Transparent heart icon with white outline and + sign.

Life's busy, read it when you're ready!

Create a free account to save articles for later, keep track of past articles you’ve read, and receive exclusive access to all RP resources.

White magnifying glass.

Search thousands of RP articles

Equipping Christians to think, speak, and act

Open envelope icon with @ symbol

Get Articles Delivered!

Equipping Christians to think, speak, and act delivered direct to your Inbox!



News

Saturday Selections – Oct. 11, 2025

Ray Comfort does a stint at a Turning Point USA event

Since Charlie Kirk's murder, his organization has been filling his shoes with quite a variety of stand-ins. His podcast has featured the vice president of the United States, J.D. Vance, guest hosting, followed by the DailyWire crew of Orthodox Jew Ben Shapiro, and Roman Catholics Michael Knowles and Matt Walsh. Then, this past week, Mormon Glenn Beck took a turn too.

Kirk's organization Turning Point USA continues to do events on university campuses too, and at at least one event, God's gospel was clearly heard... and not just on campus but in Fox News coverage afterwards. Network television! It's just fun to see God making that happen!

What is K-Pop Demon Hunters? A primer for parents

It's the latest "thing" – one of those cultural happenings that all the kids are talking about. Here's a quick primer on the Netflix film. It's hardly family-time viewing, but depending on how many of your kids' classmates have already seen it, it's worth considering if you might want to watch it together so you can discuss it with your own crew.

A woman has been appointed as the Archbishop of Canterbury

In as far as the Church of England has a head, it would be the Archbishop of Canterbury, and now, for the first time in 1,400 years, that is a woman. In addition, Sarah Mullally is pro-choice, and doesn't seem willing to call homosexuality sin.

The good news? There are many conservative Bible-believing Christians still in the Anglican Church, especially in Africa, but all over the world. They have found ways to insulate themselves from their denomination's liberal trends, while still remaining a part of it. But when your denomination calls evil good, blessing same-sex unions and countenancing the murder of the unborn, should you want to still be associated with it? Of course, the reason these Christians have stayed is in the hope they could still reverse the course.  But if they were unsure before of whether they should stay or go, that their is denomination is now being led by a usurper – Mullay has long been one, taking on church leadership roles God hasn't allowed for women – might grant them now the clarity they've needed to know there is a time to go.

When the fallible, the over-confident, and the liars tell us to  "trust the science"

"Because of disillusionment with the COVID-19 vaccines, more people are refusing to have themselves and their children inoculated with other vaccines, which over a long period of time have proven to be safer and more effective than the COVID-19 vaccines.

"This has led to an increase in preventable diseases such as measles, chickenpox, and polio. Rather than criticize such people as ignorant and foolish, governments and public health authorities should perhaps take a long look in the mirror to see what role they have played in this undermining of trust in the public health system."

The sad state of Evangelical theology in 2025 

This was a survey of folks who actually say the Bible is their highest authority. Two examples:

  • 64% believe that “Everyone is born innocent in the eyes of God.”
  • 53% agree that “Everyone sins a little, but most people are good by nature.”

Conspiracy or gossip?

Candace Owens is not well known in Canada, so why bother sharing a warning against her conspiratorial videos? Well, because she isn't the only one sharing gossip. Aren't our social media pages full of it?

The video below spreads a rather harsh assessment of Owens, so isn't it gossip too? That's a good question, and raises another: how can we tell what's gossip and what isn't? Well, if we spread a bad report about someone, it's gossip unless:

  1. It's true. This isn't a matter of you sincerely believing it is true – Owens certainly seems sincere, but that doesn't lessen the damage she is doing. If you are besmirching someone's reputation, you need to have grounds. You should have the "receipts."
  2. It needs to said (Eph. 4:29). Truth isn't reason enough to share a bad report. Everyone doesn't need to know that so and so was caught up in pornography once, or that this couple had a rough spot in their marriage years ago. In Prov. 20:19 we read, "A gossip betrays a confidence so avoid anyone who talk too much." You can gossip in spreading truth that doesn't need to be spread.

Can you prove it, and does it need to be said? Two good questions to ask before sharing the latest report, even if it is about folks you just know are bad guys. That you're slandering Justin Trudeau or Mark Carney doesn't make your slander any less of a sin. What it does do, in the eyes of any non-Christians who might be watching, is discredit your Christian witness. That doesn't mean keeping quiet about the monstrous evils these two have pushed (abortion, euthanasia, transgender mutilation, and more). It does mean, stick to the facts – these important facts. God wants us to stop gossiping!

Red heart icon with + sign.
News

Saturday Selections – Oct. 4, 2025

Bahnsen vs. Hitchens, the Rap Battle Here's AI put to its weirdest and most wonderful –the late Reformed apologist Greg Bahnsen taking on the late atheist apologist Christopher Hitchens. Were dragon stories really dinosaur encounters? Short answer: it sure would seem so! Where do human rights come from, senator? A US senator thought that it was akin to being a fundamentalist Muslim to think that human rights come from God. They come from the state, he insisted. But if they come from the state, how could the state ever violate them? How could we ever complain about any state abusing human rights? Health-care costs for typical Canadian family will reach over $19,000 this year That we don't pay for healthcare directly doesn't mean we don't pay for healthcare. It means, at the very least, that tax dollars that go for that care aren't used for anything else. And the hidden costs of our socialized healthcare system also mean it is really hard for us to tell if we're getting value for our money. Canadian government pushing hate speech law again "Hatred is a real sin. But government and law enforcement cannot discern the degree of hatred in one’s heart, though they can judge and punish the things they do. "That’s why existing prohibitions in the Criminal Code focus on prohibiting particular actions, not emotions or motivations. While Christians should condemn hateful thoughts, words, and gestures, the government cannot regulate the heart." The dangerous logic of Moral Subjectivism "If right and wrong are things outside of ourselves which we can't change, we need to align our behavior with what's right. But if it's the other way around, and morality is just a thing I get to make up, well, I can act however I want." "Huh... that's basically the same as not having a moral system..." **** This video is worth watching for what it gets right, like the above. But where it falls short is in what it settles for – that agreeing there is some sort of objective moral standard outside ourselves is all that's really important. The problem is, ideologies and religions can hold to an objective truth that includes the notion that "conversion by the sword" is a legitimate means of persuasion. So, for example, it isn't enough that an ISIS jihadist thinks a moral standard exists outside himself, he isn't about debate and dialogue. This sort of short-sightedness is what happens when we appeal to the fruits of Christianity without actually holding to the Root of it, Christ Himself. Civil discourse is a fruit of the only real objective standard that exists, God's morality, which teaches us: God has no interest in merely outward observance (Is. 1:13), discouraging any attempts at compelled belief. to treat others as we would like to be treated (Matt. 7:12), prompting civil discourse. to love our enemies (Matthew 5:43-4), prompting civil discourse. it is good to hear both sides (Prov. 18:17), which encourages hearing out things you might disagree with. we are all made in the Image of God (Gen. 9:6), and that hate is the equivalent of murder (Matt. 5:21-22), which both, again, encourage civil discourse. So not just any objective moral standard will do. Civil discourse is a fruit of Christianity, and as we are seeing, a nation that turns from Him will slowly but surely start losing the fruit of the Christian faith, including civility. ...

Red heart icon with + sign.
Assorted

Dominee’s friend

There is style and there is class. Dominee may not have had much style, as the world considers style, but he had class. Dominee had accepted a call to another church. At such a time we cover up the pain of separation with laughter. How could we be happy? This was the man whom God had sent to us to speak to us the Word of God every Sunday. We heard the voice of the Great Shepherd through His under-shepherd twice every Lord’s day. Because Dominee’s voice was so familiar, and his sermons somewhat predictable, we thought we knew him. We knew from the cadence of his heavily accented sentences when he was wrapping up the sermon — just the final song yet, and the benediction, and we’d soon be outside chatting, swapping stories, and laughing. Dominee was not what you would call an especially stylish man. During all the years he preached to us he wore a grey suit. He may have replaced it with a new one once in a while, but we never noticed because the new one was identical to the previous. Nothing stylish about Dominee. Even when he would drop by because of illness in the family or if someone needed encouragement, he’d wear a grey suit. We thought we knew him, until his farewell evening. As I said, when we are sad, we turn to laughter. To cover up our sadness. The farewell evening had begun and was evolving in a predictable way. There was only one unusual thing that immediately caught everyone’s attention. Near the front of the church sat an old Sikh gentleman and his wife. We could tell he was a Sikh because he was wearing a turban. The turban happened to be pink. Later I was told it was, in fact, lavender. The chairman of the men’s society, a serious man, ascended the pulpit. He read some Scripture, prayed, and invited us to sing a well-known Psalm. On behalf of the men’s society, he spoke some kind words of farewell to Dominee, his wife, and the children, and then presented them with a gift, a beautiful painting of local scenery: “We don’t want you to forget this beautiful part of the country!” This was followed by several presentations — women’s, young people’s, youth. And on it went, predictably and comfortably. The presentations alternated between funny, sad, and poignant. But mostly we laughed. When the elders and deacons performed a humorous skit about Dominee’s typical way of leading a meeting, we laughed heartily. When one of Dominee’s local colleagues told a story about Dominee at a classis meeting, we laughed so hard we thought our sides were going to burst. After several hours, when everyone was good and ready for coffee and cake, the chairman of the men’s society ascended the pulpit once again. With gravity, he thanked everyone for coming, bade Dominee farewell once more, and asked if there was anyone whom he had missed, or who had not been on the program but yet wanted to say something. The Sikh gentleman stood up. Well, this was interesting. Slowly, with age and dignity, he walked to the front of the church. He began to speak. This was very interesting. No one could remember a Sikh speaking in our church. He began to tell a story. It had been a hot summer afternoon when he and his wife were walking along the sidewalk. Suddenly overcome by heat, thirst, and exhaustion, he sat on a stone wall in front of a house. That house, as it turned out, was the Manse. Dominee was sitting in the shade reading a newspaper from the old country that had just come in the mail. He noticed the Sikh man sitting at the end of the driveway on the stone wall, and the man’s wife bending over him with a look of concern on her face. Dominee got up to see if he could help. “My husband is very thirsty,” said the lady. “Could he please have some water?” Dominee went to the house and came back with a pitcher of water and some glasses. He poured two glasses of water, and then he took a moment to speak about the other water, the living water that Jesus provides. On that day Dominee and the Sikh became friends. The Sikh gentleman and his wife would drop by more often to talk with Dominee. We never knew. We thought we knew our Dominee. We all listened intently to the Sikh as he told us the story about our kind Dominee. He considered it an honor to count him a friend and wanted to give him a parting gift. The Sikh explained that it was their custom to give the turban they are wearing to their departing friend. The turban would be a reminder of their friendship. With that the Sikh removed the turban from his head, reached forward, and placed it on Dominee’s head. Dominee was mostly bald and had a smaller head than his Sikh friend, and so the turban sank down over Dominee’s forehead. It was a sight to behold! Our Dominee clothed in his trademark grey suit, the only way we had ever seen him in all the years he had ministered to us, wearing a lavender-colored turban. No one laughed, snickered, or tittered. Instead, after a moment during which you could have heard a pin drop, the congregation slowly rose and began to clap. We did not know whether we were clapping for Dominee or the Sikh. Likely, we were clapping for the Lord. We had seen a remarkable thing. Our immigrant congregation may not have had much style, but on that evening we had class. Dominee wore the turban for the rest of the evening, during coffee and as we all came by his table to say farewell. He wore it with pride. Dominee did not have much style, but he had a lot of class. And we thought we knew him. There is style, and there is class. This is a true story, which I experienced as an adolescent boy at the departure of a neighboring minister. The references to style and class were inspired by Sietze Buning’s “Style and Class” collection of poems. This first appeared in the January 2015 issue....

Red heart icon with + sign.
Science - Creation/Evolution

FALSE DILEMMA: Is Genesis 1 Historical or Poetic?

or Doctrinal?      or Theological?           or Covenantal?                or an Accommodation?                     or so on and so on and so on ***** We know you can’t have your cake and eat it too. We know a man cannot serve two masters. And we know Genesis 1 cannot be both history and mere metaphor. That’s all true. But can Genesis 1 be history and much, much more? Not an either/or Among Christians one of the more common ways of undermining the historical reliability of the opening chapters of the Bible is to highlight some other attribute of this passage. We’re told that the point here isn’t to tell us how things were created but rather Who is responsible. This is a theological treatise, not a scientific one, right? And it can’t be history because in some ways it resembles poetry. In his book God's Pattern for Creation: A Covenantal Reading of Genesis 1 United Reformed pastor Dr. W. Robert Godfrey gives several examples of this same dismissive approach. The President of Westminster Seminary in Escondido, California contrasts a covenantal understanding of Genesis 1 with understanding it as history. He says a choice has to be made since the days of creation as described in Genesis 1 “are not a timetable of God's actions but are a model timetable for us to follow.” While “the days and week of Genesis 1 are presented to us as a real week of twenty four hour days,” “these days and week... do not describe God's actions in themselves but present God's creative purpose in a way that is a model for us.” He pitches this same contrast, between a historical and covenantal understanding again and again. “Genesis is not a world history text... it is a covenant history focusing on what the people of God need to know about their God and about themselves” “Genesis is not written as a history book for uninformed, worldwide readers, but is part of the covenant history written for a covenant people who already know their God” “The revelation of God as the all-powerful creator is not just information for the world. It is a message to the covenant people about the character of their God.” “Genesis 1 is not an encyclopedia of history or science but a covenant revelation of the character of the creation that God made for man...” Clearly, given the repeated “not this... but that” rhetorical device used by Godfrey, his assertion that Genesis 1 is “covenantal” in character is meant to counter an opposing view of the creation account. To Reformed Christians, this kind of “covenantal language” has its appeal; we love the covenant, and we love covenant theology, because we see in the covenants of Scripture the structure and beauty of God's relationship with His people, and indeed with all of creation. But I question Godfrey's assertions in all of these statements, because they create a conflict where one does not necessarily exist! This “not this... but that” language creates the impression that the two parts of the statement are mutually exclusive. If Genesis 1 is “covenantal” in its character, does that necessarily mean that it is not a history of the world? Of course, Godfrey does use the phrases “world history text” and “encyclopedia of history or science,” appearing to assert that those who argue for the “six consecutive real days that actually happened in history” view actually consider the opening chapters of the Bible to be a scientific treatise of some sort. This kind of language is not at all helpful, and it mischaracterizes those who believe that God created all things in the span of six actual historical days. Both/and Here's an example of this kind of thinking in practice. Suppose for a moment that two men come across a field of barley for the very first time. One man looks at the barley and says, “Clearly this crop is meant only to form the basis for a beverage. I will harvest it, mash it, ferment it, and make beer.” The other man looks at the barley and says, “Clearly this crop is meant only to form the basis for bread. I will harvest it, grind it, and use the end product to make bread.” Both men refuse to acknowledge the truth of the other's discovery. So, the one man makes nothing but beer, and the other man makes nothing but bread. Both die, one from cirrhosis of the liver, the other from dehydration. Why do they die? Because they both failed to realize that they were not dealing with an “either-or” equation, but a “both-and.” Barley has multiple uses; therefore, one use does not exclude the other. In creating a false dichotomy between two applications of the text, Godfrey misses out on a very important aspect of the message of the six days of creation. A true either/or Now I should note that while Godfrey does not accept Genesis 1 as a real chronology of events, he still insists his view is a literal interpretation and “also historical in its approach as it affirms that God created in time and by his sovereign power everything described in Genesis 1.” Given the fact that, according to Godfrey, “we must conclude that the days of creation in Genesis 1 are not simple chronology” I find it difficult to harmonize Godfrey's actual view with his claims. In contrast to the false dilemma that Godfrey presents, between understanding Genesis 1 as true history or as covenantal, there does seem need for a choice to be made here. He can’t offer up his view as literal and historical and still dispute that creation occurred in six actual days. Conclusion So yes, we can’t have our cake and eat it too. But no such choice has to be made between understanding Genesis as historical and covenantal, between it being historical and theological. These are simply false dilemmas. Rev. Witteveen’s website is Dan1132.com. This first appeared in the June 2015 issue....

Red heart icon with + sign.
News

Saturday Selections – Sept 27, 2025

Voddie Baucham (1969-2025) spoke to Christian Nationalism shortly before his passing This past week, Voddie Baucham passed away at the age of 56. A Reformed Baptist pastor, he was known for his powerful preaching, and his willingness to speak to cultural hot button topics. In one of his last public events he appeared on the Founders podcast to advocate for a form of "discipleship of the nations" that he knew would make some Christians nervous. He never used the term "Christian Nationalism" – probably because the term has so many conflicting definitions – but could have, speaking to the need for government to submit to God. Some Christians (and unbelievers too) mistakenly presume that a call for such submission is a call for the government to be ruled by the Church. But no one (not even Douglas Wilson) is advocating for an ecclesiocracy. Starting at the 24-minute mark in the video below, Baucham explained why these nervous Christian have made that mistake – it's because they've adopted the world's understanding of government as the holder of all power. They then presume that when any Christians talk about transforming culture they must be after the governmental levers of power. Not so, Baucham explains. What he was advocating for instead is akin to the public Christian witness ARPA Canada helps us offer in the political square, and the discipleship we receive via our Christian families, our Christian schools, and via the Bible studies and regular preaching in our churches. We can see the Holy Spirit already working through these means, and we should pray that His work will continue to be transformative, not just for us, but for millions and billions more in both our nation and our world! Click the link for WORLD magazine's Baucham obituary. Take the tech exit: it's not too late to get your kids off their smartphones "...nearly one-third of parents regret giving their child a smartphone or access to social media when they did. Only 1% say they wished had provided these devices sooner. Take the tech exit. Your kids may not thank you now, but they probably will later on." Is this a Turning Point for the West? "Sunday’s memorial service for Charlie Kirk may have been the largest evangelistic event in human history. Not every speaker at the event was in tune with the Gospel, but those who were stated it clearly and boldly...." What the reaction of Canadian leftists to Charlie Kirk’s murder tells us "...there is something different knowing that these journalists, professors, teachers, and others saw an incredibly graphic video of a young father getting shot in the neck and collapsing as blood gushed from the wound, and that their first reaction was glee – because he believed and said the very things that we believe and say. There is something jarring about knowing that if this happened to a Canadian pastor, or pro-life activist, or parental rights advocate, they would also rejoice..." Jordan Peterson’s Achilles Heel "The latest viral video of Peterson was not a video of him standing up to insanity but faltering over his faith. A live debate by YouTube channel, Jubilee, where Peterson took on more than 20 atheists was called, "1 Christian vs 20 Atheists," but only a few hours later it was retitled "Peterson vs 20 Atheists." Why? Because Peterson refused to be called a Christian by one of his interlocutors..." Thousands of Methodist churches reject sexual license Over 4,600 congregations worldwide have departed the United Methodist Church (UMC), most of them joining the Global Methodist Church, over the UMC embracing same-sex marriage and LGBTQ clergy, and the UMC questioning biblical authority. I didn't know anything about this, but how wonderful it is to hear what God is stirring up here. What's curious is the Christian reporter's refusal to pick a side, sharing the story as if this is all just a matter of a difference of opinion over what kind of ice cream flavor they prefer. ...

Red heart icon with + sign.
News

A renewed hunger for the Bible

Data from the Association of American Publishers reveals that the biggest sales increase among all categories of books being published last year in the United States was religious books – up 18.5 percent from the previous year. This comes on the heels of similar growth the previous year. Publishers Weekly asked these publishers what was driving the increase and the answer was Bibles, Bible study materials, commentaries, and devotionals. “Christianity and Scripture and the people who write from these perspectives hit people where they live” explained Shane White, divisional VP for sales at InterVarsity Press. “That's why we see the sales we see." "Whatever denomination you're in, whatever your religious background, you're engaging the Bible more now than you did 10 years ago," noted Bob Gaudet, the executive VP of marketing and publicity for Baker Publishing Group. Although there isn’t data of Bible sales in Canada, the Canadian Bible Society distributed 631,298 Bibles and pieces of Scripture in 2024, a 20.1 percent increase from the previous year, which was already 22.5 percent more than the previous year. In Isaiah 55:10-11, God reminds us that just as the rain comes down from heaven to water the earth and make it sprout, giving us both seed for sowing and bread for eating, the same is true of His Word. “It shall not return to me empty, but it shall accomplish that which I purpose.” Praise be to God for giving more people an appetite for the Bread of Life (John 6:35)....

Red heart icon with + sign.
Pro-life - Abortion

Pro-life incrementalism isn't immoral...but it can be dangerous

Should Christians support a bill that would make abortion illegal after the second trimester? Some say no, and argue that such a bill would save third-trimester babies at the expense of babies in the first and second trimester. This side sometimes calls themselves pro-life “abolitionists.” They insist this sort of bill is immoral because it would legitimize the murder of the babies it isn’t protecting. Others, myself included, say that a bill like this is a good first step, to be followed by many more incremental steps like: a ban on sex-selective abortions, a parental notification law, an informed consent law, etc. As the article "Direction Matters" seeks to make clear, there is nothing immoral about this sort of “incremental,” step-by-step approach to ending abortion. But an incremental approach does come with some dangers that we need to be aware of if we are going to steer clear of them. Danger of being more clever than clear The genius of an incremental approach is that it allows us to recruit people who would normally never be on our side. For example, a bill that banned sex-selective abortion could see us side by side with feminists who are upset that sex-selective abortions almost exclusively target unborn baby girls. Pro-lifers working with feminists? Who would ever have thought? The danger of this incremental approach is that when we try to recruit people who don’t share our convictions, things can get more than a little confusing. We can find ourselves being tempted to downplay, hide, or even deny our convictions to get along with our strange bedfellows. Thirty years ago, an Alberta pro-life group called the Committee to End Tax-Funded Abortions (CEFTA) tried their own incremental approach and fell prey to this temptation. They knew that while most Albertans supported “a woman’s right to choose” more than 70% balked at having to pay for that choice. So CEFTA hammered on this financial angle, demanding an end to the tax-funding of abortion. They were trying to recruit fiscal conservatives to join with them in their effort. But then they got accused of being closet pro-lifers, just focusing on the financial as an excuse to limit abortion. That accusation was, of course, 100% true. But because CEFTA was trying to keep the focus on the financial, they ended up denying they had any interest in the unborn. They were even willing to concede that abortion was a private matter between a woman and her doctor, but asked. “...why are the taxpayers in the room writing the cheques?” CEFTA didn't put an end tax-funding for abortion. The clincher might have been when someone noted that every live delivery costs many times more than a surgical abortion does, so abortion actually saves the taxpayer money. In the end all that CEFTA succeeded in doing was portraying the pro-life movement as being more about money than about the unborn… which effectively dehumanized these Image-bearers. By hiding what they knew to be true about the unborn, the CEFTA ultimately ended up undermining that truth. That’s a real danger we need to watch for. A powerful pull So long as we engage in various incrementalism, we're going to face the same temptation to be quiet about or even deny our convictions. For example, do we think feminists are going to want to work with us to ban sex-selective abortions if we're upfront that our end goal is to ban all abortions? Will we be able to get a parental-notification law passed if voters know we intend this as just a first step towards making abortion entirely illegal? There is an enticing logic to staying quiet about our convictions, and that's why this is such a powerful temptation. But we can't stay silent. The only way we'll end abortion in Canada is if everyone understands that it is a precious unborn human being from conception onward, made in the very Image of God like the rest of us (Gen. 1:27, Gen. 9:6). So if, for example, we support a 6-month gestational limit, then we need to be clear that life really begins at conception. If we stay silent and leave people with any other impression, then we will doing the very thing our abolitionist critics have accused us of – saving some at the expense of others. We must not protect third trimester babies by downplaying the humanity of babies in the first and second trimester. Clever and clear So how do we recruit unlikely allies a better way? We need to be upfront about our differences, even as we emphasize our common ground. So if we were talking with a feminist neighbor about a sex-selective abortion ban, our side of the conversation might sound like this: "Freda, I've finally found something we can agree on! What do you think about a girl being aborted simply because she's a girl? That should get a rise out of a feminist like you. Come join us – we're trying to get this banned!" Or say you and your pro-choice university classmate were discussing a bill that would ban abortions after the second trimester: “Life begins at conception, and our worth comes from being made in the very Image of God. But if you and me can't agree on that point, let me ask you this: what do you think about late-term abortions? You have to agree that it's a baby at 6 months, right? If so, then act. Come join us and save at least these children!" Our position – our difference – is made clear. Then a pointed question – one that asks our listener to be consistent with their stated position – highlights our common ground. It can be that simple. Conclusion The incremental strategy will pair us with people who don't think like we do, and who deny what we know to be true. That will bring with it the temptation to stay quiet – it tempts us to downplay the very truths our culture needs to hear. Thankfully, this is a temptation that loses a lot of its pull once we are aware of it. So let's move forward eagerly, recruiting allies wherever they can be found, while pledging always, always to advocate for all unborn children. Let's ask God to give us the wisdom to combine cleverness with clarity. Then, the Lord willing, for the first time in a quarter century, we'll start passing laws protecting unborn children! That would be brilliant indeed! A version of this article was originally published in the March 2013 issue under the title “Being brilliant and clear: Fighting abortion incrementally isn't immoral...but it can be dangerous.”...

Red heart icon with + sign.
News

Saturday Selections – Sept 13, 2025

On the death of Charlie Kirk American Christian and conservative leader Charlie Kirk was shot and killed on Wednesday. Kirk (1993-2025) wasn't as remarkable for what he said (though he did get things mostly right) as he was for how he spoke up (boldly, as a grateful child of God) and for where he was willing to go. Kirk made dozens and dozens, and maybe hundreds, of appearances – captured as YouTube clips – on campuses across the United States. He'd set up a booth and take on any and all questions from liberal students who, it so often seemed, had never even heard an intelligent conservative Christian speak before. It was at one of these events that he was murdered. The link above goes to a collection of articles, assembled by Tim Challies, reflecting on Kirk's assassination. The video below is of Kirk stepping up for the unborn. May Kirk's courage inspire many more Christian young men to be just as strong and courageous (Joshua 1). Tim Challies, on how to write a great book review... ...which is a great primer for writing a book review for Reformed Perspective too. If you've got a great book you'd like to review, let us know. Organ transplant investigations expose grisly stories of patient abuse This is an American story, but one that should concern Canadians because in our murder-as-medicine MAiD-approving country, wouldn't it be all the more likely that a dying patient might be euthanized for their organs? Taming technology (10 min. read) Some real help on offer here for families who want to rethink how technology is taking over their home. How to face apparent contradictions in the Bible Michael Kruger has three tips to deal with passages in the Bible that seem contradictory: 1) don't be scared of them 2) don't apply today's conventions to yesterday's writers 3) be humble and patient: that we don't have an explanation now doesn't mean there isn't one, or that it won't show up later My Soul Among Lions, Psalm 2 I remain fascinated at the many very different, great treatments that can be given to the Psalms..... ...

Red heart icon with + sign.
News

The assassination of Charlie Kirk

A new era has been marked; Christians must tell the truth. Unsurprisingly, on September 11, 2001, I wept. I also wept, unexpectedly, on September 11, 2011. Perhaps it was delayed grief, but mostly, it was a delayed realization. Sitting that Sunday morning with my young daughters, only 6, 4, and 2 at the time, it struck me how different their world was from the one I wanted for them. The same sense struck this week, on September 10. The assassination of Charlie Kirk seems to mark a new era, a world no one wants but may very well be here. Calling the murder a “tragedy for all of us,” U.K. comedian and commentator Konstantin Kisin wrote: "I hope I’m wrong. But tonight feels like some sort of invisible line has been crossed that we didn’t even know was there. … o murder a young father simply for doing debates and mobilising young people to vote for a party that represents half of America? This is something else. "Charlie’s death is a tragedy for his wife, his children and his family. I don’t pray often. I am praying for them tonight. But I fear his murder will be a tragedy for all of us in ways we will only understand as time unfolds. "I hope I’m wrong. I fear I’m not." Kisin is not wrong about lines being crossed, though the Christian must not fear. We must, however, squarely face the sober realities of this moment. Kirk’s murder followed another this week, in Charlotte, of a young woman from Ukraine riding a public train. Iryna Zarutska was stabbed by a man who should have been in prison or at least institutionalized, and she was then left to die by people too engrossed in their screens to notice or too jaded to care. Together, these atrocities reveal realities about our culture and how it has shaped those within it that many will find unthinkable. But we had better think about it anyway. Zarutska’s killer is a terrible example of the mental and social brokenness that permeates modern life. The bystanders who did not come to her defense or to her aid are, like the social media commenters and media personalities who callously commented on Kirk’s assassination, examples of the rabid and pervasive dehumanization that infects the Western world. In a recent Breakpoint commentary, released prior to the atrocities of this week, Abdu Murray argued that this “post-truth world that elevates feelings and preferences above facts and truth has collapsed the distinction between a person’s ideas and their identity. And so, the social erasure of cancel culture has calcified into something darker.” That something darker, he argued, is “assassination culture.” He continued, “Unmoored from that objective standard for human value, we have made gods of ourselves and therefore justify eradicating any who dare to have other gods before us.” This is precisely what Os Guinness warned of in the new film Truth Rising, that the West is squandering a unique heritage. A civilization built upon the ideal of human dignity, with a mixed and troubled history of working out that ideal, has now replaced it with something else. But racialized, sexualized, and politicized conceptions of human dignity only produce victims. George Orwell is often credited as saying, “In a time of deceit, telling the truth is a revolutionary act.” Charlie Kirk was a committed truth teller, with a remarkable gift for exposing and answering deceit. And yet, as he did this, he treated the deceived with the dignity they had as image bearers of their Creator, recognizing that they too were victims of their own bad ideas. There is a cost to telling the truth. Our Lord has told us to count this cost. If Kisin is indeed correct, that cost is higher than we have imagined. This is indeed a civilizational moment. It is to this moment that we have been called as His people. As His people, we know that this moment is not some fatalistic inevitability, nor does it determine or define the Story of which we are part. In a video circulating on social media, Charlie is asked why he went on campuses to talk with and try to persuade those who disagree with him. Charlie responded, “Because when people stop talking, that’s when violence happens.” It was a prophetic moment, but Kirk also demonstrated that we need not accept that. He showed that the conversation can be had; that it must be had. He showed that the truth still wins hearts and minds, and that lies can be opposed. And that it can all be done with a big smile. It takes courage to tell the truth and to, as Paul wrote, “regard no one from a worldly point of view.” As Murray wrote, only the “ancient biblical truth about what it means to be human can heal our contemporary malady.” It can be healed. This is not wishful thinking. This is the hope Christ secured for us all. As the banner on the Turning Point USA website proclaims, Charlie Kirk has been “received into the merciful arms of our loving Savior, who suffered and died for Charlie.” For more resources to live like a Christian in this cultural moment, go to Breakpoint.org. This is reprinted with permission from the Colson Center. Picture by Gage Skidmore and used under a CC BY-SA 2.0 license....

Red heart icon with + sign.
Dating

8 reasons you should not have sex outside of marriage

Boy meets girl. Girl meets boy. They smile, they joke, they like each other. Boy and girl have sex. If they are really conservative, they wait for the third or fourth date. There is no message in the modern media, outside of Christian publishing, that encourages people to wait until after marriage to engage in sexual activities. If one watches TV and movies, it is easy to feel glad when a couple looks so happy – when we should be slapping ourselves on the side of the head and saying: “Hello! They are committing fornication or adultery and grieving God and everyone around them right now!” We Christians know that God says sex is only for within marriage. But I have been told by people that, “everyone is doing it” and “it’s a forgivable sin” and that “we just got carried away.” So I began listing all of the reasons I have ever heard from ministers or Christian counselors that explain why we should not have sex outside of marriage. These were reasons that they based on Scripture and numerous counseling sessions. I have presented this list from the point of view of an unmarried person, but the principles apply to those who are married as well. We are in a battle against many enemies – the world, the flesh and the devil – and when the hormones heat up, I think it helps to have as much ammunition as possible. Eight reasons 1. Don’t disobey You belong to the Lord, and therefore you are not your own, and He says that you should not. He created sex – there is nothing “dirty” about it – it is one of His good gifts, in its rightful place. He also has promised to give you strength to face sexual temptation, and you should regularly ask Him for it. 2. Seek high quality The sexual relationship is a very special and intimate bond between two people who have made a commitment to each other for life. The world tells us that we’d better check out our sexual compatibility before marriage. What they do not explain, and may not even realize, is that you diminish the quality of that lifelong relationship by giving away that special part of yourself to others beforehand. You damage that capability for intimacy! Why would you want to settle for less than the beautiful creation that God has intended for you? It would be like driving a 20-year-old rusty car when a brand new luxury automobile would have been yours. There is a loss suffered when you refuse to wait. There is wonderful reward for both when you come together for the very first time after the wedding ceremony. You are both worth waiting for. 3. Focus your life There are many other exciting and interesting and helpful and practical things to do with your time and your energy. If you focus on learning and preparing, and helping others and worshipping God, instead of on sex, you will not feel nearly as tempted to disobey God in this way. When couples focus on the physical sensations during dating or engagement, they do not take the time to really get to know each other spiritually, mentally, emotionally, and economically. She might be a great kisser, but does she budget money carefully? Does she know how to run a home? He might be a hunk to look at, but is he a hard worker, or a whiner? Does he like to talk about the Lord and pray together? Does he help others, or just think about himself? There is so much to learn about a person before a commitment is made. You should bake the cake before you put on the frosting. 4. Don’t be selfish The sexual relationship is a coming together “as one flesh”, and therefore it belongs only within a marriage. It is not a recreational activity. A guy should not “use” a woman/girl just to satisfy his own lust (“what base can I get to?”); a girl should think more highly of herself than to allow herself to be used. And a girl should not use a guy to provide herself with status and emotional highs (“if I don’t have a boyfriend, people will think less of me!”). Both should trust that God will provide a spouse if He so plans. She does not have to make herself a sex object in order to get loved. Her desires, as well as his, will be fulfilled when commitment is attached, and there cannot be abandonment afterwards. 5. Don’t hurt the future Even though you are “going together,” “in love,” or “engaged,” unmarried is still unmarried, that is, not married, right up until the ceremony itself is over. If you are sexually intimate with someone and then you break up, then you have been intimate with someone else’s wife or husband, and all of you will have to deal with those memories and feelings of guilt for a very long time. Even if you marry the person, you will have that disappointment/guilt/shame of knowing you started out your relationship in disobedience to God. As well, your beloved spouse will deserve to be accepted and not mentally compared to others (herein lies an argument against pornography and the trouble it can cause later on, as well.) 6. Don’t believe everything you see Sex is not always as exciting and romantic as it looks in the movies. Think about it – how realistic are the lives of the people in the films? They make it look all “right” and “perfect” because that makes the story better. They don’t talk about body odors and annoying habits and other things that one needs true love and commitment in order to overlook. It is not uncommon for married couples to have to work out difficulties in this area. Why complicate things beforehand? You probably have many years of life ahead of you during which you can engage in quality sexual intimacy with your spouse. But if you talk with married people, you will hear that the urgency and frequency wears off a bit over the years – so why should you start the “slow-down” sooner than necessary? There’s plenty of time when it’s the right time. You have the whole rest of your lives to enjoy one another. 7. Don’t Have A Child You might get pregnant, or cause a pregnancy, and you will not be in the best position to provide for that child. It’s not good planning, and it’s not good sense to do so, nor the best situation for your beloved child. It causes terrible pain to both sets of parents as well, and you should show respect and love for them. When you are expecting a child, you should be able to tell your parents joyfully: “you’re going to have a grandchild!” 8. Don’t itch, burn, contaminate, or die You might get a sexually transmitted disease from someone who gave it to someone who gave it to someone who gave it to your “partner.” They are invisible, so how would you know? HIV is only one – there are several more that are incurable. If this person is willing to engage in sexual activity (and that means all kinds involving the private areas), then it may be likely that they’ve done it with others as well. Since they are being sinful in this one area, they may not be too concerned about adding a little dishonesty to it as well. Conclusion A friend of mine told me that the only reason that we should need is the first one: Don’t Disobey the Lord. That should be true. We are called to be a separate and holy people, different from the world. However, I believe it can help us when we see just how many different types of harm God is protecting us from when He tells us to save sex for marriage....

Red heart icon with + sign.
Parenting

J.C. Ryle on teaching our children to pray

In his book "Duties for Parents," J.C. Ryle encourages parents to take seriously the admonishment in Proverbs 22:6 to “Train up a child in the way he should go" because, as the verse continued, "when he is old, he will not depart from it.” Ryle explained that this promise applied both for good and for ill – early training would help the child right into adulthood, but bad habits fostered by parental neglect would also have a lasting impact. Now, this might seem an ominous verse, knowing that we parents are far from perfect. But God is not calling us to perfection here. He is, however, making it plain that He has given us an awesome and wonderful task, to be taken on with great seriousness. In the excerpt below from his book, Ryle urges parents to train their children to pray. **** Prayer is the very life-breath of true religion. It is one of the first evidences that a man is born again. When the Lord sent Ananias to Saul, He told Ananias: “Behold, he is praying” (Acts 9:11). Saul had begun to pray, and that was proof enough. Prayer is a key to spiritual growth. When there is lots of private communion with God, your soul will grow like the grass after rain; when there is little, all will be at a standstill – you will barely keep your soul alive. Show me a growing Christian, a strong Christian, a flourishing Christian, and I will show you one that speaks regularly with his Lord. He asks much, and he has much. He tells Jesus everything, and so he always knows how to act. Prayer is the mightiest engine God has placed in our hands. It is the best weapon to use in every difficulty, and the surest remedy in every trouble. It is the cry He has promised to always be listening for, even as a loving mother listens for the voice of her child. Prayer is the simplest means that man can use to come to God. It is within the reach of all of us – the sick, the aged, the infirm, the paralytic, the blind, the poor, the unlearned – everyone can pray. You don’t have to be academic or an intellectual to pray. So long as you have a tongue to tell God about the state of your soul, you can and you ought to pray. Those words, ” You do not have because you do not ask God” (James 4:2), will condemn many on the Day of Judgment. Parents, if you love your children, do all that lies in your power to train them up to a habit of prayer. Show them how to begin. Tell them what to say. Encourage them to persevere. Remind them if they become negligent and slack about it. This, remember, is the very first step in religion that a child can take themselves. Long before he can read, you can teach him to kneel by his mother’s side, and repeat the simple words of prayer and praise which she puts in his mouth. And as the first steps in any undertaking are always the most important, so is the manner in which your children’s prayers are prayed, a point which deserves your closest attention. Few seem to understand how much depends on this. We must beware of our children saying their prayers in haste, or carelessly, or irreverently. You must be cautious too, of leaving your children to say their prayers on their own, without you in the room. We must make certain they are actually saying their prayers. Surely if there’s any habit which your own hand and eye should be involved in forming, it is the habit of prayer. If you never hear your children pray yourself, then for any negligence on their part, you are much to blame. You are little wiser than the bird described in Job 39:14-16: For she abandons her eggs to the earth And warms them in the dust, And she forgets that a foot may crush them, Or that a wild beast may trample them. She treats her young cruelly, as if they were not hers; Though her labor be in vain, she is unconcerned; Prayer is, of all habits, the one which we remember the longest. Many a grey-headed man could tell you how his mother used to make him pray in the days of his childhood. He’ll have forgotten so many other things. The church where he was first taken to worship, the minister he first heard preach, the friends he used to play with – all may have been forgotten and left no mark behind. But you will often find it is far different with his first prayers. He will often be able to tell you where he knelt, and what he was taught to say, and even how his mother looked all the while. It will come up as fresh before his mind’s eye as if it was but yesterday. Reader, if you love your children, I charge you, do not let his early years pass without training him to pray. If you train your children in anything, then train them, at the very least, to make a habit of prayer. This is a modernized excerpt from J.C. Ryle’s article (and then book) “Duties of Parents” first published in 1888. This article was first published in Reformed Perspective in December 2018....

Red heart icon with + sign.
News

Saturday Selections – Aug. 30, 2025

Great illustrations of the government's limits Big government presumes that its bureaucracy is omnicompetent, able to manage for its citizens the job market, healthcare, education, trash collection, and so much more. And in making much of its own capabilities, it diminishes its citizens – we must be incompetent if we need their active intervention in so much of our lives. So is the government omnicompetent? No, as this video demonstrates with three examples of government programs gone wrong. Were they to acknowledge their limitations, governments would then limit their own fiddling and allow more room for other sorts of "government" – including family government, Church government, and self-government – to take up more responsibility. China slaps tariff on Canadian canola after Canada imposed a tariff on Chinese EVs Canadians who want to "go green" will have to pay more to do it, since our government imposed a 100% tariff on cheap Chinese electric vehicles (EVs) last year. Does that tariff help Canadian EV production? Possibly... but only by hurting Canadian consumers in the pocketbook. And now China has hit Canadian canola with a huge 78% tariff. Might that help China's canola producers? Maybe. But only by hurting Chinese canola consumers. When tariffs beget more tariffs, the only way to stop the cycle is for one country to step back and stop. And that isn't as defeatist as it is made out to be. It is, in fact, a defense of your country's consumers, who will no longer be forced to pay the jacked-up pricing our tariffs create. Yes, ending tariffs could hurt some Canadian producers – those who can't produce goods as inexpensively as countries abroad are able to – but ending tariffs will help our consumers, who will then get more bang for their buck. Ending tariffs will also help any of our producers who use imported products. And, in this case, ending tariffs could have helped our country's canola producers escape a punitive payback by the Chinese government. Media gives big coverage to study that says climate change will cost trillions... ... but didn't give big coverage when the same study started getting questioned. Court backs Calvin U over prof fired for officiating a gay "marriage" A same-sex "marriage" is two people committing, for life, to live in rebellion against God. They are doing so to their own harm, and quite possibly their eternal destruction, should they keep to that commitment. How could this professing Christian have been confused about whether or not he should officiate such a ceremony? It'd be akin to officiating a ceremony where a pair of anorexics made a solemn vow not to eat again – why would anyone do that to them? It's good news, then, to hear that Calvin University took a stand, and the courts backed them. Trump (sort of) says, "The US should be more like Canada" Canada's federal election results have, historically, been beyond questioning. With a scrutineer from each of the major parties overlooking the ballot counts, there have been as many as four tallies to check against each other – the Elections Canada result, but then also the Liberal, Conservative, and NDP counts. But as we move to more mail-in ballots and, municipally, we bring in electronic voting, what we're left with is a system that requires more and more trust from the voters because there is less and less transparency. We have only to look south of the border to see how badly that can go. Now President Trump has made transparency an issue, with his demand for getting rid of electronic voting machines. The Prodigal - Josiah Queen Quite the peppy take on the Prodigal Son... ...

Red heart icon with + sign.
Theology

I won't go with you: abandonment as an act of love

“You’re kicking someone out of your church?” It can be hard bringing friends into our churches – our music is slower, our benches are harder and our sermons are longer – but it gets harder still when a friend is brought the same Sunday an excommunication notice is read out. Excommunication is almost impossible to explain, because almost no other churches do it. It is a completely new thing to most people outside our Reformed churches, and on the surface it seems so harsh and uncaring. It seems mean. The biblical basis is clear enough, Matthew 18:15-18 speaks of excluding an unrepentant sinner, from the communion of the Church: “Let him be to you as a heathen and a tax collector.” 2 Thessalonians 3:14 even gives a clear reason for this exclusion: “do not keep company with him, that he may be ashamed.” But the biblical explanation isn’t very satisfying. Yes, that’s what it says, but can that be what it really means? It doesn’t seem to make sense. Wouldn’t it be better if this sinning brother kept coming to church, and kept hanging out with his Christian friends? How can God’s word act on his soul if we prevent him from even hearing it? This is the sort of thinking that has eliminated excommunication in most churches, and delayed and lengthened the process in many of our own churches. There is always the hope that as long as the sinning brother keeps attending, something might change. This hope for change seems to disappear once they have been excommunicated, and so the process is dragged out as long as possible. The pro-life explanation I never fully understood the rationale behind excommunication until a Lutheran, in my university pro-life group, explained it to me. She didn’t talk about excommunication though. Instead she talked about abandonment as an act of love. Our group was discussing what one of our members had gone through when her friend asked her to go with her to an abortion clinic. “What could I do? She’s my best friend, and she was going crazy. She needed me so I went with her.” “Did she know you were pro-life?” “I told her.” “She knew you were pro-life and she still asked you to help her get an abortion? Does she know what being pro-life means? Does she know you think abortion is murder?” “She needed me so she asked me. We’re best friends!” “Your friend asked you to help her murder her baby. Do you think she really understood what she was asking you to do? If she had really understood, do you think she would have asked you?” “But she did ask…what else could I do?” “You could have said no. You could have said, ‘You know I love you, you know we are best friends, but what you are doing is wrong, and I cannot help you do it. You know I would do anything for you, but I will not do this. If you are going to do this, you will have to do it alone.’ That would have given your friend – the friend who knows you love her dearly – something to think about. If you go with her, she’ll never understand how serious abortion is. After all, her pro-life friend went with her. But if you refuse to help her, if her best friend abandons her, then she might just be shocked into realizing just how serious this is. Abandoning her gives her more to think about than accompanying her ever could." Shock and shame An unrepentant sinner is often an ignorant sinner. He doesn’t see the need to repent and doesn’t think his particular sin is a big deal. That thought is confirmed when the church refuses to discipline him. There is no sharp break to snap the sinning brother back to his senses. Instead he’ll probably start attending less and less frequently, and start making more and more friends outside the church. Finally discipline becomes impossible because the man no longer has any friends left in the church. Excommunication at this point is incapable of shaming him, because he doesn’t care what the people in the church think. But if we act while the church is still the focal point in his life, then the unrepentant brother will see the people he loves, and the people who love him, telling him they will not walk down the wide path with him. Then the brother will be left alone with his thoughts, left alone to evaluate his path. And Lord willing he will then be forced to see the error of his ways. Excommunication does make sense, and we should thank God for it. First published in the November 2000 Reformed Perspective....

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27