie. The body you see on the other end is not a real body, but it is more fake. It is the result of a lot of make-up and such made for just that occasion. The person on the other side of that camera doesn’t care about you. They don’t even know that you exist. You will not get the joy of undressing them before your eyes and getting to run your hands over their body yourself. There’s a reason why many men today are in their 20’s and having to take Viagra. A real woman can’t get them to respond any more because porn makes them need more and more.

Women struggle enough as it is with self-image in the area of physical beauty. It doesn’t help them that they now think they have to struggle with countless women seen in porn. I say this also realizing that women today will also watch porn and will face similar struggles though different in some ways I’m sure to the men.

Abortion shows this struggle as well. Abortion downplays the body in that science is not the decider of whether that is truly a human. An artificial category is made up so that something is human, but it is not a person. There is no scientific test for such a thing. It is an ad hoc claim made to justify the killing of the innocent human person in the womb.

Homosexuality is also such a case of lying with one’s body. It is saying that one has the body of a man or a woman, but they will deny this. They will instead treat their body like it is that of a woman or a man. Again, the problem is a downplaying of the body and it is because feelings take precedence. One feels a certain way so forget what the body says. It is overruled by the emotions.

Transgenderism really demonstrates this. One believes a lie so much that one is willing to have one’s own body mutilated rather than work on changing the feelings. We live in an age where one can deny the body so much that one will undergo surgery to make it subservient to the feelings.

All of this also gives more power to the state. The state has to step in and change things. Marriage is no longer about a physical union, but it is about the feelings the people have for one another. Under many a secular definition, two roommates living together can be married even though they have no romantic feelings towards one another and will never have sex together.

The state will step in and redefine terms and then it will have to defend those terms and those who resist are enemies of the state. The ultimate target is the family. The family is a threat to the government since the family does not depend on the government for its existence. It’s a pre-political reality. The charges are serious and the cause is serious.

Get Pearcey’s book. Read it. Learn it. Open your eyes to what is going on around you. Pearcey’s book is a must-read for anyone interested in debating in any of these areas.

In Christ,
Nick Peters

Deeper Waters Podcast 1/27/2018: Nancy Pearcey

What’s coming up? Let’s plunge into the Deeper Waters and find out.

We live in an age where people are really enthused about their bodies. You can turn on TV and see many fitness shows. You can go to the library or the DVD store and you can find plenty of fitness videos. Of course, we live in an age also of rampant sexuality which means that we really want to appreciate those bodies all the more.

In this, we have a book come out called Love Thy Body. Obviously, this is a book about working out and taking care of yourself. No? It isn’t? What is it about? It’s about in an age where people claim to love their bodies and be fascinated with them, we really don’t listen to them and pay attention to them. With our fitness regimes, we treat the body as fundamentally important. With our philosophies, we treat it as highly secondary. Perhaps it could be that we don’t really love our bodies.

This plays out in a number of areas in our lives. It plays out in abortion, pre-marital sex and the concept of living together prior to marriage, homosexuality, and transgenderism. (You kind of wish the book could have talked about something relevant to today don’t you?) In all of these areas, we deny the truth of the body and put that truth below something else, most notably, our feelings for the most part.

I’m very pleased to have on the author of this book. This is a lady with a razor sharp mind and as I have gone through the book I have often asked, “Why is it that I didn’t put two and two together like this before?” The book I really think is a bombshell on the whole culture war and one that should not be ignored. The author is Nancy Pearcey. So who is she?

According to her bio:

Nancy Pearcey is the author of the newly released Love Thy Body: Answering Hard Questions about Life and Sexuality. She is professor and scholar in residence at Houston Baptist University and editor at large of the Pearcey Report. Her earlier books include The Soul of ScienceSaving Leonardo,Finding Truth, and two ECPA Gold Medallion Award Winners: Total Truth and (coauthored with Harold Fickett and Chuck Colson) How Now Shall We Live? Hailed in The Economist as “America’s pre-eminent evangelical Protestant female intellectual,” Pearcey has spoken at universities such as Princeton, Stanford, USC, and Dartmouth.

I hope you’ll be listening to this show and I hope this is a book you’ll also want to get your hands on. Pearcey gives some powerful arguments that will help with debates you get into concerning homosexuality, transgenderism, abortion, and pre-marital sex. Not only that, she often writes with a pastoral heart on the need for compassion for people struggling with many of these areas. Please be watching and please also consider going on iTunes and leaving behind a positive review of the Deeper Waters Podcast. It’s always good to know that you are enjoying the show.

In Christ,
Nick Peters