The Search Begins

What can wisdom do for you? Let’s plunge into the Deeper Waters and find out.

The Teacher decides he is going to begin the quest for meaning. I do call him the Teacher in this and if you’re wondering why, it’s because while I do hold to Solomonic authorship, my arguments do not depend on the Teacher being Solomon. That is my position, but if I found incontrovertible proof that this was someone just impersonating Solomon, I would not have to revise my understanding of the book.

The Teacher does say that the business man has been given is unhappy. No beating around the bush again. Not only that, but he attributes this to God. God has given something to man that is sad. Man has a desire to find meaning in the world. Man has a desire to make sense of it all. We are not all philosophers, but all of us to some extent have this desire in us.

If something is crooked, it cannot be made straight and something lacking cannot be counted. This points to a futility then in the search of sorts. If God has done this, we cannot undo it. If God has given us a desire to find order in the world, we cannot shut that off. If God has given us a desire to find meaning in life, we cannot shut that off. Some people do think life is meaningless, but that does not mean that they want it to be. There is a difference between wanting life to be meaningless and concluding, even wrongly, that life is meaningless.

In a statement that is definitely reflective of Solomon, the Teacher says he has acquired wisdom and knowledge beyond any who came before him. If the Teacher cannot figure out the answer to this question, then who can? The Teacher has said he is not going to hold anything back in his quest. He wants to know what makes a life worthwhile.

In the end of this section, he makes a negative statement about wisdom. Today, we would describe it as saying “ignorance is bliss.” There is a reason we often protect children from some realities of the adult world as they grow up and let them experience them gradually. It is because of the perceived innocence of children that we don’t want their childhoods destroyed by painful realities. We treat it as something unnatural when a child comes to know the nature of death all too soon.

Many of us who have knowledge do enjoy what we have, but at times, it can also be painful. Sometimes to have good theology can produce pain. Consider how C.S. Lewis once said his fear was not that God did not exist. It was “Yes. He does exist, and this is what He is really like!” Of course, there is some false information in that, but the knowledge that God exists doesn’t always bring joy. Sometimes it brings fear and sorrow. Sometimes knowing God is good is painful when one realizes what is being allowed and one cannot make sense of it.

But the Teacher will try.

Next week, we’ll really get into his searching.

In Christ,
Nick Peters
(And I affirm the virgin birth)

Under the Sun

What does this mean? Let’s plunge into the Deeper Waters and find out.

A large portion of my research was devoted to understanding the phrase “under the sun” which only shows up in Ecclesiastes. The term shows up several times in Ecclesiastes. Goldingay sees it referring to this sphere of life and what people can know from an earthly perspective.[1] Miller says it refers to “existence in this world in contrast to the realm of God (heaven) and the realm of the dead (Sheol).[2] Perry relates it to “this mortal world.”[3] It occurs twenty-nine times in twenty-seven verses, first appearing in 1:3 right after saying “everything is meaningless.” The Teacher asks what profit does a man’s toil provide under the sun. Garrett says about this passage that “The phrase “under the sun” is comparable to “under heaven” in Exod 17:14; Deut 7:24; 9:14 and refers to this world. The phrase is also found in Elamite and Phoenician inscriptions. After a life of hard labor, no one can show a net gain; everything one has is vapid.”[4] The idea entails that men can work hard all their life and, in the end, it profits them nothing. They die anyway.

In essence, we could say that the Teacher is setting the scene here. This will also take more precedence when we get to chapter 2 and I point to a further tie-in to Genesis. At this point, the Teacher is taking his wisdom and applying it to the world around him. What does he find that is worthwhile to do in this life?

In a sense, the Teacher could be doing a reductio ad absurdum. He could be saying “Let’s suppose that we have wisdom, but all we have is this world. Where does that get us?” It would be amusing to see what he would say to atheists today. If he saw one of those bus campaign slogans saying something like “There probably is no God so just go on and enjoy your life”, would he roll his eyes or be angry or just cry in sorrow at what he saw? He could just as easily ask “Why?” After all, if this life is all that we have, what’s the point? Why should I enjoy it? How can I enjoy it?

I suspect it would be more like the ending response because the Teacher does not really hold back on anything. He has the guts to follow through his conclusions where they lead. However, in all of this, his questions are not about the existence of God. He is still a faithful Israelite. His questions are about the meaning of life for man. His questions are asking what it is that a man desires in life and why does he desire this? If he gets what he desires, will he be happy?

If he isn’t, well tough luck. That’s the way it is. The Teacher will not sugarcoat the truth.

So let’s keep going tomorrow to see what his investigation gets us.

[1] Ibid. 115-116.

[2] Douglas B. Miller, Ecclesiastes (Scottdale, PA: Herald Press, 2010), 43.

[3] T. Anthony Perry, Dialogues with Koholet: The Book of Ecclesiastes (University Park, Pennsylvania: Pennsylvania State University Press, 1993), 57

[4] Duane A. Garrett, Proverbs, Ecclesiastes, Song of Songs (vol. 14; The New American Commentary; Nashville: Broadman & Holman Publishers, 1993), 284.

What’s New?

Is there anything new under the sun? Let’s plunge into the Deeper Waters and find out.

Ecclesiastes starts in a way that seems strange to us, beyond the meaningless aspect. Let’s see what the Teacher says next.

What does man gain by all the toil
at which he toils under the sun?
4 A generation goes, and a generation comes,
but the earth remains forever.
5 The sun rises, and the sun goes down,
and hastens to the place where it rises.
6 The wind blows to the south
and goes around to the north;
around and around goes the wind,
and on its circuits the wind returns.
7 All streams run to the sea,
but the sea is not full;
to the place where the streams flow,
there they flow again.
8 All things are full of weariness;
a man cannot utter it;
the eye is not satisfied with seeing,
nor the ear filled with hearing.
9 What has been is what will be,
and what has been done is what will be done,
and there is nothing new under the sun.
10 Is there a thing of which it is said,
“See, this is new”?
It has been already
in the ages before us.
11 There is no remembrance of former things,
nor will there be any remembrance
of later things yet to be
among those who come after.

Some readers might be confused wondering “How can the Teacher say there is nothing new under the sun?” We especially wonder about this. After all, we live in an age of invention where there is something new practically every time you turn around. We do things today that if science fiction had existed in the Biblical times would have been considered such. We do some things that were considered science fiction in the 20th century.

The Teacher says that the work a man does is useless. Why? We will see more on this as we go along. However, to answer the question about anything new, the Teacher is talking about nature. He describes the way of what we call science today on how the sun rises and sets, the wind blows, and the rivers flow. Such happened thousands of years ago and unless Christ returns, they will do so one thousand years from now as well. Science itself depends on the regularity.

And as for generations, we can say that yes, we have history, but so did they and how many people today do not know their history? In my Dad’s age, the Beatles were the big phenomenon, yet just recently I had someone tell me they did not know who they were until high school. If we do not know the popular history, how much more do we not know the real significant history? When you read something like the Federalist Papers, our founders put us to shame. They knew about ancient Greek and Roman battles and people and events. They assumed we do as well.

We don’t.

In a sense, the Teacher says we have the whole same-old, same-old going on. A man can do something great and then be forgotten about by the next generation.

Consider the poem, Ozymandius:

I met a traveller from an antique land,
Who said—“Two vast and trunkless legs of stone
Stand in the desert. . . . Near them, on the sand,
Half sunk a shattered visage lies, whose frown,
And wrinkled lip, and sneer of cold command,
Tell that its sculptor well those passions read
Which yet survive, stamped on these lifeless things,
The hand that mocked them, and the heart that fed;
And on the pedestal, these words appear:
My name is Ozymandias, King of Kings;
Look on my Works, ye Mighty, and despair!
Nothing beside remains. Round the decay
Of that colossal Wreck, boundless and bare
The lone and level sands stretch far away.”
In his day, this king was no doubt, big stuff. He had a statue dedicated to him and called on people around him to look at all he had done. Look and see how small and petty you are! Look and shrink back in awe. You are not worthy to be in the presence of the great king Ozymandius!
Except all that is around him now is ruins. Instead of looking with awe, now we look with pity. If you are thinking “I have never heard of this”, then the case is made. The statue depicts Ramesses II. Don’t know who that is? Again, point made.
Will the internet change this? Probably not. For those of us who care about information, we have found an invaluable resource. For others, the internet has not increased knowledge so much as ignorance. Now people can read something online rejected by the best experts across the board in the field and think they are on the cutting edge of knowledge. (Think Jesus mythicism)
Perhaps the Teacher is right in that sense. Nothing has changed.
But next time, the Teacher himself will enter the investigation.
In Christ,
Nick Peters
(And I affirm the virgin birth)

 

Meaningless!

What does the Teacher mean? Let’s plunge into the Deeper Waters and find out.

So you are hypothetically going through the Bible for the first time. You have never read it all before and you are going through the Wisdom books. Job started you off introducing you to the main character. That makes sense. You start off Psalm 1:1 and read:

Blessed is the man
who walks not in the counsel of the wicked,
nor stands in the way of sinners,
nor sits in the seat of scoffers;

That’s a good start to a book about worship and introduced you to the book as a whole. Proverbs 1:1 is just an introduction, but the next few verses spell it out for you.

The proverbs of Solomon, son of David, king of Israel:

2 To know wisdom and instruction,
to understand words of insight,
3 to receive instruction in wise dealing,
in righteousness, justice, and equity;
4 to give prudence to the simple,
knowledge and discretion to the youth—
5 Let the wise hear and increase in learning,
and the one who understands obtain guidance,
6 to understand a proverb and a saying,
the words of the wise and their riddles.

7 The fear of the Lord is the beginning of knowledge;
fools despise wisdom and instruction.

Makes sense. After reading about the woman of great character, you’re eager to see how wisdom continues. How will the next book, the book of Ecclesiastes start off?

Well, the first verse is an introduction. Okay. Let’s see what the next one says!

Vanity of vanities, says the Preacher,
vanity of vanities! All is vanity.

Um. Is this the Bible? Surely this is the start of a story where we’re going to see the opposite. Right?

Unfortunately for you, no. As you go through the book, you wonder if this could be the most dismal book you have ever read. Why is this in the Bible? Not only that, it started off saying everything is meaningless! What’s going on?!

(FYI, a lot of material in this series will be pulled from what I have written for class from here out so you’ve been warned.)

The word for meaningless is hebel. הֶבֶל (1:2) Bartholomew says this has been given a variety of interpretations such as “meaningless,” “useless,” “absurd,” “futility,” “bubble,” “trace,” “transience,” and “breath.”[1] Enns prefers to read it as “absurd.”[2] Goldingay sees a parallel between the life of man, Adam אָדָם, and then the word hebel, seeing it as the name of Adam’s son, Abel. He sees an opening with Genesis and that Adam appears more frequently here than anywhere else in the Old Testament.[3] Goldingay views the life of Abel as a mere breath that shows up and disappears just as quickly.

The idea brings to mind futility ultimately. However you want to interpret it, it is not a pretty picture. The Teacher, as I will call him, is looking at reality and saying “What is the point of anything here?” We will expound on the next few verses soon, but notice that there is no remedy being given in this blog? I’m not at all saying the Teacher is right, but I am also at this point not saying he is wrong. As we go through, I hope to give more explanation to what he’s saying and why he’s saying it and how it fits with the whole of the biblical narrative.

I hope you’ll join me.

In Christ,
Nick Peters
(And I affirm the virgin birth)

[1] Craig Bartholomew, Ecclesiastes (Grand Rapids, Michigan: Baker Academic, 2009), 105.

[2] Peter Enns, Ecclesiastes (Grand Rapids, Michigan: Eerdmans, 2011), 31.

[3] John Goldingay, Ecclesiastes (Eugene, Oregon: Wipf And Stock, 2021), 113.

 

Exploring Ecclesiastes Introduction

What is going on in this book? Let’s plunge into the Deeper Waters and find out.

Since I have spent this semester doing a research paper on Ecclesiastes, I figured as I am in the final weeks of a rewrite of my paper, I could share with you all the fruits of my labor. I had never engaged in an in-depth study of this book in any way before, and I really found it fascinating. There is so much that is debated about this book and yet, at the same time it seemed remarkably contemporary to me.

In this also, I am not going to answer questions about authorship and date of writing, though I do hold to Solomonic authorship. That does provide some interesting thoughts on the text at times, but that does not affect the overall exegesis of the text. My interpretation will remain the same, but I could say at certain points that this brings a remarkable facet to the text if Solomon is the actual author.

As of now, my thinking is that the Teacher, as I will call him in this work, is giving a sort of reductio ad absurdum of life. He is saying that if all we have is wisdom alone in this world, what can we expect? I will also be making a case that the Teacher longs for Eden. I was quite surprised to see just how much this book interacts with Genesis.

This book speaks often about evil, but it does not do so in an attempt to make arguments for or against theism. It is taking a hard cold look at the world and realizing the truth. This world is messed up. There are realities in this world that do not make sense.

Despite this, the Teacher generally does not attempt to explain all of this. He goes through the book asking the question of what makes a life worthwhile. Where can meaning be found “under the sun”? (A term that we will be looking at as we go through the book.) Going through the book can leave one thinking that everything is hopeless, but is it?

Also, how does this fit in with the Wisdom tradition? It’s placed in our Bibles between Proverbs and the Song of Songs so it does fall under the rubric of Wisdom literature. How? Wisdom is usually seen as the path of joy, but in Ecclesiastes, it looks like we are on the path of pain.

Finally, how does the book fit in with the grand narrative of Scripture? I suspect that that will not be answered until we get to the very end. We need to face what the Teacher is saying head-on. If we dilute everything early on by bringing in the New Testament, then we are like people interrupting a story saying “Don’t worry. The hero fixes everything.” We need to face the pain.

So join me as hopefully tomorrow, Lord willing, I will begin looking at this amazing book. I hope it will also give you insights into it and why we have it in our Bibles and how it can affect your life. For me ultimately, i have found it to have a highly positive effect on me and I plan to explain that as we go through.

In Christ,
Nick Peters
(And I affirm the virgin birth)

Book Plunge: The Bible and the Ballot Chapter 13

Can’t we all just get along? Let’s plunge into the Deeper Waters and find out.

The time has come to wrap up this book looking at the topic of racism. As I write this, right now in America there have been two fundraisers recently. One involves a black boy who killed a white boy saying it was self-defense. Another involves a woman who was threatened to be cancelled because she used a racial slur. Now I happen to think both people did something wrong, but they do show where we are at. Some are donating to both sides because of the race of the person.

So biblically, there is a lot I agree with Longman on.  I do agree that there is one race, the human race. I do agree we are all descendants of Adam. I do agree that we are all sinners and we all need redemption in Jesus.

I also agree on bad arguments such as the mark of Cain and the curse of Ham. Unfortunately, once again, while I agree with Longman on what Scripture says so much, when we come to application, it is a different matter.

First off, he speaks about affirmative action. Could it be right to punish one people group for what their ancestors did by giving preferences in affirmative action? Longman argues, yes.

His argument looks at the figures of Daniel and Ezra. Both of these people are righteous in the Old Testament. Yet when they pray, they repent of the sins the community did as if they themselves did them. They were suffering for the sins of the people before them.

Well first off, this was a punishment done by God. It doesn’t mean we can do the same thing.

Second, the society of the past was much more community oriented. If anything, affirmative action breaks the community by putting one race in the community against another and favoring one race over another. Perhaps Longman should have considered a parallel in Acts 6, such as Hebrew widows getting more support than the Hellenistic ones.

Third, is the program even helping? How long should it be in place? All of these are questions we should be asking. We can ask if minorities are getting into jobs and getting into schools, but what does it matter if they get a job if they are not capable of it? What does it matter if they get into a school if they don’t graduate? I am not saying all are like that, but these are questions Thomas Sowell also asks.

As for reparations, the same applies. How much is owed to a person? Who owes it? Technically, everyone alive is likely descended from someone who was a slave and someone who was a slave owner. That’s because slavery was a worldwide system and all races enslaved any other race they could, even their own. This also will not heal any divide. It will instead make it worse.

In the end, Longman’s book shows me he should really stick with Scripture. If he had just said this is what the Bible says and think about it as you vote, that would have been a whole lot better. Instead, when he gets to application, I see it as apparent he sticks with one side only and doesn’t understand the nuances of the positions he takes.

Next time, we start something new.

In Christ,
Nick Peters
(And I affirm the virgin birth)

Book Plunge: The Bible and the Ballot Chapter 12

How do we help the poor? Let’s plunge into the Deeper Waters and find out.

There is an increasing refrain in these later chapters where I largely agree with Longman’s exegesis of the text. Instead, I disagree when we get to the application. Once again, the same has happened here. I do fully agree that there is a mandate to help the poor in Scripture. I do agree that there are times someone is poor not because of laziness, but because of tragedy or injustice.

I also do agree that the prosperity gospel should be thoroughly condemned. Jesus is not meant to serve you on the path to riches. I do not think that being wealthy means being an evil man. You can be a devout Christian and be extremely wealthy.

Also, in case anyone asks, no. I am not one of those rich people. I make minimum wage and I don’t want to see minimum wage go up. I personally would like to see it abolished. I simply try to watch my spending and I have a Patreon. You can donate to that here. For now, let’s get back to Longman.

I am pleased to see that Longman acknowledges that capitalism has brought many nations out of poverty. He is quite correct on that one. However, he does say the Bible could be used to support both socialism and capitalism. I do not see how it could be used for both without being contradictory. Both systems are opposed and how could Scripture consistently teach two systems that oppose one another? He does say both socialism and capitalism could help people thrive and are both subject to corruption. Unfortunately, he shows us no examples of these places where socialism produces a thriving populace. I do agree that both are subject to corruption, but the difference is capitalism is the free exchange of goods without force, theft, or fraud. As soon as you change that, it’s not capitalism anymore.

He does say a book could be written on the topic, but it already has. Consider E. Calvin Beisner’s book Prosperity and Poverty. I also recommend reading Thomas Sowell’s books.

He also says some people think government should not be in the charity business. I’m one of them, and for the reason that he gives, because I think the church should be doing it. He says that the problem is that the church isn’t. Indeed, if the government keeps doing it, what reason does the church have to step up? Unfortunately, all of this creates government dependence. When I see someone say “If we shut down government program XYZ, what will happen to all these people in need?” My thinking is “Don’t you think it’s a problem that they’re that dependent on the government anyway?”

Also Longman, yes, the government is inefficient. We have an organization that is $36 trillion in debt and you want to tell me I should trust that organization to help the poor? Do I agree the church needs to step up its game? 100%.

Finally, I should say something about how this goes when I talk with people of a left-leaning persuasion.

Me: I think we should help the poor.

Leftist: Great! Here’s a program that we think will help the poor.

Me: I don’t think that will work.

Leftist: So you don’t really want to help the poor?

Saying you want to help the poor doesn’t mean that you agree with every way to help the poor. An excellent read on this is When Helping Hurts. Our government has declared war on poverty, drugs, and terror. How many of those have we eliminated? People can have really good intentions for when they want to help out the poor, but good intentions do not equal good results. They’re not all about helping the poor, but for examples of this, see Reason TV’s Great Moments in Unintended Consequences.

Reality determines if your method works. Your intentions don’t.

Next time, we will wrap up with discussing racism.

In Christ,
Nick Peters
(And I affirm the virgin birth)

 

Book Plunge: The Bible and the Ballot Chapter 11

What should we do about the environment? Let’s plunge into the Deeper Waters and find out.

Something I note about Longman’s book is that many times, I don’t disagree with what he says, until he gets outside of the area of Old Testament studies and gets into personal application. Here, he normally does not look at both sides of the matter and speaks on topics he is not informed on. If he wanted to write on the subject, he would have been far better presenting just what the Bible says or when looking at the issues in application saying something like “Some people think X and here’s why, and others think Y and here’s why.”

So it should not be a shock that when we get to an end of a chapter on the environment, what is brought up is climate change. Longman brings up that this is the settled science so we should accept it. Sorry, but after Covid, many of us are not so quick to accept the “accepted science.”

For instance, here is the settled science from 1978:

Now let us suppose that in that time we had said, “Dang! We have to stop this! We have to take steps to heat the Earth!” Where exactly would we be now if we had done that according to the climate change alarmists? At this rate, we would be well underwater due to the ice caps melting and everything else.

But this was the settled science.

When Covid came, we were being given all these alarmist policies and told about how many people would die if we didn’t do this. Now we look back and many people now see what those of us who actually thought about the data then saw, that this was not the case. The precautions we took were highly unnecessary. I realize this is anecdotal, but I went about my business as usual, only wore a mask when I had to do my job, and never got a vaccine.

I have also never had Covid to this day.

Also, color us suspicious when every time that there is a “crisis” the solution is always along the lines of “government intervention” which usually leads to communism or socialism. Generally, I have made it a policy to not take national “panics” seriously. So far, this has worked well in my life.

Longman didn’t go to a site ever like the Cornwall Alliance for the Stewardship of Creation. I find this strange since if one is an evangelical writing for an evangelical audience, you would think that you would, I don’t know, go to an evangelical environmental association. Could it be he just doesn’t want to hear the other side?

He also brings up the argument of religion vs science, but notice that in all of what I said above about climate change, I did not make it a point about religion. It is not religion vs science, but scientific models vs other scientific models. To bring up the argument of religion vs science in the climate change debate is a red herring.

So in the end, I still say what I said at the beginning. I wish that Longman had largely just provided the biblical data and then if he had to go with application, at least give both sides of the issue.

Next time, we’ll talk about poverty.

In Christ,
Nick Peters
(And I affirm the virgin birth)

Book Plunge: The Bible and the Ballot Chapter 10

Should we redefine marriage? Let’s plunge into the Deeper Waters and find out.

At the start, it looks like there’s not a lot to disagree with. To his credit, Longman does agree that the desire to redefine marriage in the church even is something new. The Bible speaks about flourishing sexual relationships, but those are only heterosexual ones, and only in a certain context, between a husband and a wife.

So let’s go to the end where we do find disagreement. Should Christians try to seek to have the Supreme Court ruling on redefining marriage overturned? (I will not use the term “same-sex marriage” because that is as meaningful as talking about a square circle.) Longman doesn’t address that directly, but he does say some things that are concerning.

Rightly, he says we should not be anxious when the world does not go the way Christians prefer. The world will be the world. With this, I am in complete agreement. I understand that this is difficult and yes, I do struggle at times with this as well. That being said, this is our Father’s world and He will have the final say. Psalm 2 reminds us that the one who sits enthroned in Heaven laughs at the plans the wicked make.

He then says the church should not try to impose its sexual ethic on the world and this is where we start having problems. For one, what is imposing? If I go and vote according to my Christian principles? Am I imposing? If so, then why did he even write this book? Why write a book on how Christians should think on political issues if we are not to act at all on these political issues?

If it is not imposing, then there is not a problem. A worldview is going to be enforced one way or another. If Longman thinks all Christians have is the Bible, then I see his cause for concern, but Christians also have natural law thinking. It is not as if Christians just arbitrarily say “Scripture says it and there’s no other reason for it so we go along with it.” I am not saying that would be bad, but I am saying we do have more and Longman needs to acknowledge that. Most any book on Christian ethics would have helped him out in this case.

He does say Christians aren’t arguing for laws against adultery, but an important difference between that and the redefining marriage laws is that government can take one of three positions on actions. They can prohibit, permit, or promote. Now I would not object to a prohibition on adultery, but until that happens, the state simply permits it. If it were to promote adultery, that would be another matter. However, in a way, they are, because they are not only permitting the redefinition of marriage, but promoting it, and giving it the power of the State such as if you want to support a realist position on Christian ethics, you are going against the State. Redefining marriage gives more power to the State.

If the State promotes something, then that means it gets some benefit out of it. What is the benefit in this case? How is the State helped by having a registry of people of the same-sex being together who are incapable of producing children on their own for society? This lowers marriage down to just friends with benefits.

Longman would have been better served by reading material by the other side on natural law thinking and ethics. He should listen to his sparring partner Robert Gagnon. He should also consider a group like the Ruth Institute.

In Christ,
Nick Peters
(And I affirm the virgin birth)

Book Plunge: The Bible and the Ballot Chapter 9

Should we build the wall? Let’s plunge into the Deeper Waters and find out.

Friday was about abortion. Today, it’s immigration. I told you it would be fiery topics from here on.

Longman brings up several examples of people being wanderers as he calls them, including Abraham and Moses. That part is not so controversial. He also talks about laws to care for the foreigners among other groups in Israel and to make sure that they get justice.

So let’s get to something more interesting. Foreigners were expected to observe the Sabbath. Keep in mind, the Sabbath was a law that breaking it was possibly a capital offense. Thus, when a foreigner came in, they were expected to also abide by those laws.

The unstated assumption of a foreigner seeking a refuge in Israel would be that he would, even if he didn’t embrace YHWH, heed the laws of the new country and adapt to their way of life. It would be unheard of to have a foreigner come to Israel and set up “Alexander’s Idol Shop” in the kingdom’s center. This is something we need to keep in mind in our American context today.

Unfortunately, when he gets there, Longman has nothing to say about our nation’s laws and how immigration should be done. For instance, can people come here seeking asylum? Yes, but when you are asylum seeking, you are to declare that in the first safe country you come to, which in many cases would be Mexico. You don’t just declare asylum when you get to where you want to go.

Second, those seeking asylum are to do so through valid ports of entry.  Most major cities have one in or near them. These are called airports. There are other obvious ones like Ellis Island and there are checkpoints on our norther and southern borders for immigrants to come through.

If you come into a country illegally, you are already disrespecting the country you are wanting to come into. Not only that, there are several people who spend time seeking to get into the country the legal way. Rewards people who come in illegally encourages the wrong behavior and disincentivizes the right behavior. Most Americans have no problem with immigration. They just want it to be done legally.

Longman also comes out in favor of sanctuary cities, but in the Bible, those were set up for people who did not intentionally commit a crime. Sanctuary cities today are for people who DO intentionally commit crimes. Longman thinks the Christians should show compassion for those who come here illegally, but why? If they commit crimes to get here, why should I reward that?

What about the part about separating families? Happens every day in America even to citizens of our country. It’s called jail. (It’s also called divorce, sadly) Suppose a father goes to jail. We don’t lock his kid in there with him. If a drunk driver gets pulled over and the kid is in the backseat, the family is getting separated.

Longman needs to show me why it should be different in this case.

Unfortunately, it looks like Longman is supporting that we encourage behavior that is illegal and I argue immoral in the name of compassion. Such compassion is not compassion to all the people who work to come here legally. Longman says we can’t let everyone come into our country rightly, but why should we reward those who cheated to get in?

No answer from him. Again, Longman seems to make a mistake of not looking at the legal issues here in our own country and does not study the laws surrounding immigration.

Next time, we’ll cover what Longman calls “Same-sex marriage”, which I argue makes as much sense as a square circle.

In Christ,
Nick Peters
(And I affirm the virgin birth)