Tag: homosexuality

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)

 

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)

 

 

Reply To Honestly by Tom Copeland Part 2

What mistakes can liberals make in interpretation? Let’s plunge into the Deeper Waters and find out.

Tom Copeland’s book Honestly, like I said yesterday, is for the most part quite good, but I really disagreed with his statements on sexual orientation. Last time, I discussed his concerns with a conservative schema for interpreting Scripture. I appreciate that he was fair and said liberals have some problems as well. Let’s look at those and then when we get to what he says, I will see if he does fall under any of those concerns.

The first one is that liberals can be reluctant to deal honestly with difficult passages if they think they hurt them or someone they care about. In many cases, that’s something all of us are prone to. “Well, the Bible doesn’t really say much about my sin here, but check out everything it says about my neighbor’s!” Michael Brown wrote a book on overcoming a food addiction and noted how many pastors are obese and that you never hear a sermon on gluttony. I wonder why.

The second danger is like this. If an interpretation doesn’t match how we think God is or how Christ is, we discount it. Surely a God of love would never do XYZ! Well, there’s a lot of things a God of love would do that we don’t understand. This is also something common with internet atheists and others. “Look at what God did! That’s not loving!”

The next is a lack of consistency or structure in interpreting Scripture. If much of our interpretation of Scripture is based on experiences and on what is going on in culture at the time, it is easy to get caught up in an idea because it is new. This is something that happens regularly in politics where people will suddenly show up and embrace what is obviously true despite it not being believed by anyone for thousands of years beforehand.

The last he mentions is a focus on tolerance and grace at the expense of truth. I had Gregory Quinian on my podcast once who describes himself as an ex-homosexual and he has said that we are to speak the truth in love, but if it’s not the truth, it’s not love. There are too many in our society that will not tell someone the truth for fear that it will hurt them. Many Christians often talk about loving someone into the kingdom. You can also love someone out of the kingdom.

I definitely appreciate all of these as I want to give the benefit of the doubt and think that Copeland is trying to give both sides of the coin to the best of his ability. In the end as you will see, I do not think he has made a really strong case from the Bible for his position. If you are one who doesn’t hold to Scripture, that won’t matter to you, but as I said last time, this is a book by a Christian for a Christian so we are seeing how it stacks up with a Christian worldview.

We shall continue next time.

 

Coming For Your Children

Have we gone past the idea of equality? Let’s plunge into the Deeper Waters and find out.

I had to look to find a video I could use. Why?

Because some of these are not fit for a blog of this type. They actually contain nudity that many of you would not want to see. However, if you did for some reason want to see it, where could you go?

A pride parade.

You might think “That’s disturbing.” Most of us would agree that having young children be in the presence of such a scene would not be good. Unfortunately, even that has to be defended now. It certainly needs to be explained to George Takei.

Some of you who haven’t heard about this can probably tell I’m holding something back. Okay. The title is coming for your children. Marching nude in a parade isn’t exactly targeting children.

Yet in the video I am about to show here, that’s not what is going on. They are explicitly saying “We’re here. We’re queer. We’re coming for your children. It’s not just one person. It’s a whole group saying it.

https://www.youtube.com/shorts/EYKpaPI8G4Y

When someone shows you who they are, believe them.

Back when marriage was redefined in the eyes of popular culture to throw out the sex-specificity of it, we were told that that was it. Many of us who are Christian conservatives knew it wasn’t. You give an inch and a mile will be taken. There was even a joke meme at the time that indicated the only thing that would happen if gays got married. There are many such examples. Here’s one.

See that orange unit? The family unit was already falling apart sadly, thanks to no-fault divorce, but this did further damage to it. One other chart like this had as an option that was supposed to not happen was “Teachers will teach children about gay sex.”

Whoops.

And as is said at FreedomToons, if anything didn’t happen, it was gays getting married, because marriage is a man and a woman.

There are plenty of people who consider themselves LGBTQ+ and they want nothing to do with what is going on. Ultimately, they just want to live their lives in peace. They don’t want to be glamorized. Most likely, they don’t want their sexual desires to be on the front of everyone’s mind.

I am relieved to see that this is starting to be pushed back on. The nation’s children are as always, the greatest casualties. When I was in high school and had a cold, I had to have a doctor’s note to have cough drops at school, (Which as readers of the Princess Bride know, are the greatest thing ever.) and I had to go to the school office to get one. I could not be trusted to handle cough drops on my own.

But today, not only could a teen girl get an abortion, but now the student can be taught to change their gender identity at the school and keep it secret from their parents. If the parents push back, they are the problem. If the girls don’t want a boy in the locker room while they undress and shower, then the girls are the problem.

Don’t think this is the end of it also. Every step we give in is just another step and it will never be enough. If these people are willing to take your children, what will they take next? Where will it end?

I don’t want to find out.

It’s up to us to stand up now and not support businesses supporting this and follow the adage of Get Woke, Go Broke. Bud Light should show us that we are capable of this if we work together. Naturally, this will also require us learning, truly learning, and sharing the gospel. (Along those lines, see this video I did on The Legend of Zelda and evangelism.)

If you’re a parent, go look at your children now or at least pull out a picture of them.

Those are the stakes.

Game on.

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

 

Coming To A Pride Parade Near You

What is being shown to your children? Let’s plunge into the Deeper Waters and find out.

Parents. If you have children, please watch this video, but also make sure the children are not around. (Assuming they are underage.) Even if you don’t care for TimCast, this is a video of what is happening at a pride parade and at a school. All parents need to watch this.

I wish this was an isolated event, but I doubt it is. Remember Ron DeSantis said that there couldn’t be a parade in Florida if it would involve material not fit for children. They decided to just not have the parade. What is going on at these events that this needs to be shown?

Years ago when the Obergefell case came down, the case that decided to redefine marriage to include two people of the same sex, I remember all the memes going around. “All this means is that gays will get married. Nothing more.” Those of us like myself who are conservative Christians knew better.

We were right. The first step that came after the ruling was the normalization of transgenderism and now you have kids having their bodies mutilated and healthy body parts removed. These decisions are largely irreversible. These children will never be able to have children and many will never truly experience sexual pleasure.

Now also you have men dominating in women’s sports and in any other event meant for women. Men are getting access to prisons for women and to their locker rooms and everything else. You can be sued at times for “misgendering” someone.

Not only this, but in this video, take a look at what is happening in the schools. Children are being told Happy Pride Day and celebrating running under a rainbow. Do children even know what this is? Children at the age in the video?

Parents. You should want your children coming home and asking you questions about math, literature, science, history, etc. Do you really want them coming home and asking “Mom? Dad? What does Pride Day celebrate?”

Homeschool them now or get them in good private education where this is not being taught.

When you homeschool them also, make sure you teach them at age-appropriate levels about proper sexuality from a Christian worldview. You also need more than just “The Bible says so.” You need a whole worldview to explain why this is wrong. This is not to disparage the Bible, but you need to see how it applies to all of life.

After all, if you don’t educate your children, someone else will. Even if they’re homeschooled, they will have friends, they will have internet, they will have media of some kind. You can’t isolate them from the world nor should you. In a military situation, the troops are trained before they go out into the battlefield, but it is with the understanding they will see battle. Do the same for your children. They will see battle.

Keep in mind, this does not mean that individuals in the LGBT community are our enemies. It does mean the ideology is. I suspect there are some in that community who don’t want to see this done to children as well.

I also am concerned about so many Christians who seem to hide under the rubric of love. “Well, they love each other, so what’s the big deal?” Or “Why do you hate homosexuals?” Disagreeing with someone does not mean hate. As for love, these people believe more what the world says about love than what they do Jesus and the Scriptures say about love.

Love does not mean you affirm everything someone believes about themselves. It also means you call them out if they are doing something harmful. It is love when a family stages an intervention for someone who is messing up their lives. It is love to let someone have it if need be when they are doing the same.

They also don’t understand the concept of marriage. If you think there is no essential difference between two members of the opposite sex and two members of the same sex joining together, then you do not see marriage as being about building up the next generation and the continuing of the human species and the nuclear family. It is at that point simply a glorified friendship.

Churches. On you then, we have to start teaching people this kind of material. We have too many sermons that are really about how to make it through your life with your problems. There is very little about Jesus. It is all application and sermons that are just application will not make a difference.

If this means having extra classes, great. This would actually be a great way. Start having classes that are not just marriage enrichment, but about what marriage is. Start really having teaching about sex in the church that will even explore why couples should not live together or have sex before marriage that will go beyond “The Bible says so.” Our young people today especially need to understand not just what the Bible says but why it says what it says.

Parents. You are in a war, and yes, they are coming for your children. If these people are willing to kill their own children in abortion and sterilize them in transgender surgeries, then the children will have to come from somewhere. Oh, if you think the idea of coming for your children sounds extreme, well….

The people that put this up took it down. They claimed it was just satire. Color me skeptical.

Folks. We are in a war. We are fighting for the next generation. At the start, they are defenseless and we must protect them.

Do so.

In Christ,
Nick Peters
(I Affirm the virgin birth)

Thoughts On Anthony Bass

How will we stand when persecution comes? Let’s plunge into the Deeper Waters and find out.

I was just watching a video from TimCast where the conversation was Anthony Bass. Bass is a baseball player for the Toronto Blue Jays who posted something in support of the Target boycott. Hardly a day had passed and he was apologizing for it and said he was going to use Blue Jays resources to reeducate himself.

We all know what that entails.

Now when I use the word persecution, I am going to say that no, this is not like where it is in Muslim and Communist countries where you can be killed for being a Christian. However, this is a step in that direction. If the mind virus cannot be eliminated, before too long expect them to say the person must be eliminated.

Tim Pool who hosts the program is not a Christian. Seamus Coughlin who was on this episode is a devout Catholic Christian. This led to a back and forth going on and something I will say I respect is that this could have easily been a chance for non-Christians to rag on Christians. It didn’t happen. Instead, it was said that those people weren’t really walking the walk.

Tim is confident that Bass isn’t a Christian. Why would you sell out your faith so quickly? Does this really look like someone who knows they will be judged by God one day? I’m not going to be one to be so quick to say Bass isn’t a Christian or not. I’d also say all of us who are Christians can easily lose sight of the fact that we will be judged by God one day.

Do I disagree with what Bass did? 100%. If at the end he came out of this and was no longer a Christian and was waving around pride flags, I would not be surprised. I hope that doesn’t happen, but that’s what I think will.

Yet at the same time, I am hesitant in how I handle such scenarios because many of us can talk the talk when all we have to do is talk. Picture Peter who said to Jesus “Even if everyone betrays you, I never will! I’m ready to die for you!”

And yet for him, within 24 hours, what was he saying? “Jesus? Never heard of Him.” Peter himself caved. I’m not going to go and claim I would do better. I would hope that if push came to shove, I would, but I think boasting beforehand can only lead to more trouble.

But this is a reminder that we all need to live differently as Christians. Things are getting harder for us than they have before. If you do not bow the knee often to the Pride ideology going on now, then you are the ones who are ready to be thrown to the proverbial lions.

Bass is going to reeducate himself. The problem is many of our Christians aren’t going to be reeducated, but that they were never educated to begin with. I don’t mind a school education or college or university. I mean they have never been seriously educated in Christianity and what we believe.

This is especially so for children and if we don’t educate our children, well, somebody will.

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

What Are Your Children Reading?

Do you know what’s going on in your school library? Let’s plunge into the Deeper Waters and find out.

As a conservative, I like watching the channel Don’t Walk, Run on YouTube. I don’t know the religious position of the host Andrew, but I do like the material he presents. He recently asked a question about the book The Perks of Being A Wallflower and asked if it contained any sexually explicit material or not. Now I hadn’t read the book, but I went to Google Books. It’s important to know you can’t type in a search “explicitly sexual material” or “rape scene.” Thus, I put in terms that would be used in such scenes.

I am putting in the ones I thought were the worst. I was even hesitant to share these on Facebook for fear that I would get in trouble for them. If you are hesitant to put something like this on Facebook, putting it in a book geared toward children is probably not a good idea.

So let’s see some screenshots I took of my computer.

Also, this is just from one book. In Andrew’s video, he reads passages from these books to show why they are banned. Keep in mind that books that are considered classics like Huckleberry Finn are often condemned today because of “racism” but books describing rape and having explicit pornography in them are okay.

Later on his Twitter, Andrew shared a picture from A Court of Mist and Fury and said this was one of the tamer passages in the book.

Keep in mind also no one is saying ban these books outright as far as I know. If someone wants to read them, they can go to a bookstore, Amazon, or even a public library. What is being said is this does not belong in a school library and books like this should certainly not be required reading for students.

Some might say “Doesn’t the Bible contain some explicit language?” Yes. However, the Bible is also not written as if it the primary target was young hormone charged teenagers. Also, this is either shown in a marital context, such as in the Song of Songs, or else it is shown in a way to indicate the wickedness of the action.

We are living in a day and age of mass sexual confusion. Keep in mind that at every step it has been “This is all we’re asking for.” What is being asked for has always increased. At first, it was just accept homosexuals and give them freedom. Then it was to allow marriage. Now it has moved towards transgenderism where healthy girls are getting double mastectomies. We are raising up a children that will be sterile every time they go through such an operation.

Parents. Please be watching what is on your child’s syllabus and/or assigned reading list. Make sure you read anything first. I am considering for this blog getting some of these books at a library myself and letting parents know what is in them even more. This is about protecting your children more and more because in an age of confusion, they are more prone to be victimized in the name of being loving.

It’s up to you, parents, to put a stop to that.

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

Doing No Harm

Is doing no harm a sufficient moral principle? Let’s plunge into the Deeper Waters and find out.

Often today, we don’t hear about if an action is good or evil. We hear about if it is harmful or not. Now, causing harm is one aspect to consider in morality, but it is not the only. When it comes to the idea of redefining marriage, part of the question asked is “Well who is it hurting?”

For one thing, changing the meaning of marriage for anyone changes it for everyone. Everyone’s marriage is shifted to not a union designed to bring about children for the prolonging of civilization, but rather to a sort of union from two people who are committed to one another. By this standard, we could say that two roommates could be married or a brother and sister who choose to live together are married or a son who brings his mother who is a new widow into his home are married.

However, while those are important situations to bring up, why not go back and question this principle about not harming anyone. Consider the scenario of a peeping Tom for example. he has found a peephole outside of a showering area where he can stand and watch naked women shower. He is never caught and the women never have any idea they are being watched? Are any of them being harmed? If not, then can we say this is wrong?

Consider also a dentist who has a private practice. To keep costs down, he doesn’t even have a secretary. He works alone and makes all his appointments. From time to time, beautiful women come in and he has to put them under for surgical operations. What they don’t know is that sometimes when they are unconscious, he undresses them and fondles them. The women never get pregnant and so never find out about what he’s done. Has he done any harm?

If you’re a Christian or even most any other kind of theist, you could say this man has damaged his standing before God in each case and so he has done harm at least to himself. He has lowered himself from being what a human being ought to be to being something less. If you are a secularist though, you do not have this option.

Not only that, but we know that there are times that causing harm is the good thing to do. I have a friend who just had a quadruple bypass operation. Right now, he is still in a lot of pain. I have told him some about my having scoliosis surgery and how I too was in a lot of pain and understood what that was like. In both cases, our doctors harmed us and left us with tremendous pain. The thing is, we knew this would happen and we went through it willingly and even paid our doctors for it. Why? Because we were not being harmed to be harmed. We were being given some degree of harm in order to get a greater good.

Another example is telling a loved one a hard truth. Sometimes, this is very harmful to the person for the immediate and short-term, but it is good in the long run. Again, consequences are not all that is to be considered, but they are a part of this. Consequences alone are insufficient. We need to look at the action, who is doing it, and why they are doing it.

No one being harmed by itself is insufficient. By this standard, the Peeping Tom and the dentist are both okay. By a Christian standard, they are in the wrong because they are lowering themselves as human beings and actually in the long run making themselves more likely to be the people who will take further steps to do actual visible harm to others.

Our moral thinking needs to go deeper than just utilitarianism. We need to look at who we are and why we do what we do.

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

But They’re So Nice

Should you change your mind because your neighbor is nice? Let’s plunge into the Deeper Waters and find out.

My parents are part of the Methodist Church which just underwent a huge split over the issue of the definition of marriage. Naturally, my folks want to talk to me about what’s going on and my thoughts on the matter. One comment I have heard from them is that they have friends who know someone who’s same-sex attracted and they’ll say “But they’re so nice….”

I don’t have any reason to question that. There are several who are nice people. However, how does that become an argument to say “Therefore, I should vote to redefine marriage.”?

The issue when it comes to what the Methodist Church wants to do is “What is the nature of marriage?” Now if you think nature is fluid, meaning that a man and a woman is not the essence of marriage, meaning something essential to marriage, it’s up to you to define what is.  You can say marriage is fluid, but if there is nothing essential to marriage, as in marriage has no real characteristic of it, then marriage is essentially nothing.

I have written about this in several other places, so I don’t want to make this blog on the nature of marriage. I do want to discuss the question about people being nice. I really don’t understand why this is so persuasive, aside from the fact that people think with their emotions more than they do with their heads.

For one thing, if every same-sex attracted person was among the nicest people on the planet, that would say nothing about the nature of marriage itself. I regularly hear, and have experienced, that Mormons are usually incredibly kind people. If someone is willing to grant that, does that mean that they should rush down to the Mormon Church to convert?

Of course not, and even if they did, how many contradictions would you have in your mindset on the same issue? If you met a really nice Muslim after that, would you determine that Mormonism is false and Islam is true? If you encountered a nice atheist then, would you conclude that God doesn’t exist? If every atheist was practically a saint, that would say nothing about the arguments for or against theism.

Contrary, suppose Christians you met were jerks, and sadly, this could be true. Christians shouldn’t be, but if one encounters a Christian who is a jerk, that doesn’t say anything about whether Christianity is true or false. Christianity could have the best ethical system in the world and yet if people fail to live up to it, that says nothing about the system of ethics. It just says a lot about the followers.

We could say that people who vote to redefine marriage are implicitly saying then that everyone who holds to marriage as has always been understood is a jerk. Do they really want to say that? If you vote because person A of this persuasion is nice, does that mean the person opposed is mean?

When you look at the nature of marriage in the church situation, only one question needs to be asked. What is marriage? If you see it as fluid and changeable, then act accordingly. If you hold to a reality that says the man-woman unit is essential to marriage, then do the same.

Give a real reason. Even if you support the redefining of marriage, I hope this is something that can be agreed to. People should strive to be moral, but that doesn’t mean their position is true.

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

I Was Not Assigned

What is at stake with our words? Let’s plunge into the Deeper Waters and find out.

Last week, there was an announcement made at the chapel service here at NOBTS about free flu shots being given out for students. All we had to do was go to the student center and there would be some nurses there ready to give us our shots. Being one without health insurance now (Financial realities of being a seminary student), I decided to go and get one.

Now this was a Christian hospital organization that was giving out the shots and so they had to ask me several questions, which I understand. I get the legal requirements. I don’t blame them and I realize the sad reality of what many businesses are going through, but as an individual, I did take a firm stand.

So in the middle of the usual questions that I expect, I get the one of “What is your gender identity?” I consider this to really be a nonsense question. Identity has no purpose here. How I feel about myself does not affect what I am at all. I can feel like I’m a cat and it’s not going to change I’m a human. For a more realistic example, as one going through a divorce, I can feel numerous negative things many times. Those things are not true. Many Christians can struggle with feeling God doesn’t love them. Doesn’t make it true. The reason many people commit suicide is often connected with a negative feeling about them or their future that just isn’t true.

I am a man. That is it. I can take a look at my body and the way that I came out and realize that yes, I am a man.

My next question I was asked was “Were you assigned that at birth?”

At this I think my eyes glare, not in anger at the nurses. They have to do their job. It’s in anger that this question is on here. I gave a direct answer. “No. I was born a man.” I realize we could say I was born a boy who grew into a man, but the sex that I was born as was not something that was just decided. It was known when I was born.

I also realize some people can bring up people who are intersex, but intersex and transgender are two very different things. One is a very physical condition and we have never sought to change our laws and society based on this condition. The other, transgenderism, is a psychological delusion and we are changing our society and laws to play along and real people are being the victims.

Friends. This is a hill we cannot budge any on. This is about a battle for reality itself. I consider the far-left movement in our society to be in a war against reality and trying to eliminate any idea of male and female. It’s as if we are being pushed into a political monism.

The biggest aspect of this battle to watch is our words. I will use longer and clunkier terminology to avoid granting any grounds to the other side. I will not speak of a “same-sex marriage.” A marriage by definition is the unity of a man and a woman. No. Something like polygamy doesn’t change this, though it is wrong, as it is just one man with several women, but the man-woman aspect is there. The same would be for one woman with many men.

When you say “same-sex marriage” you are speaking of a contradiction. You are speaking of a man-woman unit that is not man-woman. If we also make the definition of marriage fluid, we can make it to mean anything and then it means nothing. Why limit it to two people? Why make it consensual? Why make it lifelong? The word marriage has to mean something specific.

I prefer to not even speak of a homosexual anymore. It makes homosexual more often an aspect of the person’s identity and surely that won’t change. It becomes something innate. I will easily instead speak of a person with same-sex attraction. What is central here is that this is a person.

We must absolutely watch people who want to control our words and tell us there are things we cannot say. We have seen part of this when any monitoring is done of questions about vaccines or the 2020 election. Even if you think both of those are crazy conspiracy theories, it would be better to have them talked about and the ideas discussed. Shutting down discussion on any topic convinces more often people who think there is a cover-up.

Keep in mind that in 1984, the goal of the editing of the language was not to come up with new words. It was to eliminate as many words as possible. Control the words people say and you can control the ideas that they are allowed to think about.

The language war is essential.

No. I was not assigned male at birth. I was born that way. I could jack up my body with as many hormones as doctors say and mutilate it with surgical procedures, and I will look like I am playing a part, but it won’t change reality. Barring the return of Jesus Christ, I will die a male. Nothing will change that.

There is too much at stake. Whenever you encounter language that is meant to shape what you think, do not give an inch to it. If you have to use long and clunkier phrases, that’s fine. I would rather do that and be minorly inconvenienced than give in to fake reality and be majorly inconvenienced.

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