Can We Stop Talking About Hate?

Is this term a distraction? Let’s plunge into the Deeper Waters and find out.

I have often said before that there are two words in our society that are practically meaningless. Those words are God and love. It is not because I deny the reality of those words. It is because in our society, we take them to mean whatever the user thinks they mean. If you meet someone and they tell you they believe in God, it doesn’t mean they’re a Christian. It doesn’t even mean they’re a monotheist. The Mormons will tell you they believe in God, but their god is a vastly different being than we have as Christians.

Likewise, we have such vapid sayings in our culture as “Love is love.” What if I told you, “Glork is Glork.” Well, by law of identity, that would be true, but it’s meaningless if you don’t know what glork is. Besides, if you want to say all love is equal, no one really thinks that. Do we want to say that the love by a group such as the North American Man-Boy Love Association is love? If a person wants to have an affair with their dog, will that be love? (Brace yourselves. If the path is not stopped, defending these will come soon enough.)

Another word along these lines is hate and it gets tossed around too much. For one thing, we treat all hate as bad. It isn’t. You ought to hate some things. I’ll go further and say if you don’t hate some things, you are a demented individual.

Really? Yes. I hate that children are sexually abused. I hate it when someone commits suicide. I hate it that innocent people are mistreated. As a divorced person, I definitely hate divorce.

I also hate all of these things because I love something else. If you love children, you don’t want to see them abused. If you love life, you hate suicide. If you love justice, you hate seeing the innocent mistreated. If you love marriage, you hate divorce.

In our day and age, and especially in “Pride Month”, if you say that you disagree with something, you are accused of hating the individuals. For one thing, this is really getting into mind-reading which has no basis. For another, it really has no point. It really gets the debate to be about the mindset of the person instead of the data.

Let’s take two people. The first one will be a white supremacist. He is talking about the unhealthiness of the black community and he talks about how many black boys are fatherless. He uses this to look down on the race. Now let’s take Thomas Sowell, a famous black economist. He goes and talks about the economic state of black America and that too many black boys are fatherless.

The claim is true in both cases. The reasons for holding them are different. Thomas Sowell has no joy in what he says. The white supremacist does. However, what matters is the data. Now you can be more suspicious of the white supremacist, but data is data.

Now talk about same-sex sexual behavior. On the one hand, you have someone who is a Fred Phelps type from Westboro Baptist. He makes a statement about rampant disease spreading in the LGBT community. He can do this with glee seeing it as a judgment of God. On the other hand, you can have a doctor, perhaps himself same-sex attracted, from the CDC who says that men who have sex with men are at a higher rate for disease. Both are making the same claim. Now you can say the doctor is better qualified to speak, and that will be granted, but the claim is the same.

Having someone say you have hate for a group doesn’t touch the data. It just talks about you and frankly, if they believe that, how could you convince them otherwise? Why should you really care if they think otherwise? It’s just as much a smokescreen as saying bigot or hater or X-phobe, whatever the X might be.

And too often it works.

If anything, you could turn around and ask the person why they hate you for disagreeing with you. If it works for them, why not do it yourself? Could they ever prove that they don’t speak from a place of hate? No. It’s the exact same problem.

In every case, what really matters is the data. Name-calling and other such behavior is really just a way to avoid the issues. That is where the battle really lies, which is probably why they don’t want to talk about them.

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

Book Plunge: The Critical Qur’an

What do I think of Robert Spencer’s work? Let’s plunge into the Deeper Waters and find out.

Robert Spencer has gone through the Qur’an and given us information on the passages as well as pointed to leading scholars, past and present, to tell us about the origin of the Suras and about textual criticism. I had got this book several months ago, but I chose to wait until I finished the book before I reviewed it. I also wasn’t reading one sura (our equivalent of a chapter) every day, seeing as these can be long. A small number even have more verses than Psalm 119.

Some of you might be thinking this could be like the Skeptics’ Annotated Bible. I am pleased to say that it is not. It is not the case that Spencer jumps on anything that could be an inconsistency. There are times he even says that a claim against the Qur’an here is a poor one. Of course, he points out problems, but generally, it looks like his biggest goal can be to help with understanding.

One big problem some Muslims could have with the work is that he definitely shows textual variations that occur within the book. This is a problem since Muslims will often argue that there are no variations in the text. They say that the Qur’an is an eternal document that has always been with Allah. Of course, this gets us problems when we get to the abrogated passages, and that too will be discussed.

As I indicated earlier, Spencer interacts as well with Muslim sources of the past. This is important since it would be akin to us going to the church fathers to show the earliest handling of the text. These people were the ones closest to the writing of the book and were the ones most invested in the work.

This isn’t just a book for people who have never read the Qur’an. When I saw David Wood of Acts 17 Apologetics talking about the book, he said that he got new information on his look at the very first sura, and Wood has done a lot of work on dealing with Islam. That was enough to convince me that this was a resource that I could use.

Thus, you have a work here that goes through the Qur’an and yet thankfully, unlike the work of Skeptic’s Annotated Bible, I find to be fair. Spencer deals with misconceptions of the text. While there is no doubt he is opposed to Islam and the Qur’an, he also wants to be accurate in all that he says. He’s not going to jump on anything to go after it and he wants to make sure bad arguments against various passages are also dealt with.

One caveat though and I suspect it’s one that Spencer would not have a problem with. If you wanted to read something like Skeptic’s Annotated Bible, I would encourage you to at least read just the Bible first without any feedback along the way. In the same way, if you have not read the Qur’an on your own, as I had, then I encourage you to read it first and then come back and read the Critical Qur’an. It’s all about being fair with the text after all.

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

 

A Tale of Two Flags

What flag do you recognize today? Let’s plunge into the Deeper Waters and find out.

Here is one flag:

Here is another one:

Many of you might not recognize that first flag. It is the flag of Germany. If you went to most people on the street for a sort of “Fun With Flags” game and asked them to recognize it, I’m sure the majority would not. People who like trivia or study that kind of subject would, but most of us would not.

The second flag is the Nazi flag, and I guarantee you the overwhelming majority of people on the street could tell you about that flag and that it represents Nazism. What’s interesting is that before Nazism came along, most people would be thrilled to see a swastika. It would for them represent something like good fortune.

Today, no more. We recognize it for the wicked ideology it got associated with. Many of us when we think of Germany will think of that flag. That flag has supplanted Germany as a whole for many of us.

It’s scary to think of an ideology overtaking a country like that. Surely that could never happen. Right? Well, it apparently happened in the UK. Look at this video.

So apparently wherever this is, the “pride flag” is more important than the flag of the country. It’s not even handled carefully. It’s just let go and dropped to the ground.

But hey, that’s the UK. Right? That’s not the good ol’ U.S. of A. Right? Surely such a thing like that could never happen here.

Oh, wait. It already has.

According to the flag code for the US, this should never happen. The American flag is always supposed to be central. Unfortunately, we have an administration now that ignores that in favor of “Pride.”

We as Christians should also be concerned because, like the swastika, the rainbow has historically been seen as a symbol of God’s covenant with man to never flood the world again. That rainbow represents the promise of God to His people. It is now being used in a way that directly opposes something Christianity stands for.

Not only this, but at the White House event, some of the demonstrators had to be thrown out of the event for lewd behavior. Yes. This is the same kind of behavior that they want to have normalized in your child’s school. This is the ideology that is trying to take over your society. There will never be a step where they say “Enough.” It will always be a demand for more and more and more.

We know this because this has been the pattern. “We just want to be left alone.” “We just want the right to be with the person we love.” We want to be recognized in society.” Now we have surgeries being done on minors where their bodies are being altered. Just a couple of years ago it was seen as a big reveal to show that some hospitals were doing this to children. Now it’s common knowledge.

Now you can hardly see a movie or TV show without LGBTQ representation in it. Now you can’t take your child to a store without seeing something. A Christian friend of mine showed how her young daughter saw something on Amazon today about a program about a boy’s new dress. With the Call of Duty controversy going on (Which is what it should be instead of the NickMercs controversy seeing as there is nothing controversial about saying “Leave children alone”), we are seeing it be the debate in the gaming community.

I am pleased that this month, I am seeing pushback, but it will have to be for more than just a month. Now keep in mind when I say this about the movement, I mean the activists. I know of plenty of people in the group who just want to live their lives and don’t want all the attention. Our struggle is against an ideology and those who want to push it.

The pushback must continue though. I have a hope that sometime we will have the last pride month ever.

Maybe it will even be this month.

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

 

 

 

Can God Be Tempted?

If Jesus is fully God, how can He be tempted? Let’s plunge into the Deeper Waters and find out.

I was in a JW discussion group on Facebook recently and one of them shared about how in James, it says that God cannot be tempted, but in Matthew 4, Jesus is tempted. Well, that seems to be a problem. If Jesus is God, how can He be tempted?

Let’s right off say that when someone says Jesus is God, they are using theological shorthand. We are not saying Jesus is the Trinity or Jesus is the Father, something 99% of the arguments in this group are unaware of. We are saying that Jesus fully partakes of the divine substance.

We can say also that Jesus in His deity cannot be tempted, but in His humanity that is a different matter. That would be enough to settle the matter. However, there is another nuance I want to bring to this.

When James talks about temptation, he is talking about temptation from within. Where do our struggles ultimately come from? They come from within because of wrong desires we have within us. James is saying that God is not tempted from within.

In the Septuagint, the Greek translation of the Old Testament, in Psalm 105:14 and 77:41 (Psalm 106 and 78 for us), both of them use the exact same word for tempted that James uses to describe what Israel did to God in the wilderness. My opponent in the group had said that temptation is tempted when I tried to explain the different temptations. The problem with this is that if you play that route, then you will have a contradiction. After all, if that is the case, then James is wrong and God was tempted.

James is not wrong. James is saying that the Israelites were trying to get God to do something and God wasn’t having it. It was completely ineffectual. After all, what could you tempt God with anyway? Can you make some kind of threat to Him? Can you offer Him anything that He needs? It’s nonsensical.

If anything, we could even perhaps see a parallel here. Israel tempts God in the wilderness. The devil tempts Jesus in the wilderness. This is not saying Israel is the devil, but both of them were playing roles of tempting the deity. Neither of them were successful.

The problem with anti-Trinitarian arguments like this and so many others is that they are basically lazy arguments. There is no attempt to look and see if anyone in 2,000 years of church history has ever answered such a question before. This is what I largely see from Jehovah’s Witnesses, unfortunately. They don’t know what their opponents believe and most of their arguments are against modalism.

The other sad news is that many Christians are unaware of this and will fall for weak arguments because they were never taught about what is really meant by the doctrine of the Trinity. We need to do better. We have a unique doctrine of a unique God and we need to be able to better defend that and show what a difference it makes.

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

Book Plunge: Excavating The Evidence for Jesus

What do I think of Titus Kennedy’s book? Let’s plunge into the Deeper Waters and find out.

This book is certainly thorough. Kennedy goes step by step through the Gospels showing how archaeology impacts every aspect of what goes on, even starting before the birth of Jesus by giving us a look into the culture of the time and who was on the throne in Rome and who was on the throne in Judea. When we get to the birth of Jesus, this will even include looking at the census and his explanation for where the magi came from.

One aspect I found interesting of the early years was that of the massacre of the children of Bethlehem. It is said that this didn’t happen because Josephus doesn’t mention it, but Kennedy says Josephus never mentions the incident of Pilate bringing golden shields into Jerusalem as well. It would be a mistake to take the one major source we have on Jewish history at the time and assume he must have mentioned everything.

Not only that, but there had been an omen made according to Suetonius before the birth of Augustus that a king of the Romans would be born. The Senate tried to prohibit the rearing of any male child born that year, but it never worked because some Senators had pregnant wives and they would have wanted to be the father of the king.

From here on, Kennedy explains in what seems like minute details the life of Jesus. Simple stories you think wouldn’t have much are looked at and at times you wonder just how much more can be told about this account. This leaves me looking at the end and thinking this would be a good book to use to give an introduction to the life of Jesus.

Of course, a good portion of the book is spent on the last week of the life of Jesus including the resurrection. Here, he looks at accounts like the crucifixion of Jesus to see what happened and also as with other areas, to discuss where it happened. We don’t just jump to the resurrection though. Nope. We have to go through the burial too and here we will look at claims such as the Talpoit tomb theory and see what we can learn about the James ossuary.

That’s another benefit as this is based on the latest research. You will see replies to Talpoit and the James Ossuary, but also to the Karen King finding asserting that Jesus had a wife. There are also numerous resources listed that you can go to to get further information. This book gives you the start and then tells you where to go.

There is only one problem I have and that is no footnotes. All that is listed is the sources for further reading. It would have been good to know exactly where Kennedy gets a lot of his information instead of just having to point to what he says. If it comes from experience he has personally as an archaeologist, at least tell us that. If an updated version of this comes out, I hope it has footnotes.

Despite that, I still highly recommend this book.

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

 

Why White House Pride Flags Should Concern You.

It this just a harmless celebration? Let’s plunge into the Deeper Waters and find out.

Bud Light is losing. Target is losing. Call of Duty is losing. Even recently, Starbucks has said that they’re not going to have Pride material on display in their stores. (To which, if you can, stop by and get a drink then.) The line in the sand was drawn at children. Going after the children was way too much.

However, that memo hasn’t reached the White House where pride flags have draped the building. What does this mean? The problem with this is that it gives more power to the state.

Now all of this is going to be done from a viewpoint that will not use the Bible so no one can say that I’m just going by the Bible. I do contend the Bible does agree with my position, but I can make it without it.

So what about marriage? Sometimes people ask me if I believe in same-sex marriage. I always ask what marriage is. If you realize that marriage is a man-woman unit, then you realize you might as well ask if I believe in triangular squares. But why is it a man-woman unit?

Marriage is this because it is the building block of a society because within it is found the one act that is capable of producing children. We have made a mistake in thinking that we can have wanton sex without children and not have consequences. This does not mean that infertile couples or couples too old to reproduce can’t marry or even shouldn’t marry, but it does mean the public end of marriage is children. It is not the couple’s happiness, as good as that might be. It is not feelings of love towards one another, though that should be pursued. In the end, it is children.

The state does not come before marriage. Marriage comes before the state. No families? There can be no state. Marriage is a reality that we discover. Some people who want to bring the Bible into this will point to polygamy, but polygamy is if anything multiplying the man-woman unit beyond necessity.

This is also why interracial marriage was never invalid. Interracial marriage still has the man-woman unit in it. Removing that was actually a recovery of marriage and not a changing of it. However, changing the persons in the roles on an essential difference, their gender, DOES matter.

Now some can say that same-sex behavior exists in nature, as it does, but that doesn’t mean it is something we normalize for our species. After all, eating one’s own young also exists in nature. Are we going to pass a law saying that is allowable?

So the State creates something, an artificial reality, and they want to call it marriage also. The problem now is if the State produces it, the State will have to defend it. It’s their baby after all. In essence, this becomes a new religion of sorts. You do not question the dogma and if you do, the State comes against you.

And yet, in the new “marriage”, what benefit does society get? Why should the State care about the feelings of the people involved? When my ex-wife and I applied for our marriage license, we were never asked about our feelings or personal happiness. We were just to show that we were of age and of the opposite sex and not close relatives. That was it.

Redefining marriage gives the State more power and in the long run will have it be that if you question the dogma, you are guilty of treason. In the past, we destroyed the bodies of children in the womb. Now we are also destroying them outside the womb through “gender-affirming” care and puberty blockers.

The Bud Light pushback though has changed things. What this should show us is that when people work together and stand up, especially for their children, they can have an effect. Even if you are of the LGBT community, this should concern you. A state that can rule in your favor can make you the enemy the very next day.

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

Should Christians Play Diablo?

Is this the devil’s game? Let’s plunge into the Deeper Waters and find out.

A really good friend of mine shared with me yesterday about someone complaining about KFC because they are teaming up with Diablo for a promotion. Now some of you who know about Diablo being put out by Activision might wonder why I’m commenting on this seeing as I came out against Activision in yesterday’s post. I still stand by that, but for the sake of argument, let’s suppose that this game was made by a different company. I want to just look at the game as a game.

I went to the KFC page and saw several people talking about how demonic this game was. Evidence they gave of that? It just was. One lady who I replied to messaged me and decided to show me this picture as clear evidence that the game is demonic.

Sorry. That doesn’t cut it for me. Depicting an evil being as something that looks evil is actually being accurate. If you look at descriptions of the devil in something like, say, Dante’s Inferno, it’s nothing pretty.

If we were to take the book of Revelation and turn it into a full movie along the lines of Left Behind, a series I definitely don’t agree with, the devil would come out looking pretty awful. Can you imagine what the Beast would look like if he was pictured literalistically?

I was also told to look at the horns on this creature. The horns! Well that clinches it!

Except when you look at Revelation 5, you see horns on the Lamb. That lamb is Jesus, so if horns on something make it evil, then I guess you have a problem with Jesus. If anything, I think the devil would be upset as being depicted as a villain in a video game that an adventurer can defeat. (I understand the story is about defeating the mother-in-law of the devil, something I don’t think really flatters the devil.)

Naturally, satanism was also thrown about. Real satanism doesn’t have anything to do with satan. Satan is more seen as a symbol as being a rebel against society. It’s essentially humanism. If you go with the whole self-esteem movement, you’re a lot closer to satanism that way.

Now keep in mind in saying this I’m not saying everyone should play this. If you still don’t think it would be right for you to play, that’s fine. What I am concerned about is the jumping into panic mode immediately. I am much more concerned about the philosophy at Activision than I am about this game. When I say I wouldn’t play this game, it’s not because it’s Diablo, but because it comes from Activision. Now I might not play on other grounds such as I just don’t normally care for games that are M rated.

However, that’s another point. Someone else did tell me that this game is M rated because of all the blood and gore. Okay. That’s why it’s left to mature adults to make their own call, but if we went that route, go look at the Parents guide for Schindler’s List in IMDB. Much of the material is severe. There is full graphic nudity and there is extreme blood and gore.

Yet everyone should see that movie at least once.

Christians. If you go with simplistic arguments, you will come across these kinds of problems. The world will also look at it and tell you you are being hypocrites, and they will be right. If you don’t want to play something because it depicts a demon like this, but you have no problem with Lord of the Rings with the balrog, then the issue is not the being in it. If the presence of such a creature is the problem, it doesn’t get a free pass because, hey, a Christian made it.

Not only that, but we are fighting the battles in the wrong spot. The real threat to watch out for in a movie or anything like that is the worldview that is presented. There are a lot of cute cartoons and movies that parents will let their children watch that have a horrible worldview to them. Star Wars will give you a very pantheistic worldview. Star Trek is humanism. Am I saying to avoid those? No. However, we must be discerning in all that we watch, read, play, etc.

Learn to discern. That’s the bottom line. Don’t fall into panic. Go for what seems like an obvious threat to you and you’ll miss the real underlying ones.

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

Leave The Children Alone

Is there a problem with leaving the children alone? Let’s plunge into the Deeper Waters and find out.

Many of you reading this are not gamers, and so when I tell you there’s a big debate going on in the gaming community, you might be tempted to dismiss it. Don’t. This actually is relevant to you. If you have children in the school system, you need to pay attention to this. If you care about what the LGBT group is doing, you need to watch this.

It all started with someone complaining about the Armenian parents protesting their school considering more Pride material and the parents didn’t want this. An altercation took place and no one knows for sure who started it. One streamer posted about it and said we’re in a dark place and we should just let people love who they want.

A streamer who goes by NickMercs replied with saying that they should just leave the children out of it. That’s the real issue. You can see the tweet here.

NickMercs had made a bundle collaboration with the Call of Duty game series put out by Activision. After he said this in response, the bundle was removed from the store. The response by the fans was immediate.

They aren’t happy.

Here is what Call of Duty said themselves.

One other major streamer known as Dr. Disrespect decided that that was enough. He made a livestream video of him removing the game from his library. There is language in this if you don’t want your children to watch.

Now many of these guys would really see no problem with the LGBT community. They’re in many cases for “equal rights.” However, they do not want to see children being targeted and in comments sections are often tagging the FBI to alert them about groomers and pedophiles. (Personally, I don’t think we should say pedophiles as Philia is just friendship. Pederasts is a much more accurate term.) Many of these guys grew up playing games and are not parents themselves.

Some of these people are now saying that the community as is is a cult. If you say one thing that goes out of line against them, then they shut you down. Note that this is not saying that all people who are LGBT are cultists, but there is a mindset.

And let’s consider this still. What was the supposed statement made that went against pride? Leave the children alone.

So if you are making a statement about leaving children alone, you are opposed to pride and you are anti-LGBTQ?

That says a lot, doesn’t it?

I already shared a post about what is going on here and another one recently here. However, the gaming community has found another video and are letting others know what is going on. I urge you to go to around 5:40 in this video, although if you want to watch the whole and hear more about the “controversy”, feel free. Please do not watch this with small children around.

The LGBT group is now making it clear that their goal is to get the children. Our president has also now draped the White House in the rainbow flags so you know what side he is going to fall on. The big battle of our generation is going to be for the safety of our children.

The gamer community could have been one of the worst to go after. These are people who play games where they often have to plan out strategies, get all the information they can, and work as a team. Many of them also want to pass their hobby on down to their children so you can expect they want to have a good relationship with them.

There is an active movement going on to boycott Activision and Call of Duty. It’s odd that Activision has chosen to jump on Nickmercs immediately when they themselves have a less than glamourous history. They ignore repeated complaints from gamers about their games, but they jumped right on this one. Also, it’s worth pointing out that in America, many of their games have pride flags in the games, but for some reason, if you’re in the Middle East you don’t get those. Really standing with the LGBT community. Right?

If you’re a non-gamer and you made it this far, I hope you now see that this is relevant to you. They are coming for your children and if you stand against them, you are the enemy. There is no community they will not try to get a foothold in. If you are a non-gamer, speak out against Activision and Call of Duty anyway. While I don’t play Call of Duty, I am a gamer and I am taking this very seriously. I have spent much of this weekend watching the videos on this gathering more and more information.

Parents. Please step up now. They don’t want to leave your children alone.

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

 

 

Spiritual Deception in the Highest 21.3

What happened in the process of translation? Let’s plunge into the Deeper Waters and find out.

We are now returning against to Johnson’s *ahem* work. I got this started and I do look forward to finishing it. KJV-onlyism is awfully tedious to deal with. At any rate, the source material, if you can call it that, can be found here.

When the King James Bible was translated from Hebrew/Greek into English each scholar first made his own translation. His work was passed on to other scholars within his own section for review. This work was then passed on to other sections for their review. Lastly, the work went to a final committee to iron out differences. All the work was done in the open.

Assuming for the sake of discussion all this is true, so what? That means that this was the best way to do this? It’s good because this is how it was done before? I want to know why did they do it this way. What was thought by the society at large? Who was funding it? How much of this would be known to the general public.

The work of Westcott and Hort was VERY different:

“The Old Testament committee met together SECRETLY as one body for ten years. The New Testament committee also met together SECRETLY for ten years. All was done in secret” [S4P103-104].

Okay. So what? Perhaps they didn’t want the two committees to influence each other? That’s just off the top of my head, but it’s certainly plausible. Notice something important about this. If you have an explanation that all things being equal doesn’t impugn the person with an evil action and is also plausible, charity says to go with that one first.

“This arrangement left the committee at the mercy of a determined triumvirate to lead the weak and to dominate the rest. All reports indicate that an iron rule of silence was imposed upon these revisers during all that time. The public was kept in suspense all the long, weary ten years. And ONLY after elaborate plans had been laid to throw the Revised Version all at once upon the market to effect a tremendous sale, did the world know what had gone on” [S2P257-258].

I find this confusing. The public was in suspense and yet at the end, they didn’t know what was going on? Those two don’t go together. How can you be at suspense of a group doing work if you don’t know what work is being done or even if there is a group at work? Johnson doesn’t make it clear what is meant here.

Also, who was this triumvirate supposedly? If it was Westcott and Hort, well that makes sense. They’re the ones directly behind this. The final work has their name behind it. They should get to look at it and see if turned out the way they thought it should.

This same tactic, of buying sight unseen, was used to ‘sell’ the RSV Bible on September 30th, 1952. We know that: “Pastors had no opportunity to review the new Bible, yet they were asked to open their churches for a tremendous advertising campaign”

We know this? How? Pastors just suddenly found a new Bible in their pulpit and had to use it? Was there a threat if they didn’t? Who would enforce it?

A KJV-onlyist reading this would likely agree, but only because it agrees with them. If so, Johnson is only convincing people who are already convinced. Color me skeptical still that Johnson is really reporting accurately.

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

Book Plunge: The Trinity

What do I think of Gilles Emery’s book? Let’s plunge into the Deeper Waters and find out.

Emery’s book is stated to be a book on Catholic doctrine on the triune God. That being said, the Trinity is a doctrine for all branches of Christianity. If you are Protestant or Orthodox, there is still a lot you can get from this book.

Actually, as I read it, I found myself thinking the book read very much like a Protestant book on the Trinity could read. This is not at all to knock Catholics or imply that they are thinking like Protestants, but I did see the constant emphasis on pointing to Scripture primarily. About the only major difference it looks to me is that Catholics tend to cite more Catholic sources and Protestants tend to cite more Protestant sources. A Protestant like myself would not likely go and cite the Catechism in order to demonstrate the Trinity.

Something else refreshing is that while Emery is writing about deep topics, and sometimes it could be hard to follow, generally, it isn’t. Emery doesn’t come off as if he’s writing to academics. He’s writing to the layman, but at the same time, he is encouraging the layman to go deeper. You will find talk about divine simplicity, for instance, and how that works with the Trinity.

Yet as you are going into these “deeper waters” (couldn’t resist) of the Trinity, Emery takes your hand step by step. This is not a sudden plunge. This is a gradual wading as the Trinity is explained at a steady rate until one gets into the deeper topics. You start with just examining the confessions of the Trinitarian faith and then end with discussing the saving action of the Trinity.

For instance, consider the word God. What does this mean? It is a mistake of groups like the JWs and others to assume that God means Father. The first mistake these groups make is the assumption that God is unipersonal. If you make a one-to-one equivalent of God and Father, you have a problem, but if you realize God is not referring to a person alone but rather speaks of a nature that is fully embraced by a tripersonal being, it fits.

Thus, when we say Jesus is God, it is easy to take that to mean that Jesus is the Trinity or some modalistic sense, but what is really meant is that Jesus is a person who fully possesses the nature of God. The same applies to the Spirit and the Father. This doesn’t mean that there is no difference in relation as the Father is usually seen as the origin and the Son and Spirit exist both because the Father exists as well.

The Trinity is not an easy doctrine to understand, if one can really understand it all as it is more likely to be apprehended. However, with resources like Emery’s, Christians can have a better grasp on it. I recommend this reading not just to Catholics, but to Protestants and to Orthodox as well. The chapters are long, but not too long. A dedicated reader can go through one per day and thus finish the book in a week, a worthwhile investment.

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