Month: February 2013

The Future of Biblical Scholarship

What is in store for the future of biblical scholarship? Let’s talk about it on Deeper Waters.

I do a lot of debating and the idea amongst atheists is that Christians don’t do real research. They want to defend their pet doctrines. They presuppose everything beforehand and never really examine the case. All that matters is “God said it” and then we’re done.

The controversy involving what happened with Mike Licona back in 2011 was a great example of this and a huge embarrassment to the Christian church and evangelicalism. Instead of going out and dealing with the interpretation of Licona, if it was found to be false, the bullets started firing immediately crying “Heretic!” with an Inquisition squad ready to come out.

So let’s get this straight. We have what has been the most in-depth defense of the resurrection of Jesus meant to silence skeptics and we’re going to go against it because it went against a secondary doctrine of Inerrancy supposedly? We are going to implicitly say that Inerrancy is more important than the resurrection? Are our priorities out of whack?

In fact, the book didn’t even call Inerrancy into question. By that standard, any time Licona said an event is “Highly probable” or something of that sort, we should have raised the alarm. After all, how could an event be “probable.”? It’s part of the “Word of God.”

What Licona did was he met the skeptics on their own turf and he fired a massive attack into their camp. What was the evangelical response? Ditch him. Leave him there. Of course, this isn’t true of all evangelicals. There were a number of scholars in the field who sided with Licona.

Friends. Let’s suppose a work came out like this that explicitly denied Inerrancy. I still say we should celebrate it. Why? Because this was a case of trying to prove the most important point of Christianity. As Michael Patton said, there should have been twenty letters of commendation before there was one of condemnation.

Historically, Gary Habermas has been the #1 name in the field of resurrection stories. Licona has been his main student. What are we to do now with him? Because he has not interpreted everything the way some people want it to be interpreted, do away with him. Licona does believe in Inerrancy, but keep in mind we are not trying to convert people to Inerrancy. We are trying to make them disciples of Jesus. I’m fine with someone coming to say “Jesus is risen!” if they’re not quite willing to sign the line on Inerrancy. If you’re not, you’ve got a serious problem.

Licona talks about teaching a seminary class in the article (Link below) and having a student with tears in her eyes crying about contradictions she thought existed. Let’s start with a simple question.

Let us suppose that beyond the shadow of a doubt a contradiction was proven in Scripture. This is purely hypothetical. I don’t think it has, but let’s suppose it was.

What would that do to your Christianity?

If you’re one of those Christians who says “My faith would be shattered immediately and Jesus would not have risen from the dead” you have a problem.

Many of us would say “Well I’d have to adjust my view of Scripture and of inspiration, but I’d still have the resurrection.”

You know why? Because we think the resurrection can be established historically if you treat the Bible just like any other ancient document. If you have to treat it with kid gloves, then you’re not really playing fair. You’re doing special pleading.

If you don’t think the resurrection can be shown to be a fact that way, then might I suggest that you could have a more fideistic approach?

It’s a shame this was happening in a Seminary class also.

Licona goes on in the article to describe how he went to the gospels and compared what he saw to Plutarch since the gospels are considered by NT scholars to be ancient biographies.

A lot of stink has been raised over this. For the sake of argument, let’s suppose that it’s wrong that the gospels are Greco-Roman biographies. I think they are, but let’s suppose it’s wrong.

Here’s the reply. So what?

So what? What are you talking about?

What I mean is, you can take what your opponents will likely accept from critical scholarship, say Bart Ehrman for instance, and have it be that you can assume they are Greco-Roman biographies and then still say “Here’s how Greco-Roman biographies work. The gospels do the exact same thing. Why is that a problem?”

This is exactly what I do as a non-scientist. I am not qualified to discuss evolution, so I will grant it for the sake of argument. Why? My opponents do accept it by and large. Therefore, I can meet them on their own grounds and ask “How does this show that Jesus did not rise from the dead?”

Why do I do this? I do it because I want to convince my opponents of one thing. I want to convince them Jesus rose from the dead. They might disagree with me on Inerrancy. That’s fine. They might have different views on creation. That’s fine. They might have different hermeneutics than I do. That’s fine.

Getting them to know Jesus is risen is central.

Instead, we’ve had this whole tirade against the gospels being Greco-Roman biographies.

Consider what someone like Al Mohler said according to the article.

“First, we cannot reduce the Gospels to the status of nothing more than ancient biographies. The Bible claims to be inspired by the Holy Spirit right down to the inspired words,”

When did Licona say the gospels were just ancient biographies? Nowhere that I know of. He said they were biographies. That’d be like saying we can’t say the Epistles of Paul are epistles because they cannot be “just epistles.” To say they are Greco-Roman biographies is not to say necessarily that they are just that.

Second, down to the inspired words?

In Matthew 3:17, we read these words at the baptism of Jesus.

“This is my Son, whom I love; with him I am well pleased.”

Mark 1:11 says this:

“You are my Son, whom I love; with you I am well pleased.”

Luke 3:22 also says this:

“You are my Son, whom I love; with you I am well pleased.”

Luke and Mark disagree, but Matthew is different. Matthew has the voice speaking for the crowd. Mark and Luke have the voice speaking to Jesus? Which is it? Let’s suppose it was even the crazy idea of a work like the Jesus Crisis which has such ideas as the sermon on the mount being said twice with different tenses. Let’s suppose the voice said the first to the crowd and then the second to Jesus. (Because apparently, one voice was not enough for everyone to grasp.) You still have the problem of why would someone just leave out some of the words of God speaking?

If there is paraphrasing going on, then are we saying the very words of God were paraphrased? They might not have been quoted word for word?

Let’s consider another example. How about Peter’s confession of faith?

Matthew 16:16

“You are the Messiah, the Son of the living God.”

Mark 8:29

“You are the Messiah.”

Luke 9:20

“God’s Messiah.”

Again, there are differences. Mark and Luke are closer. Matthew agrees with the Messianic motif, but adds in that Jesus is the Son of the Living God. Isn’t that something important to include?

One more example. At the Transfiguration, what did God say?

Matthew 17:5

“This is my Son, whom I love; with him I am well pleased. Listen to him!”

Mark 9:7

“This is my Son, whom I love. Listen to him!”

Luke 9:35

“This is my Son, whom I have chosen; listen to him.”

Each of these are different, and these are the words of God!

Now someone might say “Nick. Look. Each of these is pretty similar to each other. The wording may not be the same, but the thrust of the message is the same.”

Exactly.

Mohler is putting on the text a modern category of exact wordage. The ancients would not have cared about that. For a modern look, I had a conversation with a Jehovah’s Witness today. I called some family members saying “I said X, she said Y, I replied with Z, etc.” Chances are, when I told that story, I did not get the exact wording right. That’s okay. I did not tell it the same way every time. That’s okay. I don’t know anyone who would say I was lying about the story or misrepresenting it. Even today, we know that the gist is what matters.

This would also be true for the Sermon on the Mount. Why assume Jesus gave a great sermon like that only once? If you’re a speaker, like I am, you know that you give the same talk many times in different places. You can also vary it some depending on your audience. In fact, it’s quite likely a lot was left out of this sermon. Why? The whole thing can be read in about fifteen minutes! Most speakers in the past spoke a lot longer than that! Heck. If that’s all it takes, Peter’s sermon in Acts 2 that leads to 3,000 conversions can be read in about a minute or two. How many of you would like to speak for that long and get that response?

The Bible is only interested in the main gist of the message getting out. We today can do this. We can summarize a talk by talking about the main points without saying every word the speaker said.

Thus, Mohler in doing this is expecting the Bible to read like a modern document. It’s not going to. The Bible needs to be treated by the standards of its own time and not the standards of our time. This even includes the idea about interpreting it according to “plain” language. Plain to who? Why plain to a 21st century American? Maybe it’s different for a 16th century Chines man, or a 14th century Japanese man, or a 12th century Frenchman, or a 9th century Englishman, or a 1st century Jew.

Some might think it’s cultural prejudice to give the 1st century Jewish standard the main role in interpretation.

No. It’s not. It’s just smart thinking. It’s a 1st century Jewish document. Shouldn’t we expect it to read like one?

Mohler is not done. He goes on to say:

“The second problem is isolating the resurrection of Christ from all of the other truth claims revealed in the Bible. The resurrection is central, essential and non-negotiable, but the Christian faith rests on a comprehensive set of truth claims and doctrines,” Mohler said. “All of these are revealed in the Bible, and without the Bible we have no access to them.”

If the resurrection is central, essential, and non-negotiable, haven’t we already isolated it? It is in a category all itself. The reality is the resurrection is different from the other claims. Let’s demonstrate this.

We can have Mohler make a historical case for the turning of water into wine without just “The Bible says so.”

Then we can have him make one for Jesus rising from the dead the same way.

Which one will have more evidence. Which one will have more impact? Which one will change Christianity the most if it was found to be false?

It looks like Mohler is really afraid to put the Bible to historical investigation, but why should we think this? If someone is convinced Scripture is from God Himself, then one should say “Go ahead. Hit it with your best shot.” If we are not willing to do that, then we are not really treating it like a trustworthy text. It’s easy to say the Bible cannot be attacked if you remove it from all threats.

On top of this, Licona is doing his work to deal with supposed contradictions in the Bible and see if he can find some answers. How is it undermining the Bible if you seek to explain why the Bible is the way it is? If you’re going out to defend the idea that the Bible is without error, how can you be attacking it?

Next we have words from Jim Richards of the Southern Baptists of Texas Convention.

“Although the Southern Baptists of Texas Convention has enjoyed a ministry relationship with Houston Baptist University for nearly 10 years, that relationship is not one whereby the convention participates in the governance of the university. Our relationship with HBU is based on a mutual affirmation of a high view of Scripture,” Richards said.

“The Southern Baptists of Texas Convention was formed on a commitment to biblical inerrancy, that the Bible is true in all that it asserts. Certainly, our churches, board and convention messengers expect our ministry relationships to be compatible with this core value. We will be in conversation with President Sloan regarding HBU’s response to Mike Licona’s comments bearing on the reliability of Scriptures,” Richards said.”

Once again, Licona has a high view of Scripture. He only differs on an interpretation. Note that Licona has never once said “I think the Bible contains errors” or “I think the Bible is wrong” or anything like that. He has repeatedly denied it, but for his opponents, it is not enough. What matters is what they want to see. For them, if he is not interpreting it the same way, then cast him to the lions!

May God richly bless Robert Sloan, president of HBU, for the following:

“Dr. Michael Licona is a very fine Christian. We trust completely his commitment to Scripture. There are those who disagree with his comments on what is a very difficult passage (Matthew 27:45-53, especially verses 52-53), but Mike Licona’s devotion to the Lord Jesus, his magisterial defense of the resurrection, his publicly and solemnly declared affirmation of the complete trustworthiness of Scripture and his worldwide efforts to win others to Christ give us full confidence in his work as a teacher, colleague and faculty member of Houston Baptist University,” Sloan said.”

Sloan has it right. He is being a fine academic and looking at the character of Licona and the quality of his work. Would that other people would take the same approach!

What does this have to do with the future of scholarship?

It appears an impasse is here. What are we to do? I have a strange idea with this.

Let’s be people that say “We will follow the evidence where it leads!” When we meet a contrary idea to our own, let’s examine the evidence. By all means, we have our presuppositions. Let’s be aware of those. Let’s do our best to put them to aside and study. We want atheists who are studying the text to do the same. If our presuppositions were right, great! If they were not, great! Why is that great? It’s because we’ve learned something that we would not have known. We have gained truth, and that is always to be preferred.

If people like Al Mohler have the day, we can expect scholarship will decrease. Already, I have seen some people who will be our future scholars say they want no part of groups like ETS to avoid being criticized for their work. They want academic freedom. Already, I have seen people saying that they do not want to defend Inerrancy because it has become too much of a sacred cow. Already, this controversy has been used by atheists, Muslims, and others to demonstrate Christians cannot get along with themselves.

With Inerrancy, I have seen people have their faith fall apart when all is based on this doctrine. I’m not saying it’s unimportant. I’m not saying it’s wrong. I’m just saying we don’t hang our hats on it. By all means, defend it. By all means, address contradictions. This is fine and good. Just remember the main point is Jesus is risen. There are times even I tell people that I don’t care if the gospels have some minor disagreements. Let’s deal with the central claim. We don’t get rid of other ancient sources because of minor disagreements. Why do so with Scripture?

It’s up to us to determine where we’ll go with scholarship in the future, but I hope we’ll hold to following the evidence where it leads realizing that if our beliefs are true, the evidence should show that.

In Christ,
Nick Peters

The Baptist Press article can be found here

How I Met My Princess

What is the story of the love the Princess and I share? Let’s talk about it on Deeper Waters.

For today’s entry, I’d really like to go personal and share the story of how my Princess and I came together, seeing as it is Valentine’s Day as I write this. The story starts in the year 2009. I believe it was August.

That day, I had got off of work at the Christian Research Institute and was heading back to the apartment where I lived with my roommate. Gary Habermas I had heard was teaching a week long module at SES where I was a student. Gary and I had talked a number of times since he’d spoken at the church there. I had always had a problem of being my own worst critic which I considered a symptom of emotional doubt. I wanted to know if he could help me with that. My friends who knew me before Allie can tell you that, yes, this was a HUGE problem for me.

So I stop by to see him and get there early. We meet in the lobby and he asks me if I know about Mike Licona’s daughter. I say no, but I’m intrigued already. He tells me about a hard time she’s going through and how he was talking to some fellow apologists about it and the topic came up of her having Asperger’s to which someone at the table said “Nick Peters has Asperger’s.”

Gary gave me her email and suggested I talk to her. At the start, neither one of us was looking for romance. She especially was not. In fact, she was hoping she could win back another guy at the time. Knowing what she was going through, I had decided to get her in touch with some older female friends of mine and Allie and I just kept chatting.

Except she started really developing a liking to me. Today, she’d say it was because I was like Christ to her. I was showing her great love and not getting upset with her about matters. It was something really unusual to her and she was thinking more and more about me.

I was starting to do the same.

And on Labor Day, we started going out.

It was a month later when I finally got the chance to drive down for the first meeting. We also had the first kiss, which was my first one as well. Our first date was to go to the Georgia Aquarium together. We even had a homeless person on the street ask us how long we’d been married on our first date!

There are pictures of me there touching some of the fish in the water which led one of our friends to say “That’s how I knew you two were going to work out. If she got you to touch something, it was good.” On the way back, we listened to music in the car together and I found she even liked my Final Fantasy music. It was just incredible.

That evening, we watched together at her parents’ house “Beauty and the Beast”. It was my first time to see that as well. Normally, Allie’s parents would have been nervous about her dating a much older guy, as I’m nearly ten years her senior, but her parents already knew about me. Mike had seen me at SES a number of times and liked me.

There is a funny story about Allie and I watching the movie together downstairs. Seeing as we were trusted, her parents gave us a wide range of freedom. That first night when we were watching the movie, her brother wanted to go downstairs by us to the kitchen to get something and her Mom said “Nick and Allie are downstairs on the couch right now and they’re cuddling. You might not want to go down there.” (By the way, for all concerned, Allie can assure anyone I was a gentleman the whole time. Cuddling was not anything inappropriate.)

We never saw her brother the whole night.

I honestly don’t remember much more of what happened that weekend, but I know she was depressed when I had to get back and get to work, and I was sad about it too. I’m sure I called her almost as soon as I got out of the driveway. I don’t remember if that’s when we first told each other we love each other or not.

I have been told that when I got back, my roommate told a mutual friend of ours that he might have to start looking for another place to live.

At the end of the month, Allie and I got together again. When we weren’t together, we were bombarding each other with IMs and emails. In fact, we would often have LOOOOOONG phone conversations at the end of the day, staying up past midnight. Could I tell you what we talked about in these conversations? Nope. Not a bit. Neither can she.

When we got together again, we were visiting my parents this time so Allie got to meet them and she got to meet my grandmother, who passed away about a year later. I have been told that when the time came for us to leave, that my mother wanted her good-bye hug. I told her I had to get Allie in the car first. She later called one of her friends just so sad about it to which she was told “Nick’s found someone special and you’re going to have to accept you’re no longer the #1 woman in his life.” Of course she did, but I understand it was hard.

Just so everyone knows, my parents are great parents. Both of them have done all that they can to help us out and we try to get together regularly. For instance, on Saturday nights, they like it if we come up and watch Huckabee with them. Some Saturday nights, I forget. Often times, my mother will help us with cooking and some household things, seeing as we’re not the best in that area. I say this because I want everyone to know that I greatly value my parents.

The next time we met was at the Apologetics Conference in November. Allie was there before I as she had to work that day. She tells me how she liked how then president of SES Alex McFarland had introduced her (Seeing as she was with her Dad) as “Nick Peters’s girlfriend.” She thought it was such a joy to for once not be introduced as Mike Licona’s daughter. My friends there were surprised that I only bought two books that year. Hey. I had more important money investments to make.

I remember waking up so excited the Saturday of the conference that I’d be with Allie again soon and after the conference, I was talking to the mother of some twins who were friends of mine and realized then, I would not find another girl like Allie who was so devoted to me and understood me so well and who I enjoyed being with. My decision was clear.

I also recall being at work and coming through a hall and hearing someone there talking about me. Apparently, someone had asked who I was with and I heard the person answering saying things like “Match made in Heaven.” “Wonderful couple.” “Great how God brings people together.” “Probably going to get married.”

He knew how true that was when I asked if he knew a good jeweler in the area.

In fact, my rooommate at the time messaged me at work one day saying he’d found someone who needed a roommate and he was going to take the chance and said “Besides, if I’m reading the tea leaves right, you won’t want me around much longer.” I told him if he was reading them right, he wouldn’t want to be around much longer.

I think he got a good inkling of where it was going when we went to the mall one day so he could get some jeans and I was checking out jewelry stores.

To which, I saw Allie around Thankgiving that year and her mother knew what I was planning. She gave me a stone to use in the engagement ring. It was a pink sapphire that was a family heirloom. I was quite secretive about this and especially with Allie. In fact, Allie and I went to the mall and went to some jewelry stores. While there, she wanted to try on rings “just because” and told me about the stone saying her Mom said I could use it, totally unaware I already had it. When we got back and her Mom asked how things went, Allie told her about the stores to which I said “Yeah. Allie said something about some sort of….pink sapphire…that I could use. Can I look at it later?”

Allie has definitely learned that I am incredibly sneaky.

The next month was December. I called her parents then as I was as traditional as I could be. I got them both on speaker and they hid themselves from Allie as much as possible. I told them I knew Allie and I hadn’t been dating for long, but I adored their daughter and I wanted to ask her to marry me and I wanted to get their blessing.

Guys. If at all possible, do this before you propose please.

As you can imagine, they happily gave it.

On Christmas Eve, Allie was flying in to the Charlotte airport. I got off work at Noon. I had the plan all worked out. I had been practicing what I would say and everything. Her flight was to arrive at 1:04. I got at the airport at Noon. Her flight actually got there early and I saw her at 12:49. I helped her get her bags and said I wanted to show her something before we left.

Outside of the airport, there’s a statue of Queen Charlotte who the city is named after. It’s a fountain statue with a star-shaped pool around it, and I took my Princess (As I call her) out there. While showing it to her, I was fumbling around in my pocket. I had the ring in the box and I wanted to make sure I didn’t open it the wrong way.

Okay. It’s right.

So I released the line I’d been preparing for.

“So Princess. Have you ever thought about being a queen?”

And she answered “Only if you’re the king.”

So I said “I guess you’ve made this easy for me.”

And her mouth opened in stunned silence as I got on my knee and opened up the box and said “Allie Licona. Will you marry me?”

And she said yes. We were both stunned.

Especially since my cell phone went off during my proposal.

Of course, I had ignored it, but now that she had the ring on, we decided to see who it was. I thought it was my Mom. She ALWAYS calls at the worst times.

Half right. I had the wrong Mom.

Allie’s Mom had wanted me to know Allie’s plane had arrived earlier. It is something we have said we would always be teasing her about.

I suppose with this blog, we can definitely say “Mission Accomplished.”

We drove to Knoxville with her calling everyone. I called my roommate and got a busy signal. I called someone else and then checked back to see my roommmate had left a voicemail. He wanted to congratulate me saying that Allie’s Mom had already put it up on Facebook.

Yeah. There was some excitement.

When we got to our first stop for Christmas Eve celebrations, I told Allie I was going to do things strategically. We walked in with I on the left and her on the right. There had been bad weather and we had to take a longer route so everyone was together when we got there.

Perfect.

Anyway, we walked in that way because I was covering her hand with the ring. This was the first time several of them had seen her and so I said “I want all of you to meet Allie. She and I have been going out for a few months now and as of X hours ago, she’s become somewhat more important.” As I said that last part, I would remove my hand to show the ring.

I then say I dove out of the way to avoid the onslaught of women wanting to see that ring.

I honestly don’t remember too much in the months after that. Everything was in a rush getting set for the wedding. It was also difficult when I lost my job in that, but friends did come through and provide for us to get things like a bed and a honeymoon. (We went to Ocean Isle Beach.)

I remember speaking with my roommate in his new place one time and telling him I wanted him to pick us up at the hotel the day of the wedding as her parents had arranged for us to have a hotel stay on our wedding night. I remember him kind of shrugging about it. Then I said “I figure you can either pick me up there that morning or else just pick up a couple of honeymooners the next day and take us to our car.”

I remember his eyes opening big and opting for the first option instead.

Our wedding really was a dream wedding. Things went off so well. The theme to Superman was playing as we walked down the aisle together. A lot of people thought since I’m the Smallville buff, that I was the one who thought of that. Wrongo! It was Allie! She wanted to surprise me. We had “Wait for Me” by Rebecca St. James, “Love Story” by Taylor Swift, and a song that is still “our song.” That one is “Eyes on Me” which is actually from Final Fantasy VIII. My sister sang that and Allie’s Mom played the piano. (My sister got some good teasing in January of 2011 when she put up moments of the past year that made her smile and my wedding was not shown at all!)

My roommate also had the best wedding toast ever. I am posting it here in its entirety.

As we were moving Allie’s things into Nick’s apartment, my foot struck an object embedded near the creek. It turned out that they were a set of golden plates, curiously arranged. On them appeared writing; but it was of an unintelligible nature. I quickly realized that this was Nick’s writing; which, as most here know, required the gift and power of God to translate. I have done so—and here is what I found.

AND IT CAME TO PASS that Nicholas did meet Allie in the last year of the reign of George.

And it came to pass that while Nick did reside in the region of Mecklenberg, Allie didst reside in the far-off city of Atlanta, named after the Roman goddess of traffic jams;

And it came to pass that they didst fall in love with one another, and this love was confessed; nay, confessed and shown morning, noon, and night;

And it came to pass that their courtship did blossom like unto kudzu; nowhere to be seen one day, and is everywhere the next;

And it came to pass that Nick didst begin to contemplate a future of more than just phone calls and AOL Messenger chat; lo, he didst envision the prospect of Marriage, and a Family.

And it came to pass that he set about achieving this goal.

And it came to pass that he did quest within the Queen City for a band of metal wrought like unto the work of the smiths of old; from the City East to the City West to the Park of South didst he look. And lo, he found one.

And it came to pass at the Eve of the Feast of the Nativity that he didst finally pop the question;

And it came to pass that she said yes.

And it came to pass that many quests and trials didst they pass to get to the altar. Verily, the gifts and talents of much family and many friends didst they obtain, and grateful were all at the giving.

And it came to pass that they did get hitched in the second year of the reign of Obama, to the delight of all; lo, though those in charge come and go, Nick and Allie’s love shall not, lo, nor will they let their affection do the same.

And it came to pass that they did endeavor to be an Example, and for the radiance of their love and virtue to remain unsullied even should the years pile up like books; and they did also desire to be a reflection of the splendor of the Trinity to all they did meet.

And it came to pass—or at least, it better come to pass—that all their many friends and family did support them, and did offer counsel, aid, kindness, and wisdom.

Thus ended the text on the plates.

Kidding aside, I do not think that either of you could have found anyone more well-suited. Therefore it is my distinct honor to propose this toast:

First, to your holiness: because all else rightly flows from this. May it remain undimmed through many, many blessed years.

To your marriage, that it fully reflects that greater Marriage between Christ and his Bride. May this marriage be an image of the joy of His return!

To your virtue: that faith, hope, and love grow stronger and deeper from this day forward; that your temperance, prudence, justice, and fortitude become an example that none can see without admiration.

To your health: or rather, to your attitude towards it. Good health you will not always have, nor is it guaranteed; yet may you have the perspective to face both blessing and trial with grace.

To your home: may it be Godly, and happy, in that order; and may all who enter it be washed and renewed its resonant blessedness.

And in all, may God receive the praise and glory. It is my desire that your marriage should seem fitting of praise; yet it is also my desire that you do not keep it for yourself.

Nick and Allie, thank you for letting me be a part of your wedding.

Thank you.

We left the wedding in a limo her parents had arranged. That was on July 24th, 2010. There have been bumps and hurdles since then. There have been good times and bad. We still have the financial struggles as before. We still have issues we’re working on. Still, to this day, my Princess is still my valentine and she is still the love of my life.

To my Princess, Happy Valentine’s Day. I hope reading this will make you smile as much as writing it made me smile.

In Christ,
Nick Peters

A Dude With Doubt

How can you help some real dude with doubt? Let’s talk about it on Deeper Waters.

I was sent this today by someone who was hoping to see if I’d respond to it. I do aim to please. Let me state at the start that I am not a professional counselor or psychologist, but I do know that doubt is something serious and can be affected by any number of things.

For instance, if your health is not in the best state, you could be more prone to doubt. If you have just undergone a traumatic event, you are more prone to doubt. Some medications could alter your mind and make you more prone to doubt. It could be a lack of sleep or eating the wrong thing or any number of things. Of course, it could also be receiving really hard objections to what one believes.

Doubt is extremely common among all people. People who have never doubted what they believe are people who have not taken it seriously enough. I wish that more Christians were forthright and honest and saying that they were wrestling with doubt. When I meet someone who is doubting and fearful his faith is not true, I want to celebrate. This is someone who is taking his faith seriously.

Unfortunately, too many are not doing that, especially pastors. Our pulpits are filled with pastors who have not studied the reasons why they believe what they believe. Their sermons are just calls to ethical principles and feel-good messages about how much Jesus loves you and won’t it be great to get away from this old sinful world?

In the link above, unfortunately, I don’t have much information. I don’t know this guy’s medical history. I don’t know his educational background. I don’t know what he has going on in his life. Therefore, I really do not have as much to go on, but I’ll take some of what he says and see what we can gather from it on dealing with doubt.

“When you start doubting the faith, there are days when you just wake up in a state of unbelief. ”

This is certainly true, but what I’m wondering is what was this guy doing with his doubt? We are often told by well-meaning counselors “Read the Bible and pray.” This is an insult to God, the Bible, and the person being counseled. Now this is part of the process I agree, but it is not the whole deal. Prayer and Scripture are not meant to be magic cures.

For instance, let’s suppose intellectual doubt is there. It won’t help intellectual doubt to read a book that you’re intellectually doubting. This is especially the case if there’s emotional doubt. After all, emotions have a way of overpowering reason and the person in the state can interpret everything in a negative light. We’ll see that this is what happens to the dude in this story. (And I keep saying dude since the blog is “SomeRealDude.” It is not meant as disrespect.

“Usually something will set it off, but in my case, today I simply woke up unbelieving.”

Absent from this is any mention at this point of an evaluation of the evidence. I have a suspicion that this was more of a felt position than a thought position. This is my suspicion because too many people in the world today use the words “think” and “feel” as if they’re synonyms. For instance, the Christian who says “I don’t feel like God is leading me this way.” We often judge moral commitments on the basis of feeling. In our marriages, love has been seen more as a feeling than an attitude and commitment.

If this kind of change can happen just by waking up one day, then can we really see this as a case of examining the evidence and pondering it? I would not even want it to be the case that someone just wakes up and becomes a Christian. I want Christians with solid foundations.

“I was in a funk most of the day because of this and right before lunch, I had some time to quietly sit at my desk. I began to get sick to my stomach as I processed the implications of my 5 hours of unbelief. I considered the potential damage it could do to my marriage, my daughters, and the friendships I have developed with so many wonderful Christian people through the years and my eyes began to well up with tears.”

All understandable, but also largely emotional, which causes me to suspect a lot of emotional doubt behind the intellectual doubt. Note also the person is panicking about their condition. Last night, I counseled someone who was doubting and told them to not panic. Doubt is not the end of the world. Doubt is common and if all you want is truth, then what do you have to fear if you find it?

“After work, while driving home, I listened to a podcast show by Robert M. Price where he showed just how ridiculous Joshua’s long day really was. Upon briefly researching an apologetic answer to this, I found this link where the author argues that the writer/redactor of Joshua was using modern phenomenological language to describe the movement of the sun across the sky. The problem is, the Hebrews actually believed that the sun traced across the sky in the hard dome of the firmament. They didn’t believe that the earth rotated, they believed, as far as we know, the exact opposite. After Dr. Price explained this, I thought to myself, “Yep, more malarkey. Its no wonder I woke up not believing this stuff. Talking donkeys . . . sun standing still in the sky, geesh, I can’t believe I have seriously believed these ideas for so long. Man, this is the stuff of fairy tales.””

As you can imagine, I have great qualms with considering Bob Price a reliable source. I also wonder why this guy was wanting to listen to Price. Note also that in his search for an answer, no books were cited. It was just an internet source. Is the desire to save faith not even sufficient enough to go to your local library and study up on it?

Some sources on the internet of course point to books. An example can be found here. Please note that at the start of the argument, the arguer gives FIVE different explanations for this. Five of them! Our dude has heard one and deemed it insufficient. Personally, I agree in many cases. Too many apologetics arguments can be weak and contrived.

Note also something else lacking. There is no argument against miracles. There is just an assumption. Miracles are obviously ridiculous if there is nothing outside of the universe and all is the result of material interactions, but that is the point under contention. Is that the way the world is?

Another point to consider is there is nothing about the resurrection of Jesus. It’s as if to say that because I have a problem with an OT passage, that means Jesus didn’t rise from the dead. This is all-or-nothing thinking that would be unacceptable anywhere else, but people seem to think works just fine with religion.

Part of this is a hang-up over Inerrancy in our modern world. There are some Christians who think that if there is one error in the Bible, nothing in it is true. If you can prove the Bible is wrong about how many horses Solomon had, then Jesus didn’t rise from the dead! The case for the resurrection needs to be taken on its own. We are not trying to get people to believe in Inerrancy, but to get them to believe in Jesus.

“After coming home, getting a good meal and then spending time with the kids, and then briefly contemplating to write this article, I am exhausted but not as discouraged as yesterday. I almost feel as if my unbelief was exhausting and depressing during the first half of the day but quite a relief during the latter half. Yes, I know, I’m a mix of emotions; but what do you expect when you wake up an agnostic about the Bible you’ve believed, preached, defended, and formally studied and counseled others with for almost 20 years?”

How much formal study has gone on? I don’t know. How much reading? I don’t know. The author’s not mentioning of books I find problematic and his reasons for abandoning Christianity are not centered on a disproof of the resurrection. Of course he’s a mix of emotions, which is not the time to be making a decision like that. Sit back. Relax. Go see a movie and enjoy yourself. When your mind is clear, sit down and really examine the evidence. By all means, examine both sides. Then make a decision that will be rational and informed.

“Not perceiving the sustaining work of the Spirit today,

Some Dude”

And this part makes me wonder as well. What is it the Spirit was supposed to do? I see nothing that tells me the Spirit is to protect us from doubt. I mainly see the Spirit leading us in sanctification based on our own study of Scripture. Too many Christians seem to think the role of the Spirit is to make them feel good emotionally. This is not the case.

Personally, I wouldn’t mind chatting with the dude and seeing what’s going on. Naturally, this will be left on his post. If he wishes to engage, he is free to.

In Christ,
Nick Peters

Book Plunge: Bamboozled

Are the Christians bamboozled, or is it the reverse? Let’s talk about it on Deeper Waters.

I have a kindle as a gift from someone I was in Seminary with and I get a list of free books that come out regularly. One of my subjects of interest naturally is religion and so when free books on religion come out, I get notified. One such book was by a man named Timothy Aldred called “Bamboozled.” I amusingly told a friend who is in apologetics as well and he downloaded it and read it before I did.

I was told to expect something incredibly bad from him. He could not believe what he was reading. I was thinking “It cannot be that bad.”

After all, in my time of apologetics, I have made it a point to read what I disagree with regularly. I have been online for more than a decade doing debate and I have seen a lot of really strange ideas.

I do not think I have seen anything as crazy as this. I kept thinking throughout the book that I would love to find a good psychologist who would read this book and try to give an assessment of the author. The material I find in here is insane.

Aldred says he was a born-again Christian. I do not doubt him. Then about 50 years later he abandoned his faith and now argues against it. As I have argued elsewhere, all he did was change his allegiance. He did not change his mode of thinking. It would be difficult to give examples, but it is not because there are too few. There are too many! In fact, I stopped using the highlight option on the Kindle after awhile or else I would have been highlighting most everything. To reply to all the mistakes in this book would take a book ten times the pages in length, and that’s because there are so many false assumptions all throughout.

Aldred regularly makes statements about God speaking telepathically and has an obsession with talking about an “invisible God” and says that the answer to any objection is “God can do anything.” You will not find arguments given why some people think the Bible is reliable in this book. In fact, with his own sourcing, at best, he tells you a book he found the information on. There is no citation with a page number so you can check it up yourself.

Not to mention, his sources when he uses them are regularly not scholarly sources. The Encyclopedia Britannica is cited regularly on Constantine, leading me to think that’s all Aldred read on the matter. In the chapter on the Dead Sea Scrolls, Baigent and Leigh are the main sources, a source no historian would accept, although Aldred lists them as historians. In the chapter on Billy Graham, Wikipedia is his main source.

Aldred tells of how biblical history is blindly accepted but a look at real history shows otherwise. What is the real history? Sumerian history. What is the reason given to accept Sumerian history? None. Aldred accepts it with the same blind faith that he accepted biblical history.

So what Sumerian history are we talking about? Oh just the usual. You know, stuff like aliens establishing space ports on Earth and that there was one in Canaan and that YHWH is not the real deal but that there were alien overlords working with humanity. This takes place all throughout Genesis.

Do you not believe me?

From page 22

“the Anunnaki maintained outposts at the gateway to the space facilities; Jericho is one of them.” (This is started in mid-sentence to be fair, but any reader can look at this for free and see it changes nothing.) One is reading this and thinking “Is this serious?” The sad reality is “Yes. Yes it is.”

Aldred has an obsession with the KJV Bible and with Rome. For him, everything is a big Roman conspiracy. Dead Sea Scrolls? That was a Roman cover-up to keep us from seeing what was in them. John Allegro tried to expose the cover-up, but he failed. Never any mention that Allegro’s own publisher apologized for releasing the book Allegro wrote called “The Sacred Mushroom and the Cross.”

The conspiracy theory runs constant throughout the book. Indeed, it takes a lot of faith to believe what Aldred is selling. I was even thinking at one point that Peter Joseph of Zeitgeist would have told him that his theories were crazy. Aldred ignores all evidence opposed to his theory and his biblical interpretation is horrendous. (Has anyone heard of an interpretation of the parable of the ten virgins where the bridegroom is coming to marry all the virgins? Note that that is said to be “light paraphrasing.” (Page 111)

Aldred came from a background apparently that fostered faith as belief without evidence and did not consider that perhaps, not everyone is that way. He has not changed that belief. He grants full faith to the Sumerian accounts as accurate history. He grants full faith to Baigent and Leigh. He grants full faith to Wikipedia.

Most amusing is an account of him on trial against D. James Kennedy of Coral Ridge. I am no fan of Kennedy. Still, reading this, it seems to escape Aldred’s attention that the problem could have been him. He goes to a church and causes a disruption and gets indignant when he is told to leave and when he doesn’t the police are called. Aldred sees himself as a hero standing up and exposing Coral Ridge instead of realizing they did exactly what would be done anywhere. It seems to be Aldred’s position that he could not be at fault and perhaps, what was the real problem was his fundamentalist way of thinking.

Fortunately for me, the book was free, but finishing it was a labor. I regularly told people I was reading the most ridiculous thing I had ever read. It almost makes me think I should pick up a book by a new atheist again soon because at least there is some glimmer of reason in there from time to time.

What is sadder is that people on Amazon have frequently commented about how eye-opening this is and what great research was done. Great research will have better documentation than this and interact with much more scholarly resources. For instance, in writing on the Inquisition, there will be no interaction with writers like Henry Kamen. Of course, Aldred would reject any such scholarship as part of the great Roman conspiracy that has sought to bring monotheism to the world to deny our real history under a gospel of Jesus.

Yet he is believed entirely by some readers. I even wonder if they know what he believes. Is Aldred a Christ-myther? I can’t tell. What does he think about textual reliability of the NT? I can’t tell. Does he think Peter or Paul existed?

Sadder still than Amazon is the fact that we are responsible. When the church does not give a good focus on education, people like Aldred are the result. Aldred regularly writes about a God of love would not allow X to happen, ignoring that God is a God of justice. He writes that he can see no reason why X should be the case, as if that would settle the case entirely.

Aldred is still a man of faith. His allegiance is changed, and for those agreeing with him, it is sadly the blind leading the blind.

In Christ,

Nick Peters

Christian Ambition

Should a Christian wish to succeed? Let’s talk about it on Deeper Waters.

Yesterday, my pastor did a sermon on the temptations of Jesus and spoke about how we can often want to have shortcuts. It would have been easy for Jesus to bypass the cross by jumping from the temple or to go ahead and get all authority by bowing down to the devil, but in both cases he refused. In the end, he ended up getting billions to see him as the Messiah and today does have that authority.

In this, he talked about the drive for success in Christians and I was pleased to hear him say that ambition is a good thing to have. Christians should seek to be ambitious people. Unfortunately, as I as complimenting him afterwards on that, he did tell me that all too often he sees the opposite attitude.

We tend to think it’s humble to not succeed. After all, we don’t want to steal any of the glory of God. Certainly that is something true. None of us wants to take glory that should go to God and give it to ourselves, but let us remember that the goal for the Christian is to give glory to God.

How are you giving God glory by being mediocre?

If you want to have God glorified in your life, then you give God as much as you can for Him to get that glory with. For some of us in ministry, that does mean we seek to give the best sermons, write the best books, do the best in counseling that we can, do the best in debates and giving answers, etc. Not everyone is in ministry, so what else do you do?

If you are a Christian doctor, you be the best doctor you can be. You seek to learn all about the field that you’re in that you can and you seek to have the best reputation with your patients for treating disease. We are told regularly in the Proverbs about how important it is to have a good name. Seek that name.

If you are a teacher, you seek to be the best you can. You seek to make sure your students know the subject well. You seek to learn all you can and make an impact on the lives of your students. You want it to be that they remember you and what a legacy it will be if the teacher they remember is the one who was also clear in her Christian walk.

If you are a businessman, you seek to run the best business that you can. You seek to have the best product or the best service. Do you believe God gave you a mind for your business? Then you seek to use that mind to the best of your ability. You seek to please as many of your clientele as possible.

Some of you might be thinking about the danger of wealth. If you build up too much wealth, won’t that be a bad thing?

Excuse me. Do you know how much good you could do if you had a lot of wealth?

Imagine going to that poor family in church and making sure their children have toys on Christmas. Imagine going to that single mother and making sure she gets a car so she can take her children to and from school. Imagine going to that grandmother who lives alone and paying her electric bill when it looks like no one else would. Imagine helping that student who wants to go to school by paying for his college education.

Also, imagine the ministries that you could support, just like Deeper Waters. I was talking with a friend yesterday about the possibility of my doing a radio show that would be syndicated on the internet with 20,000 listeners. Now we’re in a tight financial situation right now and I started thinking “If each of those listeners gave just $1 a year to the ministry, we could be secure and be sure to have our time devoted to full-time ministry.”

To run a ministry takes some of that wealth. If you build up wealth, you can easily use it for the Kingdom of God. Of course, there is always the temptation to misuse wealth or be fixated on it, but wealth like anything else is just a tool and it is not to be avoided for that reason.

What about pride? That’s another one.

This will also depend on you. Allie has been present when I have received compliments from people. Those are always nice to hear and I will tell you that you do not need to respond negatively internally to compliments. Be happy about them and thank the people who give them. Yet always also tell yourself this.

“It is an honor to be used as a servant in the Kingdom of God.”

Remember. It is your role to be a servant. You are just doing what you are supposed to do. God is using you, but you are not essential. He could just as easily have used someone else. He chose you. Be grateful for that opportunity. You are here to build up His Kingdom, the one that will never fade, not yours, the one that will fade with time. Even if your name lives on for years, it will only live under the name of Christ. Aquinas’s legacy could fall without killing the cause of Christ. If the cause of Christ goes down, then Aquinas will be a great thinker for his time, but just so sorely misguided.

To deal with pride, start developing Christlikeness now.

Then, whatever you have in mind to do, seek to do the best at it that you can, provided it is in line with Christian teachings. Seek it all for the glory of God and to hear those great words “Well done good and faithful servant.” That will be something you can smile about for all eternity.

Which is how long you’ll have to smile.

In Christ,

Nick Peters

Book Plunge: Ehrman’s Introduction To The New Testament

Are our students ready for Seminary? Let’s talk about it on Deeper Waters.

Yesterday, I went on a search through local churches in our area to see how many of them were interested in having a speaker come talk about apologetics-related topics. I would consistently find that there were youth programs and college programs, but on only two churches can I recall finding anything remotely related to apologetics.

Oh you can find about concerts and pizza parties and “Jumping into God’s Word!” everywhere. What you cannot find is serious content. It is more important to keep our youth entertained. Still, there will be some who will want to go off for higher learning and that includes in the Christian faith and when we send them off to Seminary or Divinity School or something of that kind, we can be sure that they’ll be safe. Places that teach the NT will teach them the beliefs that they grew up with.

If you really believe that, you are part of the problem.

I have been making it an effort to study Bart Ehrman’s material more. In wanting to get the most of his thought, I ordered his “Introduction to the New Testament.” Now Ehrman does say that he’s just trying to go with what historians can say about the Bible. If you want to believe the Bible is the Word of God, he’s not going to tell you to not do that.

However, he sure won’t give you any reason to think that.

Now of course, Ehrman does have some good material in there. There are some interesting ways to look at the text and a good student of the NT should be prepared for that. Yet despite his saying that he doesn’t want to persuade you of X, the end result is that his book will persuade you of X if you are not prepared.

Sorry parents and ministers, but pizza parties are not preparing us.

“But we are teaching our youth what the Word of God says!”

Until they meet an Ehrman who tells them through his book in a Seminary that the gospels are by anonymous authors and we can’t really study miracles and the accounts are written late and that there were other holy men walking around doing miracles and that most critical scholars think that a number of books in the NT are pseudonymous and that there are numerous contradictions in the Bible.

It will be hard for the youth to think the Bible is the Word of God while accepting all of that.

And what are they to counter Ehrman with? Faith? No. Faith is not meant to be a counter. It is not meant to be a leap in the dark. It is meant to be trust on reliable evidence and unfortunately, going to that big youth concert is not giving the youth the tools they need to be able to have that reliable evidence. There is only one way for them to get it. They must be taught it. Either parents and churches will teach them what they are to believe about the reliability of Scripture, or rest assured people like Bart Ehrman will.

It is quite disappointing to find that Ehrman never really gives counters to his positions. For instance, when discussing who wrote the Gospels, he never lays out the case for why some scholars think Matthew wrote Matthew. Any mention of the church fathers saying X wrote a Gospel are seen as “hearsay” because they are too late. (Although apparently 20th century interpreters are not too late.) It doesn’t matter that the tradition is quite constant about the authorship of the gospels and these are the people who would have been in the position to know. Ehrman will give no reason why you should think Matthew wrote Matthew, but he will give you reason to think that he didn’t.

The same goes with dating. Ehrman will tell you that these accounts were written after the events and use time descriptions that sound like a long time, without bothering to mention how long after the fact it was that other ancient biographies were written and that the time is like a blip in comparison.

When discussing a passage like 1 Cor. 15, Ehrman will say some people use it to defend the resurrection, but absent is any mention of the arguments that are used by those people. In fact, Ehrman says very little about the resurrection. He certainly gives no other explanation for the data. This is increasingly a concern of mine. Ehrman will give the impression that there is no one in scholarship who disagrees with the position of critical scholars and if they are, they are certainly in the minority.

His usage of Acts is quite odd. When Acts suits his purpose, such as when saying that Peter and John were uneducated, then Acts is reliable. When Acts disagrees with what he says, as it does numerous times, then Acts needs to be taken with a grain of salt. Why should I accept Acts 4 as reliable when I should question the “We” passages? This would be particularly so since Acts 4 would be early and the writer would not likely have been an eyewitness.

To be fair, a few times Ehrman will list evangelicals in the recommended books, but the overall tone of the book is clearly one that is meant to show that we should not trust the accounts.

Interestingly, when it comes to the text of the NT, his main area, Ehrman says the following on page 481:

“In spite of these remarkable differences, scholars are convinced that we can reconstruct the original words of the New Testament with reasonable (although probably not 100 percent) accuracy.”

This isn’t the impression you’d get from books like “Misquoting Jesus” or “Jesus Interrupted.”

So now let’s return to the college youth groups in churches. Our youth are not prepared. What are we to do with this? If we don’t do anything, then when the student goes off to college and starts reading Ehrman’s book, there will be one of three possible responses.

1) The person will apostasize or at least severely water down their faith effectively nullifying any good they could do for the kingdom.

2) The person will hold on to their faith but purely as a “faith” position and will isolate themselves from the world and not bother interacting with disagreeing thought, again effectively nullifying any good they could do for the kingdom.

3) The person will actually study Ehrman’s arguments and read the other side and make a defense for the Scripture.

Sadly, #3 will be the rarity if it ever happens.

We must be doing better. There’s nothing wrong with having some pizza parties and concerts and such, but if this is all we are doing for our youth, we are sending them off to have their faith destroyed, and no amount of pizza will restore it.

The choice is ours. We can determine who will teach our youth how to think about the Bible. It will be us, or it will be our opponents.

Choose wisely. Their eternity and the eternity of people they reach could hang in the balance.

In Christ,

Nick Peters

You Can Serve

Can you serve in the Kingdom? Let’s talk about it on Deeper Waters.

A favorite passage of Scripture I like to discuss with my Mrs. is the one in 1 Cor. 1 where God uses the shameful and despised things of this world for his glory. I have written much about getting apologetics in the local church, but I would not want people to have the idea that that must mean everyone has to know apologetics.

My friend J. Warner Wallace of Pleaseconvinceme.com has a great analogy for this. He says that few of us will be top chefs. Some of us are, but most are not. Still, all of us know the basics on how to fix a meal for ourselves. In the same way, not everyone will be a professional apologist, but all should know how to fix a basic defense for themselves.

Are there other ways to serve?

Before answering that, I would like to deal with the attitude that comes up with people saying “I can’t do anything for God’s Kingdom.” First off, this is an insult to God actually. You are telling the one who is omniscient that He did not know better when He made you. You are making a statement that He made a mistake. Your existence is not supposed to be part of this world.

If we believe Scripture, we must believe that a person is valuable for what they are and that God works everything together for good to those who love the Lord. That means yes, He can use your efforts. Note also that biblically, even if you refuse to serve God, your actions will serve His plans anyway. As C.S. Lewis said, you will either serve willingly or unwillingly, so you might as well serve willingly.

The problem for many of us is that the voice of the world seems to overpower the voice of God.

To reply to that, I’d like to let readers know a little bit about where I’m coming from.

I have not hid in this blog that I have Asperger’s, as does my wife. I also have scoliosis. The first one inhibits me socially. The second one inhibits me physically. Still, I do tend to blend in well enough. With the second one for instance, most people would not know the way I still run everywhere that I have that cold hard steel back there. (My treatment involved surgery to place a metal rod on my spine.)

Growing up, I was quite inhibited. I could say I was liked, but the people I counted as friends were few in number. I was mainly living in my own world. The thing I had going for me was my intelligence. Gym class was naturally the worst form of suffering that I could undergo. I was that kid in school that sat in the class room and went home and spent the day doing what I wanted and still managed to make A’s. In High School, I got the senior superlative of “Most Studious.”

Yet in high school, there were no dates. There were no girlfriends. I didn’t go to any prom at all in school. In fact, for the last couple of years, I found myself struggling with depression. The only thing I really knew was my Christian faith.

When it came time to go to college, because of disability, my parents were able to find help for that. I told the people from Vocational Rehabilitation that I was wanting to go to college to go into ministry. For them, this seemed ridiculous. My mind was better suited to something like an engineer, but this held no interest for me.

I was told that this was a mistake also because due to my social inhibition, I would not be able to handle public speaking.

I wish they had been there when in my senior year at Bible College, I gave a senior sermon to my entire student body and a large number of professors, around 1,000 people, and did it just fine. In fact, it was a message that even when I was on the campus a year later working on my Master’s, students still spoke to me about.

Part of the success was learning to not listen to those around me who were critical.

Now in Bible College, that is where I learned about apologetics and that is how I found my niche. It was through that that my depression lifted. I found a way that I could truly serve and put my mind to the most use. Before too long I was buying any book that I could and devouring it. I was listening to broadcasts online, with my personal favorite being Ravi Zacharias. (It was a great joy in my life when my Dad honoring a Christmas wish I made somehow arranged for me to get to meet Ravi in his office. It is a day I have never forgot.) My mother would want to panic every time I came home from the bookstore since I would have even more books. At my first apologetics conference, I spent $400 on books, to which the person running the bookstore would often thank me for paying his tuition every year.

Keep in mind in all of this time, there were of course critics. There were people who were saying I had no business being in this field. Still, I have had a tendency to refuse to listen. However, there was one critic that followed me to no end constantly going after my abilities and doing their best to disregard the contributions I believed I was making.

As you might guess, that critic was myself.

After all, we are always our own worst critics.

This was despite the fact of being a student working on a Master’s in Seminary and being respected by practically everyone that I met. My journey to success in this involved talking to people who were quite good at dealing with emotional doubt and seeing what I could do to get the problem under control.

Some matters helped, but there was one step that has helped the very most.

To quote the beginning of the Tobey Maguire movie, “This story begins with a girl.”

It was in 2009 that I was introduced to Allie. Now keep in mind as I said I was the shy and inhibited kid. I think I had had one date in all my time since high school. Allie and I had really hit things off. Allie was my first kiss and that of course, is an event I keep repeating to this day. (It is a point of ours to begin each morning giving each other a kiss before we get out of bed and letting a good night kiss end the day) My own roommate I understand told a mutual friend of ours (Who later was a groomsman) that we needed to book a wedding chapel soon. He was sure this was going that way as he started looking for a new place to live. It was a change neither one of us would have thought was coming earlier that year (Note to those going to college or seminary or just moving out. Always put in a marriage clause for a roommate).

As I said, I met her in 2009. Within three months, I had proposed. We were married on July 24th, 2010. As a friend of ours told us recently hearing our story on the phone, “You didn’t waste any time did you?” For us, it is incredible how many people look at us and see a perfect match. It is interesting since we are in many ways quite different, such as I’m the intellect among us and she’s the emotional one. Naturally, I do see ways we’re influencing each other. I’m more in touch with my emotional side and I notice her catching bad logic in what people are saying.

It was after our marriage in fact that I really started to launch Deeper Waters and push it forward. It was after that that I found my personal critic was learning to shut up. My thinking on this has been that I used to be vindicated by my apologetics as it were. Now, Allie provides my vindication. She is the one who affirms me constantly. That frees me more in other areas and pushes me to succeed more.

I tell this to her several times. I could not do what I do without her.

Okay. This has been long, but I thought it important to tell you about myself. Why? Because I think people like Allie and I are the ones that the world looks at and says that they’re no good. We don’t fit the “perfect” mold. We are not the way that everyone else is supposed to be, so we just need to mind our own business and let the world go on. We don’t have anything to contribute.

Balderdash.

If people like us, people the world has often rejected, people with limitations on us, can serve, so can you. Now I realize there are people with greater limitations than us. Still, I know many of them are serving. I even think of the clip I’ve seen of a guy who came on Oprah with no legs and no arms and is serving by telling people about the Lord Jesus Christ. In fact, he even said on the clip that he and his wife are expecting a baby.

My wife is not an apologist either. I’ll go on and state that clearly. If the Mormons or JWs come to the door, she’s going to defer to me. (Although, I have found she can really put Mormons in a bind) So what does she do?

First off, as I’ve said, she is an encouragement to me and that in itself can be a great service. I happen to have thoroughly enjoyed the TV series “Monk” and read the books that come out and I’ve told her that she is my Natalie. She is the one that best enables me to function in this world. Encouragement is a great gift to have. People like myself need others to come alongside us.

Chances are you have a pastor. Your pastor needs encouragement. Of course, if he’s going the wrong way, don’t encourage him in that. Allie is the first one after all to point out if she thinks I’m stepping out of line somewhere. Still, try to make sure to thank the people in your life who are spiritual influences on you. There are a number of times a good comment will come in here on Deeper Waters that I will share with Allie as something that just touches the heart.

Second, find what you do well that is good and praiseworthy, and do it for the kingdom. If you are the top chef as mentioned earlier, then you serve well. Perhaps you can cook for your church or a local homeless shelter. If you are in the world of entertainment, try to bring as much joy as possible to your audience. If you are in the role of medicine, seek to treat each patient as Christ would. If you are a scientist, seek to uncover the grandeur of God.

Whatever it is that you do, I urge you to not settle for second best. I urge you to be ambitious. We are told that whatever we do, we are to do for the glory of God. God does not deserve mediocre or average. Give him the best.

My wife’s gift is art. She’ll spend hours working on one picture, something I just don’t understand. As it stands, right now she is working on a Manga that will be a Christian Manga and really getting into it. What do I think? I think that’s excellent. If that’s the way she wants to serve, then let her throw herself into it and make sure she is serving to the best of her ability.

The problem with the church is that so many of us think that God could never use someone like us so we just don’t even bother to try. It would be a shame to get to the throne of God and realize how many opportunities we missed because we listened to our own voice and the voice of the world rather than the voice of Scripture. If God is incapable of using you, that not only speaks negatively about you. It also speaks negatively about God. It is saying He does not have the power, wisdom, or knowledge, to use you for His glory. You must be the accident.

It might be cliche, but it is true. You are the one who is holding yourself back. God put you here to serve Him in the Kingdom. It’s not about your identity in yourself. It’s about your identity in Him. You are a part of the body of Christ and as part of the body, you are not to say that in any way you cannot serve.

And in fact, if 1 Corinthians is true, which you should think it is, then if you are shamed and rejected, chances are that’s all the more reason you will be used. God did not choose the Romans, the Babylonians, the Egyptians, or any other great culture to serve Him, but chose a group of insignificant people called the Jews. Many of Christ’s disciples that He chose were not influential people. In fact, the people He spent the most time with were the rejects of society.

I highly encourage you to not let yourself be held back. If you wish to serve God, He will help you to serve Him well. Of course this is not done on your own. It is done by reliance on Him and His Holy Spirit working in you. In fact, the more you have to rely on Him, the more glory He gets from it, which is what should be sought.

I also anticipate that if this kind of idea catches on, that people really realize they have the ability to serve God and serve Him well in the Kingdom, we could see our world changed. We could see Christians become the people they were meant to be. We could see them boldly going forth trusting in God to use their offerings, no matter how meager they think them to be, to advance the Kingdom.

Let this truth be put in you today and not ever denied again by anyone, including yourself. YOU CAN SERVE.

In Christ,

Nick Peters

The Wrong End Of The Battle

Is there a problem with the church and culture today? Let’s talk about it on Deeper Waters.

First off, apologies on not having much this week. By a complete surprise, I did get hired somewhere Monday and have worked every day this week, but I do have weekends off. Still, I plan to try to keep up with the blog as best I can. For those who want to financially support us, keep in mind that your support enables me to do more research and writing, which I can say is something I much more prefer to do.

For now, let us get to the point of today’s blog. Recently in the Christian Apologetics Alliance, there was a post about the sexuality of the culture today. We are constantly bombarded with sexual messages wherever we go and while Christians can look like prudes, we are having to resist what is going on around us.

I’ve written much about the sexual state of our society today, particularly here in America, and while that is fascinating to write about, there is a problem that stems from this overall. Christians are always on the wrong side of the culture war nowadays in America. This is in total contradiction to what we see happening in Christian history.

For instance, the early church was going out doing evangelism to the people all around them and they weren’t afraid to speak. Peter, James, and John would speak openly before the Jewish leaders and when they would be punished for doing so, they would only consider it a badge of honor and go out thanking God for it.

Paul in his missionary journeys a number of times is called before leaders. In fact, when he is arrested in Acts 16, he is told that he is free to leave afterwards but refuses. Instead, he points out that those who arrested him did so to a Roman citizen and that they will not leave until they are personally escorted out of the city. Can you imagine a Christian today making such a bold appeal to the leading authorities? Paul even had the courage at the end to say “I appeal to Caesar!”

Keep in mind the church was a small movement, but they kept going forward. Early apologists like Justin Martyr wrote to the emperor to persuade him that the Christians were not a threat and give reasons why Christianity should be seen as true. How many of us today would be willing to write something like that to an emperor who would have us killed as well as our congregations without a single thought?

Jesus started with a small group. In 300 years, that group had dominated the Roman Empire.

And today in America we can think our culture is too far gone?

What has happened?

The problem is that we have got complacent in our beliefs and taken for granted the Christian status that we have. Christianity became a recognized force and we took that for granted thinking that the situation would always be that way. Today, there are too many Christians who still live as if America is in a strongly Christian era where all they need to do is go out there and say “The Bible says” and that will settle everything.

It no longer will.

Is this because the Bible is less authoritative? In itself, no. In its effect on culture, yes. The Bible no longer holds that place of respect so before we use it, we have to argue for it. Too many Christians are still caught in a fundamentalist mindset where they think that all they need to do is go out there and give a passage of Scripture to someone and they will respond immediately.

Question. If they believed the Bible, don’t you think they’d be Christians already?

Sorry, but we don’t live in that world any more and we won’t get there by just wishing it or acting contrary. We are supposed to be people who live in reality. The reality may not be pleasant, but it sure wasn’t pleasant either for the early church that was regularly being exterminated. Yet for some reason, that church kept going onward.

For those of the fundamentalist persuasion, too often I find they are locking themselves in their own little isolation chambers away from the culture. We are called to be the light in the darkness. Light does not hide itself away. Light shines. Light goes out into the darkness and pierces it. Paul compared us to stars in the night sky. If there were no light from the moon and stars, it would be total darkness (Although in America with our numerous lights, that is hard to imagine). Now think of that total darkness and then suddenly these pinpoints of light called stars show up. Even then, those stars stand out.

What happened? I propose a number of events.

First off, higher criticism of the Bible came around. Christians should have stood their ground, but instead, they caved. What does that say? It says “We do not want to examine the Bible because we do not believe it will hold up to scrutiny. By the way, trust Jesus Christ who is spoken of in the Bible to be the Lord of your life for all eternity.”

Second, evolution came. Christians should have stood their ground as well. Now I am of the opinion that the question of evolution is really moot, but we instead started reacting to the theory. Instead, our response should have been “The science could be insufficient now (Which I think it was) but we will leave the door open and you do your studies and if it is true, we will accept it.”

Christians. This has to be our response. We cannot deny anything that is true. If evolutionary theory is true, then we have to realize we were reading Genesis wrong, and quite likely it will require another reading, like John Walton’s idea in “The Lost World of Genesis One.” If evolutionary theory is false, then oh well. If you are like me and not scientifically-minded, then don’t argue it. You are prone to making as many embarrassing mistakes as the new atheists do when they write about the New Testament. You know how ridiculous they look to us? That’s how you look in the eyes of the scientific community, and you can rest assured they won’t want to hear about Jesus then.

As soon as the church retreats, we case to be the church Jesus created. In Matthew 16, we are told that the gates of Hell will not stand against the church. Gates are defensive. That means the church is to be the one moving forward. Our church was meant to be proactive in engaging the culture. The culture should be wondering how they are going to respond to us. We are instead responding to them. We are in a reactive mode against the culture and thus, we are on the wrong side of the battle. We are having to defend ourselves instead of making the culture give an explanation for its stance.

It’s no surprise we’re that way. Too few people in the church have any clue whatsoever how to defend their faith or what they really believe. Most people just know to give their personal testimony. That’s great. Just today, I read a personal testimony from a Muslim who claimed Allah had healed him. The Mormons whenever I see them give a personal testimony of how they had a burning in the bosom. Ex-Christians give personal testimonies to me about how they used to be and what “set them free.”

If all you have is your testimony, why should someone accept yours over these? Does the truth of your Christian belief depend on you? If your personal testimony is compromised, does that mean that Christianity is not true?

If your Christianity is based on anything other than the fact that God raised Jesus from the dead, your Christianity has the wrong roots.

Now does this mean we all have to go out and get our degrees from Seminaries and such in order to have an effect? No, although it couldn’t hurt if more of us did that. It does mean that we need to give ourselves at least some basic education. Heck. The early church won out while most of them were illiterate. We don’t have that problem today. We have so much knowledge at our fingertips it is incredible.

Can you imagine what Paul would have done had he had the internet in his time? Can you imagine all the letters to churches that would have been written? There would be forums addressing the major controversies. There would be powerpoint presentations showing Jesus rose from the dead. His friend Apollos would likely be on every debate forum demonstrating through debate that Jesus rose from the dead. We have means of reaching the world these people could only dream about.

And we’re numerous times less effective than they were.

Now as Christians, we know the problem is not the message of Christ. That message is true. We could say the problem is the culture, but the Roman Empire did not even have a Christian background. It was pagan to the core.

We have met the problem, and it is us.

Why are we in this case? We got complacent and let the rest of the world go out and now we are the ones on the defensive.

Again, this is reversible. The last thing to do to this is to get even more depressed and decide that we are going to retreat even more. What needs to be done is we need to repent of our laziness in evangelism and be going out there again doing the work that we need to do. We need to learn what we believe and why. Churches need to be educating their members not just on how to be good people, but on why Christianity is true. After all, if you want to be a good person, many of the great philosophers of the past can help with that. They had those in the Roman Empire too. If you want to have the truth, only Christianity can deliver that. You are not out there trying to make your listeners into good people. You are out there trying to get them righteous before YHWH, and no philosophy can do that.

The choice is ours. We can hide away and do nothing and let the culture trample all over us, or we can rise up and challenge and let it known that we have a case and we will be heard making it.

I’ve made my choice. What’s yours?

In Christ,

Nick Peters