Author: Nick Peters

Book Plunge: Evidence Considered Chapter 23

Is there a problem with bad design? Let’s plunge into the Deeper Waters and find out.

Chapter 23 looks at work done by Jonathan Witt on the idea of bad design. I see this as a defensive work on Witt’s part. It’s not theism going on the offensive, but on the defensive. If theism is true, why do we see instances of what is thought to be bad design?

As a non-scientist and a non-IDist, there is not much for me to respond to. However, one point I do want to address is something Jelbert says about Witt’s work. Jelbert does show that Scripture speaks about creation as the work of God such as in Psalm 139, Genesis 1:31, and Romans 1:20. However, we must remember the Biblical authors are not blind. Yes. Humans are fearfully and wonderfully made, but they knew more about child mortality from experience than we do. When a child is born today, it’s generally assumed the mother will survive and that all things being equal, the child will grow up and live a natural life.

Not so for them. Many times a mother would die in childbirth and you would want to have many kids because not all of them would live long lives. The authors are not writing though to give an answer to the problem of evil, but because there is still something grand to them in creation.

Jelbert says that God’s involvement appears to be capricious. Things look to be callous and random. Events happen that do no good and bring no redemption and don’t appear to fulfill a grand plan. They do not show that God is in charge of this drama. Jelbert says Witt will fall on God’s mysteriousness again or some other divine attribute.

Let’s notice something here. Not a single objection here is scientific. It is all theological. It is saying that if the God of the Bible existed or even the God of classical theism, He would not allow this or there is no good reason why He should allow it. How is this known? Where does Jelbert get this theological knowledge?

Something else sad about this is that this is part of the logical problem of evil that even the majority of atheist philosophers will admit has been answered. Alvin Plantinga did it decades ago with a little book called God, Freedom, and Evil. It’s important to note that one does not need to demonstrate the answer to why a certain event happened. One has to show that it is just possible that God has a good reason for allowing it. We don’t have to know what that reason is. Jelbert has the burden of proof here. It’s up to him to show that there is no good reason for this to happen.

Jelbert can call it a cop-out to say God is mysterious or something like that, but why think any of us should know all that God knows? If God is real, He has far more knowledge than we could ever have of why events are happening. Jelbert has simply said that things seem a certain way. He has to demonstrate it or else his argument fails.

Now he could go another route and say that it seems unlikely that a good God would exist and that is something else altogether, but it is no longer the hard case. If he went that route, I would reply with the Thomistic arguments, which are not addressed in the book it looks like, and of course the resurrection of Jesus, which we will get to later. I just have to answer one and it is not a deductive argument. The Thomistic arguments are deductive and thus more powerful.

I walk away from this chapter unconvinced. Jelbert has not demonstrated his theological claims. It’s interesting that in a section purported to be about science, we have more about theology instead.

In Christ,
Nick Peters

Book Plunge: Evidence Considered Chapter 22

Does what’s inside a cell make a case for God? Let’s plunge into the Deeper Waters and find out.

We return to Glenton Jelbert’s work again to see what he has to say about the inside of the cell. In this chapter, he responds to a young molecular biologist named Bill Wilberforce. Wilberforce seems especially enthralled with something in the cell called Kinesin. As readers know, I, not being a scientist, will not comment on the science, but let’s see what I think of Jelbert’s response.

Jelbert starts by saying he thinks the author is in conflict as he seems to be admiring science but also undermining it. His explanation of why he thinks this is that he says before some tools existed, scientists thought the cell was a blob of protoplasm surrounded by a thin membrane. Jelbert says this is nonsense and scientists have appreciated how complex cells are for a long time.

Unfortunately, Jelbert never tells us when this is. Was there a time when scientists thought what Wilberforce says they did? After all, we have improved microscope technology so was there a time we could not see in the cell that much and that was what we thought? Jelbert gives no indication that Wilberforce is right, but he also doesn’t show that he is. If all Wilberforce has done is make a claim, Jelbert has done the same. There’s not any reason alone to think anyone of them is right.

Jelbert also says that there is no meaningful prediction coming out of Intelligent Design that can be tested. Before this, Jelbert seems to say that the stuff Wilberforce has found was predicted by evolutionary biologists. He gives several places to look, but sadly, he gives no articles himself. I would have liked to have seen him done this.

To get back to ID, I am not convinced this is true. I believe that ID made a prediction about Junk DNA that happened to be right. I say this not as a supporter of ID, but I say it simply as one wanting to be fair with the evidence.

At a later point, Jelbert makes an admission I find troubling. He says, “Rationally, we will always search and go on searching for natural causes for any unknown, preferring to admit that we do not know than to give the non-explanation of an ill-defined supernatural being.”

I find this quite troubling. For one thing, he says that this is rational. Why? Is it a sign of rationality that someone doesn’t believe in the miraculous? Is it a sign of rationality that everything can be explained by materialistic causes?

Second, what about miracles? Sure, Jelbert doesn’t believe in them, but if he saw one in his presence, does that mean he would try to find a natural cause? Suppose it was even the favorite of an amputee growing a limb back. Will Jelbert say it is rational to find a cause?

Third, I find it hard to believe we are talking about an ill-defined being. If we went to the arguments of Classical Theism, Jews, Christians, and Muslims could all use them. This being was not ill-defined but many characteristics of Him were given.

As I wrap this up, I think what Jelbert is missing is this drives many people to theism not because of irreducible complexity, but because of wonder. People see what looks like a little factory in the cell and it leaves them in awe. Thinking it is irreducibly complex does not make them think of a creator so much as just thinking that the thing itself exists and is working towards an end. (This is in fact the classical argument from design.) When atheists argue for something natural and seek to remove God, many people see this as a way to remove the wonder. I am not an expert in the sciences, but many times something I see talked about in the sciences does leave me with a strong sense of wonder that makes me think that God is a brilliant mind behind all of it. Whether He did it through an evolutionary process or not doesn’t matter. Either way God is awesome with His creation.

We will continue later.

In Christ,
Nick Peters

Deeper Waters Podcast 6/9/2018: Tremper Longman

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

Noah’s Ark is often one of the most popular stories of the Bible. It’s one that we grow up hearing. The story seems simple enough. The world is full of evil people. God has had enough. He sends a flood and everyone dies except the good people, Noah and his family. As children, we don’t ask many questions.

Nowadays, we do. Not only are we asking questions, people around us are asking questions. Christians might know this story well, but so do our skeptical friends, and they don’t believe it. After all, they want to talk about the scientific data behind the story. They want to know if the whole world was flooded and how does that mesh with science?

Meanwhile, we realize that Israel was going through their own trials at the time and living in the midst of pagan cultures. These cultures also had flood stories. Maybe Israel just copied them and applied it to YHWH. Maybe it’s all just a myth. How should we approach the story?

To discuss this, we need someone who knows the Old Testament very well. We also need someone who knows the cultures surrounding Israel very well. We also need someone who will be able to tell us if we even need to bother to address the scientific concerns or not. Fortunately, The Lost World of the Flood is with us now. It is by John Walton and Tremper Longman, and the latter will be my guest this Saturday.

So who is he?

According to his bio:

Dr. Tremper Longman III (B.A. Ohio Wesleyan University; M.Div. Westminster Theological Seminary; M.Phil. and Ph.D. Yale University) is Distinguished Scholar and Professor Emeritus of Biblical Studies at Westmont College.  He has written over 30 books including commentaries on Genesis, Job, Psalms, Proverbs, Ecclesiastes, Song of Songs, Jeremiah, Lamentations, Daniel, and Nahum. His most recent books are The Fear of the Lord is Wisdom: A Theological Introduction to Wisdom Literature in Israel and Lost World of the Flood (with John Walton). His books have been translated into seventeen different languages. In addition, as a Hebrew scholar, he is one of the main translators of the popular New Living Translation of the Bible and has served as a consultant on other popular translations of the Bible including the Message, the New Century Version, the Holman Standard Bible, and the Common Bible. He has also edited and contributed to a number of Study Bibles and Bible Dictionaries, most recently the Baker Illustrated Bible Dictionary (2013). Tremper and Alice currently reside in Alexandria, VA and  have three sons (Tremper IV, Timothy, Andrew) and four granddaughters (Gabrielle, Mia, Ava, and Emerson).  For exercise, he enjoys playing squash.

I hope you’ll be listening to this interview. We’ll be talking about the book and how we moderns should approach the flood narrative today. I hope it will be of great help to you in your apologetics endeavors. Please go on iTunes also and leave a positive review of the Deeper Waters Podcast.

In Christ,
Nick Peters

 

36 Arguments For The Existence of God — A Work of Fiction: Appendix

How do the arguments stand? Let’s plunge into the Deeper Waters and find out.

Okay. I kind of cheated. I saw that all the arguments are in the appendix and that’s why I ordered the book from the library so I decided to skip the novel since I have many other books waiting to be read and get to the meat of the issue. How does Rebecca Goldstein handle the arguments?

Goldstein lists 36 arguments. I have been in apologetics for nearly 20 years and some of these arguments I have never before seen used. Many are left out, such as the arguments of Thomas Aquinas and the argument from the resurrection of Jesus.

Let’s start with the first argument she deals with, the Cosmological Argument. The first premise she has listed in the argument is “Everything that exists must have a cause.” When seeing that, it’s hard to not think about Edward Feser’s epic takedown of this kind of nonsense. Note Feser also includes “What caused God?” as a dumb objection.

Feser rightly points out that no prominent defender of the Cosmological argument in history has ever said the argument is that everything has a cause. Maybe your local pastor who doesn’t know the argument well might say that, but it is not said by serious philosophers. How did Goldstein make such a basic mistake?

If this is the first objection also, we have to wonder how seriously one should take Goldstein on the others since this is a basic mistake. It leaves one considering that Goldstein has never read any serious work on the cosmological argument. If she has, that could be even worse because she badly misunderstood whatever it is she read.

Many arguments from this point on are scientific and I have no wish to look at those as I am not a scientist, or they are arguments that I would never use and have not seen anyone else use. The next one I want to look at is the argument from miracles. However, to really look at that, I have to leapfrog ahead to another argument. That’s the argument from holy books.

Of course, it is a fallacious argument to assume that the book can only be the Word of God if God exists. but I am interested instead in dealing with the flaw in her look at flaws in the argument. The second one has her saying that all the books contradict, which they do. Goldstein says that one has to have arrogant provincialism to believe that the documents held sacred by the clan one was born in are true and the others false.

Apparently, it never occurs to her that one could, I don’t know, look for evidence that one of the books is true and make a decision based on evidence. If one is convinced the book is true, it is not arrogance to accept it. It would be arrogance rather to not accept it.

So when we return to miracles, Goldstein sees a similar problem. Miracles are used for any number of religions. How do we know any of them are true?

Technically, Christianity is the one that is founded on a miracle, the resurrection of Jesus. Muhammad does no miracles in the Koran. Miracles would not fit in Hinduism or Buddhism. Miracles could be added in later traditions, but they are not foundational.

Goldstein also says a miracle is a violation of the laws of nature. She does not tell where this comes from. Certainly, some people describe it this way, but not all.

Finally, she of course appeals to Hume. Hume’s argument has been critiqued several times over. One of the best critiques is by the agnostic Earman in his book Hume’s Abject Failure. For my own purposes, Hume was arguing in a circle. How does he know that a miracle has never occurred? Hume mainly relied on his own elite companions who like him did not believe in miracles, but he has no basis to demonstrate that no miracle has ever occurred.

The next argument is the argument from morality. Once again, as if on schedule, Goldstein trots out Euthyphro. Does God have a good reason for what He does? If He does, then we can use that same reasoning for ourselves. If He doesn’t, then His choices are arbitrary. It never occurs to Goldstein to define goodness itself. After all, if she doesn’t, she will have to live with the dilemma herself. Is something good because it benefits society, or does it benefit society because it is good? I have dealt with this elsewhere.

Naturally, there’s also criticism of the God of the Old Testament. As expected, there is no interaction with the scholarly work in this field or looking at life in an ANE culture. No doubt, Goldstein would not want creationists who never study evolution critiquing that, but I guess she gets a free pass.

These are the only ones I really want to look at. Most of the others are outside of my area of expertise or are just weak. It’s a shame to see so many atheists praising a work like this. On the other hand, it also shows us that the atheists are not becoming informed on these matters and likely just believing something because it argues what they want to believe.

In Christ,
Nick Peters

Book Plunge: 36 Arguments For The Existence of God — A Work of Fiction –Part 1

What do I think of Rebecca Goldstein’s book published by Pantheon Books? Let’s plunge into the Deeper Waters and find out.

When I read through Steven Pinker’s Enlightenment Now, he referred to this book as a book to deal with the arguments for God. I decided I’d order it to see what it was like. I have started it and really I don’t see how this book deals with the arguments for God thus far.

The book deals with an atheist celebrity of sorts who studies the psychology of religion named Cass Seltzer. The problem I have though is that I really can’t find anything likable about this character. I don’t see any real personality and he seems rather bland. I don’t think the book thus far has dealt with the existence of God at all, but even as a novel I find it boring.

This isn’t because of ideological differences. As a story, I could actually enjoy The Da Vinci Code. The history in it is awful, but the story isn’t that bad. (Don’t go see the movie. The movie was terrible!) I think the Foundation series by Isaac Asimov is some wonderful science fiction. I enjoyed reading Huxley’s Brave New World as well as Orwell’s 1984 and Animal Farm. I have strong ideological differences with all those authors, but the stories weren’t bad.

I can’t say the same about Goldstein. What is disappointing though is that this book is meant to deal with arguments for God, but it really doesn’t seem to do that at all. The first chapter is about something called the argument from the improbable self. It’s along the lines apparently of asking how I came to be me where I am. Seltzer starts thinking in the piece about existence and yet doesn’t appear to do anything. It’s as if he’s on the verge of something and then stops. (To be fair, the appendix I see does deal with more of the arguments so that will be interesting to see. I don’t expect much though since she says for the cosmological argument that the first premise is “Everything that exists must have a cause.” No great thinker in academia ever has ever defended such a notion for this argument.)

As the story goes on, various arguments seem to be dealt with, but it’s really hard to see how they are. If all that really deals with the arguments is the appendix, this book could have been much shorter. All we see is Seltzer attending scientific meetings and interacting with some women in his life. None of this really shows an atheist taking seriously the arguments.

I am thinking then at this point that I might not be able to write much anything more about this until we do get to the appendix, which is a shame. The story as it is is just rather boring and I don’t have any connection to the characters whatsoever. If things change, I will let you know out there, but if they don’t, then we will just deal with the theistic arguments in the appendix when I get there.

In Christ,
Nick Peters

Book Plunge: Atheism On Trial

What do I think of Louis Markos’s book published by Harvest House? Let’s plunge into the Deeper Waters and find out.

Markos’s book is an interesting read. He writes as a philosopher with a pastor’s heart. He clearly has a great love for many of the literary classics that have been shaping our culture. This work is a look at how many of those from the past dealt with the atheism that we see today. It’s nothing new. It has already been answered every time. There may be some different arguments, but many of them have the same kind of presuppositions.

The pastoral side of the work is that Markos wants to take us beyond just the God of the Philosophers. I do think that the arguments of classical theism that get you to the God of the Philosophers are just fine. I try to establish classical theism before I establish Christian theism. Still, there is something unique about Christian theism.

Markos rightly points out the importance of miracles for a Christian worldview and finds arguments against them wanting. He also has a section on the good, the true, and the beautiful. I find this to be an important distinction to make because too many of us don’t know the point of those ideas. Many people today might not have even heard of that saying.

There are also responses to such things as the problem of pain. This really came about in the Enlightenment time and one of the chief events talked about in Voltaire’s Candide is the earthquake in Lisbon, Portugal that murdered a large number of people. Evil is probably the most understandable argument against theism, but logically, it no longer works. It can still be used as an emotional or existential argument.

If there were some things I would change, one is that Markos decided to not have notes in order to make things friendly for the layman, but instead included a brief summation of each chapter in the back of the book that did include where to find the information. I would have preferred the notes. Notes have not been a problem in books for laymen. Consider the Case books by Lee Strobel for example. They have been filled with notes and yet they are incredibly reader-friendly.

I also notice that Markos really likes his Plato and so he has a lot to say about empiricism. I do not think empiricism was properly defined since I consider myself a classical empiricist in the Aristotelian-Thomistic tradition. I do realize that there are many who are atheists who consider themselves empiricists, but empiricism does not rule out the immaterial realm at all. (Note that I do not say supernatural realm as I don’t use that term.)

Markos also has arguments against evolution. As a Thomist again, I have no problem with evolution and as a non-scientist, I tend to stay out of it. I would not be bothered at all if I found irrefutable proof that evolution is true nor would I if I found the same that it is false. It does not affect my arguments for theism or my understanding of Genesis one iota.

I still do think that this will be an enjoyable read for many people. Atheism has been with us longer than we realize and in every age, it has been refuted. There is nothing new under the sun.

In Christ,
Nick Peters

My Thanks

What appreciation do I have for those involved in helping us? Let’s plunge into the Deeper Waters and find out.

Yesterday was my best day since the accident. I made it through the day without screaming in pain and I am finding movement is becoming easier and easier. I can turn my head much more to the left and the right. That might seem small to you, but to me, it is huge.

I am thankful first off for the people who helped us when the accident took place. I don’t know their names and likely never will. I am also thankful for the first responders who came and were at our location practically immediately and helping to get my wife out of our old car.

I am thankful for my mother-in-law staying with us in the hospital throughout all of this. I was afraid of what could happen since already I knew it was my fault and I was beating myself up. I didn’t get any of that though. We were taken out to Subway afterward and over the next few days got help with groceries and driving Allie around when I couldn’t.

Let’s go a step further with that one. Both of my in-laws together gave me my father-in-law’s car while they got a new one for themselves. I think they might have done it because of an offhand remark I made about dual temperature controls being something that it would be nice to have. Their car does have that. Allie really likes it cold when we drive and I have often froze because of it. The car also has dual controls for sound volume so I can listen to my talk radio all I want to and it doesn’t disturb her with her headphones.

I appreciate my own parents calling to check on me. They couldn’t help us out financially and I understand that. They did share about our need with church groups asking for prayers for us.

I am thankful to friends who got in touch with us at the hospital. I am thankful that some people called just wanting to know who we have been doing. I have even heard hopes of recovery from atheists who are my intellectual opponents and that is really touching to me.

I am thankful for the friend who when he heard that Allie had her purse break in the accident in that a strap came undone, he told her to find a purse on Amazon and he would get it for her. In the end, he got two purses for her. Allie is already enjoying and appreciating them.

I am thankful for another friend who got us a heating pad. He had messaged me on Facebook saying he wanted to do this. I told him we already had some, but he’s free to order more if he wants to. He did order another one and it really works great.

I am thankful also for the friend who came over yesterday and wanted to show me this great tape product. It’s something medical in nature that you put on the spot of injury for some healing. I will say that I do think I am recovering so maybe there is something to it.

Of course, I thank my wife who has had to put up with me in many ways. She has had to be there when I had to extend an arm so she could take it and help lift me up. She has also given me some neck massages and put icyhot on my neck to further help with healing. I know I made it hard for her to sleep sometimes because I was constantly wincing in pain, but she was there for me still.

Finally, I thank God. I don’t see any other way Allie and I could have survived that crash let alone walk away. Plenty of people have said that when they had been growing up, a crash like that would have killed them. Allie is especially grateful since she has said several times she could have even been paralyzed.

Tomorrow, at this point, I do plan on doing my show. It might be a challenge, but I can live with that. Hopefully, we’ll reach a place of normalcy very soon. Thanks to all who have been there for us.

In Christ,
Nick Peters

 

My Favorite Book of Scripture

What book of Scripture do I enjoy reading the most? Let’s plunge into the Deeper Waters and find out.

I figured I’d write something on my favorite book of the Bible since I don’t think I have done that before. Now some of you are already trying to guess, which is fine. I would do the same thing. Is it one of the Gospels? Maybe it’s the adventure of Acts. Maybe it’s one of the epistles. Perhaps you like the idea of end-times in Revelation?

No to all of those.

Well, maybe you like one of the prophets most like Isaiah. Maybe you like the Exodus account or maybe you like Song of Songs so much or Proverbs. Again, these are all good guesses, but they are still wrong. The one I like most is one most of us don’t think about, but we should.

As a child going through Scripture for the first time from Genesis to Revelation, I came across the book of Esther not knowing anything about it. As I started reading through it, I could not stop. It was like reading an adventure novel and I had to know how the story turned out. I read it all in one sitting.

Today when I get to that book, it is still a great moment of joy for me. This book is full of excitement and I have been going through it at night though using my main method of two verses at a time so I can think even better about it. I have not been disappointed so far.

Something fascinating about the book also is that God is absent in the book. Well, He’s absent in name. Now I know some people say if you go back to the original languages and look a certain way, God is smuggled in. They could be right, but the name of God does not really appear written in a normal way. God is supposedly absent, but He’s also ever-present.

When you go through the book, you see so many little coincidences that take place. What if Vashti had not refused the king’s command? Would Haman have succeeded in his plot? What if Mordecai had not reported to Esther about the officials wanting to assassinate the king? What if the king had not had insomnia and asked the royal records to be read to him?

There is also great irony in that everything is reversed. The villain of the story gets what he has coming to him. The Jews who are the victims at the start turn out to be the victors. Mordecai who refuses to honor Haman is himself given great honor recognizable by all.

Also interesting to me is that Esther is described as a very beautiful woman, which I don’t doubt was essential to her winning the heart of the king. One of the highest compliments the Bible usually gives to a woman is to describe her as beautiful. Beautiful women play a part in influencing the society around them as today for good or for evil.

God’s absence is something I think important to this story. It’s how we will look at our own lives one day. Events that seem random and unrelated at the time will one day turn out to be greatly related. We often don’t know what God is doing going into a situation. It’s coming out that we know what’s going on.

I hope I have encouraged you if you haven’t read this book of Scripture to read it. I think Christians should read all of Scripture. There are parts that we will honestly like more than others. For me, Esther is my favorite one to go through. I wind up wondering about events going on in my own life and how those can be working together for a greater good I cannot fathom.

In Christ,
Nick Peters

Book Plunge: Saving Truth

What do I think of Abdu Murray’s new book published by Zondervan? Let’s plunge into the Deeper Waters and find out.

Murray is writing about a situation that I have thought for a long time has plagued the church. It is that we live in a post-truth society. Nowadays, the truth doesn’t even matter. How someone feels about a claim matters or how well it serves an end-game is what matters.

This isn’t the fault of the world alone. The church is also to blame. The church determines truths based on feelings just as much as the world does. I wish I had a dollar for every time I heard about doing something as you “feel led.”

There’s also the fact that Christians can just as easily spread false information. Last night, I had to deal with a family member who shared a news story that I could tell in less than a minute was false. Going further, I found that the website also held to the idea that 9-11 is an inside job. Yep. Real reliable source there.

I get greatly bothered when I see something like this happen. We have the job of trying to convince people that Jesus rose from the dead, a fact that they cannot check the veracity of immediately, but we will so easily share stories that can be easily seen as fake? Doesn’t that damage our witness of the Gospel?

Murray also writes about our misunderstanding of freedom. We think by freedom that there is a certain something that has no hold on us. That is true to an extent, but it like saying being literate means that you can decipher symbols in an alphabet. Yes, you can, but you need to able to do more. You read so you can learn much more that there is to learn. You read so that you can be a better person.

In the same way, you are free not to pursue whatever you want to do, but you are free so that you can pursue the good, the true, and the beautiful. You are free to live for something greater than yourself. Freedom is not about you get to do whatever you want, but you are free to do as you should.

Murray also talks about issues of human dignity, what does it mean to be a human? Do we treat human beings as objects more in this day and age? What about issues of abortion?

Issues of sex and gender are definitely on the stage. Murray begins this chapter with a question a woman asked in an open forum about Christianity and homosexuality. It dominates the landscape in this chapter as Murray keeps thinking about it. Murray deals with the purpose of sexuality and questions relating to transgenderism as well. What does it mean to be a man or a woman?

Murray also deals with questions of science and of pluralism. Both of these are issues that strike our epistemology. Science is seen today as the only way to truth. Pluralism is seen as rude and exclusive.

There are many issues discussed in Murray’s book. Each of them in itself is worthy of a book-length work. Murray’s book is a good look at these topics and often shared from the perspective of an ex-Muslim who had to realize that truth mattered more than anything else.

In Christ,
Nick Peters

Reflections On The Pain

What have I been thinking on since the accident? Let’s plunge into the Deeper Waters and find out.

Since the accident Thursday, there’s been a lot going on. We do have a car now, but I’ve mainly been thinking about all the pain that I’ve been in. It’s quite interesting that the real pain that came did not show up immediately at the hospital. It came later.

For instance, it was either Friday or Saturday night that I started developing a headache. Well, that’s not to big a deal. Unfortunately, it was and has been. For instance, pause in what you are doing. Look to your left and look to your right.

I can’t do that.

Seriously. I have to use my peripheral vision. I can’t turn my head one way or the other, not without some incredible strain and pain. If I go to bed to lie down or come from there to get up, both are painful. Moving to another side can be killer if not impossible. Having my head bent at any angle induces great pain.

It has been getting better, but it’s still killer. This is something that I think on and realize that even a simple action like looking to the side is something that can be taken for granted. I did in the past and now it would be a dream to get to do any of those without pain.

Sometimes I have to go and as painful as it is, just lie down. This is something I don’t like doing. I never take naps. I am always active and doing something. When those times come, Allie usually gives me a nice neck massage and puts some icyhot on my neck. (Okay. The massages are a nice benefit of this.)

We’ve been avoiding driving even with the car because the pain is too intense. I do take Ibuprofen, but it is never strong enough. When I wake up in the night, the first thing that I feel is the pain. After some time from the neck massage and such, I can usually go a few hours without, but it doesn’t last long.

As a Christian, I wonder about this. I don’t think God created a pain-free world in the beginning. Our nervous systems were designed to be able to experience pain and I don’t hold to perfection. Still, at times like this I wish some modifications were made. It’s not like I can do anything about this. I keep wondering what purpose my prolonged pain serves.

Yet at the same time, could I not be making a mistake in thinking God has to be teaching me something and as soon as I repent, the pain will go away? That’s the mistake of Job’s friends isn’t it? Could these things happen just because that’s the way the world was set up from the beginning? Could this be giving me something to look forward to in the full coming of the Kingdom when there will be no headaches and there will be no neck pain?

I wrote about how it is that I can take my own wife for granted. Do I not take other things for granted? Do I not take a life without headaches or being able to turn a certain way for granted? What other things am I taking for granted? What if I had lost the ability to walk or the ability to type on my computer or anything like that? Should I not consider what James says? Any good and perfect gift comes from the Father above?

I don’t think it’s wrong to pray to God and beg Him to remove my pain, and I hope readers will do that with me, but should I not consider my many reasons to be thankful? Isn’t that what we often do in suffering? We look at one instance of suffering which could be genuine and bad, and look at that and discount all the good that comes into our lives?

When I am past this, and I hope it’s soon, will I ever be the same way where I will look at lying down and getting up and not take them for granted? Will I have a headache someday and say “I would rather have this than the ones I had after the accident?” Will I go through the day without taking Ibuprofen and be thankful? Will I drive my car without being in pain and able to look both ways and rejoice?

Pain is seen as something that tells us the world is not as it should be, and we look forward to a day without it, but today, I think I should try to learn through it. Instead of seeing it as an adversary to be defeated, maybe see it as a companion on the journey encouraging me to count my blessings. Maybe I should realize that there are many more blessings I have in my life that I might have missed were it not for it? Maybe it should teach me to slow down and spend less time doing things that don’t matter and spend more time doing things that do matter.

Still, while all of that could be true, I do want your prayers very much. Allie and I have experienced great generosity from friends who have given us gifts or offered us gifts. It’s been fascinating to know we mean so much to so many people. Many people have got in touch to check on us and we are grateful to all of you.

Please pray for me. I want to return to relative normality soon.

In Christ,
Nick Peters