Category: Apologetics

Did Constantine Change The New Testament?

Is the favorite bad boy of ancient history at it again?

When talking about Christian history, it seems like every vile and evil thing in church history goes back to Constantine. Before too long, I’m anticipating I will hear that Constantine was responsible for the Crusades, the Inquisition, and the Salem Witch Trials. Most people have no real historical idea of what Constantine did and just know what they have read about him in popular media.

Yesterday I was talking to an atheist on Facebook who gave me the line of “Who knows what Constantine took out of the New Testament?” Well, anyone who knows anything about church history and textual criticism knows the answer to that question. Nothing.

You don’t have to take my word. Listen to what Bart Ehrman says on his blog.

One of the reasons I’m excited about doing my new course for the Teaching Company (a.k.a. The Great Courses) is that I’ll be able to devote three lectures to the Arian Controversy, the Conversion of the emperor Constantine, and the Council of Nicea (in 325 CE). It seems to me that a lot more people know about the Council of Nicea today than 20 years ago – i.e., they know that there *was* such a thing – and at the same time they know so little about it. Or rather, what they think they know about it is WRONG.

I suppose we have no one more to blame for this than Dan Brown and the Da Vinci Code, where, among other things, we are told that Constantine called the Council in order to “decide” on whether Jesus was divine or not, and that they took a vote on whether he was human or “the Son of God.” And, according to Dan Brown’s lead character (his expert on all things Christian), Lee Teabing, “it was a close vote at that.”

That is so wrong.

There are also a lot of people who think (I base this on the number of times I hear this or am asked about it) that it was at the Council of Nicea that the canon of the New Testament was decided. That is, this is when Christian leaders allegedly decided which books would be accepted into the New Testament and which ones would be left out.

That too is wrong.

So here’s the deal. First, the canon of the New Tesatment was not a topic of discussion at the Council of Nicea. It was not talked about. It was not debated. It was not decided. Period. The formation of the canon was a long drawn-out process, with different church leaders having different views about which books should be in and which should be out. I can devote some posts to the question if anyone is interested (I would need to look back to see if I’ve done that already!).

https://ehrmanblog.org/widespread-misconceptions-council-nicea-members/

For Constantine to do this, he would really have to know more about the New Testament than we do today. He would have to know where every copy of every New Testament manuscript could be found and then he would have to have soldiers or other servants who could go and track down all those copies and somehow either destroy them or edit them so that no hint of them was left behind. It they were destroyed, then there could be no evidence that this happened since we cannot point to evidence that was destroyed.

People who say this really demonstrate that they don’t know what they’re talking about and play their hand. It was kind of ironic since this was in a conversation where I said too many atheists online refuse to read what disagrees with them. I stand by that. This is not to say that none of them do, but when I meet an atheist who actually engages, it’s a refreshing exception.

So what evidence is there Constantine edited the New Testament? Really, none. It’s a popular myth in the world of internet atheism and really, internet atheism does itself no service as saying it is a position of reason and evidence. To paraphrase Jesus, these people honor reason with their lips, but their heads are far from it. If you are such a person, you owe it to yourself to read contrary thought and see where you might be wrong.

And if you don’t, you don’t have a commitment to reason and evidence. You have a commitment to your own personal faith.

No. Constantine did not edit the New Testament. He did not determine the vote at Nicea. He did not pick the NT canon. None of those are true. If you are an atheist who wants to go about eliminating what you see as myths, start with your own house first.

In Christ,
Nick Peters

On Alcohol

Should we or should we not drink? Let’s plunge into the Deeper Waters and find out.

Yesterday I was doing a survey online and questions about alcoholic beverages came up. Now I am someone who has never drank alcohol in my life and in two months I turn 40 and I have no intention of changing that. However, I went to my Facebook to find out how many people are like me and have never drank alcohol.

I want to be clear at the start that I do not abstain from alcohol because alcohol is a sin. I don’t think that’s a biblically sustainable position. I avoid for personal health reasons. I am an underweight man and I realize it would not take a lot to get me drunk. My fear is I would lose control and hurt someone I love someway.

So let’s consider some data about it.

First off, I don’t know the alcohol content in the past such as in the times of the Bible, but I do know that it was enough for people to get drunk and for Solomon to warn against that in Proverbs. It’s tempting for some people to say that it was just grape juice that was drank in those days, but I don’t think there’s a basis for that. It was real alcohol.

We also know the first miracle of Jesus was turning water into wine. Now some could say that wine had no alcoholic content, but I think that that is something the writer would somehow point out. Either way, it’s an argument from silence. When the text says wine, we should assume that it was wine.

We also know that Paul encouraged Timothy to drink a little wine instead of just water to help with his stomach and frequent illnesses. The book of Psalms tells us that God gives wine to gladden. However, not all of us have illnesses that require wine. As for wine to gladden, that is true, but it is also said that a man is to delight in the wife of his youth and may her breasts satisfy him always. Because that is part of the purpose of the wife of one’s youth, it does not follow that everyone ought to have a wife and if someone is not, they are sinning. Someone can be celibate for their whole lives and still be in the will of God.

That means Scripture doesn’t forbid us to drink, but at the same time, it doesn’t command us to drink. That means then that we go with the path of wisdom. So what are some dictates that we are to follow?

Personal health has to be a big factor. If your doctor tells you to not drink alcohol, it is best to avoid drinking alcohol. My wife doesn’t mind a drink when we’re out at a restaurant, but now she’s on medication that forbids it. Because of that, she doesn’t drink.

There is also the point of causing needless offense. If you are around someone who has struggled with alcoholism or has lost someone to alcohol and you are aware of this, then it is probably best to abstain for the sake of not offending that person. You may do what you will in the privacy of your own home, but outside of that, it’s best to be sensitive to those around you so that you don’t cause someone to stumble.

There is also your personal health to consider. Do you have an addictive personality? You should probably abstain then. Perhaps you’re like me and don’t want to risk getting drunk because you’re a smaller person. Then you can seriously consider abstaining. However, if you think you can control your alcohol, you have freedom to do so. This comes with the caveat that if experience starts to show you can’t, then you should abstain.

If alcohol is becoming a problem in your life, I recommend you join a group like Alcoholics Anonymous or Celebrate Recovery. If you have a loved one struggling, there’s also Al-Anon and Alateen.

Interestingly, Welch’s grape juice was made to help deal with alcoholism. Welch knew someone who struggled with alcohol and did so again after a Communion service. The grape juice was made so that something could be served at Communion services for those who can’t drink alcohol and for my own personal tastes, I have never took Communion where real alcohol was used.

So this comes down to personal wisdom. If you want to drink, then be sure to practice self-control and if you cannot, then get help. If you don’t want to drink, that’s fine too. Don’t automatically condemn everyone who uses their Christian freedom to responsibly enjoy alcohol.

But as always, I look forward to your thoughts on this.

In Christ,
Nick Peters

Your Will Be Done

What does it mean to do God’s will? Let’s plunge into the Deeper Waters and find out.

So many Christians today want to find God’s will for their lives.

Should I get married? Who should I marry? What job should I take? Should I go to college and if so, what should I major in? So many decisions are about finding the will of God.

Is this what the Bible means when it speaks about the will of God?

No. This is a highly personalized idea. Let’s consider the first one about marriage. Assuming marriage is even for you, the Bible in a book like Proverbs lays out criteria. Since one should marry in the Lord, a Christian should marry a Christian. When speaking of a wife, the book mentions the kinds of qualities to look for. Don’t marry a nagging wife is one example. Marry a woman who fears the Lord. (Or a man if you are a woman)

Somehow, we got this strange idea that when we got to the New Testament, God decided to jettison wisdom and was going to tell us all what to do and we needed to find a way to get these secret messages from God. We are to look for clues, often ones that reside in our feelings and emotions, and from there try to determine what God is telling us. Scripture may be used, but apparently, it’s not as reliable as those feelings and emotions.

As you can imagine, I think this is a bunch of bunk. I see nothing in Scripture about it and it only showed up in our time of individualism. This kind of thinking really makes us very self-centered Christians.

Not only that, if God has a specific will for our lives like that, we’ve already screwed it up definitely. Also, if any one other person has screwed up their lives, they’ve ultimately done it for everyone. If you are to marry one specific person, then that means that if you marry the wrong one, both of your intended spouses have to marry the wrong one and then all their intended spouses have to marry the wrong one and on and on it goes.

It also causes the wrong focus. What we should be looking at the most is what kind of spouse we are going to be. What kind of employee are we going to be? What kind of student are we going to be?

“But how will I know what God wants for my life?”

It’s very easy. I can tell you definitely what God’s will is for your life and I have no hesitation in doing so. God’s will is to conform you to the likeness of Christ. The best thing to do when examining an action and if you should do it is to ask if it will conform you to the likeness of Christ.

When we pray for God’s will to be done, we are not praying that we will find some specific individualized will, or at least we shouldn’t pray that. We are praying that God will make the universe the way He wants it to be. How He wants us to be is to be conformed to the image of Christ. He wants us to be like Jesus.

You have plenty on that in Scripture.

Go try following that instead.

In Christ,
Nick Peters

Your Kingdom Come

What does it mean to want the Kingdom to come? Let’s plunge into the Deeper Waters and find out.

Do we really want the Kingdom to come?

I mean, let’s think about it. If we’re Christians, we know the right answer we’re supposed to say is yes. We want God to rule this Earth. We want Him to be the one in charge. We want Jesus to be acknowledged as king. We say we want that.

Do we really?

To pray for His kingdom to come also means something else. Ours doesn’t. Most of us struggle with an inflated view of ourselves and that can be even if we’re really negative. We are often not just moderately dumb or ugly or unlikable or anything like that. No. We are the worst of the worst. If anything goes wrong in our lives, it’s our fault.

When we pray this prayer though, we are supposed to be willing to forsake our own little kingdoms. This is God’s kingdom. We don’t want to be the ones in charge of our lives anymore. We want God to be in charge.

That also means we have to be willing to get rid of the sin in our lives. We have to drop that pornography habit. We have to stop that overeating. We have to be willing to give up gossiping about our neighbors. We can’t keep on thinking about that woman who isn’t our wife.

Do we really want that?

The truth is, our actions will answer for us. If we really want the kingdom to come, we will be willing to sacrifice those actions that we know are opposed to the kingdom. If we do not want the kingdom to come, we will keep acting like we are the ones who determine right and wrong and we are the ones who will see our own will be done.

This also is not a Democracy or a Republic coming our way. This is a monarchy. This is not something that we will vote on or campaign for. Jesus is a king and what the king says goes. It is absolute.

Today, our every action will show in some way what we want. Do we think our way is best or do we think the way of Christ is the best? We can say with our lips the right answer all we want, but actions do speak louder. I hope mine will show I want the Kingdom the most, but I fear too often they will show the other way. Perhaps that is where we need to encourage one another.

In Christ,
Nick Peters

Book Plunge: Heaven and Hell

What do I think of Bart Ehrman’s latest published by Simon and Schuster? Let’s plunge into the Deeper Waters and find out.

Generally, I have enjoyed reading through Bart Ehrman books. I thoroughly disagree, but I like the books. However, when I read the one before this, The Triumph of Christianity, I found myself walking away disappointed. There just didn’t seem to be anything there like the last ones. I started reading Heaven and Hell when it came out, got caught up in other books, and it was just awhile before I came back. Perhaps it seems more like Ehrman is moving away from Jesus to an extent and going to other areas in history and philosophy and there just doesn’t seem to be as much there. I can’t say entirely.

This book is a look at the formation of the doctrine of the after-death, as I prefer to call it, in Christian thought. Ehrman starts with the way the pagans in the world viewed death. From there, he goes to the Old Testament and then to Jesus and on to Paul and looks as well at Revelation. From then on, he looks at the church throughout history and then gives some concluding remarks on how he views heaven and hell.

This also leads to questions of the nature of heaven and hell. Again, these are more theological and philosophical questions so it could be that this just isn’t Ehrman’s area and so it seems more like just personal opinion at that point. However, there are some interesting points worth noting in the book.

Ehrman does show that in the pagan world, generally speaking, resurrection was not a good thing. The body was a prison to be escaped. Thus, resurrection in the Jewish or Christian sense also did not fit in.

For many skeptics who think that resurrection was the Jews copying from Zoroastrianism, which shows up on the net at times, Ehrman cannot agree, which is refreshing. As he says:

More recently scholars have questioned a Persian derivation for the Jewish doctrine because of certain problems of dating.1 Some experts have undercut the entire thesis by pointing out that we actually do not have any Zoroastrian texts that support the idea of resurrection prior to its appearance in early Jewish writings. It is not clear who influenced whom. Even more significant, the timing does not make sense: Judah emerged from Persian rule in the fourth century BCE, when Alexander the Great (356–323 BCE) swept through the eastern Mediterranean and defeated the Persian Empire. But the idea of bodily resurrection does not appear in Jewish texts for well over a century after that.

Ehrman, Bart D.. Heaven and Hell: A History of the Afterlife (pp. 104-105). Simon & Schuster. Kindle Edition.

Also, on a humorous note, he gives the story of how in an account Jesus said people would hang by their teeth in Hell over fires. Some disciples asked “What if someone has no teeth?” Jesus would then reply, “The teeth will be provided!” This was a joke done by a professor not to be taken seriously.

Also, for those discounting the Gospels as sources for Jesus, Ehrman has the following:

Even the most critical scholars of the New Testament agree that Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John are by far our best sources of information for knowing about the historical Jesus.

Ehrman, Bart D.. Heaven and Hell: A History of the Afterlife (p. 150). Simon & Schuster. Kindle Edition.

Unfortunately though, at times he lapses back into his more fundamentalist days of reading the text. As commenting about Mark 9:1 where Jesus says some standing here would not taste death before they saw the Kingdom of God come in power:

Jesus is not saying that people will go to heaven. He is saying that some of his disciples will still be alive when the end comes and God’s utopian kingdom arrives on earth. Or, as he says elsewhere, when his disciples asked when the end of the world would come: “Truly I tell you, this generation will not pass away before all these things take place” (Mark 13:30, emphasis added).

Ehrman, Bart D.. Heaven and Hell: A History of the Afterlife (p. 154). Simon & Schuster. Kindle Edition.

As I have argued, Jesus nowhere says when the Kingdom comes, it will be a utopia immediately. Jesus does not speak of the end of the world either, but of the end of the age. As an Orthodox Preterist, I’m convinced Jesus’s prediction was stunningly accurate.

Interesting also is what Ehrman says about 1 Cor. 15.

And so, for Paul, there will indeed be a resurrection. It will be bodily. But the human body will be transformed into an immortal, incorruptible, perfect, glorious entity no longer made of coarse stuff that can become sick, get injured, suffer in any way, or die. It will be a spiritual body, a perfect dwelling for life everlasting. It is in that context that one of the most misunderstood verses of Paul’s entire corpus occurs, a verse completely bungled not just by many modern readers but throughout the history of Christianity. That is when Paul insists: “Flesh and blood cannot inherit the Kingdom of God” (1 Corinthians 15:50). These words are often taken—precisely against Paul’s meaning—to suggest that eternal life will not be lived in the body. Wrong, wrong, wrong. For Paul it will be lived in a body—but in a body that has been glorified.

Ehrman, Bart D.. Heaven and Hell: A History of the Afterlife (p. 182). Simon & Schuster. Kindle Edition.

Ehrman also thinks the beast in Revelation 17 is the same as the beast that came out of the sea in Revelation 13. I disagree with this. Looking at the passage, it talks about a great harlot and the beast himself actually attacks this harlot after a time. Who is the harlot? Look at your Old Testament. One nation is repeatedly referred to as a harlot and that’s Israel. Israel would work with the Beast for a time, (Being Nero) in killing Christians, but in turn, the Roman Empire would eventually turn on the harlot, as Israel was destroyed in 70 A.D.

Yet at the end of this look on Revelation, Ehrman gives a paragraph that aside from the opening remark could easily be said in any evangelical church. As many preachers I know would say, “That’ll preach!”

Even if parts of the vision are difficult to unpack and explain and others simply do not cohere, the author’s main points are clear. His overarching message is that God is ultimately sovereign over this world, even if it doesn’t seem like it. We may live in a cesspool of misery and suffering, and things may be getting progressively worse. But God is in charge, and it is all going according to plan. Before the end, all hell will indeed break loose, but then God will intervene to restore all that has become corrupt, to make right all that is wrong. Good will ultimately prevail.

Ehrman, Bart D.. Heaven and Hell: A History of the Afterlife (p. 230). Simon & Schuster. Kindle Edition.

In the end, where does Ehrman fall? While he rightly tells us to try to avoid emotional reasoning, it’s hard to not see this in his response.

Even though I have an instinctual fear of torment after death—as the view drilled into me from the time I could think about such things—I simply don’t believe it. Is it truly rational to think, as in the age-old Christian doctrine, that there is a divine being who created this world, loves all who are in it, and wants the very best for them, yet who has designed reality in such a way that if people make mistakes in life or do not believe the right things, they will die and be subjected to indescribable torments, not for the length of the time they committed their “offenses,” but for trillions of years—and that only as the beginning? Are we really to think that God is some kind of transcendent sadist intent on torturing people (or at least willing to allow them to be tortured) for all eternity, a divine being infinitely more vengeful than the worst monster who has ever existed? I just don’t believe it. Even if I instinctually fear it, I don’t believe it.

Ehrman, Bart D.. Heaven and Hell: A History of the Afterlife (pp. 293-294). Simon & Schuster. Kindle Edition.

Of course, this would all depend on how you view heaven and hell. I have written about my views elsewhere. Ehrman does say he doesn’t think this is what God is like. While I don’t think it’s accurate to say God is actively torturing people or even allowing it, seeing as I think torture and torment are two different things, I have to wonder that it’s incredible that Ehrman is willing to take the risk. Seriously, if Heaven is possibly there to gain and Hell is possibly there to avoid, I think it behooves anyone to seriously consider the question and when you decide, it needs to be more than “I just believe it” or “I just don’t believe it.” Some might think Christians should then read other religions as well. I have personally read the Mormon Scriptures and other of their books, the Koran, the Tao Te Ching, and the Analects of Confucius.

Overall, there is some good stuff in the book, but there seems to be something missing. I can’t help but see an Ehrman who I think after all these years is still searching. Perhaps a book on the afterdeath is coming as Ehrman is seeing himself getting older and thinking about these questions a lot more. I still hold out hope that one day he will return to the Christ he has since rejected. I am pleased when in the end he says three of his great heroes are Dickens, Shakespeare, and Jesus. He would love to get to meet them in an afterdeath.

I am sure Jesus would love to meet Ehrman also.

Hopefully, it will happen, and on good terms.

In Christ,
Nick Peters

Deeper Waters Podcast 7/18/2020

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

We’ve all had events that changed our lives forever in a bad way. A wife could tell her husband she’s been having an affair or he could tell her he’s an addict to porn. A doctor could say the word “cancer” to patients. A son could die in a car accident.

These events shatter everything we know and require so much to recover from. Another one is a huge accusation of moral turpitude. My guest had just such an event happened. While he had been teaching journalism and living the life of an investigator, he had been accused suddenly of sexual misconduct and the #MeToo movement jumped in. Sadly, after Kavanaugh, I do have suspicions about what happened. My guest lost everything for the time and had nowhere to go.

But then, he used this to start asking bigger questions about life and especially started looking into the story of Jesus. As a result, he became a Christian. Now he’s telling his story in his book about how it happened. The book is Aftermath and my guest is Alec Klein.

So who is he?

According to his bio:

Alec Klein is a bestselling author and award-winning investigative journalist formerly of the Washington Post and Wall Street Journal. His groundbreaking investigations have uncovered a wide array of wrongdoing, leading to significant reforms, congressional hearings, changes in federal law, criminal convictions and more than half a billion dollars in government fines. His investigations have also set free several prisoners who were wrongfully convicted of murder and accused of other crimes. And Klein has helped dozens of excessively sentenced women gain their freedom and regain their lives through parole, commutations and pardons.

His first book, Stealing Time: Steve Case, Jerry Levin, and the Collapse of AOL Time Warner, was a national bestseller published by Simon & Schuster. The book was translated into Japanese and Chinese, excerpted in Great Britain and selected as one of the “Best Business Books” by Library Journal and Strategy + Business.

His second book of nonfiction, A Class Apart: Prodigies, Pressure, and Passion Inside One of America’s Best High Schools, also published by Simon & Schuster, was named “One of the Best Education Books of the Year” by the American School Board Journal and translated into Chinese, where it went through several printings.

His memoir, Aftermath: When It Felt Like Life Was Over, was published in 2020 by Republic Book Publishers. It is a story about faith, forgiveness and redemption.

As a consultant since 2018, Klein helped to create and launch an Oklahoma nonprofit that assists wrongfully convicted and excessively sentenced prisoners in regaining their freedom. He devised a system that has helped free dozens of women through parole and commutation, including some who had been sentenced to life in prison. He also helped to create a drug treatment program at a nonprofit in New York to give people a second chance at employment after failing drug screens. Over the past two years, Klein has worked on a pro bono basis to help several other prisoners regain their freedom, while he has consulted on various writing and media projects. He is also the creator and host of the podcast series, Life On The Other Side: stories from prisoners, their families and those helping them find justice and redemption.

From 2011 to 2018, Klein ran The Medill Justice Project, a national investigative journalism center at Northwestern University. A full, tenured professor from 2008 to 2018, Klein led an investigation that discovered exculpatory information, prompting a federal judge to release an Illinois prisoner a decade before her release on a first-degree murder conviction, which was overturned. Other investigations Klein oversaw led to the exoneration of a Miami man who had been convicted of murder and sentenced to life in prison. Klein also directed a probe that freed an Oregon mother who had faced more than 30 years in prison. In addition, Klein led an investigation in which a Louisiana inmate was released from solitary confinement after more than 36 years. Over the years, Klein has fought and won Freedom of Information Act appeals and access to records in state and federal courts as part of his investigations.

Under Klein’s guidance, The Medill Justice Project earned recognition nationally and internationally for its investigations, photography, videos, podcasts and website, including nearly 100 awards in seven years. Among them was a national Robert F. Kennedy Journalism Award, the first in Medill’s history, an Investigative Reporters & Editors award, a Sigma Delta Chi award and a Sunshine Award from the national Society of Professional Journalists. Klein also oversaw investigations that were honored with a regional Edward R. Murrow Award, Peter Lisagor Awards, local Emmy nominations, Eppy Awards from Editor & Publisher as well as awards from the National Association of Black Journalists, the Online News Association and others. Klein was also named to the Northwestern University Associated Student Government’s annual Honor Roll after being selected from a campus-wide nomination process and chosen from nearly 1,200 nominations of faculty and administrators. He was also recognized as one of six Medill faculty members by the Multicultural Student Affairs for being significant and influential people in their lives, based on an annual survey.

As a Washington Post investigative reporter from 2000 to 2008, Klein wrote a groundbreaking series on the little-known but widespread practice of reusing single-use medical devices in the United States. The stories documented patient injuries and device malfunctions and showed how the industry has eluded comprehensive oversight and is comprised of several entrepreneurs who have run afoul of federal authorities. The series, which won the Society of American Business Editors and Writers award for special projects, prompted an investigation by the Government Accountability Office, Congress’s investigative arm, congressional hearings and industry reform.

Klein also wrote a three-part series for The Washington Post about the world’s big three credit-rating firms, showing how they dominate an important part of global finance with little oversight or accountability, how the rating system is subject to manipulation and conflicts of interest, and how the credit raters use strong-arm tactics to generate business. His series, a first-place winner in Washington’s Society of Professional Journalists, prompted an investigation by the New York attorney general, congressional hearings and the passage of federal law to strengthen government oversight of the industry.

Among his other stories at the Washington Post, Klein conducted a yearlong investigation of AOL’s takeover of Time Warner. His investigation, based on hundreds of confidential AOL documents, showed how AOL secretly inflated its revenue to pull off the largest merger in U.S. history to create the biggest media company in the world. His investigation sparked investigations of AOL by the U.S. Justice Department and the Securities and Exchange Commission. Klein’s series also prompted the company, then called AOL Time Warner, to launch its own internal investigation of its accounting, which led the company to admit that it had improperly reported at least $190 million in advertising revenue, causing it to restate two years of financial results. The company agreed to pay $510 million to settle criminal and civil allegations that its AOL division improperly pumped up revenue before and after its merger with Time Warner. In the wake of Klein’s investigation, several top AOL executives were forced to resign, several business partners involved in AOL’s schemes were indicted and convicted on fraud charges and the AOL division that was the focus of his investigation was disbanded. For his coverage of AOL, Klein won the Gerald Loeb Award, business journalism’s highest honor. He also won awards from the Society of American Business Editors and Writers in project reporting and the Virginia Press Association in news writing.

Klein has won a number of other awards and fellowships, including at the East-West Center and the Poynter Institute. Klein, who also worked as a reporter at the Baltimore Sun and Virginian-Pilot, is a frequent guest speaker, having presented at the National Press Foundation, the American Press Institute, the Society of Professional Journalists, Investigative Reporters and Editors, the Society of American Business Editors and Writers, the Asian American Journalists Association, the South Asian Journalists Association, Unity: Journalists of Color, and various newspapers and other media outlets, schools, associations, clubs, conferences and education groups throughout the country and the world, including Japan, France, Canada and South Africa. Klein has been a guest lecturer at several colleges, including the University of California at Berkeley, George Washington University and New York University. He was also selected as a business writer-in-residence at the University of Wisconsin-Madison. Klein has given a series of Webinars to professionals throughout the country and abroad. Klein has served as a judge for the Society of American Business Editors and Writers awards and other journalism contests and has appeared on several television and radio programs, including CNN, CNBC, CBS and NPR as well as the BBC and TV Asahi. .

Klein, a Phi Beta Kappa graduate of Brown University, is the author of several staged plays, a novel and the foreword to an edition of Show Me The Money: Writing Business and Economics Stories for Mass Communication, a textbook adopted at universities across the nation.

Born in Sleepy Hollow, N.Y., and raised in New York City, Klein is the son of a Japanese artist and an American journalist.

We have also caught up on some more shows and I have uploaded them. More will be coming very soon. Thank you for listening.

In Christ,
Nick Peters

Book Plunge: Atonement and the Death of Christ

What do I think of William Lane Craig’s book published by Baylor University Press? Let’s plunge into the Deeper Waters and find out.

William Lane Craig is often said to be the #1 apologist alive today. I consider him a friend personally, and yet I honestly haven’t read many of his books at this point. It’s not because I am opposed to him in some way. It’s just that for whatever reason, I haven’t. When I got this book in the mail though, I figured I should see what it was like. Most of Craig’s works I know of have been apologetics works. While there is apologetics in this to a degree, this one is more theological.

I was also curious because I am a fan of N.T Wright and I couldn’t help but think of this being a response in part to his book on the atonement. Thus, I dove in. I will be giving a brief summary of what the book is about and then listing things I liked about it followed by areas that I had some questions about.

The book is divided into three parts. The first is the biblical data, which makes sense. When forming a doctrine from the Bible, the Bible is usually seen as a good place to go to. Craig actually begins in the Old Testament, which I also thought proper, and looks at topics like sacrifice and the suffering servant before proceeding to how this is fleshed out in the new.

From there, he goes to history. What do the Fathers of the church say about the atonement? What was said in the medieval period? What happened after the time of the Reformation?

Finally, we get into probably what is the most unusual part of the book, though interesting and helpful, and that is the philosophy of the atonement. In this, there is not only a look at the philosophy surrounding justice and mercy, but also around law courts. There are several instances of American law cited and questions of topics such as how do pardons work.

So for positives here, Craig is indeed very thorough. Most people would not think of including something like this last section in a book on the atonement, but Craig does. He also does include some words on the New Perspective on Paul. It’s food for thought, but at this point, I am not ready to say the NPP doesn’t work.

On page 206, there is a wonderful paragraph on the necessity of the crucifixion and the resurrection. This helps show the connection between God dealing out justice and God being merciful on us. There is too little of this in Christian thinking today in that we don’t see the difference the resurrection makes beyond “Christianity is true.”

As I said earlier, I appreciate Craig going to the Old Testament. The Old Testament is where our faith begins and too often we dispense of it. Most Christians I meet who are biblical scholars are New Testament scholars. Nothing wrong with being one, but we need specialists in the Old Testament as well.

I also did appreciate the final section. It was interesting looking at the atonement through the eyes of jurisprudence and seeing how modern notions of law can help us see the way the doctrine works. I also appreciate the philosophical objections being dealt with such as penal substitution being immoral.

However, there are some points I wish to raise that I would like to see addressed.

First, when we get to the New Testament data, I think there is an overemphasis on Paul. I am not opposed to Paul, but when you look in the references, you will find more references to Romans than you will to all the Gospels combined. While I do not consider it Pauline, at least exclusively, the same applies to Hebrews as well. On this point, I think Wright does come out ahead since he does spend more time in the Gospels with the direct words of Jesus.

On p. 167, Craig says it seems odd that someone can be forgiven for their sins and punished for their sins. It does, but I immediately remembered King David’s first son with Bathsheba. David was explicitly said he was forgiven, but he was also told immediately that the child born to him would die. It looks like then that David was forgiven and still punished. I would like to see this fleshed out.

I would have liked to have seen more interaction with N.T. Wright. Wright is the most prolific writer who has put out something on the doctrine and while he was cited at times, I would have liked to have seen an extensive interaction with him.

Finally, I thought the discussions of modern law were interesting, but I kept being struck by a concern in that. If we were in England, would we see English law? Would we see German law in Germany? American law is the category we think in, but does it follow that it’s applicable to the biblical doctrine?

I would have liked to have seen interaction with law in the world of Jesus, such as the law of Caesar or the law of the Sanhedrin. How did justice work in those courts? How did Caesar dole out justice and mercy both? Could Caesar give a pardon and how would that work? After all, these are the categories the biblical world was set in. I am not saying that there is no correspondence to modern law, but I can be skeptical. In a future work, I would prefer to see law in the ancient world look at.

That being said, Craig’s work is a great defense of penal substitution in particular, but I think also rightly recognizing there are some elements of other atonement theories. It is quite likely one will not cover everything. Those wanting a good resource on the doctrine of the atonement owe it to themselves to read Craig’s book.

In Christ,
Nick Peters

Hallowed Be Thy Name

What does it mean for God’s name to be holy? Let’s plunge into the Deeper Waters and find out.

Hallowed is simply a way to refer to something as holy, and holiness is something we have lost sight of. In our world today, the question “Is nothing sacred?” is entirely relevant. Most people today seem to live just for the next pleasure high, and that doesn’t necessarily mean drugs, though it can. Casual sex is all too often and apps like tinder can exist to pretty much just give a hook-up to someone.

Sometimes I look at our society and wonder what people think is worth living for. What is the true greatest good in our lives? For we Christians, we would say it’s the goal to see God one day, but while we say that, we often live like the greatest good is something else, myself included.

Holiness refers to something being set apart. It’s not just something common and normal. It’s to be reserved for a specific usage and time. God’s holiness means He is set apart from creation and refers to His goodness and purity. He is unique.

We can honor His name best by how we live our own lives. Do we live lives of service and gratitude to Him? Do we seek to love our neighbor as ourselves? Do we seek to do good to those around us even when they wrong us?

Also, do we treat God way too flippantly. Do we seek to speak for Him when we have no business doing so? I think about this when I hear so many people convinced that God is speaking to them. God gets treated in a casual manner. I don’t really care for John MacArthur, but I think he was 100% right when he talked about the guy who told him that God talks to him every morning while he’s shaving and MacArthur asked “Do you still keep shaving?”

My wife and I attend Celebrate Recovery together and normally, you introduce yourself as a faithful believer in Jesus Christ. I don’t say that. I try to remind myself of something else with my introduction and say “Servant of King Jesus.” Jesus is a friend for sure, but He is not just any friend. If you were friends with the president, regardless of what you think of him and if you don’t like Trump replace him with someone you do like, you would not treat that friendship casually. You would treat the president still with the utmost of respect.

Clay Jones in his latest book Immortal argues that one of the reasons we might not have such a Christian drive in our country is we have lost sight of what happens when we die. We try to not think about the fact that one day all of us will. When we lose sight of that, we also lose sight of the fact that we will be judged.

Think about that. You will give an account for every deed that you do. Really think about it.

Every deed.

So what have you done? Did you get snippy with your wife? Were you berating your husband? Did you scare the kids by being harsher than you should have been? Did you give your neighbor the cold shoulder? Did you rejoice over the suffering of a personal enemy?

Every deed.

Most of our sins against God are not directly done against God. They’re done against His creation, mainly other people. Jesus tells us this in His parable of the sheep and the goats. C.S. Lewis reminded us that we have never met a normal person. Every person we meet will one day either be a creature we would be tempted to bow down before and worship, or a creature that would come out of our nightmares.

And a lot of this starts with a low view of God. If God is treated casually, then we are missing out on Him. Most Christians don’t have a clue about the Trinity, for example, and what a difference that should make to our lives. God is really no different than Zeus to most of us. He’s just a superpowered human being.

Seeing God as holy will require a revolution in our thinking about God. We will need to take doctrine seriously and our own holiness seriously. We will need to seek to banish evil not just from the world around us, but from our very selves. Fair wager here, but I suspect most of us spend more time complaining about the evil of others around us than the evil within us. To refer to Lewis again, he said that we often seek to excuse our sins, but not the sins of others. When we sin, that is different, but the other person? They really ought to know better!

If we are going to be Christians who say Jesus is #1, our lives had better be different. Our marriages had better be different. Our parenting should be different. Our job performance should be different. Our entertainment should be different. Everything. We should be different people because we serve a God who is really different from everything else.

In Christ,
Nick Peters

Job and Personal Experience

Do we really know what God is doing in our lives? Let’s plunge into the Deeper Waters and find out.

Lately my wife has been reading Job and when she does, it’s an interesting experience. She doesn’t just read the book to herself. She reads it quietly, but in an audible voice. I can hear what she is saying which gives a new way to really interact with the book. Many of us might not understand reading out loud today for private reading, but in the past it was the norm. Augustine was surprised when he walked in on his teacher, Ambrose of Milan, reading silently.

Something that occurs to me hearing the accounts is that in the first two chapters, we are told what is going on behind the scenes and we have no indication Job was ever told it nor his friends. If they were, they certainly didn’t know about it during the discussion in the book of Job. Yet what happens when we get to this discussion?

Everyone apparently “knows” what is going on. They all know what God is doing. This includes Job. Job knows that God has turned on Him and is ignoring Him and is not being just with Him. Job wants to have his day in court. Job wants to speak to God about what has happened.

Meanwhile, his friends have the wisdom of the ages. Eliphaz tells Job that men with gray hair older than his father are on his side. These people also “know” that Job has sinned. They “know” that he just needs to repent and get right with God and then everything will be right for him.

These people all sound too much like modern-day Christians in the West.

Many times when I go to a church service, I hear the speaker talking about everything that God is doing in the life of the church. I always want to ask how they know that. How do you know that what is happening is because of the activity of God? I am not ruling out that they could be right. It could be the hand of God. I want to know how do they know.

We are all too quick to speak what God is doing into someone else’s life. This is especially so when disaster strikes. Christians at funerals can say some of the worst things ever. Their intentions can be noble to provide comfort, but they are not. Imagine telling small children that God took their mother away because He needed another angel. Bad theology aside that human beings become angels, what view does that give the children of God?

When a disaster strikes, it’s too easy for Christian leaders to stand up and say that it’s judgment. Consider when AIDS showed up and it was a divine judgment on the homosexual community. Of course, I do not support homosexual activity, but what are we to say if a cure shows up? God wanted to judge the community, but He couldn’t overcome science? What kind of God is that?

When an earthquake or a hurricane hits anywhere, I don’t bother listening to people who claim that this is the judgment of God. Again, it could be, but I want to see some real evidence of that first. I want to know why I should accept this person as a prophet speaking with divine authority.

In our own lives when suffering comes, there’s nothing wrong with looking at yourself and seeing if you need to repent in some way. After all, we all always do. None of us lives a life that we ought to be living. Still, it is false to always think it must be because of a sin and once we repent, God will restore us. That is actually the very way of thinking being challenged in Job and yet we still hold to it today.

If someone you know is suffering, one of the best things you can do is what Job’s friends did originally. Be there. At the start of the book, the friends show up and they just sit there. No one says anything. The gift of presence was enough.

Most of us have a hard enough time figuring out why we ourselves do things. It is quite arrogant to struggle with that and still think that we know why God is doing what He is doing. Of course, He is active in the world, but we need to be careful when we try to say what He is and isn’t doing. Speaking for God and about Him should never be taken lightly.

Remember, in the end, everyone was wrong even though everyone was convinced they were right. None of them saw properly what was really happening to Job and all of them got humbled. Let’s not make the same mistake lest we also have to get humbled for speaking out of turn.

In Christ,
Nick Peters

Are Men Monogamous?

Can we really stay with one woman? Let’s plunge into the Deeper Waters and find out.

If you asked me how many women I have found attractive in my lifetime, I have no idea how I could answer. I think women are absolutely gorgeous. I am super thankful that God made them. If the only argument I had for the existence of God was female beauty, it would be enough. This is also from someone who did not grow up watching pornography.

While that number is countless, if you ask how many women I have had a sexual relationship with, that number is easy to count. One. My darling wife Allie is it. Two weeks from today will be ten years of marriage for us.

Yesterday while driving to a meeting, I heard a radio show that was local asking about if men are monogamous. Can they be? Is it in our DNA to want to have multiple women? One lady on this show said she grew up reading the Bible and throughout the Old Testament, the great heroes of the faith didn’t seem to be monogamous. Abraham, David, and Solomon had wives and concubines.

These are all important questions.

In the Old Testament, divorce was a practice that was allowed, but Jesus reminds us, it was because of the hardness of our hearts. The ideal was one man and one woman for life. Once those two come together, the union is complete and no other party is needed.

As for these relationships with concubines and multiple wives, that was also allowed, but whenever it happened, there was trouble. Abraham’s relationship with Hagar was because of a lack of faith on his part and that led to trouble in the family. Jacob’s family was extremely dysfunctional and his multiple wives led to favoritism. David was a horrible father and his kids had murder and treason and rape going on with them. Do I really need to tell what happened to Solomon?

When we get to New Testament times, this kind of behavior in Israel at least is hardly seen at all and nowhere can I think of described in the Gospels. When Paul writes his epistles, he assumes a husband will have one wife to lead the church. You don’t see polygamy really being talked about.

But is it in our DNA to be monogamous? I think that’s the wrong place to look. I understand it could be a figure of speech as well, but if we want to see what a man is meant to be, Jesus was the greatest example of what a man is meant to be. While He never married, He did always treat women with respect and honor.

Jesus was also tempted, which is no sin, but He did not give in ever. That means if Jesus had been married, He would have treated His wife as His alone and not gone after another woman. He would have treated His wife with honor physically, mentally, emotionally, and sexually.

Part of the problem is that once we step outside of sex between a married man and woman as the norm, we open the door to everything else. Most people really do not think about sex today. Some of you might be astounded to hear that. Haven’t I watched TV? Well, yes. I have. Doesn’t change my mind.

Oh we fantasize about sex. We talk about sex. We daydream about sex. We just plain have sex. We just don’t think about it. We don’t think about what it’s for and how it’s to be used. We just see it as a really fun thing that we do together. The ultimate point in most TV shows is when the couple has sex together, as if there’s nothing higher.

Maybe there is something higher like years of committed monogamous marriage to one another.

You see, anyone can have sex. Anyone really. It’s not that big of an accomplishment. To be faithful to one person for several years though is an accomplishment.

A woman is not just there for a man to get to treat as a plaything and then move on. Sex is not meant to be the testing grounds to determine if you love one another or if you belong together. I even see many Christians today deciding to live together before marriage and having sex before marriage as if it were no big deal. It is a big deal.

Does this mean temptation is not a battle? Not a bit. I have to look away from women numerous times. My wife is an absolute knockout and more than enough for me, but the sinful desires in me are tempted to want to look elsewhere. In our society today, porn is an easy way to do that. You don’t even have to seduce a woman. Just a click away are several women you can look at.

Which is a great dehumanization of them. It is getting a woman that requires nothing of you. You don’t have to be a man to win her heart. She doesn’t know you and she doesn’t care about you. Also, you don’t know about her or care about her. All you are caring about is her body and you are training your brain to think that way bit by bit.

However, men can be monogamous. We can be faithful. We can rise above desires that we should not have and do what we know we ought to do. While I do have the desire for many different women, higher than that is the desire to honor God and be faithful to the wife that I have. If it is my highest desire to please God, I will be faithful to my spouse. (This is all assuming you do not have a spouse who is abusive to you. If so, that does not justify an extra-marital affair, but you can leave that spouse.)

This is also why I have the group “As Christ Loved The Church” on Facebook. To help men who are either married or on the path or just wanting to marry to learn how to be faithful husbands to their wives. It’s a real struggle.

I know I’ve emphasized the men here because the question was about men. Women need to practice this themselves. Women really control the sex market and every time a woman gives sex without marriage, she is really lowering what is required of her on the market to give herself and saying she does not require a lifetime commitment. The next woman will go even lower until before too long, sex on the first date becomes common. Is it any shock you have the app Tinder that says you can get together for just a hook-up?

Sex is sacred. Men and women are sacred. Marriage is sacred. We need to treat all of them like that.

In Christ,
Nick Peters