Month: December 2023

Book Plunge: Outdated

What do I think about Jonathan Pokluda’s book on dating? Let’s plunge into the Deeper Waters and find out.

In many ways, this is an excellent book. It deals with a lot of myths out there not so much about dating, but about marriage. Naturally, I hate that I have to read dating books again, but lo and behold, I do. Pokluda is a minister who didn’t walk the street and narrow before his conversion and so has made many of the mistakes in the book. Each chapter begins with a brief lie about marriage and then what the truth is.

Throughout, there are generally good insights. An example is that if you are just out there dating just to have fun, that’s what you’re going to get. Dating should not be a hobby. It should be done as a means to an end. When you start dating someone, there are going to be two possible outcomes. You get married or you break up.

One myth he deals with is the idea that you have to find the one who is out there and just right for you. It is a lasting myth many people believe and he cites a NASA scientist who said that if the idea of soul mates were true, 1 in 10,000 people would marry theirs, and I really think that’s likely being generous. We are too often expecting a magic fairy tale scenario.

He also says we have an idea that there is supposed to be a magical spark when we meet someone and we just know. It would be something like a movie where you see that person and all of a sudden you just get spellbound. The reality is there are probably plenty of people you have met who would be wonderful matches for you and you have put them in a friend zone for some reason like that. He mentions people looking for a mystical sign, which I think could easily include God saying “This is the one!” The speaking of the friend zone is his wording, but I want to speak on behalf of many single men out there and say “Hear! Hear!”

Instead, real life and real marriage is hard and when you marry someone, you see their flaws and if you went on a spark, that spark fades away. Then you meet someone else who you have the “spark” with and decide that that person must be the real one you were meant to be with. However, you bring all your same problems with you that you never worked on in the original relationship and before too long, history repeats itself.

Speaking about appearances, he has a great saying that if you can’t cherish someone who loves Jesus, but isn’t that physically attractive to you, that says a lot more about your spirituality than anything else. On the other hand, this chapter did seem to be teaching a lot against “Don’t marry for looks” to which I agree with, but said very little on the role physical attraction plays in a relationship. I agree it is not everything and to think so is shallow, but at the same time, the Bible, specifically when speaking about women, regularly talks about their great beauty.

I also understood what he said about men needing to be initiators in relationships, and I agree, but as someone on the spectrum who has a hard time even asking for a divider at WalMart, easier said than done. On this front, ladies, please let us guys know you are interested in us. What you might think is obvious is not obvious to us.

There are many other topics dealt with in this book such as pornography, living together before marriage, and pre-marital sex. This is really a good book for dealing with a lot of myths that people have and the author wants to see good dating because he wants to see good marriages. He wants a great foundation and it starts with proper dating.

If you’re single, I recommend it.

In Christ,
Nick Peters
(And I affirm the virgin birth)

 

Does The Fourth Commandment Matter?

Do we need the fourth commandment today? Let’s plunge into the Deeper Waters and find out.

Yesterday, I wrote about the Ten Commandments and said that I don’t think the fourth one applies to all of us seeing as I don’t think it can be known from general revelation. However, does that mean it is absolutely useless? Not at all. Does it have any place for us today? Indeed, it does.

For one thing, the commandment reminds us that one day of the week is to be separate from all the others. Pastors and those who do a large portion of their job on that day can be excused and use another day. We can also say that if all medical personnel and others were to stop one day a week, we would all be in trouble. (I definitely know that not everyone in our nation is Christian, but this is hypothetical)

Also, Jesus makes it clear that at least some work is done on the Sabbath in the New Testament. Animals are led to where it is that they can get a drink of water and their basic needs are taken care of. Naturally, if there is an emergency on the Sabbath day, you are allowed to work then to stop that crisis. Whatever role we give to the Sabbath, as Jesus says, man was not made for the Sabbath. Sabbath was made for man.

In that sense, we could say the Sabbath was not meant to be a duty really. It was meant to be a gift. Consider what God was saying to Israel. “Work hard those six days a week, but on the seventh, make sure you don’t work. I’ll make sure you’re taken care of then.”

That would be a major reprieve, but at the same time, it would be a major test of trust for the people. For us today, that would not be an issue really. We can have food stored in our refrigerators and pantries and clothes stored in our closets and money stored in the banks. The average person back in that day did not have that.

Sometimes we think it is hard to trust God when times are bad. Could it perhaps be the opposite? We don’t know how to trust God today because too often times are good and the mildest thing that throws us out of our comfort zone would be seen as laughable to the people back then?

For me, when Sunday comes, one thing I do is take a break from online debates. The rest of the world can handle it that day if they want to. If someone emails me a question, I don’t answer it until the next day. Of course, there would be valid exceptions. If someone asked me something in person at church, I would likely help, and if Mormons came to my church, as has happened at a church I used to attend, I would likely say something then, but those are the exceptions.

The day is to be holy meaning it is set apart. It is different from the other days of the week. It is also the way God did things. If God doesn’t work on one day, it’s quite arrogant of us to think we have to work all seven days.

The commandment is not meant to be a burden. It’s to be a joy. It’s a shame that when we get to the time of Jesus, it looks like it had been turned into a burden.

In Christ,
Nick Peters
(And I affirm the virgin birth)

What are the Ten Commandments?

What purpose do they serve? Let’s plunge into the Deeper Waters and find out.

We often refer to them as the Big Ten. If you watch a movie about the Exodus, it can easily be called The Ten Commandments. We have them enshrined at the Supreme Court building in America. Many of us grew up in Bible School learning the Ten Commandments. (Though many of us did not understand this adultery one at the time.)

They are important, no doubt, but what are they? Generally, we can see them as if they were commandments that were meant to be emblematic of the covenant community. There are a lot of laws that do not show up in the Big Ten. That doesn’t mean that those laws are somehow less valid than these are. It’s actually the opposite really. Jesus when asked what the most important commandment was gave His most important one and the second most important. Neither of those were in the Commandments.

“But these were written by the finger of God!”

And?

That again doesn’t mean that these happen to be more important than the others, as once again the testimony of the savior says otherwise. These were written by the finger of God for the purpose of having a public record. They were to be put in the Ark and Israel could look at these Ten any time easily. It would be difficult to write a stone out and cumbersome if it had over 600 commandments.

Each of these commandments is shaping in some powerful way as well. There is some speculation that much of Deuteronomy can be laid out as further explaining what the Ten Commandments are. We should learn them all, but the question is going to be are they all binding for us today?

Here we get into deeper questions. Obviously, moral law codes are still binding for us today, but moral law codes are also codes that are part of general revelation and known to everyone. Everyone can know from general revelation that murder is wrong. Most every law code around the world also has a command to honor one’s parents.

Is the Sabbath in there? Not that I know of. We could all easily recognize the need for rest, but we couldn’t recognize that one specific day of the week is to be set aside for that rest. Even if we could, there’s no rule in such revelation that states it would have to be on Saturday.

Also, something worth noting is that while many of the Ten Commandments are repeated in the New Testament, the one to observe the Sabbath is not. If anything, we often find the opposite. Paul regularly states to not judge one another on the basis of Sabbath. Of course, we will be covering more issues like this when we get to the New Testament.

For now, yes, this was part of Israel’s law code, but we are not under it entirely. We are under moral stipulations, but those are stipulations that can also be known through general revelation. Of course, if someone wants to observe Sabbath on Saturday, be my guest. I have no qualms with you.

In Christ,
Nick Peters
(And I affirm the virgin birth)

Sabbath’s First Mention?

Where does the Sabbath first get mentioned? Let’s plunge into the Deeper Waters and find out.

While there is a Sabbath described in Genesis 2, the term itself does not show up there. So where does it first appear? You can look all throughout the book of Genesis and you will be disappointed.

“Okay. Maybe the word Sabbath doesn’t appear, but how about the concept of the seventh day of the week?”

Nope. Outside of the creation week, it doesn’t show up at all. The number seven shows up very frequently. Seventh as in the ordinal does not.

The first appearance shows up in Exodus 16 and in this reference, it is to the Israelites going out and gathering manna in the Exodus wanderings. Food isn’t exactly the most abundant, so God would have this strange breadlike substance come down and it was called Manna, which meant “What is it?” Every day, the Israelites could go out and get some. However, if they tried to save it until morning, it was disgusting and filled with maggots. There was one exception to this.

On the sixth day, they could store it overnight and it would not have maggots or stink in the morning. Moses tells everyone on the sixth day to gather enough for two days. The seventh day is to be a Sabbath. They are not to go out and do the work of gathering food. Of course, there are some who try, and they are disappointed, as is Moses.

What’s interesting about this is Moses doesn’t have any need to explain this. At this point in the text, nothing is said about why this is the Sabbath day or even what the Sabbath day is. So what are the options?

It could be that this was already known and part of the background knowledge? It didn’t need to be explained. Granted, odds are that they did not get to enjoy their Sabbaths while they were slaving away under Pharaoh in Egypt. They could have well welcomed a six-day work week.

It could be that this was already known, but the further explanation is known to be coming in the Ten Commandments, so why mention it here? This one also makes sense. Moses knows well what is coming in the story and sees no need to reinvent the wheel.

It could be that this was unknown, but that doesn’t really make much sense as it is said without explanation at all. Again, one could say it isn’t because that is coming in chapter 20. No doubt, the reader who read the account at the time knew the reason, but we don’t know what the Israelites were thinking.

I am much more inclined to go with 1 or 2 and if I had to pick one, I would probably pick the first one. Still, this time is worth mentioning because it is the first time that the Sabbath is mentioned for the people in the Bible. In this case, don’t go out and pick up food and get enough for two days on the day before.

This is the first story, but it won’t be the last, and sadly, some stories for Israel concerning Sabbath will not be that good and will sadly set the precedent for a history of failure on the Sabbath.

In Christ,
Nick Peters
(And I affirm the virgin birth)

Why A Day Of Rest?

Why do we have a day of rest? Let’s plunge into the Deeper Waters and find out.

On the seventh day, God rested from all that He had done.

Why?

It’s not because He was tired. The creation week did not wear out God a bit. God did not have to use up a usable supply of energy in order to create. The main reason we can rest is because we are tired, but not so for God.

John Walton in his work The Lost World of Genesis One suggests that this is the way it was shown that a deity was dwelling in a temple. In this case, the cosmos is the temple. Our world is where God is meant to dwell with man, and there’s no reason to think that that has changed.

We could say in a sense God was making this place more than just a temple, but a home. I remember being in Elementary School and my parents had saved up enough that we could get our own house, and we were having someone build it. I came home every day and bit by bit, I saw the progress that was being done on that house. However, the house could have been completed and for some reason, we never moved in. It would have been a house. It would not have been our home.

Rest is a way of appreciation. Home is supposed to be where you go where you can be yourself. You don’t have the pressures of the world all around you. Home is a sort of retreat.

The day of seven is meant for us to have a day where the world doesn’t depend on us. We do this every night when we go to sleep and we trust God that He will keep the world turning while we sleep. It is truly one of the most vulnerable times we can ever have.

Today, it doesn’t matter as much to us really to take a day of rest. We have our bank accounts and our credit cards and many of us have enough saved up in the bank that we can rest. We have it that if we get sick, then we are sick and we call in that day. We hate the pay cut, though some appreciate a bit of a reprieve from their work. I realize not all are like that, but here in the West, many of us have it good.

We forget the ancient world.

You want to eat? You can’t go to the supermarket. You have to work to grow your food and process it and follow all the steps on cooking. Want some meat? Then you’d better be ready to sacrifice one of your own animals or else be a good hunter. Want some water? You can’t just turn on a tap. You have to go and get that water yourself. What about clothing? You’re going to have to make your own clothes.

Keep in mind, this is while dealing with any day-to-day problems and not having air conditioning in the summer or heating in the winter. Your houses would not be that big and all the families might have to share one room. Despite that, you would need to have a lot of children because first off, a large number will die in childhood, but after that, that’s pretty much the closest you have to social security.

This was rough.

Now imagine going to that world where the majority of people live on money they earn from day-to-day. Now you tell these people, “I want you to take one day a week and rest.” In a way, that could be financial suicide for these people. “What? Take a break? We’re working furiously just to try to get by?”

Yep. Take a break.

Oh, but it gets worse.

Your land also has to take a break.

Every seventh year, you weren’t supposed to toil the land. Nope. Just leave it be. Expect the land to produce the food for you independently. Trusting one day a week is monumental. Trusting one year out of seven is unthinkable.

Yet Israel was told to do it.

We can afford to relax at time in our day and age. Israel had to be forced to. Israel had to be forced to not do business with their neighbors on that day. Israel would show the world they could trust in God and still make it.

The Sabbath gave them a chance to recuperate from their work and also to show their trust in God. Their sovereign was providing for them regardless. This would be a very public demonstration to the world of the loyalty of YHWH to His people when they honored the covenant.

I will contend as we go through that we still need to rest. It’s one reason I don’t do debates on Sunday. I just relax and enjoy myself entirely, which is hard since I do enjoy a good debate. If you are an SDA minister, technically, you will need to do another day for your one out of seven since you definitely can’t rest on Saturday since that’s when you do your work of preaching.

We are not commanded to take one particular day as the Sabbath, but it is a good principle to have a Sabbath. It is a good principle to take a break. It reminds us we are not in charge of the story. He is. None of us can work ourselves too hard and even those of us in ministry can get burnout.

Take a Sabbath. God set the example. Take some time away and make your house a home.

In Christ,
Nick Peters
(And I affirm the virgin birth)

Sabbath on the Seventh

How should we see the seventh day? Let’s plunge into the Deeper Waters and find out.

A group I am in on Facebook has recently been visited by people who are very keen on the Sabbath and honoring the seventh-day. As I was pondering this, it occurred to me that this is one area that I just haven’t written about that I can recall. Thus, let’s have some fun and go through and see what Scripture has to say about the Sabbath and arguments for and against when Christians should observe it.

At the start, I will say I do not see this as a salvation issue at all. When I worked at the Christian Research Institute, I went through the Seventh-Day Adventist publication Questions on Doctrine. Naturally, I disagreed with a number of points, particularly in relation to Ellen White and her eschatology and to the Sabbath, but I found that they did uphold essentials like the Trinity and the bodily resurrection.

So if you’re a member of an SDA congregation and you want to observe Sabbath on Saturday, go right ahead. I have no real quarrel with you. My only request is that you accept that I am also trying to be faithful to the Scriptures and think that Sunday worship is indeed allowed and I contend was what was made the norm after the resurrection.

So let’s start with Genesis 2. In this passage, we are told that God blessed the seventh day and sanctified it. This isn’t anything new in that there is a whole lot of blessing going on in the creation week. There is a different in that the day is sanctified, which means that it was declared as holy and set apart.

Now I am normally told that the Lord blessed that day so the hidden implication is that this is something permanent, but is that always the case? For this, I am only going to be staying to the writings attributed to Moses. Are there temporary blessings?

One passage I notice is that Ishmael was blessed by God as well. This does not mean the line of Ishmael is celebrated in Scripture. If anything, too often, the line of Ishmael proves to be a problem for Israel.

Blessings can also be temporary. We see this in Genesis 39 in that while Joseph is serving in Potiphar’s house, his house is blessed for that time. This was done not because of Potiphar, but because of Joseph.

In Numbers 6 and 22, Israel is said to be blessed. Does that stand today? Eschatologically, I would say no today. Jew and Gentile are both invited into the covenant. Jews do have a special gift as Paul said in that they are the ones through whom Jesus came and they are the ones who were entrusted with the Scriptures. Before God, there is no special benefit in being a Jew or a Gentile. He has no favoritism.

Deuteronomy 10:8 gives an interesting parallel. In this one, we are told that Levi is blessed and is to stand apart and to serve the Lord in Israel. Is this eternal? No. Hebrews tells us that there has been a change in priesthood when a new covenant came and Jesus is our high priest who was not from the tribe of Levi.

What about the idea of being sanctified? This shows up in Exodus 29-30 and speaks often of the priesthood of Aaron. Again, we have a new priesthood. Thus, this sanctification is not eternal.

“Whoa! Are you going to go and just skip over Exodus 31:13? It says the Sabbaths are a sign for you throughout your generations and they are sanctified.”

Yes. I hear you. That is something we need to discuss and it will be done at a later point.

Thus far, I don’t see anything that indicates that all sanctification is a process that is unchanged. I’m quite sure it is changeable seeing as many items that were sanctified back then are no longer around in that state. For all I know, some of the molecules in those items could have even made their way to the laptop I’m using right now. Who knows?

We shall continue next time.

In Christ,
Nick Peters
(And I affirm the virgin birth)

How Porn Is Destroying Sex

Will pornography help your sex life? Let’s plunge into the Deeper Waters and find out.

Last night, I was watching the TimCast IRL show and there was talk about pornography. The claim was made that in Japan, families are now hiring strippers and prostitutes for their sons because their sons are so addicted to pornography that that’s all they do. Folks. I try to verify everything, but after a brief web search, I decided to just grant this one and say even if not true, the situation does make sense.

Fortunately, all I saw in my search was links, but it was clear when all I saw about was hiring sex workers, I figured it was best to move on. I have enough information on this here in America. After all, when listening to talk radio often in the Atlanta area, I would regularly hear commercials for ED medication. There are men in their 20’s taking this kind of medication.

I blame it on pornography.

There have been attempts to do studies of men who watch porn regularly compared to those who do not. The problem is they have only been attempts. In our society, there haven’t been enough men found in the latter category to make a significant contribution to the study.

When I worked at a retail job before I came to New Orleans, I remember the word got out that I don’t watch porn and the women who I worked with were stunned. This included teenage girls naturally who were likely working their first job. A man who doesn’t watch porn?

The problem with pornography is that it takes subjects that are beautiful, sex and the human form, especially the female form, and cheapens them. It makes them common. These are both things that should in the most intimate sense remain private, but it makes them public.

I am mainly going to be speaking about men here, seeing as I am a man. I am not ignoring that this is becoming more and more of a female problem as well. Women also have their own version of porn that they deal with. (Think romance novels) Men are presented with a physical fantasy. Women often get an emotional fantasy.

For men, the problem becomes that we get so hooked onto the fake that we want more and more of it and can’t accept reality anymore. Reality loses its appeal for us. This is why real women can’t compete with porn. It’s not that real women aren’t beautiful. They certainly are! It’s that you can make fantasy be whatever you want.

In movies and TV shows, the hero is always a perfect shot, everyone knows just the right thing to say, and love flows naturally and smoothly. In real life, bad guys can get away because heroes can be bad shots, people say hideously wrong things, and love can have constant blunders, and even sex can have embarrassing moments and sometimes, it’s not the case that both the man and the woman are jumping to go at each other.

We also all tend to go down the path of least resistance. If a man thinks that he cannot coax the lover in his life, be it a wife or girlfriend, into a night of passion, well go and turn on the computer or pick up the phone for a little bit. I’ve thought lately of an analogy of this with the gaming world.

When I was growing up, if you made it to the final boss, for the most part, you had to work to get there. You had to take all the steps right and it required skill. Now, you have save states where you can stop at any time and pick up where you left out. In some ways, this is good for those of us who don’t have time like we used to, but it also makes us not take the game as seriously and play as well. I lost? No biggie. I’ll just start from that same spot again.

Over time, we’re not nearly as good at this and I find I don’t play nearly as well as I used to. The same happens in our relationships. If we can take the easy way, we won’t work so much on what is the harder way. That way is the way of discipline. It is learning how to love your wife better and then learning how to control yourself when things don’t work out. I am not at all saying men should love their wives just to get sex, but in a healthy relationship, that should be happening regularly and men should be putting in the effort to love their wives so both people can be satisfied spouses.

Along the same lines, this is also why social media can easily lead to divorces. I talked to a friend after mine who said he did some research into court cases with divorces and noticed that Facebook showed up a large number of times. When you live with someone, you see in person all their faults and failures and those habits you wished weren’t there. When you talk to someone on a computer, you only see their best. You can turn them into whatever you want and again, reality cannot compete with fantasy.

Fairy tales often end with happily ever after as if the wedding of the couple is the end of the story when it’s the beginning. When Cinderella woke up the next morning, Prince Charming had bad breath. When he woke up in the morning, Cinderella was having a bad hair day.

If we take the easy way of porn, we damage ourselves and our relationships and ultimately, our country and world. Pornography is really a tool to destroy the family unit and if the family falls, so does a nation. If you are a married man, pornography is essentially cheating on your spouse. There’s a reason a woman feels betrayed when she catches her husband hiding a porn habit. She feels like she is not good enough or beautiful enough for him, and why shouldn’t she? She wants to be your one and only when you’ve shown she’s your one of many.

Here’s an idea to consider men. Getting rid of pornography will actually enhance your sex life. It will make it so that every time you see her body, it will be because she trusted you and you earned that honor. It will make it all the more special. You also won’t have to think about all these other scenes you have seen in your head. It’s just you and her.

I have said reality cannot compete with fantasy. There is one distinction.

Reality is real.

It is really happening. This is a real woman showing you her body and trusting you in the most intimate way possible. This is a real woman who can really love you and really have your children with you.

The woman on the screen? She doesn’t really care about you. She doesn’t even know you. She is doing this for just any other guy out there too. (Yes. That OnlyFans girl doesn’t care about you.) That real woman does. She really wants you. She really wants to have a future with you.

Also ladies, please cut your men some slack. He’s not going to do everything men in romance novels do. We men try, but honestly a lot of times we just don’t get it. We bumble and make mistakes and if a man tries to do something, don’t tell him what he did wrong. Appreciate what he did. (Believe it or not, a lot of guys won’t bother to try to load the dishwasher again if when they try, their wife comes over and “corrects” everything and shows them what they did wrong.)

So guys, if you are watching pornography, please get help. Try organizations like ProvenMen or Covenant Eyes. Go find a local Celebrate Recovery.

Since these are Christian ministries, it’s important to remember also that if you are watching pornography, you’re not just hurting yourself and your wife, you’re dishonoring God. You’re treating women he made as objects when you could be investing in a real-life woman who loves you or seeking out such a woman.

Be a real man. Get rid of porn. Go for a real woman instead.

In Christ,
Nick Peters
(And I affirm the virgin birth)

Reply To Honestly By Tom Copeland Part 5

Are all relationships sinful? Let’s plunge into the Deeper Waters and find out.

Paul writing to the church in Corinth.

So guys, I hear you’ve got a case where you have a man who’s sleeping with his stepmother. Gross! Am I right? But hey, all relationships are going to be hard in life. All relationships have struggles. I want to suggest that all of you just show your love and support to them. Don’t judge them by any means! God can redeem any relationship and He will redeem this one!

Or at least that’s what Copeland’s friend would likely say if he was in Paul’s shoes.

Copeland has a friend who grew up very conservative and now is an Anglican with no condemnation of same-sex relationships. This friend is described as someone who takes Scripture very seriously and knows the Bible very well. His proposal is that instead of looking at same-sex relationships as fine and wonderful, just realize all relationships are sinful. All of them have all of us acting in sinful ways. All of them are used to sanctify us.

Copeland uses an example of him being married to his wife for thirty years, and yet he has been a sinful man many times in that relationship. Anyone who is married can attest to that and anyone who has been married can be. Even if Jesus was married, He wouldn’t have had a perfect marriage because He would have been married to a sinful woman.

Except Scripture doesn’t say all relationships are sinful. It says all people in all relationships are sinners, but the relationships themselves are not always the problem. If all relationships are fallen and we just need grace in all of them, Paul would not have written what he wrote in 1 Cor. 5.

Copeland goes on to say to people in a same-sex relationship that:

The good news here is that even if the scripture does condemn your relationship (and as I’ve said, I’m not sure it does), it doesn’t condemn it any more than any other, and God redeems it.

Copeland, Tom. Honestly – A Book About Sex for Christians . Tom Copeland. Kindle Edition.

Because we know of all those passages that condemn opposite-sex relationships.

Now someone could say “Well what about the situation in 1 Cor. 5? Isn’t that such a relationship?

Indeed, it is, but the problem wasn’t it was opposite-sex. The problem was it was highly incestuous. Not all opposite-sex relationships are approved by Scripture, but not a single same-sex romantic relationship is. I would love to see Copeland try to back the statement he has made here.

Ultimately as Christians though, if Scripture condemns it, we have to as well. Now how we could do that could be wrong. We should realize that a person with same-sex attraction is experiencing a real loss and if they are willing to sacrifice this for the good of the kingdom, we should support them in that and praise them and help them with the struggle, just as we help a single person who is not married.

The rest of this section in this chapter is about the scientific research, which I cannot comment on. On the ethical, I find it all weak. Copeland does not interact with the best Scripture and violates on the ways he says liberals violate. It’s a shame because really, much of the rest of the book is quite good.

In Christ,
Nick Peters
(And I affirm the virgin birth)

 

Reply To Honestly by Tom Copeland Part 4

What about wealth and divorce? Let’s plunge into the Deeper Waters and find out.

In this part, Copeland decides to have us look at two different issues that he wants to use to draw an analogy to how we treat same-sex relationships. These are wealth and the question of divorce and remarriage. Let’s see how he fares.

At the start, he says we should not condemn rich people or divorced people. I agree. I would have said the same thing even before my own divorce. So what does he say instead?

In looking at wealth, he cites many common verses such as not laying up treasures in Heaven and no man can serve two masters. There’s examples of giving generously and of the early church in Acts and Luke 6 supposedly saying to not ask property back from the one who robs you.

Unfortunately, none of this is with any context whatsoever. In the last case, the ones who were doing this were likely the Roman soldiers themselves who were essentially the police force in this context. Rome, the biggest empire in the world, has a soldier who takes something from you. Who are you going to go to?

In the early church, there was certainly the case of people giving, but also we see in Acts that Ananias and Sapphira had sold their land and they had all right to keep some of it for themselves if they wanted. Instead, they lied and acted like they were giving it all away. Note also that if some people were selling, that means private property was existing. (Also, if you believe Jesus has pronounced doom on Jerusalem, why hold on to the land anyway?)

As for other warnings, having money is not the problem. Money having you is the problem. Money can indeed too easily become an idol and I do believe that if you have been blessed financially and know how to make money well, you should be giving some of that money away. See below on this blog if you want to consider this work as a means of giving.

Copeland goes on to say the Bible must not be really saying what it sounds like it’s saying, and indeed, to an extent, that’s true. Copeland is reading it apart from the social and historical context. He says the passages are easy to interpret, but we ignore that. Not really. We don’t need sermons condemning wealth, but greed is another thing altogether.

Now when it comes to the passages on same-sex relationship, those are also quite clear and even with the social and historical context, the meaning doesn’t change. Are we to brush that under the rug? Unfortunately, Copeland’s position looks to be that we should.

Copeland isn’t all down on wealth. He does think we need to look at questions we ask about retirement and are we really saving up just so we can live easily later on in life? I have no problem asking such questions. Do we give preference to rich people in our churches instead of poor? We do need to consider that. The problem is none of these make the analogy work.

With divorce, Copeland says that Jesus is clear. If you divorce your spouse for a reason other than adultery and you remarry another, you are guilty of adultery. I agree. I think this could also include reasons such as desertion as in 1 Cor. 7 and abusive relationships as these are people who have also betrayed and broken the covenant.

He says that divorced people walk down our aisles and sign our cards and join our churches without a question about their past sexual behavior. Unfortunately, this is not so. I know whenever I have talked about doing any ministry, I have had to explain my divorce and its circumstances and relive the pain all over again.

Copeland says that this should concern us because divorce and remarriage have done a lot more damage to the church than same-sex relationships have. I disagree. I contend that making divorce easy was the stepping stone to another redefinition of marriage. This in turn is the stepping stone to all the chaos resulting from transgenderism.

If marriage is not meant to be permanent, then that is the first step. Then after that, it can easily become just another relationship and hey, why not let same-sex attracted people marry one another? With that, the male-female requirement is gone. If that is gone, well, why not do away with male and female altogether? I have no idea what comes next, but we’ve already descended into insanity.

What happens along the path? The further breakdown of the family unit. We have lost the meaning of sex, marriage, and family. Copeland’s approach will just keep us going further.

Copeland goes on to say that if we want to teach that same-sex relationships are wrong, he wants us to condemn just as much the accumulation of wealth and the divorce culture every time. Well first off, many people do condemn that. Second, Copeland doesn’t set the rules. Third, it’s interesting the conservatives have to change their ways, but the ones on the left do not.

Anyway, next time, we’ll look at what a friend of Copeland has to say about relationships.

In Christ,
Nick Peters
(And I affirm the virgin birth)

 

 

 

Reply To Honestly by Tom Copeland Part 3

What about interpretation? Let’s plunge into the Deeper Waters and find out.

In this part of the book, Copeland starts with examining the biblical data. He admits upfront he’s not a biblical languages scholar. That’s fine. Neither am I. We’re not going to get into any fancy use of Greek or Hebrew here. So let’s see first off what Copeland says is the standpoint of the positions.

He says that conservatives point to Sodom and Gomorrah, Leviticus, Romans, 1 Corinthians, and 1 Timothy mainly to offer passages they say offer indisputable proof that the bible condemns same-sex sexual behavior. Liberals dispute these and sometimes say that some of these passages could be about pederasty instead. They say that the Bible gives no condemnation of loving and consensual same-sex relationships.

Okay. Both sides could have some nuance, but they are generally a fair assessment. This is certainly something that is written about back and forth. So how does Copeland respond to these?

So which side is right? I’m not really sure, and I’ve come to the conclusion that it doesn’t really matter that much.

Copeland, Tom. Honestly – A Book About Sex for Christians . Tom Copeland. Kindle Edition.

I’m sorry. What?

I mean, this is only Scripture which we say is our authority. This is only what we say could be about the fate of countless souls for all eternity. This is a question that doesn’t matter that much?

Last time, I wrote about how the liberal side is reluctant to deal with passages if they think they hurt them or someone they care about. We have already seen that take place. I would have preferred at least some reason for thinking that the conservative side is wrong rather than a dismissal of the issue altogether.

He instead goes with an approach from Tillich saying that we are all dealing with our own interpretations and all sides have claimed biblical sanctions on various issues. It is certainly true that all sides have, but one side has been wrong and the other has been right, at least if you hold to a conservative view of Scripture. If we go this route, then we could easily say anything is okay. Moral relativism wins out.

He also says Rich Mullins said God knows what it means. The rest of us are just guessing. To an extent, but some guesses are also better than others. God knows what the disease is someone has, but odds are if they go to a doctor, he has a better guess than they do.

He also quotes Donald Miller and says we are more interested often in a propositional claim than a relational one. Interesting to note that that itself is a propositional claim. They’re unavoidable. We should make sure ours are rooted in truth. He then asks what if we’re wrong?

This is followed by asking if Christians should be passing radical anti-abortion laws to protect unborn children like the one in Texas.

Okay. This book was published in 2013, so I’m guessing that law was HB2. I looked up the measures of this radical law. I did find something from the UK on it here.

So what is so radical?

– Abortions doctors were required to have admitting privileges to a hospital within 30 miles of their clinic.

– All abortions clinics were required to upgrade to become ambulatory surgical centres (ASCs).

– Abortions after 20-weeks were prohibited, except in the case of “severe fetal abnormalities” or to “avert the death or substantial and irreversible physical impairment … of the pregnant woman”.

– Women who take abortion-inducing pills, must do so under the supervision of a physician, requiring two trips to the clinic for each dosage.

– After the administration of the abortion-inducing pills, a woman must set a follow-up visit with the physician 14-days after the dosage.

In addition to the three visits required of those seeking abortions under HB2, Texas passed a law in 2011 requiring women to undergo an ultrasound procedure 24 hours prior to getting an abortion – resulting in a minimum of four visits to the clinic.

The article says that if this were upheld, 10 or fewer clinics would have served the state.

On that last part, might it not be best to say that if so many clinics can’t handle these requirements, maybe they shouldn’t be open? What is really so radical? Is it wanting an ultrasound so a woman can make an informed decision? Is it being near a hospital in case something goes wrong? Is it that except in cases like a fetal condition that could cause death to the woman abortions weren’t allowed after 20 weeks?

And this is radical?

Copeland asks if we should instead have healthy choices for women, particularly in cases of rape and incest.

The hugely overwhelming majority of cases of abortion are not for rape or incest.

Should Christians be in favor of the death penalty or opposed to it? He speaks no further on this, but I say, yes, we should be.

Should we be in favor of second amendment rights, even having people allowed to have concealed handguns at church? Well, considering how many bad guys with guns have shown up at churches, yes. I don’t live in fear of the majority of citizens having guns. Bad guys having guns without the majority having them? Yes. That’s fearful. Even more fearful, the government being armed while we’re not.

This goes on to questions of war and wealth. Copeland asks who we usually say is right. The answer is us. Of course, that’s not a major claim. If I did not think my position was right, why would I hold it? However, if I hold a position, I have reasons for it.

He goes on to say that he doesn’t know and he has this thing called faith which requires not knowing. I have written on faith more here. Based on this, you might as well say that we should strive to know less so that we can have more faith. This doesn’t fit anyway. “I don’t know which side is right, so I have faith?”

He then says he can’t make life-altering decisions for someone else based on passages that only show up in the Old Testament and Paul and are mentioned nowhere in the Gospels or any other New Testament writer. (Ignore for the point Jude could say something about it.) Unfortunately, Copeland has already done this. Saying he won’t condemn the behavior is itself making a life-altering judgment and if he is wrong, then his advice could condemn numerous souls for eternity.

Never mind that James 3:1 says teachers will be held to greater account. Will he stand before God and say “I decided it really didn’t matter what your Word said about the issue.”? As for Jesus, Jesus never said anything about the death penalty or abortion or guns either, but yet Copeland sure asks about those. Jesus talked about questions that were relevant debate topics in Israel. We have no reason to think same-sex relationships were one of them.

After this, Copeland says:

The stakes are real. The stakes are people. Depending on the research you read, between 25-40% of non-heterosexual teenagers have attempted suicide and as many as 75% report having had suicidal thoughts. The rate is as much as five times higher for teens who identify themselves as gay than for heterosexual teens. For the church to do anything that could possibly contribute to that is unacceptable.

Copeland, Tom. Honestly – A Book About Sex for Christians . Tom Copeland. Kindle Edition.

I agree that the stakes are real and are people and we need to do something, but notice this. If someone is having suicidal thoughts based on whatsoever issue, the first thing to deal with primarily is what in them is making them have suicidal thoughts. Having gone through divorce, I sometimes pondered the question of suicide and I understand that most people who go through divorce, particularly those wrongfully divorced, do. Now if I was at a point of acting, is the thing to do to change everyone else and force my ex to take me back, or is it to change my own thinking on how I see myself regardless? Wouldn’t it be best to deal with the underlying mental health issue?

In the end, Copeland might say he doesn’t want to really take a side, but the reality is he has. He can say he doesn’t want to make life-altering judgments, but he has. He can say he doesn’t want to make judgments on the holiness of certain actions, but in reality, he has. They are unavoidable.

I think he’s wrong entirely.

We’ll each have to stand before God and give reasons for our answers someday.

I hope we’re both prepared.

In Christ,
Nick Peters
(And I affirm the virgin birth)