Deeper Waters Podcast: 10/19/2013 Benjamin Wiker

What’s coming up on tomorrow’s episode of the Deeper Waters Podcast? Let’s talk about it on Deeper Waters.

A few years ago when living in Charlotte, my roommate gave me a copy that I had been looking at in a bookstore. It could have been a coincidence for all I know for I never mentioned my interest to anyone, but he got the book for me for my birthday. It was a book called “Ten Books That Screwed Up The World And Five Others That Didn’t Help” by Benjamin Wiker.

At that point, Wiker became a favorite writer of mine, even though we do not agree on everything, I find his style engaging and witty and he is the kind of author who I find just “Tells it like it is”, a quality that I admire in a writer.

So when it came to finding guests for my show, I thought that I should get in touch with Wiker, who I had spoken to after an apologetics conference one year. (I could also point out that this was an apologetics conference that I made the suggestion to the guy heading it up to get him)

Wiker agreed to come on the show and suggested that the best topic of discussion would be a book that he had written recently called “How To Think About God On A Plane.” Readers of Deeper Waters should recognize that name. I blogged on that book not too long ago as you can see here.

I certainly encourage you to tune in to this show to get to hear Wiker for yourself and even beyond this book, recommend you check out his other books. (I’m still itching to read the one about 10 books that every conservative must read.) The purpose of the plane book is, as the blog says, to give you something that you can read in a short time and be able to use to talk with the person sitting next to you.

And ironically, the show could last longer than the plane flight itself or even longer than it would take you to read the book.

Wiker in this book has interacted with religious claims and biblical claims (Somewhat. The book focuses more on natural theology rather than making a case for YHWH or the Trinity specifically) and philosophical claims and scientific claims. Despite its short length, it also packs within it a powerful argument. As we discuss the book on the show we will get insights into the nature of the history of science and religion and the philosophical perspectives that have helped shape the debate and reached a conclusion that we could reach in the time of a plane flight, that God does indeed exist.

I hope that you’ll also be wanting to come along for the ride on this journey. The show will be airing from 3-5 PM EST on Saturday, October 19th. The call in number if you want to ask Dr. Wiker a question yourself is 714-242-5180. The link can be found here.

Enjoy your flight!

In Christ,
Nick Peters

The Problem of Conversion

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

In popular thinking today, it’s often asked how we can get more converts into the church. I state instead to others that I have no desire whatsoever to get converts.

“How can you say that? Do you not care about bringing people to Jesus?”

Of course I do. I would not be doing what I do all day if I did not, but I choose to follow what Christ said. Go and make disciples of all nations.

Let’s consider an analogy. It is rightly said that marriage is on the decline in our country. So let’s suppose the goal then is to make more married people? That’s easy enough. I have men who are friends and single. If they wanted to, they could go out and find someone and get married today. They could encourage all their friends to do likewise and their friends could encourage their friends, etc.

Voila! Problem solved! Marriage is back!

Well, no. We might create a lot of married men, but would we really create a lot of husbands? Would we be creating men that are devoted to loving their wives and seeking to grow in that love or not?

Getting married is easy. Any one can do that. Being a husband or wife? That takes work! The same has been said about children. Anyone can make a baby but it takes a man to be a father. Unless there’s something wrong biologically with the man or the woman, any man can get a woman pregnant. Not a big deal. I know of no way that there’s a secret technique that a man must use in the bedroom and only if he pulls it off rightly will his wife get pregnant. (If such was the case, then we’re sure wasting a lot of money on birth control and the abortion advocates can stop complaining)

Making the baby is simple. The guy’s work is usually done pretty quickly. Raising that baby as a father? That’s a lifetime of work.

So now back to the illustration of the church. In the church, we often go and make converts. What happens in our evangelism? We have someone who has come to the church and filled out a card. We go out to them. We talk with them about Jesus. We get them to say the prayer and then celebrate about our success!

It would be better if we kept tabs of such people and see how many of them actually come back to the church and how many of them grow in Christ? I’m sure some do, but do most?

Now granted if you just go with converts, you can grow a church pretty quickly. You can have several people sign up and come in to the church and be active members, but are they really going to be growing in the grace and knowledge of Jesus? Or, are they more just going through the motions?

How many marriages do you know of where the love died a long time ago and today, people are going through the motions just because it beats the alternative?

Worse, these people are absolutely unprepared for what waits outside the church. Atheism has gone popular in the new atheists. The internet has made information of all worldviews easily accessible. Worse still, someone with no knowledge can be seen as someone with knowledge just because they have a web site. To those untrained in a field, an argument from even a Christ-myther seems sophisticated.

There’s also the cults that are out there. Walter Martin of the Christian Research Institute said that the average Jehovah’s Witness can turn the average Christian into a doctrinal pretzel in 90 seconds or less. I would not hesitate to say the average Jehovah’s Witness knows the Bible far better than the average Christian.

This isn’t even counting moral problems! Affairs take place right within the church. 1 in 3 men in the church are said to struggle with pornography. A pastor dare not speak about homosexuality or sex outside of marriage or couples living together lest it offend those people in the church or put him on the political radar of the enemies of the church.

Our youth are often the biggest consequence of this. In their classrooms, they will no doubt hear of evolution. Now I as a non-scientist do not speak on evolution. I see it as an irrelevant question to Christian belief, but we all know there are atheists who see it as the most relevant question. If evolution is true, Christianity is false for them, and they will no doubt proclaim this letting their students know you either go with modern science or go with the Bible. It gets even worse if they make it that the Bible can only be read to say the Earth is 6,000 years old. (Do note I have friends who are YEC, my ministry partner is YEC, and my wife is YEC. In fact, a person who is an evangelical and told me about the dangers of making YEC an essential part of Christianity is himself a YEC)

And of course, the youth will have the moral issues as well. If they’re on YouTube looking up their favorite song, they could see an atheistic video on the side. Just one click is all it takes. In Middle and High School, they will be tempted sexually since all their friends are doing it and why not? It’s so much fun and it doesn’t hurt anyone! We’re just sharing love! It will get even stronger in college where professors are more upfront with an atheistic agenda and co-ed dorms are becoming more and more common and parties will involve alcohol and sex abundantly.

And hey, a young person wants to be cool.

In the past, I have written profusely on why apologetics is a necessity for the “relevant” church today such as found here, here, here, here, here, and here. This is just a snippet of it all.

In fact, to say otherwise for our youth is to say it is important for them to have pizza and to attend concerts for their growth in being like Christ, but it is not important for them to actually learn anything about Jesus Christ. You might as well tell a newlywed couple it’s not important for them to really learn anything about each other. Just have a lot of sex together and you’ll be fine!

If you want to grow closer to your spouse in marriage, you will need to learn about your spouse, devote time to your spouse, and actively do things for your spouse, and you have to do that regardless of how you might be feeling at the time. Even if you feel unloving, you are to be loving.

If you want to grow closer to Jesus Christ, you will need to learn about Jesus, devote time to Jesus, and actively do things for Jesus, and you have to do that regardless of how you might be feeling at the time. Even if you feel like you don’t care, you are to care.

When we make converts, we get people who are not prepared to deal with what is outside. When persecution comes, they will either fall away, which is the most disastrous of all, or they will simply hole up within themselves, which is fortunately going to keep them in the Kingdom, but they will be carrying weight for the those who are active and be a hindrance to demonstrating Christlikeness.

Let’s take the first example. What happens? It usually results in fundy atheists. Christians who did not get any answers and became convinced that there were no answers because no one takes their questions seriously. I meet these people most every day on the net. They have a grudge against their former belief system and are some of the hardest people to reason with.

Now let’s take the latter group. These people hole up inside themselves or with others of the same mindset. They might be helping each other be good people, but they cannot effectively evangelize. Once someone challenges their perspective, they’re sunk. In such a world, this person is going to be a hindrance in evangelism as others of the fundy atheist mindset will look at them and say “Yep. All Christians are as deluded as I was.” Others might be nicer and will have no problem letting them keep their beliefs, just so long as they “don’t hurt anyone” or “force your view on me.”

Also for this latter group, what will keep them going? Their experiences. Now experiences are a good thing, but you cannot make a regular diet out of them, at least not the grand ones. Those do not happen on demand after all and we cannot will them that easily.

There’s also a great danger that we have other groups that have experiences. I know of a Muslim man who claimed he was miraculously healed of pancreatic cancer. Prima facie, I have no reason to deny this claim. Why should I? Should I deny that he is wrong about his own life just because his worldview is different from mine? What about Mormons who claim to have a burning in the bosom? Should I claim they do not? Of course not. If all you have is your experience vs. another person’s experience with nothing else to fall back on, then there is no reason to choose one over the other except personal preference.

But what if you did have something you could use? What if you could use truth? Ah. Now we’re getting somewhere. Note that I am not saying the church must be full of scholars, though I am hopeful all would take part in scholarly information. The church should have people who have some basic knowledge about their worldview. Here are the basics they need I think.

Each person needs some reason to hold to the existence of God be it cosmological, moral, or even an argument like the resurrection of Jesus.
Each person needs to know how they can make a case for something being right or wrong.
Each person needs a basic understanding of biblical interpretation.
Every person needs a basic understanding of the reliability of Scripture including textual criticism.
Each person needs to be able to make a historical defense for the resurrection, at least a basic minimal facts approach.
Each person needs to be able to show the Trinity in the Bible.
Each person needs to make a case for their view of the atonement.

Well geez. That sounds hard.

Yes. Sounds hard to those of us who realize we live in a society where you can still remember how to get to every dungeon in the original Legend of Zelda, follow the plot of your favorite TV show with myriads of characters, know the statistics of your favorite sports teams, and memorize songs, jokes, and recipes.

This will take work. No denying that. The question that must be asked then is “Is Jesus Christ worth that work?” If He is, then act accordingly. If He is not, then also act accordingly. We can easily boast about how we would die for Jesus and how much we love Him and what He means to us. If such is true, then one should look at this and say “No problem.”

And what happens then? We get disciples. We get people who are actively learning to seek to grow in their faith. Here’s another tip for those of you out there. Get at least one good mentor. I have several mentors that I still go to today, but I have one main one that I email every night who helps hold me accountable and has been my friend and confidante in many tough situations. I say that as one who considers myself mature in the faith. I need a mentor. I am thankful to have one.

What will disciples mean? It will mean pastors also preach more informed sermons. Why? Because the congregation will know most of the basic stuff already that you’re sharing. If you want to teach them, you’ll have to go deeper than they are. If not, then they will leave you because those who are actively seeking to grow in their faith want more than just milk at church.

It will also mean we have a better presence of evangelism. Imagine how much it would mean if all Christians could at least make a case that there was a historical Jesus instead of just saying “Well you have to have faith!” Would nonsense like Richard Dawkins’s “The God Delusion” even make a dent in the Christian community? Not a bit.

It will also mean people living holier lives. Why? Because those who are disciples of Jesus are the ones that will be taking His commands more seriously and holding one another accountable for what they do. These people will be thinking with a well-informed mind on Christian issues and know how they apply to the current situation in the world and to their own personal lives.

Dare I say it, I think this one change alone could bring about the revolution in America we’ve been waiting for. Why is our situation the way it is? Is it because of the gospel? No. We know the gospel has the power to transform lives and culture. Well if it’s not on the end of the gospel, then it must be on our end. The problem is not the message. The problem is us. If we want to change the world, we must start with changing us.

From now on, do what Jesus said. Don’t go out and make converts. Go out and make disciples. Just as importantly, be one yourself.

In Christ,
Nick Peters

Book Plunge: Reading the Christian Spiritual Classics

Is there a proper way for evangelicals to engage the spiritual classics? Let’s talk about it on Deeper Waters.

Reading The Christian Spiritual Classics is a work edited by James Goggin and Kyle Strobel. If the last name sounds familiar, it’s not a coincidence. That is Lee Strobel’s son and this has been his area of study. Lee is a friend of mine who got me a copy because frankly, a book on spiritual classics is quite frankly something I would not have picked up on my own.

In the area of apologetics after all, we’re trying to keep up as much as we can. There are so many new books that we need to read and then there’s all the research and we at the same time are family men who need our own time as well and then there’s still time that we have to spend with prayer, Bible study, etc.

People don’t often realize how big a job ministry is and in ministry, one often thinks they carry the burden of others around them. To an extent, of course we do, but we are not alone and part of the essential process of a Christian is sanctification. This is why I’ve surrounded myself as well with mentors, including a mentor I email every night to make sure I have been keeping up with prayer, an area I need to improve on, and seek advice for problems in my life.

I say all this because this review could sound negative at the start, but it really isn’t. When I started reading, I felt like I was having to push myself through. That is not because this book is a problem. Not at all! It is because I know that this is not what I am used to reading.

This is not to say I never read anything dealing with sanctification, but it is not something that I think we commonly read, much like an apologist I interacted with recently said apologists need to spend more time reading fiction. We should have our place in the academy of course, but we are not to be just in the academy. The best apologists I know are the ones that can also be real people. If I can laugh and joke with someone in my field, I know they’re real. It’s also why I make sure to take time for non-academic interests, such as the Mrs. and I watching our favorite shows most every night.

Reading a book about spiritual classics then is stretching someone in the field, but we need to be stretched. Part of Christian sanctification is being made uncomfortable unfortunately. It’s about doing things that we normally wouldn’t do. I would in fact encourage someone who just reads spiritual classics that they need to pick up books like Lee Strobel’s “The Case for Christ.” Every bit of sanctification we have must be grounded in truth. All that we do must be grounded in truth.

The book in its work tells why they should be read but also gives a warning in our day and age and one that applies greatly to apologists. This book is for evangelicals and so it assumes evangelical positions and tells us we could be reading a spiritual classic and it will talk about the veneration of Mary, for instance, and some of us who might be staunchly against the Catholic position could raise our defenses up and unfortunately, miss all the good stuff that is there.

And yes, this book recommends reading the Catholic classics. It also recommends reading the Orthodox classics. I do not doubt that people in both of those camps would also recommend reading works by people in the other branches just as much. Wisdom can be found in all manner of places in the Christian tradition.

Reading this book gave me a challenge to consider these kinds of areas more seriously and even had me looking on my Kindle to see from time to time if I could find any of these books that were talked about for download.

Christians are called to be holy people and of course, people of truth. It is easy to miss out on any one side. In our church today, we can often reflect on holiness and our experience, without remembering that these have to be grounded in truth. In more apologetic circles, we forget that truth that has no impact on us is just what is going to puff us up. If we believe something is true, we should act accordingly. If we believe in the Lordship of Christ and the advance of His kingdom, we should act accordingly.

It is because of that then that while I read the book as dry at first, I saw myself becoming more receptive over time, and realized the dryness said nothing about the book but about myself. If I went through again, I still think it would be difficult, but I think I would be still getting more out of it. I recommend this book then knowing that it will be a challenge, but a way that we need to be challenged.

In Christ,
Nick Peters

Thoughts on Joseph Atwill

Did the Romans invent the Christians? Let’s talk about it on Deeper Waters.

There has been much talk lately about Joseph Atwill and his claim that Jesus was invented by the Romans. It’s still bizarre to think the Romans would create a religion that they would go out and persecute. Still, many are claiming that Atwill is a biblical scholar as even the press release about the announcement said.

Reality? He’s not.

Is that the opinion of someone like me, a Christian who believes strongly in the reliability of the NT? No. That’s even the opinion of a Christ myther himself like Richard Carrier. Unfortunately as Carrier points out, news of this has not reached Richard Dawkins. Carrier also adds that Robert Price and Acharya S. disagree with this idea. As Carrier says about these people like Atwill:

They make mythicism look ridiculous. So I have to waste time (oh by the gods, so much time) explaining how I am not arguing anything like their theories or using anything like their terrible methods, and unlike them I actually know what I am talking about, and have an actual Ph.D. in a relevant subject from a real university.

If those three, some of the biggest names in Christ-mythicism, say that your theory is bunk, it’s quite likely that it is.

Now it’s rare to find scholarly talk about an idea such as this. Why? Because by and large scholarship ignores crank theories like this. In fact, most people if they really thought they had something would want to take their idea to the scholars first. Larry Hurtado has said that

I haven’t heard of the guy before either (Joseph Atwill), largely because, well, he’s a nobody in the field of biblical studies. No PhD in the subject (or related subject), never held an academic post, never (so far as I can tell) published anything in any reputable journal that’s peer-reviewed, or in any reputable monograph series, or presented at any academic conference where competent people could assess his claims. Instead, per the flimflam drill, he directs his claims to the general public, knowing that they are unable to assess them, and so, by sheer novelty of the claim he hopes to attract a crowd, sales, and publicity. It’s a living, I guess (of sorts).

In saying why he doesn’t bother with it that much, Hurtado says that

It’s not necesssary to engage something so self-evidently unfounded and incompetent. If his press releases at all reflect his stance, it’s not worth the time. We scholars have enough to do engaging work that is by people with some competence. There isn’t time or value in dealing with nonsense. And Atwill and his ilk don’t really want scholarly engagement anyway. Again, let it go.

And when told Atwill would want scholarly engagement Hurtado says

No. He wouldn’t. Otherwise, he wouldn’t avoid the normal scholarly venues to test theories. These people know that they would be shredded by competent scholars.

And yet, it’s making a buzz. Fortunately, even some atheists like P.Z. Myers are condemning it. Myers does not hold back.

I think a few too many atheists are seeing “Scholar Says Jesus Was Fake” and are not thinking any more deeply than that. The whole idea is ridiculous.

If you’re one of the many atheists who gleefully forwarded this to me or credulously mentioned it on twitter…hello, there. I see you’ve already met the good friend of so many half-baked wackos in the world, Confirmation Bias.

That many atheists did in fact spread this immediately and treated it seriously shows that there is indeed a great deal of ignorance in the atheistic community. “Well what about your Christian community?!” I’ve been saying for years the church has failed to educate its members and their fear at something like this is a prime example of it. Our tendency to want to protect ourselves more than anything else keeps us from really isolating with these issues going on in the real world. As I told one skeptic recently, I condemn ignorance on all sides.

Here are some of my problems with the whole theory.

First off, it will HAVE to deal with all the counter-evidence. Can he deal with Tacitus? Can he deal with Josephus? (I know his theory claims to rely on Josephus, but will scholars of Josephus support it?) Can he deal with Mara Bar-Serapion? How about a question of the reliability of the NT? Can he deal with claims for that?

Second, what about the Pauline epistles. The earliest epistles come before Josephus wrote. These epistles also include a creed such as in 1 Cor. 15 that comes to within a few years at most of the resurrection event. Can Atwill’s theory deal with this?

Third, can he demonstrate that the gospels in the genre of Greco-Roman biographies would be able to be read in this way? This theory has been tried over and over by so many people and it has never ended well. Why give Atwill any credit?

Fourth, does he have any evidence from the Roman perspective? Does he have some ancient mention of Jesus that we have never found even though scholars have been looking through works of ancient society? What would this say for Christ mythers who say that there is no mention of Jesus? Why mention Jesus if Jesus was not being talked about?

Fifth, can his theory account for the dating of the NT? Would this not presuppose that the gospels were written after the writings of Josephus? Has he made a case for that? If Josephus based his account on the gospels, which he didn’t, then Atwill’s theory is in trouble. Atwill will require a late date. It would also require the writings of Josephus to also be in Jerusalem at the time already and being read, which will be problematic enough even if just Mark dates to before 70 A.D.

Now by all means, let Atwill present his evidence, but keep in mind he’s trying to bypass the scholarly community and go straight to the sensationalist route. That might be a more popular approach, but it’s not the proper approach to academic work of this nature. The reason one seeks to bypass the scholarly community is most likely because one cannot survive scrutiny under that community.

Check the sources always on claims like this. That so many atheists have passed this on shows that there is just as much blind faith and lack of biblical scholarship in the atheistic community as in the Christian community they rail against. That so many Christians get scared of something like this is an important demonstration of why the church needs a good education in basic apologetics.

In Christ,
Nick Peters

Deeper Waters Podcast 10/12/2013 Jeff Harshbarger

What’s coming up this Saturday on the Deeper Waters Podcast? Let’s talk about it on Deeper Waters.

Awhile back, a good evangelical friend of mine recommended that there is one area in apologetics that I do not need to study the other side in. That is in the area of the occult. Why? Because this is a dangerous area and the temptations are great. It is best to not put yourself at risk by studying such things. Instead, leave it to those who have done some study in the occult.

That’s why I am having Jeff Harshbarger of Refuge Ministries come on my show this Saturday to discuss this important topic. Jeff is an ex-satanist who came to Christ decades ago and has written a couple of books on the subject. He has also collected the testimony of several Christians who came out of the occult, including the famous Son of Sam.

Also, Jeff has been a personal friend to Allie and I helping us out in some issues. He is a student working in counseling now and has a heart for people who are still trapped in the occult and wanting to make sure that they get accurate information.

Part of this for Jeff has been outing those in the field who he thinks are “padding their resume” as it were by making up stories about events in the occult that are not accurate. We’ll likely talk about how important it is to get an honest look at the occult and how those of us who are not specialists in this field can learn to examine some claims.

With Halloween being this month, I’m also thankful to have someone like Jeff on who I consider to be very level-headed in this area. I have often made the claim that too often, Christians are seeing demons behind most every bush. Jeff knows about the reality of demons, but he also knows that they are not responsible for everything. I know this especially since he shared an article I wrote on this topic called “Demon-Haunted World.”

What are you to do also when you meet someone in the occult if you yourself have not studied the occult? We’ll talk about that. Generally, my stance has been to try to pass them on to Jeff, but perhaps you might not have a Jeff in your life or it might be a face to face encounter and there’s not someone out there to send them to immediately.

And of course, how should Christians handle the presence of the occult in their own lives? Should we be scared of the possibility of being possessed by a demon? Do we need to fear any powers of those who might be in the occult? Are these powers even real? We’ll talk about all of these!

This is an important topic and I hope that you’ll be listening in to the show to hear what Jeff has to say on the matter. The show time is from 3-5 PM EST. The link can be found here. Call in number with a question is 714-242-5180.

I hope you’ll join us!

In Christ,
Nick Peters

Separating Life From Religion

Is there supposed to be a distinction? Let’s talk about it on Deeper Waters.

Yesterday, I wrote about how I had asked around for a copy of Bill O’Reilly’s book “Killing Jesus.” (Which I never found by the way) My folks had suggested I read it and one of them told me that it wasn’t a religious book. It was supposed to look at Jesus from a historical perspective. This was in reply to my saying O’Reilly just isn’t that good in the area of religion.

My problem with this is you cannot write a book about Jesus that is historical and not have it be religious. Something that scholarship is realizing more and more now, and it’s a wonder that they had to realize it, which shows how far we have had to climb up from the bankruptcy of enlightenment thought on Jesus, is that Jesus was a Jew. You can you don’t think He was God incarnate. You can say you don’t think He was the Messiah. You can say you don’t think He worked miracles. You may not say He was not a Jew.

Jesus lived in the Jewish holy land. He was raised in a Jewish town by a Jewish family. He walked with teachers of the Jewish Scripture and He knew those Scriptures Himself. He lived in a world of Sabbath, dietary laws, and Torah.

If someone wants to write a life of Jesus and have no religion in it, they’re just not going to be able to do it. As I pondered this, there was a much more concerning thought that came to my mind that concerns me greatly about our society today.

Christians today are called to be disciples of Christ and walked as He did. What we have to ask ourselves is that if we had biographies (Of which the gospels are Greco-Roman biographies) of our lives written after we were gone, would the best biographers be able to separate us from our religion?

Christians are often accused of god-of-the-gaps arguments. Sadly, this is sometimes true. If the only purpose of God in your worldview is to fill in gaps in knowledge alone, then you do have a more god-of-the-gaps mentality. This does not mean that nothing is explained by God. On the contrary, it means that everything is.

If you remove God from your worldview and all that changes is your science, then that is all God meant to your worldview. If you remove God from your worldview and your entire life changes, then that means God played a worldview in your entire life. This is what is concerning about people who apostasize from the faith so quickly. One can wonder how much their view meant to them to begin with.

What would be different about your life? Is all that would be different is you’d be sleeping in on Sunday? Would your morality change? Would your whole reason for living change? Would your hobbies change? The degree to which your life would change shows how much God means to you right now.

Sadly, looking at the church today, I’m suspecting God does not mean much to people. He’s someone good to have around when you’re in a jam and provides nice emotional support for people, but to have a strong understanding of how He provides a foundation to one’s worldview and understanding of it is absent. We will not reach that point however without serious study, and this means more than just Bible study, as important as that is. It means learning as much as we can about what we have that passion for and being disciples. This is something I plan to write more on later, but laziness is never a Christian virtue and this includes learning about God.

Today, I would like you to honestly ponder this question sometime today. If that biography was written about your life, how hard would it be for a biographer to separate you from your Christianity?

In Christ,
Nick Peters

Why I Read What I Read

Is all reading done out of the same desire? Let’s talk about it on Deeper Waters.

Recently, I got into a conversation with my family about Bill O’Reilly’s book “Killing Jesus.” Now I’ll be blunt. I wasn’t too impressed with Killing Lincoln. There was some information in there that was historical, but the style of the whole work seemed to be dry. I read it because my mother checked it out from the library and couldn’t get into it so she let me have it for her time. I did read the whole thing, but I just felt I was having to push myself to finish it.

Also, I haven’t been too impressed with Bill O’Reilly lately. On the issue of the marriage debate, he has been notified numerous times that there are more reasons for the traditional position than just “The Bible says so.” As far as I know, he has not corrected that. Also, when he has people come on to debate religion, I just don’t think he’s in his league.

This is not to say Bill O’Reilly is not a Christian or he’s unintelligent. It’s just that there are specialized areas of study and studying in one area does not give you the authority in another area. For those concerned, I try to be consistent with this. I don’t enter debates on science as science. I will talk about the history, such as how it was done in the Middle Ages and what happened with Galileo, but I will not talk about the theories as theories. Do I believe the Earth goes around the sun? Yep. Could I begin to make a case for it? Not at all. It’s the same with questions like evolution. If I was a theistic evolutionist, I could not make a case for it. If I take the other side, I also could not make a case for that. I instead choose to simply grant evolution to the atheist, who will naturally accept it, for the sake of argument.

So to get back to Bill, my folks had been telling me to read O’Reilly’s book first in response to hearing about him debating against Candida Moss. I immediately went on my Facebook and asked if anyone in my area had a copy I’d be willing to borrow. Someone did post and ask along the lines of “Why would you want to read that? There are better sources you could go to.”

This was a non-Christian also who has debated me in the past and I consider it important to answer this question as I think Christians should by and large use the best sources. If that’s the case, am I being a hypocrite for going to what is considered the best source? Well that depends on the reason why one reads a book. Let’s list some.

First, most of us do reads just for fun. For instance, when a new Monk mystery novel comes out, I have it in my hands pretty quickly. I was a big fan of the TV series and I think the books are an excellent way to keep the series going. Usually I finish a book in a couple of days and spend all my time thinking about who did the crime, why, etc. I suspect in our day and age, most reads are reads for fun. I also think those of us who consider ourselves serious academics do still need reads for fun.

Second, another reason we read today will be for schoolwork. Most of us in High School and College read books that we would never ever have read on our own because they were put on the syllabus for us to read and frankly, most of us would never ever read them again as well!

Third, some of us read books as well for our own information. I recently used some Amazon points and ordered my wife a book on Fennec Foxes. That’s an interest of hers. Most books I have in my library here I’d say are along these lines. I read the books because I want to be informed on the subject matter.

Fourth, another reason to read a book is because it’s popular non-fiction. An example of this would be Bill O’Reilly’s “Killing Jesus.” I want to read this one because it’s in an area I consider myself an authority on and people are talking about it. If this is what people are interested in, I want to know if they’re really getting good information. When someone comes to me asking “What do you think of X?” and X is the latest popular book going around, I want to be able to answer them.

Fifth, another reason to read a book is because it is an informed position you disagree with. For something like this, I could consider a work like Richard Dawkins’s “The Blind Watchmaker.” To be sure, “The God Delusion” is not an informed book. Dawkins did write about subjects he had not studied and those of us who have studied those subjects wince at how bad he gets them. It would be just as bad as reading something of mine on “How to Fix Your Car” or “How to Play Basketball Like a Pro” or “Evolutionary Biology for Everyone.”

Better examples from my field would be books published by academic publishers of non-Christian scholarship, people like John Dominic Crossan or Gerd Ludemann or Bart Ehrman. It’s important that these books have publishers with high credentials as they only want the best to come through their publishing houses.

Sixth, you could read because it’s not an informed position that you disagree with. This would include works like The God Delusion. These are read because enough people are talking about them and when they’re being talked about, you need to be able to answer them. You can’t tell people what’s wrong in a book without having read it yourself. This is why apologists were reading “The Da Vinci Code” when it came out. (To its credit, I found as a novel the story itself was entertaining. The information was still hideous. Don’t talk to me about the movie. The movie was just terrible.)

Seventh, you could read something fictional to see what people are talking about even though you could enjoy it as well. When I started going through the Harry Potter series, it was so I could have an informed opinion on it for people who asked me. In the end, I turned out to thoroughly enjoy the series and now I own all the movies. I had read the books on audio from the library and have two of them. When the final book came out, I was one of those people waiting at the bookstore at midnight.

Of course, one eighth reason that comes up for Christians often is edification. You read a book to learn how to be more devout in what you believe. For us, Scripture is the central book here, though this can also be read for historical information as well and should be. We could also include great Christian classics such as “Pilgrim’s Progress” or “Knowing God” or “Practicing The Presence of God.” Many Christians read works so they can learn how to be closer to God.

Ninth, one can read just for self-development in an area. For instance, I recommend people read “Telling Yourself The Truth” and learn to practice it, something I’m still working on! Another book I’ve recommended along those lines is David Burns’s “Feeling Good.” Some of us could read books on an area we want to improve on, such as public speaking, overcoming a phobia, learning to cook, or learning the best way to exercise.

A final reason I can think of why I read some books is because I’ve been asked to. Sometimes people ask me to review books and I do so for them. Some of them I like. Some of them I don’t. In either case, I make sure to give a fully honest review. I don’t want to give a book a good review just so the author will feel better. I want to give it an honest review. If someones respects my opinion enough to share a work of theirs with me, I owe it to them to have enough respect to be forthright about it.

I hope also that this writing has helped you look at why you read what you read and take the time to think about it. For those who are interested, I am on Goodreads.com and there’s a link on this blog where you can find me. If you want to send a book for me to review, just ask. Generally, I’ve been just fine with taking the time to do so. That could change when I start Master’s work and move on to PH.D. work, but for now, I’m doing that.

And to everyone, please keep reading period.

In Christ,
Nick Peters

Book Plunge: The Legend of Zelda and Theology

Is this book worth the price of the rupees? Let’s talk about it on Deeper Waters.

I grew up a gamer. I’ve always loved games. My wife and I still have several gaming systems here. One series that I grew attached to early on in my life was the Legend of Zelda. I got that and Super Mario Brothers 2 for Christmas one year and ended up playing Zelda first, even though Mario was the harder to find.

Before too long, I wanted everything of Link’s. I wanted to get a boomerang because, well, Link had one. I had a fascination with swords because that was the weapon Link used. I even went to a barber once with a Nintendo Power magazine saying I wanted my hair cut like that. Unfortunately, I didn’t have side burns yet, so no deal.

When I found out about this book, I was pleased to have a gift certificate from my sister for my birthday and promptly ordered it. We’ve seen several books in the pop culture and philosophy series, but this is the first one that I’d seen with pop culture and theology and frankly, I want to see more!

I found this to be an excellent work looking at the games in a way that I never had before and asking good questions. This isn’t just a passing glance at the games. The people who write these articles are both serious gamers and serious thinkers about theology. I happen to admire that. I try to be serious in whatever I do. When I write, I take my work seriously. When I play a game, I also take that seriously. I seek to give my best in every area.

They also make a defense of gaming in general, while of course pointing out that like many good things, it can be done to an extreme. I found it amusing to read about the creator of Zelda signing autographs and having a message telling children that on sunny days, they need to go outside.

Playing Zelda in many ways is like exploring in ways you don’t get to in real life. That is why gaming is seen as an extension of one’s own self. There does seem to be a bond between you and the character and you can feel the joy of adventure and the passion of good overcoming evil and doing something heroic. Hopefully, this would extend over into the real world and people will seek to make a difference there.

There will always be a gamer side to me and I’m happy to accept that. After a day of debating online and answering questions left and right, when it comes time to unwind, I’m glad that there are series like the Legend of Zelda there to give me that time. As I’ve said, I hope that there are others that come along in this series. I would especially be interested in seeing a work such as “Final Fantasy and Theology.” My thanks to the people who put together a work that helps me see some of my favorite games in a whole new light!

In Christ,
Nick Peters

Book Plunge: Hardwired

What do I think of James Miller’s book? Let’s talk about it on Deeper Waters.

Hardwired was for me a mixed bag. I agree with much of what was said, but the methodology didn’t seem to strike me right. I do agree that mankind is hardwired for God, designed if you will, to find His purpose in God alone. Yet I disagree with the approach that Miller takes.

Those who read me regularly know I come from a more classical/evidentialist approach to apologetics. I have my arguments for God’s existence and then I have my arguments for the resurrection of Jesus and I leave it at that. I also have had my own major concerns with a presuppositionalist approach.

That’s what struck me the most about Miller’s approach. He does not come out as a presuppositionalist, but that is where I saw him leaning the most. This was particularly evident when he said approaches taken like those in “The Case for Christ” by Lee Strobel are not going to work.

Now this I disagree with entirely. Miller has a problem with the idea that we need to become scholars in the field to understand Scripture. For a basic understanding of Scripture, you don’t need to be a scholar. The central message anyone can pick up. For an informed understanding, well you simply need to be more informed. While you don’t have to be a scholar yourself, you certainly need to learn from them.

It struck me as odd in fact for Miller to state something against this kind of approach when throughout the book he uses evidences and apologists from a perspective he would not agree with such as William Lane Craig.

I venture that the problem is not the approach. It is not the information. The problem is the people. The people just don’t care enough and while Miller does point to how things are known through an internal understanding, I wish to suggest that that could in fact be part of the problem. People are making decisions based on internal subjective views rather than the objective evidences.

For instance, what is the basis for marrying someone? It is how you feel supposedly. What happens when the day comes that you don’t feel any love? Well you move on with a divorce. Why are you to give in the church? Because you “feel led.” (Terminology not in Scripture at all!) If anything, our culture is too feelings oriented. (Consider also how often we say “feel” when we really mean “think.”)

The normal verse, Romans 1:20, used in this idea, in fact works best with an empirical approach much like my own. How does it say we know God? It is not by the things that are within, but it is by the things that are seen! We know God exists based on the evidences.

It was problematic as well to have Miller be so opposed to the idea of the blank slate. This is the belief that man is born without knowing anything. There is no a priori knowledge. On page 48, this is called a relatively new idea. What is the new idea is in fact epistemology. There have always been ideas on how we know what we know, but there being a branch called epistemology is rather new. Plato, Aristotle, Augustine, and Aquinas all talked about knowledge of course, but they did not have formal theories in a category called epistemology.

Miller writes about how we have an internal GPS, a God Positioning System. For Miller, this is opposed to the blank slate. Yet a Thomist like myself who believes in a blank slate has no problem with the idea of a GPS like that in us. The two work hand in hand. In classical Thomism, all that one seeks after is the good. Some don’t make it to the ultimate good, but they all want that which is good.

This can include our hardwiring in fact. There is nothing contradictory in the idea. The problem I was having then was seeing this either/or paradigm being put out where you either believe in a blank slate or you believe in a GPS. One can have a GPS and still have an empiricist approach that rejects a priori ideas. If Miller wants us to choose between the two, this will hurt his approach.

For Miller, the hardwiring is evidence we already know God exists. For my position, we’ve been presented with enough evidence that there’s no basis for the denial to begin with. Miller on page 33 says some won’t come to God still because of pride and having to confess sins and matters of that sort.

Yet isn’t that a problem with any approach? There is no silver bullet in evangelism after all! There is no argument that will convince everyone because everyone is different and some people have hardened their wills. There are all manner of doubts that can occur. Miller gives the impression that other apologetic methods only interact with the head and not with the heart. As he says on page 153 “Traditional apologists think they can satisfy the mind without engaging the soul.” I wonder how this can be said since an evidentialist like Gary Habermas spends so much time talking about emotional doubt and how the emotions affect how we view the evidence.

That having been said, I do think Miller offers many good arguments that seem rather evidentialist. I also think he has some excellent questions which I think would be good for small groups wanting to discuss this.

My main concern is still that I would really like Miller to realize that this is a rather both/and. It’s a mixture of the head and heart both and that can come through internal experiences to be sure, but also through outward evidences. The problem in the church is not the methodology so much but rather the mindset of the church.

Now as for much of the material in the book, otherwise, it is excellent. I did not find much I disagreed with, but yet I found it odd that all this evidence was amassed when an evidentialist approach was disagreed with at the beginning, an approach might I add, I see the apostles themselves using with their claims to eyewitness testimony.

If you want a good experiential argument for why one should be a theist, I think you’ve got an excellent idea. I would just hope in further works that if Millers want to go against the blank slate idea, that he does deal with it in a more rigorous fashion. I, a Thomistic empiricist, have no problem with man being hardwired and having a blank slate both.

In Christ,
Nick Peters

Deeper Waters 10/5/2013 Robert Gagnon

What’s coming up this Saturday on the Deeper Waters Podcast? Let’s talk about it on Deeper Waters.

Dr. Gagnon will be my guest and is an informed speaker on this area, having written the book “The Bible and Homosexual Practice.” This is one of the most thorough works if not the most thorough (And certainly the most thorough I’ve read) on the matter of what the Bible has to say about homosexuality.

Gagnon doesn’t even begin with Scripture but rather begins with the ancient society that the people of the Bible lived in. How was homosexuality viewed in their culture? What did the other societies do in relation to homosexuals or even to simple accusations of homosexuality? How did Israel behave in comparison to them?

Then, there’s the looking at the biblical texts and even texts that some people would think at the start have nothing to do with homosexuality. Does the story of Noah being shamed by his son have anything to do with homosexuality? It just might.

Of course, there is then time spent on accounts like Sodom and Gomorrah and looking at any argument against that being about homosexuality that can be found. Certainly, Gagnon takes us through the arguments of the holiness code in Leviticus and argues why it should be treated as a prohibition and explains why eating shellfish would not fall in the same category.

What about the writings of Jews outside of the Bible? Gagnon also looks at the positions of Philo and Josephus for instance to see what they say. Now some could say “Well Jesus never says anything about it?” According to Gagnon, Jesus in fact does say something about it and we’ll be definitely looking at that this Saturday.

Then we come to the NT and especially the passage in Romans 1. Is this a condemnation by Paul of homosexual behavior? Is it true that Paul knows nothing about loving and committed homosexual relationships? Do modern studies on sexual orientation change anything that Paul has said?

For those who want more, Gagnon also looks at modern discussion on the topic and even scientific studies on the matter. We’ll be discussing what the implications are of accepting the redefinition of marriage and why it is so important that we win this battle today.

I urge everyone to listen in and please be willing to call in and ask your questions, though I’m suspecting that some that champion tolerance in calling in might reveal themselves to be people who are in fact only tolerant of that which already agrees with them. In other words, intolerant. If you want to call in, the number is 714-242-5180. The time is 3-5 PM EST.

The link can be found here.

In Christ,
Nick Peters

Note: This blog entry is largely a copy of what I had back in August when unfortunately we had to reschedule so if some of you are getting a sense of Deja Vu this time, there’s a reason. The information he has is still just as relevant so please be listening.