The Escapist Mentality

Do you want to die and be with Jesus? Let’s talk about it on Deeper Waters.

In Philippians, Paul tells us that he desires to die and be with Christ. Does that fit anyone else? How many people really want to die and be with Christ? I have met several Christians that it seems their #1 desire at this point is they just want Christ to return so they can get out of this world. They want to die and be with Him.

Astute readers could be thinking, “Nick. That’s not the whole verse! Don’t you know how it ends?!”

Of course I do. I wanted to just emphasize the one part for now. What Paul said is that yes, he does desire that, but to go on living is more necessary.

Keep in mind, he said that in jail as well.

I consider Paul to be quite realistic in his approach. There is nothing wrong with looking forward to being with Christ. Yet Paul says this when it could be that death is right around the corner and he’s not sure which way things will go. Today, many Christians take a different approach. They want to die just because they want out of this world.

Note that last part is just as problematic to me. We have this idea that this world is an awful place and that we need to abandon ship and go back to the homeland. What if this world is the homeland? What if my overall position is right and the goal of God is to bring Heaven to Earth? Now this isn’t something that comes by political advancement or government actions, though we should seek the best in those areas, but by a divine act of God through the preaching of the gospel.

We should all be ready if need be to die for Jesus, but we should seek all the more to live for Him. Dying is scary, but quite simple. Once it’s done, it’s done. Living is a lifetime action that requires constantly dying to yourself. Dying for Jesus could be a way to bypass the harder task of living for Him.

We as Christians are called to engage the culture. We are not called to escape it, and too often we are escaping it and hiding in our little Christian caves and only interacting with people who agree with us. You might be building yourself up, but you’re not doing much for the culture that way.

This also includes pastors. Too many pastors just want to speak to like-minded people and don’t know what to do when the skeptic shows up with hard questions. It takes little courage to stand up to people who already agree with you and tell them what they already agree with. It’s like standing up in Hollywood and saying you support redefining marriage. If I want to hear about the courage of someone in Hollywood speaking out, I’ll wait until one of them has the guts to accept an award at the Academy Awards or some similar event and say they think marriage should only be between one man and one woman for life.

I prefer to engage the culture instead since I also think my eternity depends on what I did with this life. Did I live it in service of Jesus Christ? Did I leave this world a better place than I did when I came into it? I want it to be that when I stand before the throne, I will hear “Well done, thou good and faithful servant.” I want to know that any future descendants I have will be better off and if we don’t have children ourselves, I want to know that the world will be better for everyone else’s children.

This also fits in with the therapeutic nature of Christianity today. We want to feel safe and secure. It’s why ministries that do that get so much support, but apologetics ministries, like this one, don’t get much. Many people are interested in what helps them feel good. They’re not as interested in material that makes them think or engages the culture.

Of course, there are other ministries worth supporting. There’s nothing wrong with giving to your local church, which you should do, or supporting charities that help out with physical and mental conditions and such for people, or help families in crisis, or many other good things, but too many people can just give to a ministry and think that means they’ve done their part in Christian service. Well that is a part of it, but it’s not the whole deal. It would be like saying you hired a maid and therefore you cleaned your house. If you can afford a maid, great, but don’t speak about it like you’re the one really working.

The irony is that many of these Christians want to escape the world because it’s so evil and not realizing that their failure to engage the culture is making it worse for them and everyone else. You don’t like the way the world is? Neither do I. In fact, neither does God. That’s why Christ came! If you don’t like it, then instead of running away, do something about it.

In this battle, myself and other apologists I think are the ones on the front lines directly debating those seeking to do away with the only hope we have. Not everyone is meant to do that. I get it. I think everyone should have a basic apologetic argument for themselves, but not everyone is meant to be a professional apologist. Then do your own part.

We’ve already mentioned financial support. That’s good and should be done, but also be an encourager for those on the front lines. Go help out those in need. Volunteer at your church. Be willing to go on a mission trip. Seek to study the Bible and learn more about what it means to be like Christ and show that to the world. There are countless ways you can serve Christ.

When your work is done, you will be called into the presence of Jesus. You can look forward to that, but make sure your sole goal in life is not to escape what you see around you. You are where you live and you are when you live as well for a reason. Acts 17 tells us that. Your existence is not a mistake, but what you do with it could be. Seek to live the life for Christ.

If we will actually engage the culture, we will be amazed at what could happen. I think we could really end the marriage debate easily. We could do so much to stop the silent holocaust of abortion in our land. The spreading and living of the gospel will also do more to stop mass shootings than any law the government can pass.

Save the world. Engage the culture. Be Christian.

In Christ,
Nick Peters

The Parking Space God

Is God your personal genie? Let’s talk about it on Deeper Waters.

I was very pleased yesterday to hear my pastor speak out against those people that talk about how God provided a parking space for them when they were driving around and in a hurry. (Personally, I think if people would just be willing to park a distance away, not only would they get in some exercise, but they’d be in and out sooner instead of having to have the “terrible drudgery” of walking a little bit longer, especially when they’re going into a store where they’ll be walking a long time.)

This is along the lines of looking at what has been called Moral Therapeutic Theism. God is there in our lives to make things easier for us. When trouble comes, we look up and ask “What’s gone wrong?” It’s a wonder that we do this since we are in fact promised that we will have suffering.

My wife happens to be enjoying the Vikings series on the History Channel now and last night we saw an episode where a Viking agreed to be baptized, though apparently for show, and the way his fellow Vikings responded to him. Most notably was that how he had betrayed the gods. (And our preview of next week’s episode shows that he is to be offered as a sacrifice and it’s directly tied in to his getting baptized.)

Yet this is what Christians from the beginning had and what Christians around the world still face. It’s not something like changing your career. It’s making a statement about how you view the world and where your loyalty lies. To become a Christian would mean that to those who were loyal to the old view and the old deities, you are a threat. (That also includes the loyalty to the idea of a lack of deities)

Today, we have this idea reversed. We think that God is to serve us. God is to make our lives easier and if he does not do this, then something is wrong. We have lost the idea that we are to be servants. When we think God is to serve us, we make it clear that we view ourselves as greater than God, for who is greater, the master or the servant?

This also ends up with God being trivial. Of course God could provide a good parking space if He wanted, but why think He’s micromanaging the universe just so you don’t have to walk a little bit further? (In fact, in many cases, that could be encouraging laziness)

It also leads to embarrassment before others. I had a friend on Facebook recently put up a status about a lady in line behind him at the grocery store who said God told her to come to another store across town to save 50 cents on one item. My friend was thinking she probably spent that much on gas. What’s the impression given by this? Christians are idiots and God talks to them about matters like this.

Yet what about the person who is going through a struggle and says they want God to show up and nothing happens? What about the person who is not looking for a parking space but is looking for a meal to feed their family? What about the person who is wondering if God will heal their cancer?

Of course, God can provide small blessings at times to people for various reasons, but to emphasize those as a sure sign of His favor brings great pain to those in more dire situations and makes God appear trivial. It becomes the case that God is one who wants you to just sit back and be comfortable and let Him take care of everything.

Now in the long run, God does take care of things. If something is not in our control, by all means do your part and then leave the rest to God, but note that you are to do your part. If you want to be a good apologist, you are to read. If you want to be in good health, diet and exercise. If you want to be in a certain career path, then you need to study for that path and go to school. If you want to be an athlete, you need to train.

The church today needs a robust theology that recognizes God as the sovereign Lord of the universe and not a personal genie. We are to serve Him. He is not to serve us.

In Christ,
Nick Peters

4/13/2013 Someone’s Knocking At Your Door

What will be on the Deeper Waters Podcast on 4/13/2013? Let’s talk about it on Deeper Waters.

Tomorrow on the Deeper Waters Podcast, we’re going to be talking about Jehovah’s Witnesses. The link to where you can listen to the show can be found here. Many of us have had these people come by. In fact, I’m having them come by on a regular basis right now. To some of us, they can be just nice but overzealous people. To others, they’re those annoyances that lead us to lock the doors and lower the blinds on the windows. Yet who are they?

My guest for this will be my friend Mike Matuszewski. (I hope I get that name right on the air!) If you haven’t heard of him, it’s because he’s a friend I know through Facebook, but part of the purpose of Deeper Waters is to get out there in the public people who I think should be out there more. In this community, it’s important that we build up one another so that we can better be able to do ministry in the body of Christ.

I plan tomorrow on not really focusing on the Trinity. That is a big issue, but we just had Robert Bowman come on to discuss that so this time, I plan on talking about the Witnesses themselves. Who is this group? How did they get started? What is the status of them today? Are they Christian? If not, why? (And no, they’re not)

We will also be discussing how it is that the Watchtower Bible and Tract Society works. The Watchtower does an incredible amount of publishing. What does that have to do with Christians today? How fast is the Watchtower growing? What threat does it pose to Christians today?

The Watchtower is also well known for many of its predictions on when the end is going to come and as it is, like the Bible, they have a perfect record. Unlike the Bible, their perfect record is perfectly wrong. How has the organization been affected by all of these false prophecies?

Also, is it really a good idea to bring up those prophecies when the Witnesses come by? What is the best method one can go about reaching a Jehovah’s Witness that can break through the thinking that one is taught by the Watchtower? Should we focus on the Trinity? The Prophecies? Salvation by grace through faith? Where exactly should we go?

Of course, there are many other issues that could come up that make Jehovah’s Witnesses a fascinating topic of discussion. What is it like at a Kingdom Hall? What is the point of the “no blood” cards that one sees in their wallets? Why do they not celebrate birthdays and holidays? Why is it that they take no part in anything that is political?

Please join me tomorrow then from 3-5 EST as I discuss with Mike Matuszewski the Jehovah’s Witnesses. If you want to call in and be a part of the fun and ask a question, the number will be 714-242-5180. I hope you will be tuning in tomorrow!

In Christ,
Nick Peters

Was Jesus’s Death A Sacrifice?

If there’s a resurrection, is there a sacrifice? Let’s talk about it on Deeper Waters.

In a video I dealt with recently, the question came up about the death of Jesus. Jesus came back from the dead on Sunday morning after dying on Friday afternoon. How can that be a sacrifice? Is it really a sacrifice if you give something up and you know that you will get it back?

Something to consider. This is a parallel to the account of Abraham. Did Abraham know he would get his son Isaac back. He had been told specifically that “Through Isaac, your offspring will be reckoned.” He had been given a promise that Isaac then would be the one through whom God would build a great nation.

But yet he was told to make a sacrifice and in spite of that sacrifice, he was assured that Isaac would be a father. How could this be? The Hebrews writer tells us that Abraham somehow even then trusted that the God who brought about a miraculous birth of Isaac could raise him from the dead. This was in an age where miracles weren’t widespread and there had been no resurrection yet.

Now we are strong defenders of the deity of Christ, but let us remember we are also strong defenders of His humanity. There are things Jesus did not know on Earth and the only things He knew were that which God had revealed to Him (Beyond basic learning and such of course). When it came to future events, He had to trust the revelation of God.

This was the way of His life. Jesus too had to trust in the Father. When He was tempted, He had to give answers as to why one should not follow the devil but follow the Father instead. When He prayed, He prayed that if there be another way, please let it come about. He knew not of one, but He was still wanting one.

Could it be that the Son was trusting in the Father that He would raise Him from the dead? Was He saying on the cross that I commend my spirit to you in the trust that you will find favor with it? Could it be then the sacrifice was real on the part of Jesus just like it was on the part of Abraham? Both were confident that they would get back what they had given, but both to the end had to trust YHWH? Jesus Himself had to trust the Father to the point of death, as Jesus had to succeed where Israel had failed.

After the sacrifice was made, God could do with it what He wanted. If you give me all you have as a gift, it is still a gift even if I say I will give it all back to you. Even if you think that I will do so, you can still consider it a gift. Of course, someone could say YHWH would be faithful to the promises that He has made, but remember Abraham and Jesus had to realize that when push came to shove, and it was a lesson Israel had not learned.

This was also why Jesus did not just die as an infant. Jesus had to live to be the true King of Israel. It wasn’t just that Jesus came to die alone. Jesus came to be the King, and He had to live a life to let the world know that God’s appointed King had shown up. Jesus showed his right to rule by His trust in YHWH, trust even to death.

What difference did it make? That’s for another time.

Book Plunge: God’s Problem

Is God’s Problem a problem? Let’s talk about it on Deeper Waters.

God’s Problem is the work of Bart Ehrman on the problem of evil and why he thinks the Bible does not address the problem. This is not his usual type of work. For one thing, I was surprised to read a book of Ehrman’s where he did not talk about the paper he wrote on Mark 2 in college. Yet on the other hand, Ehrman is stepping outside of his territory.

A usual criticism I have of Ehrman’s books is that you get the sound of one-hand clapping. Ehrman only presents his version of the story. He does not interact with those who disagree. Of course, I do not expect him to argue for what someone like myself would say, but I expect him to argue with it. I expect him to bring up writers like Plantinga and Ganssle and Copan and Zacharias and others and say why it is that they are wrong. He doesn’t.

What do we find? On page 18 he says “There are, of course, numerous books about suffering already. In my opinion, though, many of these books are either intellectually unsatisfying, morally bankrupt, or practically useless.”

Why are they they? Who knows? Which ones are they? We don’t know. We’re just told to simply visit any Christian bookstore. Personally, as one who goes to Christian bookstores frequently, one would be hard-pressed to find these kinds of books that Christians should be reading there. If Ehrman’s dislike is based on what is read in Christian bookstores, then I really do feel his pain.

Yet is it really a convincing way to make a case? Can he really just hope a section like that would deal with Plantinga and others? Would it be a convincing argument if I said “I choose to believe in Christianity because books like Ehrman’s are either intellectually unsatisfying, morally bankrupt, or practically useless.”? Of course not. I need to give a reason.

Now if Ehrman wants to say a lot of these books are not written to help those who are suffering. I agree. So what? A lot of philosophers are not professional counselors. Why should they be? In fact, what is Ehrman’s book doing to help people who suffer? If anything, it would hurt them because one could say he’s taking a great source of comfort that they have and calling it into question. Of course, he has all right to do that, but to do such an action and complain about what others are doing is highly problematic.

In fact, I have no doubt that if Alvin Plantinga, a leading Christian thinker on the problem of evil for those who don’t know, had a mother come to his office whose son died in a car accident, he would not give her a copy of one of his books on the problem of evil. He would listen to her. He would comfort her. He would pray with her. He would read Scripture with her. If he was not qualified in his opinion to do any of those things, he would find someone who was. In fact, aside from praying and reading Scripture, I think Ehrman would do the same thing. We all should.

Throughout the book Ehrman does present challenges to people’s faith. (Once again, how is it supposed to help those struggling with evil to go after their faith in a time of suffering, and yet Ehrman complains about others) These are the usual canards. The gospels are anonymous. Moses did not write the Pentateuch. The gospels contradict. Daniel was written late. Jesus and Paul are failed apocalyptic prophets. Anyone who’s read any of Ehrman’s other works will recognize the recycled arguments. It is not my purpose to deal with those here. It is only to point out again, is this the kind of message that Ehrman wants to give to suffering Christians? Is this the bet time to attack their faith? Of course, he could say he has not written this book to give emotional solace but to address an issue. That’s fine, but then why go after other books for the exact same reason. If anything, at least these books are trying to strengthen someone’s faith when they think they need it most.

Many of Ehrman’s objections also seem simplistic. For instance, on pages 12-13, he asks why there can be free-will in Heaven and everyone does the good, but there can’t be on Earth. My answer I’ve had for that for years is that Heaven is the end result of a lifetime of choices. Earth is the place where you choose who you will serve. When you are in the presence of God, you are locked into whatever choice you made. You can still act freely, but not against that basic lock. Now my answer for the sake of argument could be wrong, but it is an answer.

Ehrman also is not inconsistent with his approach often. For instance, he will say that the prophets knew that not all suffering was the result of sin and God judging the people, yet this is the view he still constantly repeats as theirs. The prophets are usually not speaking about evil as a whole, but about a particular evil and saying that yes, the covenant people are not being faithful to the covenant.

An interesting quote for readers is on page 127 where he says “What if I was right then but wrong now? Will I burn in hell forever? The fear of death gripped me for years, and there are still moments when I wake up at night in a cold sweat.” One can’t help but wonder why in a book on evil Ehrman would want to risk having more people do the same thing.

Ehrman does point out that we could all do more to help deal with evil, and I agree. Yet is that all he wants to say? I see nothing beyond that. He’s of the view that we should still enjoy our lives, and I agree with that. If anyone wants to know why I think evil is the way it is in the world today, look at the church. Evil will prosper where the church fails to be the body of Christ. Interestingly in all these disasters Ehrman talks about, he seems to not notice it’s Christians who are responding. When he talks about how he helped someone who had escaped Cambodia during the Khmer Rouge with his family, he mentions it the was a Lutheran ministry that got them here, but Ehrman doesn’t make the connection. Could it be the Lutherans did what they did because of Christ? Could it be God is operating through the church?

If this is the way God is dealing with the problem of evil, then by going against Christianity, could it be Ehrman is himself contributing to the problem he rails against?

I’d also like to point out that evil is not a defeater for Christian belief. It cannot be the case that the first way of Aquinas is true and that the problem of evil shows that God does not exist. The theistic arguments must still be dealt with. It cannot be that the historical case for the resurrection cannot be established because of evil. The case must be dealt with on its own.

I conclude that Ehrman has not dealt with the problem of evil, but the book I suspect is just another way of going after Christianity. Of course, Ehrman is free to do this, but I do not see why one would want to knock down a system to help deal with evil without putting up any system of one’s own in its place. Ehrman is doing what he says the Christians works he condemns are, except worse. At least those are usually trying to strengthen someone in a view for comfort. Ehrman is instead knocking them down.

In Christ,
Nick Peters

Is God a SadoMasochist?

Is the cross just a sick and depraved act? Let’s talk about it on Deeper Waters.

Recently, this video was brought to my attention. Be warned that it does contain strong profanity for all interested as well as some disturbing images. I put it up here just so that readers can make sure I have given an accurate representation of the video. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YXXgUpv7APE

Now lately, I’ve spent much time blogging about how we have the gospel wrong. We have taken a part of it, forgiveness, which is an important part, and made it the whole deal.

When John the Baptist and Jesus showed up teaching the gospel, most people were not thinking about forgiveness. The Jewish system already had a way set up where you could receive forgiveness and there was no major need to replace it. Of course, some did come for forgiveness as Jesus was showing how forgiveness would work in the Kingdom, but Jesus did not preach an unheard of concept. All the Jews knew about forgiveness.

Jesus taught something greater. He taught that the plan of Israel was coming to a fruition. God was about to act to rectify the problem. What problem is that? It is the problem of sin and evil and death. Our teaching today tends to ask about the cross “What does it do for me?” It is foreign for us to think about the rest of the world.

So in replying to the producer of the vid, who based on his name I will just call BD for short, we will need to keep this in mind. Nowhere is there any material about the kingdom of God in the video, or about the problem of evil, or anything about the story of Israel.

Note also something else important that never shows up in the video. Never do we see an argument against the existence of God. We do not see an argument that shows that the resurrection did not happen. It is as if BD just wants to hit us with an emotional attack and make us not think about the real claim. If God exists and if Jesus did rise, then Christianity is true and that must be dealt with.

So let’s deal with some errant concepts that show up.

BD has a terrible rendition of the Trinity where the Son is the reincarnation (How can there be a reincarnation without a first incarnation) of the Father. However, he also uses the classic Bill Maher type of argumentation where God sends Himself to sacrifice to Himself, Himself to solve the problem that He Himself created.

If BD does not want to be a Christian. Fine. If he wants to think the Trinity is nonsense. Fine. Yet in all of this, at least get the concept right. If someone wants to be an atheist, at least seek to be an informed atheist. When I see a misrepresentation of the Trinity in this way I automatically know this is someone who doesn’t know what he’s talking about. A good library would have volumes that would help give BD some understanding of the Trinity even if he doesn’t believe in it.

BD also wishes to point out that some people have suffered worse than Jesus. This is not being denied. But so what? BD assumes the worst part of the crucifixion was the pain of the cross. Of course the cross was physically painful, but it was more designed to be socially painful. It was designed to shame the criminal before others and thus give the notion to anyone else watching that “Maybe you don’t want to do what this guy did.”

Furthermore, Jesus being shamed was said thus to be a traitor to Rome and to be under the curse of YHWH. This is what makes the resurrection so important. The resurrection is the vindication of the claim of Jesus to be the King of Israel. It is God raising Him up so He can rule, since a dead king cannot rule the Kingdom of God. It is a reversal of the shame and God giving Jesus the place of highest honor.

So what about that sacrifice? How could it be a sacrifice if Jesus knew He was coming back? When something was offered to God, God could do with it what He wanted. Jesus had to face shame and death as it was entirely to take on the full curse for us. (If you remember, Genesis 3 has a little something about a curse) In facing death and shame head on, Jesus is able to overcome them for us. He is able to rectify the problems of evil, death, and sin.

This is why the story of Israel is so important. Genesis 3 is not an accidental test. It sets the whole tone of the Bible from then on. It’s not the case that the story of Abraham has nothing to do with that. The story has everything to do with it. Abraham’s role is to help restore that which was lost. Over and over, man fails at the attempt to rule as God desires, until finally Jesus comes who is able to do that.

Well couldn’t God just forgive? Not exactly. God is the greatest good and thus has the greatest honor. If God decides He won’t punish sin, then He is not treating Himself as the greatest good. He is being inconsistent. If He does this just for us, then it is akin to idolatry.

God must be just. That must mean there must be some punishment given for sin. BD wishes to make it be that God delights in punishing us. If that was the case, then one wonders why forgiveness would be offered at all. If God just wanted to punish us, He could have been eternally just and never sent Jesus and no one could say “You’ve done wrong.” God is under no obligation to forgive anyone or even provide a way of forgiveness.

Of course, BD has the idea of Hell as a torture chamber. Is he truly unaware that there are many different views of Hell, including ones that see it as eternal conscious torment, that are not torture chamber motifs? This includes my own view that sees Heaven and Hell as not physical locations, but as relational realities. The same sun that melts wax hardens clay. The love of God that melts the hearts of the repentant hardens the hearts of those opposed.

In conclusion, we note that BD has not given any arguments against the central truths of Christianity but has chosen to speak (Quite ignorantly) of the parts he does not understand. Once again, if someone wants to be an atheist, be one, but at least be informed in your atheism.

In Christ,
Nick Peters

Book Plunge: The King Jesus Gospel

Are we doing something wrong in Evangelicalism? Let’s talk about it on Deeper Waters.

Recently, I finished reading Scot McKnight’s book “The King Jesus Gospel.” (By the way, if anyone wants to know about what I’m reading, just head over to GoodReads and feel free to add me. I regularly update it.) I had heard much good about the book and with N.T. Wright pointing out what a good book it was, I knew I was in for a treat.

The book is telling us that we are doing something wrong in evangelicalism. McKnight starts by sharing how he went door to door with someone from his church shortly after his “conversion” (I say it that way because I hate the term) and they spent an hour with the guy who had visited their church and really wasn’t interested, but eventually he did accept Christ as Lord, though most likely from McKnight’s perspective, it was an outward show. They went back to church and there was much celebration. The man was never seen at the church at all.

McKnight wants us to think about what has happened.

We have got to a point in our society where we have the message of salvation, which is really part of the gospel, and made it the whole gospel. This fits in well with our individualistic culture where the question then becomes “What is God going to do to take care of my problems?”

In this kind of society, people can make decisions quickly, but McKnight wants us to konw that the apostles were not sent out to get people to make decisions, but were sent out to make disciples. If we can get someone to “convert” and then not have anything required of them or any incentive for them, then we’re pretty much getting them to just say “Yes. You’re right.” We are not instilling in them a desire for Christlikeness.

When it becomes about our problems, then McKnight takes the saying from Dallas Willard that the gospel becomes simply “sin-management.” Of course, no one would say we need to downplay the importance of dealing with our sins. We certainly must deal with them. We just must make sure they are not the only aspect of reality that we deal with.

McKnight proposes we do that by broadening our picture. The coming of Jesus is not about getting someone to come and deal with our problems. It’s about God dealing with the problem. Interestingly, I just today started reading “Bart Ehrman’s book ‘God’s Problem.’ ” It is Ehrman’s work on the problem of evil and why he thinks the Bible doesn’t address it.

Ehrman is partially right. Evil is the problem. It is what the cross and the empty tomb are there to deal with, but part of the reason that problem is not taken care of is that we’re so fixated on our problems. Now of course we all have problems to deal with, but even our own problems can be seen in a different light when we place them under the kingship of Christ.

Could it be that when we start dealing with God’s problem, that we’ll find out not only do our problems get taken care of, but so does God’s problem? Could it be that if the church were to start acting the way that Christ had meant for us to act that maybe the problem of evil would not have been as severe? There are aspects we cannot change. There would still be hurricanes and earthquakes and tsunamis, but there would be more Christians to help those in need and more resources to help them.

McKnight wants us to see that the gospel is about the story of Israel reaching a fruition. It is about the Messiah, the rightful king, coming and taking the throne and when He takes the throne, He begins working out the problem to the proper solution. We are so busy looking at ourselves that we are not aware that God is at work in the universe and bringing about His mission.

We send people out to make decisions, but we don’t instruct them in what it means to be a disciple of Christ. It is as if we seek to get someone to an emotional high and then assume that our work is done. You might as well say that when a woman goes through the labor of childbirth and gives birth to a child, that she can then leave and go her own way. Her work is done. That does not work in parenting. It will not work in discipling.

McKnight urges us to return to the Old Testament also and see about the life of Israel. Don’t just look to see how it relates to Israel for the time-being. Look and see about the story itself. What is Israel dealing with? Why is God using these people? What is His overall purpose? Is it just a random thing, or is there some purpose to Israel?

Lately as I go to sleep, I’ve been trying to think through the OT and get the story of Israel in my mind. My mind has to have something to think on serious usually to get any peace and this is a great aid to me. It’s fascinating to see how the story of Israel could play itself out. I’ve been doing this for a few days and I’m not even through Genesis yet!

Upon reading this book, I have realized that this is the kind of book that every pastor needs to read. We are giving our people only part of the story. We are giving them forgiveness, but giving them the impression that God is there to deal with their problems instead of this idea that God wants something from His people. He wants them to be seeking Him continually and acknowledging His Son as the king of their lives.

The only downside I can think of is that with a place like Amazon, I cannot give this book six stars. Five is just not enough.

In Christ,
Nick Peters

Deeper Waters Podcast 4/6/2013

What are we going to the talking about on the podcast on 4/6/2013? Let’s talk about it on Deeper Waters.

Some of you might have noticed that the time of posting for the blog has changed recently. I find it’s much easier to do the blog in the morning so that I have the rest of the day to myself and spend less time online that way. I have also since doing the Deeper Waters podcast every Saturday, decided to do the blog just Monday-Friday. Sunday, I just decide to take a rest to recharge.

I figured today that since I want people to know what’s going on on the podcast and have a reminder that they ought to listen in, then I’d start posting some on Fridays about what we’re going to be talking about on the podcast on the following day, especially since I’m booking a lot of great guests to come on and talk about relevant issues.

For those who don’t know, April is Autism Awareness Month, a topic I blogged on profusely last April. Most people who read this blog know that my wife and I both have Asperger’s and so this is a time of the year that we take extremely seriously and we want to show that on the podcast.

Recently, I was made aware of a book by Jacob Alexander about his son Joseph called “In The Belly of the Whale.” Joseph has Asperger’s and Jacob wrote it about the challenges that his son faced as he was growing up and why the condition of Asperger’s has not been something that Joseph has used as an excuse to give up, instead quite the opposite.

As you can imagine, that’s the kind of story that I like to hear seeing as I have the same mindset. I view my condition as a unique way I have of looking at the world and getting to relate to people. In fact, I agree with the opinion I’ve heard Temple Grandin has given before. If there was given to me an opportunity to have a cure for this, I would not want it. It’s become part of who I am and affects my mind in such a way that gives me a good edge on my thinking.

On tomorrow’s program, we’ll spend two hours with Jacob talking about his son. I had hoped to get Joseph himself on the program, but he’s busy preparing for something in his schooling and now is not a good time. Still, I have read Jacob’s book and I have a lot of questions I want to ask about his son growing up. I also plan on sharing experiences of Allie and I with Asperger’s that I think relate to what Joseph has gone through.

I hope you all tune in and listen tomorrow. While the Alexander family is a Christian family so this is a Christian story, I think learning about Asperger’s would be beneficial for everyone and not just the Christian community, although we are certainly a community that needs to learn how to love those who are different from us. Please tune in tomorrow then to the Deeper Waters podcast to hear about a success story of someone with Asperger’s.

In Christ,
Nick Peters

Jacob Alexander’s book can be bought here

The link to the show can be found here.

Things Ancient People Did

Were the ancient people stupid and superstitious? Let’s talk about it on Deeper Waters.

Recently, I’ve been debating on an article that Dr. Gary Habermas wrote for the Washington Post for Easter on reasons Jesus rose from the dead. Consistently, an argument that I have seen is one that says that the ancient people believed in a lot of this superstitious nonsense and that this didn’t happen in an age of science where people know better.

Oh really?

For the sake of those with that mindset, I’d like to point out to you some activities that the ancient people did.

#1-Ancient people had sex.

Yeah. This might seem like a shocker, but ancient people were really interested in having kids. After all, that was how you had a productive home life and made sure your family name was passed on. Their preferred method of getting to have kids was through having sex. They didn’t sit around and wait for virgins to get pregnant and then be overjoyed at the thought that they were now parents. Even back in Abraham’s day when he was told he should have a kid through Hagar by Sarah, he decided to sleep with her. When Lot’s daughters wanted to have kids without another man around, they got their Dad drunk and slept with him. They seemed to realize that there was this connection intrinsically between sex and babies.

#2-Ancient people built boats.

Sometimes, ancient people wanted to travel on the water. There was a whole industry for this and the ships would be used for battle as well as transport. In order to be able to move on the water, the ancient people built boats. They realized quite easily that when men start to walk on the water, they don’t last too long. They could not explain why this was, but they figured if they want to move on the water, they’d better build something that can.

#3-Ancient people grew food.

Believe it or not, ancient people worked long hours just to make one loaf of bread for their families. They planted seeds and cared for them in the hopes that they would have a good harvest. Why did they do these things? They did them because they did not expect food to just instantly pop up on their doorstep. They had this strange idea that they would actually have to work to produce food.

#4-Ancient people made wine.

Ancient people loved to drink wine, and they did not expect that if they just left water in a jar in the house, that it would suddenly turn into wine. Instead, they went through a long process in order to get the wine that they wanted. Once again, it’s a strange idea to some today I’m sure, but the ancients did it.

#5-Ancient people had doctors.

Of course, their doctors weren’t as good as ours today, but they had doctors who sought to have natural theories. Galen, for instance, believed that there had be a balance between the four humours of the body. He was wrong, but this theory was one that was perfectly natural. Like in any age, there were some quacks, but there were some who did seek those natural treatments.

#6-Ancient people buried their dead.

When someone died, the ancient people would bury them. Why? They didn’t need much experience to know that dead people stay dead. No one expected that when uncle Jacob died, that he would by some chance suddenly wind up on their doorstep within a week. They were dead and that was it. They had abundant evidence for this. People staying dead seemed to be a consistent pattern.

Why do we say all of this? Because ancient people would know what a miracle was. They had a basic idea of the natural order even if they couldn’t explain how it all worked. We can say they were wrong about miracles taking place, but we cannot say they were wrong in being able to tell what would qualify as a miracle. Suppose they were wrong about Jesus coming back from the dead. That would not mean that they would not know that had He come back, it would have been a miracle.

Were some people superstitious? Sure. So are some people today who read their horoscopes and such. Were they superstitious because they believed in miracles and deities? No. To have such an approach is to beg the question in favor of an atheistic worldview as being the only rational worldview through a circular argument.

By all means, say the ancients could have been wrong, but let’s not establish idiocy to them where it is not due.

In Christ,
Nick Peters

Are Christians Supposed To Be Good?

Do we have the concept of a good person wrong? Let’s talk about it on Deeper Waters.

There’s a story about a professional basketball player who would often distance himself from his female fans, particularly since some female fans will have a tendency to really throw themselves at an athlete they admire. When asked why he would do this since so many other women were offended he replied, “If any woman is going to be offended, it’s not going to be my wife!” His first duty was to honor her and to do that, he would not even risk an event like that.

Yesterday, I started writing about Moral Therapeutic Theism. (MTT) One of the views of God in this is that Jesus came to make us be good people. We are often told that we are to love our neighbor as ourselves. Indeed, this is true. Yet this is a horizontal command. That is, it is a command about how man is to relate to man. It is often forgotten that this is the SECOND greatest command. The greatest is to love the Lord your God with all your heart, soul, mind, and strength.

#2 will make no sense without #1. If you do not love God, your love of man will be useless. If you put man before God, you are guilty of idolatry. The love of God must be foremost in your mind. Remember we love because He first loved us. The only way we can love our fellow man is because we have received the love of God. Even if we don’t acknowledge it, there are traces of God’s love all around us.

Yet our reasoning has by and large been horizontal. We do not speak out on sin in the world because we want to be good people. We don’t want to judge anyone. We don’t want to be critical. That’s not what Jesus would do to anyone after all is it?

Go read the NT, come back, and tell otherwise.

Of course, Jesus had love and grace and still does. Who was it towards? It was towards the people who knew about their sin and acknowledged it. Jesus never once made light of sin. He knew it was a serious consequence. Even in the case of the adulterous woman, He never denied the sin. He told her to go and sin no more. He dealt more seriously with the sin of hypocrisy he saw around Him and people who were wanting to use this woman for their own evil intentions.

Go read a chapter like Matthew 23. Go read most any conversation Jesus had with the Pharisees and Sadducees. Go read a passage like Luke 11. Jesus did not have any patience for people who were thinking they were righteous and not in any need of a savior.

If you do not have a problem with sin in your fellow man, then you are not loving God. Now you can be wrong in how you deal with it, but you have to realize that God does not coddle the sin of people He sees around Him. Christ sought to remove people from that bondage. He never sought to enable them in it.

If you make the love of man paramount and not offending your fellow man, meaning not dealing with evil when you see it, then you are not loving God. Keep in mind John in his gospel told us about people who did not come forward in support of Jesus because they wanted the honor of man more than the honor of God.

Now this doesn’t mean you’re to go out there as if you have no sin and go after everyone for every sin they commit. Yet you are not to turn a blind eye either. How you speak will be important and that will be learned only through the study of wisdom.

Our modern world has got us thinking the opposite. We are of the opinion that we are not to rock the boat at all. If the apostles had not rocked the boat, there would be no Christianity. Go read the epistles and see how seriously Paul took sin in the midst of the church. Go read Acts and see the forthrightness of the apostles. Go read Revelation and see how God judges sin. (Regardless of your views on eschatology, you can’t read Revelation and walk away thinking God takes sin lightly.)

A good person is not someone who just gets along with everyone. A good person is one who values what God values and opposes what God opposes. To be a truly good person today, one will have to know God. Note also that a good person is not the same necessarily as a nice person. A good person will do what he or she ought to do and not simply what will make people around them happy. In fact, if you’re a good person, you will quite often make people unhappy, much like Christ did.

Once again, there is no condemnation about being good. What is asked is that we be good the way God desires us to be. The world is not to set the bar for what is good. Goodness is found in God fundamentally and essentially and we must meet His criteria.

In Christ,
Nick Peters