Category: Marriage

Book Plunge: Christian Body – Why Wear Clothing?

Why does Frost think we wear clothes? Let’s plunge into the Deeper Waters and find out.

In this section, Frost is going to say why he thinks we wear clothes. At the start, he says it is a result of our inner sin nature rebelling against God’s beautiful creation. Well, that’s a lovely start. That means everyone you know who is wearing clothing regularly is apparently living in sin.

It’s statements like these that are so extreme that it’s hard to take Frost seriously.

But at any rate, let’s look at his big three.

The first one he says is a legalistic ego trip. This might be for some people, but it’s not that they wear clothes and others don’t. It’s more like they think they dress better than others do and they want to wear the latest fashion and trends just to wear them. This is not to say everyone who dresses nice is trying to do this, but no doubt, some are. We know that there can be a pecking order in some social areas that if you don’t wear the right clothes, you are out.

This is not to say there are not times one should avoid dressing their best. If you are on a date or a job interview, you will naturally want to have a good appearance. I won’t claim to know someone’s heart, but too often, it looks like Frost thinks he does.

The second reason Frost gives is to avoid responsibility. Frost does rightly say that it’s easy to blame someone else for our lusts, and this is so, but there is some truth in that some people do dress in order to tempt. That doesn’t justify what someone does with the temptation, but we should be aware of how our behavior does affect other people.

For instance, Paul warns about this with eating meat offered to idols. He wants to enjoy his freedom, but if it means he could entice his brother to sin, then he won’t eat the meat. The weaker brother is ultimately responsible, but Paul doesn’t want to be a contributing factor.

So if a guy sees a beautiful girl and goes home and watches porn as a result, he can’t blame the girl for that. It was his own choice. At the same time, all of us who are Christians should watch what we do and say around others in case we meet people who are susceptible. If I know someone has a history of being an alcoholic, I would not meet them in a bar, for instance.

The final reason is insecurity about our own bodies. Now this is true that we can all have insecurities, and while I know I have some, I also know when I was married, I never struggled with that insecurity around my ex-wife. If anything, our Instagram age has been particularly unkind to women in this area.

Frost never mentions positive reasons though. I wear clothing because for one thing, I am cold-natured and I like to stay warm. I also wear clothing because I don’t want to get arrested out in public. I often wear clothing that tends to reveal something about who I am and my interests. Many people at the seminary Post Office I work at notice my T-shirts about being sarcastic and it’s a good icebreaker when I wear my Smallville T-shirt. On Saturdays, I wear an NOBTS T-shirt in the hopes of meeting a lady who might want a seminary student for a husband.

It would be easier to be kind to Frost’s case if he didn’t go to such extremes in his argumentation. Unfortunately, he does. I hope he has just as much passion for reaching the lost as he does for getting people to not wear clothing.

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

 

Book Plunge: Christian Body – Immodesty and Lust

Should we keep things hidden? Let’s plunge into the Deeper Waters and find out.

Frost starts at this chapter with saying that Chinese men used to be captivated by the feet of women. Why was this so? Because they were kept hidden.

Question.

Many women today I know wear socks and on top of those socks they wear shoes. Since that is the case, why do we not go crazy over women’s feet as men?

Frost has at the start said that women’s feet were deemed attractive because they were kept hidden. No data has been given for this. Could it be they were kept hidden because they were deemed attractive? Without data, we can’t know either way. Frost could be right. I could be right. The problem is Frost starts off with the assumption that he is.

He then tells us the natural body should have remained neutral. Agreed. Unfortunately, this little event happened called the Fall of Man. From that point on, we have been using and abusing our fellow man. I tend to see the idea of Christian naturism as trying to get us back into the Garden without realizing that we are not in the Garden. In a way, it’s as if trying to force Utopia on Earth and well, Utopias like that never work out well in the long run.

Frost says lust is not caused by nudity in the Bible. The problem is he wants to see those exact words. I don’t think it ever says “Lust is caused by clothing” either, but Frost has no problem saying that. By the way, what was Bathsheba wearing when David started to lust after her?

As I have said, Frost often reads the Bible from his own culture and he reads it like a fundamentalist would. “I need chapter and verse to make this explicit!” As I said also, he makes exceptions when it comes to what he wants the Bible to say.

Now does keeping something hidden lead to lust? Perhaps it does, but at the same time, if things are done proper, it will cause a man to work harder. This is a great article with a hilarious title on the topic and a follow-up can be found here.

To say that if we put everything out in the open, then the problem will disappear, would be like saying that if we put money out in public and not behind safes, then greed would disappear. We would still have problems because people are evil and until the return of Christ, we will always have that evil within us. Christian Naturists are right on one thing certainly. Lust is a problem that is within us that we have to control. The problem is I disagree with their solution and in some places, it would be impossible to do. If you’re a Christian who lives in a cold climate, do you have to struggle with lust because people have to wear clothes constantly in public to stay warm?

Consider also the book of Judges. At the start, Caleb will give his daughter in marriage to someone who will conquer the enemy and Othniel does it. Othniel is willing to go and fight to win a woman. In the end of the book, women are being kidnapped so people can have wives. You can measure the morality of a society by how the women are treated.

Easy sex has made women to not be prizes to win. They are more objects to conquer. For a man like myself, a woman is a treasure and her beauty is a gift from God and one only gets to see that beauty if they are deemed worthy by the woman. That beauty is only shared with someone she covenants with. I avoid seeing nude women now not because they are icky, but because I am not worthy of seeing one who I have not covenanted with.

In closing, I think the movement is right on a problem. However, I don’t think the solution is right. It might have short-term benefits, but I think in the long term, it would be problematic.

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

Book Plunge: Christian Body: Romans 14

Is clothing a Romans 14 issue? Let’s plunge into the Deeper Waters and find out.

Many of us know about Romans 14 issues. In the ancient world, it was what kind of food you could eat and what days you could observe. We have our own. It can be what kind of entertainment do you partake in. What should you wear to church? What kind of music should be played in church?

Well, Frost wants us to consider that maybe the question of if we should wear clothes is one of those questions. He says that Paul says that earthly things are neutral. They cannot be spiritually unclean and it only matters how we use them in our hearts. He then says this applies to clothing because we have taken what God has made and said in our hearts it is unclean.

Again, Frost seems to always chase after windmills. He never tells us who is saying this.

So let’s try some other scenarios of things God created and see how well that works.

Sex is created by God. It’s a good and beautiful gift. He made it to be enjoyed by husband and wife and we should not look at it as shameful. Therefore, you think it’s okay for a husband and wife to publicly have sex in a church service. I don’t. Let’s just agree to disagree.

God created defecation. He made the body to work in this way. It’s a part of the natural order. You think it’s okay to drop your drawers in the middle of the street and poop on the sidewalk. I don’t. Let’s agree to disagree. (I do understand this is a hot debate in San Francisco right now.)

He then quotes James 1:14 saying temptation comes from within, and therefore lust is caused by that which comes from sinful desires and nothing that we see.

Yes, everyone out there. If you have ever lusted, it had nothing to do with something that you saw. Nope. It was all you. You just spontaneously started lusting for no reason.

Now I am not saying that the sight of a naked woman forces a man to lust. A man needs to control himself, but that doesn’t mean that women also don’t have responsibility. Achan needed to control his own greed, but seeing the riches in the ruins of Jericho were enough to inspire greed.

Frost also tells us that clothing causes lust. Remove the clothing and the erotic effect will disappear.

Look. I know it’s only anecdotal, but I can safely say that when I was married, seeing my wife naked never ceased to have an erotic effect for me. I contend Frost lives in a delusionary world if he thinks this will happen. He is right that if something is forbidden, it often becomes that which is most longed for, as in some societies, for instance, women’s feet are covered to avoid lust. Society still recognizes some parts of a person’s body need to be treated with special honor.

Ultimately, Frost has taken his personal issue and acted like suddenly it’s a Romans 14 issue because of disagreement. We’ll be looking at 1 Timothy 2 next time, but I find Frost’s case highly unconvincing. He would need to show me why he thinks it would be wrong for a husband and wife to have sex in church publicly. After all, God created that good thing and it’s not shameful or sinful either.

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

 

 

Is Love Love?

What is love? (Baby, don’t hurt me. Don’t hurt me, no more.) Let’s plunge into the Deeper Waters and find out.

“Love is love!” is often what people in support of the LGBTQ+ groups say. It sounds simple. How could you respond to something like that? Love is not love? I saw someone actually say at an event in the comments recently “Love isn’t love!” Well, that’s wrong, but does that mean the other side is right?

A lot of Christians hear a saying like this and think that they can’t really argue against that. Who is opposed to love after all? Isn’t love good? Isn’t God love.

Let’s replace it with another saying.

Cats are cats.

Now would anyone want to dare say that cats aren’t cats? What else could they be? However, what if I said cats are cats, therefore, this:

Is the same as this:

Are there similarities? Yes. Are there relations? Yes. Despite that, when I go to bed at night, there’s only one I want jumping up on the bed with me. Meanwhile, if you go to the zoo expecting to see the bottom one and you see the top instead, you’ll be thinking the zoo isn’t bringing in all these interesting species.

Both of these are cats, yes, but both are not the same kind of cat. We have to break down what that means. My Shiro, for instance, is a Turkish Angora largely. My parents have a cat that is a Himalayan. As someone who loves cats, every day I ask my Echo device what the cat breed of the day is. Somedays, I do get something like a lion. Most days I get a breed of housecat.

You could fill in the gap with several items. Dogs are dogs. Books are books. TV shows are TV shows. Movies are movies. Sports are sports.

The Greeks had four different words for love.  Many of these we celebrate in our society. I don’t know anyone who is opposed to friendship. We can say there are some people you shouldn’t be friends with, but we are not opposed to friendship in general.

Agape love is usually seen as God love and while there are people who don’t believe in God, many would not oppose the idea of something like loving your neighbor as yourself. They could say that if a Christian thinks God loves them, they’re wrong, but good for them. Family love is more familial love. This is the kind of courtesy you have for a complete stranger just because they’re a fellow human being.

Now we get to the last one, erotic love. Very few people are probably anti-sex altogether. That includes we who are Christians. It’s one of the reasons we get married as well after all. Christians have books and resources too on how to have a good married sex life.

At the same time, that doesn’t mean everyone celebrates every kind of sexual activity. Let’s start with an obvious one. Children. The overwhelming majority of people says children should not be involved in sexual relationships. Pederasty is still largely condemned, though if society keeps going the way it is going, that won’t last much longer.

How about another one? Rape. You can love women and you can love sex, but if you force yourself on a woman against her will, then that is wrong. Yes. I know rape is about power, but it is also an act of sex as well and one we condemn.

Most sex is celebrated today. I am not saying I celebrate it, but let’s face it. On a sitcom or drama, the question often thought is “Will they or won’t they?” It used to be “Will they get married?” but nowadays it’s “Will they have sex?” It’s usually celebrated when they do. I am not agreeing with it. I am just saying the reality is real.

Yet despite that, do we really think we should live in a culture where we celebrate and encourage ALL sexual activity even if it is consensual? Do we want to celebrate couples forming one-night stands and not forming long-term relationships? Do we want to oppose men and women forming lifelong covenants called marriage?

After all, something that sets sex apart from every other activity out there is it alone can produce new life. That means with it comes responsibilities and risks as well. Seeing as life is a good (Although sadly, many think life in the womb is not a good but a problem to be dealt with), we encourage relationships that are capable of bringing that new life into the world and raising it. Thus, we encourage marriage as a form of stability for raising new life.

This is the love as a society that we should be promoting the most. No other relationship can do this. Some might say some incestual relationships could, but those blur the family lines and also are prone to more genetic harm to the child. That is why societies promote married love. It is not because the people feel good about themselves. It is not because they have their identities affirmed. It is because that alone produces children and society depends on its members having children.

Note in all of this I have not said same-sex sexual relationships are immoral. (though I think they are) I have said simply that they are not the same as married opposite-sex relationships. This is also why the idea of redefining marriage is so problematic. It has been compared to the bans against interracial marriage in the past, but the problem here is that race has no affect on the sexual behavior. Men of all races are still men and women of all races are still women. The races are interchangeable in the relationship. It is not the same with the person’s sex.

By the way, along those lines, if one can say they are the wrong sex and identify as another, what could stop someone from identifying as a different race? I am fully white, but what if I said I was born into the wrong race and I feel like a black man? If anything, race is much more on a spectrum than sex is.

So is love, love? Yes, but it needs to be broken down and not treated as a cliche. Cliches tend to stop thinking and our society needs more of it.

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

 

How To Treat Enemies

How do we treat our enemies? Let’s plunge into the Deeper Waters.

If anything has been disturbing about the assassination attempt I wrote about last time, it’s been the response from many on the left about how disappointed they are that the shooter didn’t miss. There is a saying that when people show you who they are, believe them. What we have seen from multiple people is who they are and how they view their enemies.

What happens if you become their enemy?

As a Christian, I know Christ told me to love my enemies. Isn’t it interesting that He never denied we will have enemies? The Old Testament didn’t, even within the community of Israel. Exodus 23:4 told the people of Israel that if they come across the ox or donkey of their enemy wandering off, return it. This would be within Israelite territory most likely.

I hope many of you have known on this blog that I try to treat my enemies fairly. I have not held back in saying that I am a conservative Christian. Thus, I view people like Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama as enemies. I have some extremely strong viewpoints about both of these people.

However, when I have seen something false being shared about them, I have answered it. I used to get email blasts from someone who would talk about the latest horrible thing Obama had done when he was in office. I would spend a few minutes researching it, find out it was false, and then send out an email response to everyone back documenting the claim.

Yes. Conservative Christians share fake news also.

Some of these people who were getting these emails were liberals. I know that some of them came to respect me even though they disagreed with me because I cared about getting facts right. I have often chided Christians, even on this blog, for sharing information that can easily be shown to be false by a five-minute web search. If you want people to believe you on a claim about what happened 2,000 years ago, they need to be able to believe you on what happened two days ago.

Some of these responses have been public posts. Consider when Reclaim America shared a claim about Hillary Clinton. Another one was about Muslim apologist Zakir Naik. Now if I oppose these people ideologically, why would I write posts defending them?

Because truth matters. I will not take down my opponent with a lie. If they are as bad as I think they are, the truth about them is sufficient.

Let’s talk about present realities. You might be surprised, but I pray for the Biden family every night. I pray our president will have long life and health while he’s in the office. At the same time, I think he has done great damage to this country and the world and I do pray for justice, but that will come at God’s hands, not mine. I also realize we both have to answer to the same God one day.

If anything, the person I think has the roughest time in all of this in that family is Ashley Biden. Think about this. How many of you ever kept a journal or a diary where you would write down your most private and intimate thoughts. It wasn’t meant for everyone to see. Her diary was meant to be that, but now it’s public. Anyone can see it.

Would you like yours being open for everyone to see?

Now let’s get even more personal.

I have an ex-wife. I’ve spoken about my divorce. Does it hurt? Yep. Every day. Is it tempting to speak ill of her and even to think ill of her? Yes. I can easily say no other person on Earth has hurt me as much as she has.

I still pray for her well-being every night.

I challenge you even to come to campus and see if you can find anyone who has heard me speak ill of my ex-wife. If anything, I try to avoid doing that. I don’t even think you could find someone on Facebook who has seen that happen. That’s a bold claim, but I’ll make it.

Christ told me to love my enemies. That is unconditional. There are no exceptions to that rule. He didn’t say “Love your enemies, except that person who hurt you more than anyone else ever has. It’s cool to hate them.”

This is something I wrote about years ago in a post asking if your murderer will be in Heaven. I love how someone in the comments said that Stephen and Paul are together right now. That is the kind of radical love and forgiveness Christ calls us to.

Sometimes I see people on my Facebook feed say awful things about their exes. Every time, my thinking is the same. “I don’t know much about that person, but I sure know a lot more about you.” There are a lot of people I suspect in this election season who are seeing the reactions and saying “I wasn’t sure where I stand on Trump, but seeing how you all are reacting, I think I’ll stand with him.”

One tip I offer you all for your enemies is to pray for them. I mean real prayers for their well-being. It’s easy to say you will pray a Psalm of judgment on them. I have said before we often ask justice on our enemies and mercy on us. We hardly ever if ever reverse that and ask for mercy on our enemies and justice on us.

The way I see it anyway, if I live with anger and hostility towards my ex-wife, she wins. She’s still controlling me. She’s still dominant in my life. The more I let my hostility go, the more I am free.

Will I continue to pray for the Bidens every night? Yes. While I think Trump will win, if by some chance whoever the Democrat nominee is wins, I will pray for them every night too. I won’t pray for their agenda to succeed, but I will pray for them as a person.

When Obama was in office people used to ask me if I could meet with anyone in the world who would it be, and I said it would be him. Why? I would sit down and tell him the gospel. I would say the same about Trump when he was in office. I would say the same about Biden now. Something all of us have in common is all of us need the gospel.

Pray for your enemies. If not, you are more likely to become that which you condemn.

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

 

Nope. No Indoctrination Going On Here!

What is being talked about with history? Let’s plunge into the Deeper Waters and find out.

I was going to continue looking at the Muslim book, but I want to comment on a mailout that I got yesterday from Tom Woods. It’s actually going to take place right here in my own New Orleans. I saw a list of some of the topics he said were going to be spoken on and so I went and looked them up. Yep. They’re there.

You know how we’re constantly told that there’s no campaign going on to indoctrinate your kids?

They’re lying.

You can see the program here.

Doing a Ctrl+F, the word “Queer” shows up fifty-one times and LGBTQ shows up twenty-five times. There’s even a talk Woods pointed out on how to support “Pregnant-capable” students in abortion-ban states. That leaves me wondering what that has to do with American history. Check it out women. Now you are known as “Pregnant-capable” people. How’s that war against the patriarchy going?

Now I’m not saying all of the talks are like that. There could be some that are just fine to go to. I am saying that when you look at the bulk of these, they are more ideologically driven than anything else.

Remember, it was just within the past thirty years that we were told that all that was wanted was tolerance. Many of us at the time knew that was a lie. How can we tell it was? Because as soon as the party crying tolerance got into power, they treated anyone who disagreed with them with anything but tolerance. Cries of “Please just let us be!” became “Bake the cake or be ruined, bigot!”

If we want to talk about where our country really went off the rails, if I could point to one major event that started everything, I would point to the sexual revolution. Nothing has led to the breakdown of the family unit more than this disastrous event. Sadly, we in the church have not responded well as we are often just as informed on sexual matters. If anything, divorce and living together before marriage are too common in the church. (Keep in mind, I say this as someone who is divorced. In many cases, if you want to meet someone who hates divorce, find someone who was wrongfully divorced.)

Nowadays, your kids are not being taught history. They are being taught history and politics. They are not being taught science, but science and politics. I remember when I was in school learning about environmentalism in the fifth grade. (I also remember learning about fears of a coming ice age.)

The solution is also the same every time. More government. By the way, this is also something that goes along with redefining marriage. Since the State made up an artificial idea of marriage, they are the ones that have to defend it and force it on everyone else. Change the idea of marriage for one and you change it for all. All of this gives the state more power and more control.

Who knows? Maybe I’ll talk to some people here on campus and see if we might attend this event just to see what it’s like. It could be an interesting experiment, though before too long, we could be branded as heretics for not supporting the new orthodoxy.

Kind of like what cults do.

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

 

 

No Woman Should Be A Feminist

Are men the greatest threat to women? Let’s plunge into the Deeper Waters and find out.

Before diving into another book, let’s talk some about feminism. Women often complain about how men mistreat them and are the greatest evil to them. Then you see protests going on, one a friend told me about recently, where women decided the best way to protest it was to go topless.

Yep. That’ll stick it to the men alright.

Women in this movement also tend to be very much pro-abortion, which is quite odd. If there’s something that sets women apart from men, it’s that they can give good birth. They have the ability within their bodies to bring new life into the world. These women think that this is a negative and must be stopped and what’s more important is to have a career, the thing that men have.

It’s almost like when you get down to eat, women think the ideal is to be like men. Go and have working jobs and careers and have sex without consequences. Avoid having to go through that horrible period called giving birth where you bring a new human life into the world.

Now a lot of women aren’t like this. They are actually pro-life, but they have been hurt in other ways by feminism. They have imbibed mindsets that counter-productive to what they want.

These women want good men who will take care of them and provide for them and help them to raise families. They want to be wives and mothers. Unfortunately, they have bought into the feminist idea too often that men are the enemy.

Let’s consider this mindset that was going around not too long ago with saying that women would rather meet a bear in the woods than to meet a man. What was the point of this? It was so many women saying that they thought in general men were so dangerous that they would rather meet a bear in the woods as they’d have a better experience with it.

Okay. So let’s suppose a good woman shares this thought. Now there are two kinds of men in this thought experiment out there.

The first are the bad men she’s talking about who don’t really care about women and have no problem using a woman for sex. They will see this and say “Don’t care. If I want to have you, I will do what I can to get you and then toss you aside.” Then there are the good men who do care, but they will see this and say “If that’s how she sees me, I don’t want to get close to her.”

The good woman then is not attracting the good guys to her by sharing this. She’s enabling the bad guys actually. They won’t be deterred a bit by what she shares. If anyone will be, it is the good guys. Bad guys don’t care about being bad. Good guys don’t want to damage their reputation of being good.

You also have cases of women going to the gym in skin-tight outfits barely leaving anything to imagination and then are shocked when men notice them. Not only this, they record themselves working out and then make negative comments about the guys they accuse of leering at them. One case of a woman complaining about this involved a man who told the people at the gym, truthfully, that he was blind.

By the way, these women also often have an OnlyFans account.

Nowadays, feminism is even getting worse. Now you have men winning beauty pageants for women and this is considered a victory. You have men dominating in women’s sports and this is also accepted. In trying to say there is no difference between men and women, women have created a world that said “Okay” and acted accordingly. It doesn’t help that this same world also decided to redefine marriage and treat men and women as if they were interchangeable entirely.

So in order to stop the patriarchy, now we have cases of men beating women at women’s sports and beating women at women’s beauty pageants.

That’ll stick it to the patriarchy alright!

Women also aren’t helping themselves out when it comes to pre-marital sex. If a guy doesn’t have to make the effort to get you, odds are, he won’t. If you don’t make a man work to get you, then you are setting a low worth on yourself. Make a man rise to the occasion and if he really wants to be with you, he will do just that.

When I showed up on the first date for my ex-wife, I had plenty of money in my wallet, I had flowers, I had tickets to the aquarium, and I had downloaded her favorite music to my phone to play for her. Men who care about women love to impress women and if you go on and give in to them immediately, that will stop right there. It’s one reason married couples need to always be pursuing one another and chasing one another. Dating should continue into marriage.

Feminism may have meant to hurt women, but it hasn’t. It has done the opposite. By painting men as the opposition, it has stopped the natural way the two sexes are to work together. Of course, more could be said on how men should treat women, but that would be a whole other blog post.

For now, just remember if you are a woman, you should celebrate it and embrace womanhood. If you want to stay single, that’s your choice also, but remember that involves being celibate as well. If you want to be married and have a career, that’s fine too, but I wouldn’t recommend sacrificing children so you can get a career. Children are a gift. They will give you far better memories and influence than a career most likely will.

The worst enemy of women today is not from without. As in most other cases, it is from within, the way empires fall. Feminism is the greatest enemy a woman has.

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

 

The Control of Language

Do words matter? Let’s plunge into the Deeper Waters and find out.

I was looking at a group I’m in on Facebook Wednesday night and saw someone share a before and after picture of Ellen Page, who is now calling herself Elliot Page such that if you do a web search for her name, the first thing you can get is Elliot Page. Already, if some are reading this, they would accuse me of misgendering and insist that I say “He” about her.

One comment left on the picture was about how sad she looked after X number of years living as a man.

I jumped in and said she has lived zero years as a man. She has lived instead as a mutilated woman.

This kind of thing might seem minor to some people, but it is huge. “Why do you say ‘he’? Why not just say ‘she’? What’s the big deal. It’s just a pronoun.”

Pronouns are gateway drugs.

What it is really saying is “I have the power to define myself in contradiction to reality and not only do I want to contradict reality, I want you to join me in contradicting it.” I can freely say that Ellen believes herself to be a male. I can freely say she has mutilated her body to look like a male. I can freely say that she identifies as a he now. However, I can say those things because they are either what she believes about herself, the first and the last option, or something objectively true, the second one. I cannot affirm that her beliefs reflect reality and thus, I cannot affirm them.

It is the same thing I see when I hear someone talk about someone who is a biological male. There is only a male. As soon as we say biological male, we are saying on some level that we think women who mutilate their bodies become men. Male needs no explanation. You either are or you aren’t.

I also do not speak of a same-sex marriage. If marriage is a union of a man and a woman, and it is, there can be no such thing as a same-sex marriage. You might as well talk about a square circle. If you say the term, you have already given up half the game. How can you say that it’s not really a marriage when by your words you have already said it is.

What do I say instead? Redefining marriage. The impetus is on the other side to show why the classical definition of marriage is wrong and why it should be changed. They must also show why it is changed to what they want and not what they don’t want. Marriage has to mean something. If it can mean anything, then it is nothing so there’s no big deal in having it.

Some of you might have noticed I don’t even use the term homosexual. I use the term same-sex attracted. Is it clunkier? Absolutely, but I fear part of the danger is we make who someone sleeps with part of their identity and if that is your identity, how can you expect to deny it? I prefer a term that describes the attraction without saying the person has to have this in their identity.

Every step of language is one we must defend. One might think that this is so small, but what started just a few decades ago as “Just let us live in peace and don’t bother us” has now become Pride parades going on with sexual acts being done where children can see them. We have children taking puberty blockers and mutilating their bodies. We have books in public school rooms graphically displaying sexual acts that are often dangerous and also exploitive and abusive.

We were taught tolerance for so long that most people didn’t see that it was a sham (Though some of us did) and as soon as the reins of power switched, tolerance went out the window.

Also, some might think this is unloving. I disagree. What is unloving is to affirm someone in a deadly delusion that can destroy them. Loving someone does not mean denying reality.

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

Book Plunge: The Toxic War On Masculinity Part 9

What happens when the church absorbs secularism? Let’s plunge into the Deeper Waters and find out.

We are going to conclude this tonight as the last two chapters are about men and marriage and the church and patriarchy.

For the former chapter, Pearcey says it takes a man to save a marriage, and in many ways, I think this is true, but not all. I know many men like myself who we did not want our wives to leave at all. We fought tooth and nail to save our marriage.

If someone wants to leave, you can’t stop them.

Yet still, there is no doubt men need to be pulling their weight in marriage. Of course, women do, but this is written considering the men. We need to make sure we are treating our wives honorably and in a way pleasing to Christ.

That gets us to the last chapter.

Can we get some matters clear?

UNDER NO CIRCUMSTANCES IS IT ACCEPTABLE FOR A HUSBAND TO ABUSE HIS WIFE!

Let’s add a corollary to that.

UNDER NO CIRCUMSTANCES SHOULD A WOMAN STAY WITH A MAN THAT IS AN ACTIVE DANGER TO HER AND/OR HER CHILDREN!

The first one seems obvious, but there’s a real danger in that several churches tell women they cannot leave an abusive relationship. They have to respect the man as the leader of the household. If he’s not being the man he should be, who’s fault is that?

Why it’s the woman, of course. She is just obviously not being pretty enough or taking care of the house enough or being submissive enough or not having enough sex with him. If she will change her behavior, he will change his.

Baloney.

One strong reason men who abuse keep abusing is that they know that they can get away with it. A woman in this position is not respecting male headship. She is enabling true toxic masculinity.

This is not some new modern idea. This goes back to Augustine.

In the fourth century, the great church father Augustine said that if a husband is committing serious sin, such as fornication or adultery or physical abuse, his wife should not submit to him. She should regard God himself, not her husband, as her head: If her husband fornicates, she offers her chastity to God. For Christ speaks inwardly in her heart, and consoles his daughter with words like this: “Are you distressed about your husband’s wrongful behavior, what he has done to you? . . . In so far as he behaves badly, don’t regard him as your head, but me.”

Pearcey, Nancy. The Toxic War on Masculinity: How Christianity Reconciles the Sexes (pp. 257-258). Baker Publishing Group. Kindle Edition.

If you are in danger, get out. If your children are in danger, get out. If your church tells you you have to stay, leave that church.

Headship means the man is actually striving to act like Christ. A man who is an abuser is not a man. He’s a temper-tantrum boy in the body of a man.

Pearcey closes the book describing the Titanic and when it sank, the men went down with the ship so the women and children could flee. One man put on a tuxedo so he could die as a gentleman. Now, a group of men regularly gather around a statue commemorating the event and say the following:

“To their dignity, grace, and style, but most of all, tonight we toast their courage. . . . To those brave men.” “Hear! Hear!” “To the stewards, the men who stoked the boilers, the crew who shared that bravery as much as any man in a tuxedo. . . . To those brave men.” “Hear! Hear!” “To the young and old, the rich and the poor, the ignorant and the learned, all who gave their lives nobly to save women and children. To those brave men.” “Hear! Hear!” Finally, one man closes the commemoration saying, “Chivalry, gallantry, bravery, and grace—in these times those ideals seem to have all but disappeared. But by our remembrance they are born again. And in our lives, they can live again.”

Pearcey, Nancy. The Toxic War on Masculinity: How Christianity Reconciles the Sexes (pp. 269-270). Baker Publishing Group. Kindle Edition.

May they live again in men today!

Hear! Hear!

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

Book Plunge: The Toxic War On Masculinity Part 8

How can fathers work and be Dads both? Let’s plunge into the Deeper Waters and find out.

Going forward, Pearcey reminds us what the past was like.

In the colonial period, men were integral as actively engaged fathers and leaders of virtue. The family worked together daily in a family industry. . . . During the Industrial Age, this dynamic changed. Women became responsible for “civilizing” men (which led to the destructive mindset that excused and perhaps expected crude behavior from men). . . . The family dynamic became disjointed.

Pearcey, Nancy. The Toxic War on Masculinity: How Christianity Reconciles the Sexes (p. 211). Baker Publishing Group. Kindle Edition.

Nowadays, a lot of men sacrifice time with their family for their work. Why? They’re the breadwinner. They have to provide. They want their children to be able to go to any college they want and give as much as they can.

Problem is, a lot of these children want their Dads more than that.

Fortunately, some businesses are realizing this.

After her article went viral, Anne-Marie Slaughter gave a TED talk saying, If you work for me and you have a family issue, I expect you to attend to it. . . . I am confident, and my confidence has always been borne out, that the work will get done, and done better. Workers who have a reason to get home to care for their children or their family members are more focused, more efficient, more results-focused.

Pearcey, Nancy. The Toxic War on Masculinity: How Christianity Reconciles the Sexes (pp. 213-214). Baker Publishing Group. Kindle Edition.

Imagine that. Workers who get to spend time with their families and work out issues can actually work better. Could it be that if a job leaves a man thinking he’s being taken away from his family, that he will resent it? Could it be if he resents it, he won’t be as productive?

Not only that, if you can learn how to manage a family, you will usually be better on your job. In a hilarious statement she says,

Research has “determined that parents tend to excel at skills such as negotiating, compromising, multitasking, and patience. If you can resolve conflict with a three-year-old, you can almost certainly manage a group of adults.”

Pearcey, Nancy. The Toxic War on Masculinity: How Christianity Reconciles the Sexes (p. 214). Baker Publishing Group. Kindle Edition.

And research again shows that more families want more time together instead of more money together.

When Peggy Orenstein interviewed couples on their work-family balance for her bestselling book Flux, she found that the most satisfied couples were those who limited their work commitments: “The husbands had flexible jobs, worked regular hours [no overtime], or were self-employed.” Orenstein found that men who adopted these strategies often received fewer promotions and took a salary hit—the Daddy Penalty. But they said the payoff was worth it, namely, “a closer relationship to their children.” When asked, 70 percent of fathers say they would prefer more time with their family, even if that meant earning less. In a separate study, the same number of wives—70 percent—say they would prefer more time with their husband over a higher paycheck. A man who is slaving away at work for the sake of his family may be surprised to learn that his family would prefer his time and presence instead of fancier cars, nicer vacations, and designer clothes.

Pearcey, Nancy. The Toxic War on Masculinity: How Christianity Reconciles the Sexes (p. 215). Baker Publishing Group. Kindle Edition.

This is shown more and more throughout the chapter. Shorter work weeks even lead to more productive workers. Men. It might be better for your family if you can work part-time. Fortunately, one good thing Covid did is show many of us that is possible. I know many people who supplement their income doing work on YouTube so they can be with their family. I have a gamer on YouTube I watch frequently who talks often about spending time with his children and playing the games he got to play with his parents.

The guy is doing it right.

I have often said this about ministry. When I was married, I made it a priority to have my wife with me as much as possible, even when many speakers didn’t share that mindset. For me, family was more important. As Pearcey says:

One of my students attends a church where the senior pastor repeatedly tells his congregation, “I refuse to have a ‘successful’ ministry and a broken family.”

Pearcey, Nancy. The Toxic War on Masculinity: How Christianity Reconciles the Sexes (p. 223). Baker Publishing Group. Kindle Edition.

Several people can do a job. Only one person can be a husband to your wife and a father to your children.

Choose which is more important.

Well, this all sounds noble, but still, men can imbibe a secular mindset. What then?

Next time.

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