Recent Articles | Reformed Perspective

Parenting

Give your kids a super power

Reading to your kids will give them something better than the ability to leap tall buildings

*****

I've been thinking lately that books are incredible. They are full of adventures and worlds and characters that shape us in profound ways. They make us laugh and cry and think. They dispel boredom, boost grades and reduce poverty. Giving kids access to books is like giving them a super power.

There is only one problem: Not every child can unlock this power.

They may be literate and able to read, but they aren't readers – kids who love good books and devour as many as they can. If you can raise your children to be readers, you will unleash a power that will change their lives.

Parents say, “I wish my son would read, but he just doesn't enjoy it." How do we get kids to fall in love with reading?

Of all the skills we want our children to master, reading is near the top of the list. We want our children to love words so that they will be daily readers of the Word. The Bible is a challenging book, and our children need to be able to read and understand it in order to grow in their relationship with God. We want them to read Christian literature so that they will grow in faith and that they can be a blessing to others. And one day, our boys might become elders or deacons, and they will need to do a lot of reading. If they are fluent readers, their task will not be such a burden. Raising readers is a priority for Christians.

So how do we get them to change from those who love the image to those who love the Word?

A soccer lesson

A baby is not born wanting to read, any more than he is born wanting to play soccer (believe it or not!).

So what makes kids learn to love soccer? Usually, someone in their life is excited about the sport and introduces them to it. They practice with their mom or dad or brother or friend, and the more they play the better they get. Soon they enter a positive upward spiral:

They enjoy soccer because it's fun, so they play lots and they improve – and they love soccer even more!

To get proficient at a skill, children need to practice it over and over. But they are the same as adults: they tend to avoid things that give them pain and to do things that give them pleasure. Learning to read involves a certain amount of pain. Have you ever sat next to a child sounding out her home reader? Yeah, I know. If it’s painful for you, what do you think it’s like for your child?

Children need to read a lot to get proficient, but they won’t unless it's enjoyable. So they enter a negative downward spiral:

They don't enjoy reading because it's hard, so they don't practice and they fall further behind – and they hate reading even more!

If only we could make the pleasure of reading outweigh the pain long enough for kids to become proficient readers. Then the super power will be unleashed. When they start to read because they want to, a whole new world of ideas, delights and experiences will open up before them like the view from a mountain peak.

In love with reading

So how do we get our kids to fall in love with reading? With books? The answer is very simple: We read to our kids out loud. We start as soon as we can and we read for a minimum of fifteen minutes. Every day. Throughout their childhood.

It’s not complicated. It doesn’t cost any money. But it is the secret to raising readers.

How does this help?

You might be wondering, "If I'm doing all the reading, how is that helping my child to read on her own?"

Reading to kids is like advertising for books. From a very young age, children learn that great books are a source of joy and delight. They associate these books with the pleasure of snuggling on your lap. They are drawn into the story so that when you stop, they say, “Oooh, keep reading, keep reading!” And they steal the book off the shelf and read the next chapter on their own because they can’t wait to find out what happens next. They are highly motivated to master this skill.

The pleasure outweighs the pain.

Most kids start school eager to learn to read. But as they go through the grades, this interest drops lower and lower. They might know how to read, but they never pick up a book. What is happening?

The advertising has stopped. Parents figure they don't need to keep reading to their child now that he can read on his own. But here's the thing. A child's level of comprehension is way above his reading ability until about grade eight. The gap doesn't close until age 13 to 14. That means in the early grades he’s stuck reading “Matt and Pat put on a hat” when what he’s thirsting for is adventure stories, with knights and spies and fearsome foes and daring-do. But he can’t read that on his own yet. He is stuck reading simple, boring books.

Then the pain outweighs the pleasure.

It's not worth the slog.

We have to keep advertising. We have to keep reading out loud.

Wait, there's more

Reading aloud is such a bonding thing to do with your kids. The story characters become part of your family culture. You laugh and cry together. You discuss serious topics together. You read chapter after chapter way past bedtime because it’s too exciting to stop. It’s a simple, beautiful activity in which your children feel very loved.

My dad was a very busy man, and he had a hard time talking to his children. But one of the ways I knew that he loved me was that when I was a teenager, every night, I would go into his study, and he would read The Viking Saga by Henry Treece.

My dad was diagnosed with cancer when my youngest sister was 10 years old. He kept reading The Hobbit to her every night until he was too sick to continue. Those moments are now some of her most treasured memories of her dad.

Reading to your children is one of the most powerful things you can do for them.

But how do we compete for their attention in an age of screens and constant entertainment? And where do we find the time to fit this into our hectic schedule? And what if I'm not good at reading?

To help, here are twelve tips for developing a read-aloud habit in your home.

12 tips

We all have the same twenty-four hours in a day and we find time for whatever we think is important. The bottom line is: reading to our children only happens if it's a priority! And here’s how to do it.

Start small. It’s better to read every day for five minutes, than to wait for that elusive half hour of "free time." Build the habit and the attention spans slowly.
Decide on a set time and place. Write your plan down, post it on the fridge and tell your kids you are starting a new habit. Attach reading aloud to a habit your family already has, such as eating a snack after school. Let them know “It’s book reading time!” Soon they will be reminding you!
If your children are very active, pick a time when their energy levels are low and they would appreciate snuggling in for a story. Every child is happy to listen to a story if it means bedtime will be postponed.
How well you read doesn’t matter. As the parent, you are the best reader for your child, especially fathers. Pick a book that you enjoy and don’t be afraid to skip boring bits.
Look for other pockets of time to read out loud. Keep a book in your bag for when you are waiting in the car or the doctor’s office. Resist giving them a screen to keep them occupied. You want to feed their brains, not damage them.
Read around a campfire.
Listen to audio books during long car rides – or short ones! You’d be amazed how much of the Bible you can listen to over a year of driving kids ten minutes to school. The NIV 1984 (dramatized version) is a favorite for our kids, with its sound effects of swords clashing and cargo splashing overboard.
Record yourself reading aloud on your smartphone. Young children can listen to it while you make dinner.
Have lots of great books in the house. Check out book sales and thrift stores. Give kids a bookshelf to start their own collection, and let grandparents know what titles they can give as birthday presents.
Visit your local library regularly (with discernment!). Make use of their online reservation system to make requests.
Children should see you enjoying books, so model reading for yourself.
Keep reading to children even after they learn to read.

Let’s do this together

Many of the ideas in this article are based on The Read-Aloud Handbook by Jim Trelease, first self-published in 1979 and now in its 8th edition. I highly recommend it, especially because it contains extensive lists of books for all ages. It might make for a good selection for any book club you are in, or want to start. Tackling it together could be a wonderful encouragement – we can help each other keep up with this important habit.

Let me leave you with the concluding verse from a Strickland Gillilan poem:

You may have tangible wealth untold;
Caskets of jewels and coffers of gold.
Richer than I you can never be –
I had a Mother who read to me.

Amanda Poppe writes Christian fiction for children ages 8-12. Find her at amandapoppe.com and download a free short story to read to your kids. A version of this article first appeared in Una Sancta.

Being the Church

Love thy neighbor. Love thy neighborhood encampment…?

Interview with an artist

Laura Kroesbergen’s hyperrealistic animals

Capturing a moment in pastel ***** 'A Whole New World'15.5x21.5in.This lion cub's...

Technology

Less screens = more life

What we learned by stepping away from our phones for 10 days ***** We were hoping for 200 to sign up. Turns out a lot of us were ready for this –...

Internet

Is AI helping you, or dumbing you down? Yes.

3 questions to help us use AI better. ***** The Preacher declares in Ecclesiastes 1:9 that “there is nothing new under the sun.” He was saying i...

In a Nutshell

Tidbits – June 2026

Done before the first down Notre Dame’s famed football coach Knute Rockne wasn’t above employing psychology to give his team an edge. A legend is told of how, when he was about to face the much better University of Southern California (USC) team, he spent the week beforehand scouring the city of South Bend for its largest men. He found a hundred, all 6’5” or taller, and every one of them weighed 300 pounds or more. Then he decked them out in Notre Dame uniforms and the pads and helmets only made them look even bigger. When it was game time, he marched them out. One after another, these giants ran onto the field, right past the opposing players. The USC coach kept telling his guys, “They can only field 11 men at a time,” but it didn’t matter. None of them played a minute, but the opposition was so intimidated at the sight of them that they dropped passes, committed fumbles, and even ran into each other in their crossing routes. And Notre Dame won the game. Did it happen? Maybe. But the reason the story is told is because this sort of thing does happen. Think of the men who spied out Israel and got intimidated by the giants of the land before any battle was even fought. Consider today’s battles and how often God’s truth is more loudly defended by non-Christians like Ben Shapiro or Jordan Peterson than by us – we’ve run from the battle and left it up to others, scared of what we might, but haven’t yet, had to face. How often are we beaten before we’ve even begun? Thankfully, our God is not just mighty – bigger than any giant on the football field sidelines, or standing in front of a Canaanite army – but He is also gracious and forgiving. So let’s fall on our knees, and get ready to put up our fists when God next calls us to fight for His glory. Source: adapted from Michael Hodgin’s “1001 More Humorous Illustrations for Public Speaking” O Canada! A Canadian woman and a Saudi woman were arguing about which country was better. The Canadian said, "Canada has more than its share of problems, but at least here I can freely walk up to Parliament Hill, head to the Prime Minister's office, and loudly complain, 'Mark Carney, I don't like the way you're running this country.'" "But I can do that in my country too!" the Saudi woman exclaimed. "I’m free to walk up to the palace, go to the King's office, and loudly complain, 'King, I don't like the way Mark Carney Harper is running Canada!'" Source: Adapted from a Reagan joke about Russia and the US 4 of a kind Grace and Mercy are two words with distinct meanings…but do you know what they are? Through sheer repetition some Christian words seem to blend into each other and we forget their distinct meanings. But their differences do matter. Below are three short definitions that describe the following four words: Grace, Mercy, Justice and Persecution. not getting what you do deserve getting what you do deserve getting what you don’t deserve Test yourself. Do you know what definition applies to each word? The answers follow: Not getting what you do deserve, is God is merciful when He doesn’t send us to hell. We deserve to go to hell, but fortunately Christians don’t get what we deserve. Getting what you do deserve, is God’s justice requires that sinful man be punished. Jesus took our deserved punishment on Himself and thus fulfilled God’s requirement for justice. Getting what you don’t deserve is Persecution. If justice is about getting punished when you do something bad, then persecution is about getting punished when you’ve done nothing, or done something good (like handing out a Bible in China). Persecution is, therefore, getting something bad that you don’t deserve. This definition is a little tricky, however, because it can also be a good thing to get what we don't deserve. That's exactly what Grace is! Our salvation and adoption as God's children is ours entirely out of grace – we have done nothing to merit this reward. It is through grace alone. Another reason everyone should study economics A story is told about an old man who was called silly names by the neighborhood kids and he couldn’t get them to stop. Then he hit on an idea. The next day, when the children gathered around him, shouting their taunts, he told them that next week he was going to pay them to insult him – if they came on Tuesday, four days later, he would give them each a dollar to shout their insults at him. They agreed, and the immediate impact was that the children stopped hassling him – it seemed they were saving up their insults. Then, come Tuesday, the man did as he promised, giving each of the little bullies a dollar for shouting insults at him. Then he announced that he’d pay them the next day too, but just 50 cents each. Wednesday they all gathered again, threw their insults, and were given 50 cents each. Afterwards the man announced that he’d only pay them a penny for their insults tomorrow. “A penny?” the ringleader complained, “that’s not even worth it.” And they never taunted the man again. Source: adapted from Michael Hodgin’s “1001 More Humorous Illustrations for Public Speaking” Do you like being corrected? David did. We’re supposed to love correction. Not throw a fit in response to it, or even stoically accept it. No, we’re supposed to love it. Proverbs 9:8 is just one of the texts where God makes this point: Don’t reprove a scoffer, lest he hate you. Reprove a wise man, and he will love you. God tells us that reproof is, in fact, a sign that He loves us: “whom the Lord loves, He chastens, and scourges every son whom He receives” (Heb. 12:6). This verse makes good sense to any parent – it’s a lot easier to not discipline our kids, to just let it go this time (and the next, and the time after that), but if we love them, then we want to teach them what’s wrong and right, and that will necessarily involve reproof of some sort. Still, “love correction” is a hard command to follow, so it struck me when I came across King David’s response to the prophet Nathan’s rebuke. As you’ll recall, Nathan came to David after David had committed adultery with Bathsheba, and murdered her husband to cover it up (2 Samuel 11-12). Nathan came with condemnation, and a curse. Though David confessed his guilt, Nathan informed the king that the LORD would kill the child that he had conceived with Bathsheba. And the child did die. We would all understand it if David didn’t think all that kindly of Nathan after that. But, despite his great sins, David was still a man of God, and he shows this in his response to Nathan’s reproof. In 1 Chronicles 3:5 we read that, of the four sons David had with Bathsheba, one was named Nathan! Here, then, is a man who was reproved, and seems to have loved the messenger who brought him that correction. Presuppositions When a little boy asked his grandfather whether he’d been on the ark with Noah, his grandfather had to laugh, and assured the boy that no, he had not been on the ark. “But grandpa,” the boy asked, “then why didn’t you drown?” Are we conservatives? Dave Rubin, Douglas Murray, and the DailyWire's Spencer Klaven are all self-described "gay conservatives," and how can that be? It's because "conservative" is a term that has meaning in comparison. So long as a position can be placed on a spectrum, there will always be liberal and conservative versions. If an anarchist wants to destroy all of Western Civilization, and I want to destroy only half of it, I would be the conservative anarchist. And if a couple of college ethics professors want to euthanize all disabled babies now, and I want to wait a few years, I am the conservative eugenicist in this conversation. In much the same way, conservative and gay go together just fine too. That’s why God's people need to understand that if we want to express our loyalties clearly, we need to come out as Christians, not conservatives. Conservative Christians even, but not simply conservatives. Showing and telling A half dozen writing tips that highlight what’s to be done, and how not to do it. Don't use a big word where diminutive verbiage will suffice. Check carefully to see if you any words out. Avoid clichés like the plague. It’s generally a good idea to be specific. Colorful, vivid, descriptive, multi-layered adjectives are overdone. Don’t re-use the same words. Use different words. Other words. That speck in your neighbor’s eye The faults we spot so easily in others may well be the ones we excuse in ourselves. Of course, there is some artistry in our self-deception – we aren’t going to bluntly say, it is wrong for my kids to be curt and impatient, but I’m allowed to be. No, we’ll say it’s wrong for them, but then relabel our own conduct as something more acceptable or even admirable, as this poetic ditty demonstrates: Stubbornness we deprecate; firmness we condone. The former is our neighbor’s trait; the latter is our own. Source: Michael Hodgin’s "1001 More Humorous Illustrations for Public Speaking" Berra-isms Major league player and coach Yogi Berra had quite the way with words. Here are a few of his most famous “Berra-isms,” with wisdom to be found, if you’re willing to ponder. It ain’t over ‘til it’s over. If you don’t know where you’re going, you might not get there. Ninety percent of the game is half mental. You can observe a lot by watching. When you come to a fork in the road, take it. If you can’t imitate him, don’t copy him. ...

Science - Creation/Evolution

The day is not an age

Billions of years don’t fit with the Bible ***** When my daughter was young, I introduced her to sketching and how to use colored pencils to enhance her drawings. She continued to practice and develop her technique until now, as a young woman, her skill has far exceeded my ability to draw. After examining one of her drawings of a horse – so real that its muzzle looks soft to the touch – one would never believe that she just randomly chose a few colored pencils, blindly allowing them to contact the paper in random strokes. Yet, this is how some Christians attempt to reconcile the historical account of Creation, the world of order and beauty recorded in Genesis 1-2, and the “fact” claimed by secular scientists that everything in the world around us is the product of random processes, occurring without a plan, over a very long period of time. What if we stretch the days? There are good reasons to believe that God did create everything in six, literal 24-hour days (Gen. 1:1–31). However, some people feel the need to interpret each “day” in Genesis 1 as symbolic of millions or even billions of years, because Science tells us that the universe was created by the Big Bang, that the Solar System and our Earth formed out of the chaos of this unique explosion, and that all life came about through the random processes of Evolution. This attempt to reconcile the Bible with science is called the Day Age Theory because it posits that each “day” in Genesis 1 represents an ‘age’ that is millions or billions of years long. The problem with the Day Age Theory is that it contradicts the Biblical narrative. This theory assumes that the reigning cosmological theory for the origin and history of the universe – from the Big Bang to the evolution of all life on Earth – must be correct because it is proven by Science. However, the Day Age Theory does not reconcile scientific belief with the events described in Genesis 1 because the order of events in Big Bang cosmology are completely different from those given in the Bible. The Sun or Earth: which came first? Secular science says that the Sun came before the Earth, and the Bible says the opposite. So who are you going to believe? For example, Genesis asserts that: the Earth was formed (on Day 1) before the Sun and stars (Day 4), plants were formed (on Day 3) before the Sun (Day 4), and that birds were formed (on Day 5) before the land animals (Day 6). Secular scientists, on the other hand, claim that: over 4 billion years ago the Sun formed first from a collapsing solar nebula, followed by the planets, including Earth, plant life only began to colonize the land around 450 million years ago, and some land animals (i.e., dinosaurs) evolved from birds. The Day Age Theory is, therefore, entirely at odds with the Biblical account and so it does nothing to reconcile the historical account in Genesis with scientific opinion. History can be symbolic too because God writes it The Literary Framework Hypothesis dispenses with the need to harmonize the “facts” of scientific cosmology with the Biblical narrative by teaching that the Biblical account is not intended to be taken as a chronological history but as a figurative, poetic narrative that teaches that God is the creator of all things. This notion that the Biblical narrative is allegory or poetry stems from a perceived parallel structure between Days 1-3 and Days 4-6. Beginning with Genesis 1:2, which describes the cosmos as “formless and void,” this argument contends that Days 1-3 create the “form” and Days 4-6 fill the “void.” However, as Dr. Noel Weeks has pointed out, “even though there is no logical reason why the presence of a structure should prove that a passage is not to be taken literally, this idea seems to have great emotive appeal.” Just as the process of constructing a building follows an ordered process – site preparation, laying the foundation, erecting the framework, etc. – the process of creating the universe will also be structured and not chaotic. Therefore, the presence of a structure in the creation narrative actually supports the fact that this is a record of a real historical and creative event that occurred over six literal days. In addition, parallel literary structures are also found elsewhere in the Bible, such as in the historical narratives contained in Exodus and the gospel of Matthew. For example, in Matthew 2, Jesus took a journey into Egypt and was led back into Israel, fulfilling the prophesy that “out of Egypt I called my son,” which parallels the nation of Israel being led out of Egypt by the Spirit of God, with pillars of fire and smoke going before them (Ex. 13:17–22). Also, the people who came out of Egypt passed through the waters of the Red Sea (Ex. 14), which Paul describes as passing through the waters of baptism into Moses to be identified as God’s people (1 Cor. 10:1–4), parallels Jesus passing through the baptismal waters and being identified as God’s Son (Matt. 3:13–17). Many other parallels could be listed, making it evident that parallel structure in a narrative does not indicate that the text is allegorical. Rather, it demonstrates God’s involvement in history. As with the examples of historical parallels described above, historical events and objects may also have spiritual significance. Augustine, Bishop of Hippo, points out the error of assuming that because something described in Scripture has spiritually symbolic significance it could not exist as a “visible and material object.” He writes: It is arbitrary to suppose that there could not have been a material paradise, just because it can be understood also in a spiritual significance… there was no rock from which water flowed when Moses struck it, just because it can be interpreted in a symbolic sense, as prefiguring Christ; which is how the same Apostle takes it when he says, ‘Now the rock was Christ’ .” In the same way, states Augustine, one may attribute symbolic significance to the Tree of Life (cf. Gen. 2:9, 3:33; Prov. 3:18; Rev. 2:7, 22:2) and the Tree of the Knowledge of Good and Evil – even the entire garden paradise of Eden: “There is no prohibition against such exegesis,” says Augustine, “provided that we also believe in the truth of the story as a faithful record of historical fact.” Jesus taught that Genesis was literal The Bible clearly teaches that humans did not evolve but were created, first man and then woman. Dr. Weeks asserted that Genesis 1 is to be understood literally stating that “a number of passages which refer to the original creation of man and woman and their relationship may be considered together (Matt.19:4; 1 Cor. 11:8–9; 1 Tim. 2:13–14). Note that the account is taken literally and made the basis of teaching on the relation of man and woman. Even if in only this point we take issue with evolutionary theory we find ourselves in complete antithesis to naturalistic evolution.” The gospels contain several examples of Jesus referring to the events recorded in Genesis as real history. When speaking of the prophets who had been martyred by the Jews, Jesus refers to Abel as the first martyr and Zechariah as the last (Luke 11:48–51, Matt. 23:49–51). In Matthew 19:5–6 (and Mark 10:7), Jesus quotes Genesis 2:24 to clarify that marriage is between one man and one woman: “‘For this reason a man will leave his father and mother and be united to his wife, and the two will become one flesh’. So they are no longer two, but one flesh. Therefore, what God has joined together, let no one separate.” Jesus uses the real history of Genesis to explain the basis of the marriage covenant. Finally, Jesus tells us that His return will bring judgement on everyone in the world in the same way God judged all people in Noah’s day. In Luke 17:26–27, Jesus says that “Just as it was in the days of Noah, so will it be in the days of the Son of Man. They were eating and drinking and marrying and being given in marriage, until the day when Noah entered the ark, and the flood came and destroyed them all” (also Matt. 24:36–44). The world-wide flood recorded in Genesis 6-9 was a real event, and so Jesus expects his listeners to believe that the final judgement will be just as real. Still, some people are tempted to believe that God used millions of years to create because the Bible says that, “with the Lord a day is like a thousand years, and a thousand years are like a day” (2 Pet. 3:8). However, we need to look at the context of this statement. The whole passage says, “But do not overlook this one fact, beloved, that with the Lord one day is as a thousand years, and a thousand years as one day. The Lord is not slow to fulfill his promise as some count slowness, but is patient toward you, not wishing that any should perish, but that all should reach repentance.” Peter is not writing about long ages of creation but about the Lord’s willingness to wait patiently so that every person has an opportunity to repent and restore their relationship with God. Peter is repeating the same illustration that he used in his first letter where God waited patiently so that people would have every opportunity to repent and be saved “when God’s patience waited in the days of Noah, while the ark was being prepared” (1 Pet. 3:20). Even with the help of his sons and hired men, it would have taken Noah many years to build and provision a ship as large as the ark and so those aware of Noah’s project would have had a long time to come to repentance. In other words, God is more than willing to wait a long time so as not to lose anyone (Eze. 18:23). Gradualistic assumptions took hold While there were exceptions, in the late-seventeenth to mid-eighteenth centuries, scientists seemed to readily accept the Genesis account of a global flood, concluding that it was responsible for the Earth’s geology, including the creation of fossils. Grand Canyon formed gradually? If you assume that “all things are continuing as they were from the beginning of creation” then the Grand Canyon’s depth and size, and the small river running through it would all be evidence of it being formed over tens and hundreds of thousands of years. But the Bible speaks of things being different in the past than they are today, with a worldwide Flood and its enormous volume of water able to carve out much more quickly what would take a small river eons to do. But by the end of the eighteenth century the majority of scientists began to favor a more “naturalistic” view of geology, no longer seeing a need for their ideas to fit with the Biblical account of Creation nor its account of watery catastrophe on a global scale. This naturalistic geology relied on slow and gradual processes, such as the laying down of layers of sediment to form layers of rock. Physician James Hutton, considered the father of contemporary geology, stated that the natural forces we observe shaping the Earth in the present also operated in the past, slowly and gradually over long periods of time. In his treatise on the subject, Theory of the Earth, Hutton says that “in examining things present, we have data from which to reason with regard to what has been..., therefore, we are to examine the construction of the present earth, in order to understand the natural operations of time past.” Hutton writes that such slow and gradual processes occurred on Earth “for millions of ages.” Hutton’s gradualist, or uniformitarian, views were later popularized by Charles Lyell in his three-volume work titled Principles of Geology. And it was the acceptance of slow and gradual geological processes that provided Charles Darwin with the long-ages required for his theory of biological Evolution, Origin of Species, published in 1859. This dramatic shift in scientific thought, currently held by many scientists today, was the antithesis of the Biblical account of Creation contained in Genesis 1. Thus, The Day Age Theory was invented in an attempt to reinterpret the days of Creation as symbolic of the “deep-time” required for the Big Bang and biological Evolution required by scientific thinking. God foreknew that people would invoke ideas like uniformitarianism to deny the historicity of the global Flood and bring doubt concerning the final judgement of the world: “Scoffers will come in the last days with scoffing, following their own sinful desires. They will say, “Where is the promise of his coming? For ever since the fathers fell asleep, all things are continuing as they were from the beginning of creation. For they deliberately overlook this fact, that the heavens existed long ago, and the earth was formed out of water and through water by the word of God, and that by means of these the world that then existed was deluged with water and perished” (emphasis added; 2 Pet. 3:3–6). Thus, it should come as no surprise that, rejecting the Creation account in Genesis 1, scientists claim that the Universe formed 15 billion years ago after the Big Bang, and the geology of the Earth was formed by slow, gradual processes over millions of years, and that life evolved over millions of years. When we are encouraged by scientists to believe that the universe was created over billions of years, and that life evolved over millions of years, we are being asked to doubt God’s Word. Logically, once the beginning of the Bible is called into question, we will also begin to doubt everything else written in the Bible as well. Did God really say? Hearing ideas that may cause us to doubt God’s Word is not a new phenomenon; in fact, sowing seeds of doubt was the first ploy used by Satan to deceive humanity. It was not long after God created a world that was “very good” and placed the first couple in the Garden that Satan came along and tempted them to doubt God’s word. We read in Genesis 3:1 that “ said to the woman, ‘Did God really say....’” In this way Satan caused the woman to doubt God’s goodness, convincing her that God does not really mean what He says. Some people do not want to believe in a God Who will hold them to account for their thoughts and actions. They do not want to acknowledge that they are sinful – that they disobey God – and that the only way to restore a right relationship with God is through repentance and belief in Jesus, God’s Son, Who died to redeem them and was raised from the dead (Rom. 10:9). Nor do they want to believe that Jesus will come again to judge each one of us. As a result, they make up their own stories about how the world began so that they can write God out of history, pretending He does not exist. The apostle Paul wrote that some people would deny God and create their own stories: “For the time is coming when people will not endure sound teaching, but having itching ears they will accumulate for themselves teachers to suit their own passions, and will turn away from listening to the truth and wander off into myths” (2 Tim. 4:3-4). We are living in such a time and Big Bang cosmology and Evolution are those myths. When Satan uses the authority of science to cast doubt on God’s Word – “Did God really say...He created the heavens and the earth in six days?” – remember how Satan deceived Adam and the woman in the garden, which had devastating consequences. Dr. Mark Sandercock is a retired forensic chemist who worked for the Royal Canadian Mounted Police and the author of “Foundation: A Biblical Worldview.” This is an abridged extract from Chapter 4. His book is available on Amazon....

Interview with an artist

Trees, rocks, water, sky, wildlife - Sheila Van Delft paints refreshment for the soul

48x36 acrylic on canvasNear Cathedral Grove on Vancouver Island – Sheila finds the forest one of the places where she recharges the best. She is so grateful to live in the country with trees all around her – and the endless inspiration they provide! The quiet cool of a forest trail brings inspiration to artist Sheila Van Delft. As an introvert, she finds she can recharge by breathing deeply in the midst of nature. And in her work, she brings that feeling to others, through haunting scenes of groves on Vancouver Island, fog-filled vistas of the West Coast Trail, or serene views of a lone eagle surveying his kingdom. “When I think deeply about why it’s always nature ,” she says, “I realize that I’m painting my longing for the new earth and fellowship with God. Adam and Eve in Paradise enjoyed perfect nature with God, and the renewed earth will also have landscapes and seascapes, trees, animals, and big skies – all perfected and even more incredibly beautiful than what we enjoy here because of the redeeming work of Jesus. I long for this, and dream of this, and in my own way, must paint it again and again.” Sheila is blessed to be able to work in art full-time – part-time as an art teacher and the rest of the time in her home studio. A typical day for her might involve: catching up on email requests and admin tasks, painting, taking a break for household tasks, taking the dog for a walk, brainstorming the next twenty paintings, painting some more, reluctantly making dinner, and then painting the rest of the evening because, really, it’s her favorite thing to do. 36x24 acrylic on canvasThe artist’s granddaughter in a field near her home in Ontario Van Delft has been an artist since she was a child, encouraged by her parents. Later, she studied graphic design, and then even later, as a mature student, she received her Bachelor of Fine Arts in Visual Arts. Through it all, she honed her skills, motivated by Colossians 3:23: “Whatever you do, work at it with all your heart, as working for the Lord, not for human masters.” “I sometimes have market customers tell me that they feel so at peace when they look at my work, or that they don’t want to leave because it’s all so beautiful. I marvel at this! How can it be that what I do can have this effect? It’s all God’s hand working through my hand.” One of the things she’s most proud of is her work as a high school teacher. Through it, Sheila nurtures her students’ ability to use their talents to share beauty and truth. Students she never expected have come up to her and admitted she made them care about art, and that brings her a feeling of fulfillment. “When I try capture emotions like awe, contentment, gratitude, harmony, joy, peace, and wholeness in my paintings, I think others can feel that too. And that’s why I paint, so others can also feel the hopeful anticipation of the better life that is coming. I’m trying to share a bit of Heaven.” Learn more about Sheila Van Delft's work on her website, where you can also stay up to date about the markets and other events where you can view her work in person. And she shares her work on Instagram and Facebook. Send Harma-Mae Smit suggestions for artists to profile at [email protected]...

Music

When the Church stops singing

or, What I learned from the organ bench ***** The first time I realized something was wrong with congregational singing, I was sixteen years old, sitting at the pipe organ bench at Tabor Presbyterian Church in Portland. The hymn introduction ended. I lifted my hands for the first verse – and almost no one sang. A few scattered voices appeared, hesitant and thin. The melody was there, printed clearly in the hymnal, but the room itself stayed quiet. From the organ bench, with the congregation behind you, silence is impossible to ignore. I remember thinking, Is this normal? Over the next several years I played organ in several churches around Portland, and that moment kept repeating itself. Some congregations sang with surprising strength. Others barely sang at all. I remember one Sunday playing “A Mighty Fortress Is Our God.” The first verse was hesitant and quiet, but by the final verse the congregation had found its voice and the room suddenly felt alive. The difference between those two moments – the hesitant beginning and the confident ending – revealed something important: congregational singing does not simply happen. It is something churches either cultivate intentionally or gradually lose. The sound Scripture expects The New Testament assumes that the gathered Church sings. Paul writes in Colossians: “Let the word of Christ dwell in you richly, teaching and admonishing one another in all wisdom, singing psalms and hymns and spiritual songs” (Col. 3:16). Notice what singing does here. It is not merely an emotional expression. Through singing, believers teach and encourage one another. Truth is carried not only through sermons but through the voices of the congregation itself. Paul makes the same assumption in Ephesians: “Addressing one another in psalms and hymns and spiritual songs, singing and making melody to the Lord with your heart” (Eph. 5:19). In both passages, singing is participatory. The church does not merely listen to music; the church sings. For centuries, Christian worship assumed this. Choirs and musicians might assist, but the central voice in worship was the congregation. Today, that assumption is not always as strong. When worship music becomes something we watch One of the things I noticed while playing in different churches was how dramatically congregational participation could change depending on how music was led. In some congregations the moment the introduction ended, the singing began. The sound filled the sanctuary almost immediately. Even people who did not sing especially well sang confidently because the music supported them. Other congregations responded very differently. The musicians played beautifully, the sound system was excellent, but the congregation remained hesitant. A few voices scattered here and there, but many people simply listened. This shift often happens gradually and unintentionally. Churches want music to sound good. Musicians want to serve faithfully. Technology makes it easier than ever to produce polished sound. But the unintended result can be subtle: music becomes something happening at the front of the room rather than something shared by the whole church. From the organ bench, that difference is unmistakable. The quiet disappearance of church musicians Another challenge is less visible but just as real: many churches struggle to find musicians. When I first began playing as a teenager, many congregations still had longtime pianists or organists who had served for decades. These musicians often trained younger players and gradually passed on their role. That pattern is becoming less common. More than once a pastor quietly asked me if I knew anyone who could play because their longtime pianist had retired and no one was ready to replace her. Sometimes churches relied on a single volunteer carrying the entire responsibility for music week after week. This shortage changes the dynamic of worship in ways many people never notice. When musical leadership becomes fragile, congregational singing often weakens as well. Leading congregational singing requires a particular kind of musician – someone who understands that their role is not performance but support. What the organ bench teaches From the organ bench, you quickly learn that congregations sing best when they feel supported. If the accompaniment is steady and confident, people join in. If the tempo drifts or the melody becomes difficult to follow, the congregation hesitates. Some Sundays the congregation would surprise me. A hymn I expected to struggle suddenly filled the room, especially on the final verse when people realized the organ was carrying them. When that happens, the room changes. People sing more boldly. The sound grows stronger with each verse. The organ historically served this role well because its sustained sound naturally supports voices. But the deeper principle is not about instruments. Congregations sing best when the music invites participation rather than replacing it. Why this matters It might be tempting to treat this as a small issue. There are certainly larger challenges facing the Church today. But Scripture treats the gathered worship of God’s people as something deeply significant. When a congregation sings together, the Word of Christ dwells richly among them (Col. 3:16). The truths of the gospel are not only preached but sung. Believers encourage one another through shared confession of faith. Children hear their parents sing. Older members who can no longer serve in visible ways still contribute their voices. Corporate singing reminds us that worship is not about personal preference. No one in the room loves every song equally. Yet everyone participates. In that sense, congregational singing becomes a small picture of the unity of the Church itself. Recovering the sound of the Church The encouraging news is that strong congregational singing is not complicated to cultivate. Churches that sing well usually share a few simple habits. They choose songs ordinary people can sing. They train musicians to support the congregation rather than showcase themselves. They encourage participation openly rather than assuming it will happen automatically. In several churches I played in, the problem was not that people refused to sing. The problem was that no one had intentionally thought about how to help them sing. Once that question was asked, the difference could be remarkable. Listening again One of the strange privileges of sitting at an organ bench is that you learn to listen carefully to the room behind you. When a congregation really sings, you feel it through the bench and pedals as much as you hear it. The sound moves through the room like a single voice made up of many imperfect ones. It is not polished. Some voices drift off pitch. Some enter late. Yet the sound carries a unity no performance can create. It is the sound of the church speaking together. And once you have heard it clearly, you begin to notice when it starts to fade. The question facing many churches today is not simply what style of music they prefer. The question is whether the congregation itself is still expected to sing. Felix Lilly is a musician in Portland, Oregon who has served as a pipe organist in several local churches. He writes about church life, music, and Christian discipleship....

Science - Creation/Evolution

Perfect planet

It all had to be just right for life on Earth to survive and thrive ***** In our garden is a plum tree. Now this may not sound unusual except that...

In a Nutshell

Tidbits – May 2026

On logic Sherlock Holmes and his faithful companion Dr. Watson once went on a camping trip. Some hours after they lay down for the night and went to ...

People we should know

J. Gresham Machen (1881-1937)

Stood strong against the tide of liberalism engulfing the Church ***** One of the greatest theologians of the twentieth century was an American Pres...

People we should know

That cloud of witnesses....

Mina and Marco in Egypt Open Doors is a non-denominational mission working in over 60 countries where Christianity is socially or legally discourage...

Homosexuality, News

Opposing rainbow crosswalk results in human rights trial

Ronald Reagan once shared a quip about the difference between his country and the totalitarian USSR. “Two Soviets… were talking to each other. And one of them asked, ‘What’s the difference between the Soviet Constitution and the United States Constitution?’ And the other one said, ‘That’s easy. The Soviet Constitution guarantees freedom of speech and freedom of gathering. The American Constitution guarantees freedom after speech and freedom after gathering.” Here in Canada, we still have freedom of speech, but, it seems, no guarantee of freedom after speech. An Alberta woman is facing a two-week hearing before the Alberta Human Rights Commission for distributing flyers opposing the Town of Westlock’s plan to paint a rainbow crosswalk. Benita Pedersen created the flyers in June of 2023, in an effort to encourage other citizens to reach out to their elected officials and oppose the crosswalk. “Based on my personal experiences in interacting with parents and children, I have learned that the practice of ‘gender affirmation’ harms kids more than it helps,” she explained to the Justice Centre for Constitutional Freedoms (JCCF). “When I composed the flyer, one of my objectives was to warn parents about the potential consequences of children pursuing the pathway of transgenderism.” She added that the way to solve problems is “by having open conversation.” Others disagree, and human rights commissions make it easy to shut down speech they don’t like. In this case, fellow citizen Laurie Hodge took offense and filed a human rights, stating that the flyer discriminated on the basis of gender, gender identity, and gender expression. Hodge has since become a member of the Westlock Town Council. The wheels of “justice” turn slowly. In October of 2025, the Director of the Alberta HRC referred the complaint to the province’s human rights tribunal, finding that there was a sufficient basis to proceed with the hearing. Human rights commissions and tribunals were under the public eye 15 years ago, in light of complaints against high-profile figures like Ezra Levant, Mark Steyn, and against Maclean’s magazine. Complaints were made on the basis of hurt feelings. Even if there was no conviction, the process of responding to a complaint – involving tens of thousands of dollars in legal bills and years of hassle – was itself a punishment. The passage of a private member’s bill in 2012 to reform the Canadian Human Rights Act seemed to settle the commissions down. But the recent decision from the BC Human Rights Tribunal to fine school trustee Barry Neufeld $750,000 for speaking against “sexual orientation and gender identity” (SOGI), as well as this case in Alberta, suggest that the sleeping giants are awaking. Let’s not be caught sleeping ourselves. ARPA Canada took a lead in responding to the challenges 15 years ago, and continues to speak out today. We care so deeply about freedom of speech and expression not because our opinions are so important, but because God’s truth is. We love our neighbors, so we want and need to be free to share what God says is best for them and everyone. Find Pedersen's flyer at the end of the human rights complaint shared here....

Contests

RP’s "Log out and look up" screen-fast challenge is July 13-22

Bring peace to your mind while raising $100 for charity. ***** Are you struggling with keeping screens in their proper place? Do you or your children find it hard not to reach for your device, almost without thinking? Last year, over 1,000 of you joined us in “breaking the spell” for 10 days. The feedback was overwhelmingly positive, making it evident we would all benefit from doing this every year. So for ten days, we're going to get re-oriented. We're asking everyone – as much as it is possible for you – to steer clear from your smartphone, computers, TV, and tablets for the ten days of July 13 to July 22, 2026. Speaking of together, we’re asking you to sign up with an accountability partner – someone who can see how you are doing and egg you on. And you can do the same for them! Need a device for work, or to stay in touch with family? No problem. You are welcome to come up with your own exceptions. Just write them down in advance and stick to them. Some generous supporters have pledged to donate $10 per day for every day you manage to go screen-free from July 13-22. The money will be split between two fantastic kingdom causes – Reformed Perspective and Word & Deed – to a maximum of $20,000 split between both causes. A few tips Commit. Don’t allow yourself to make easy exceptions, even if you are having a hard day. For example, just because you are at someone else’s home doesn’t mean you can enjoy screens again. Don't get sucked in. If you still need screens for basic your job or other functions that are essential, go for it, but ensure that you are only using your tablet and phone for that and only that. For example, if you need a phone for directions, don’t take the opportunity to scroll the news. If you need a computer at work, don’t let yourself go to other websites or play an online game. Out of sight, out of mind. Help yourself by hiding your devices and make them difficult to access. Maybe even take the TV off the wall. Log out. Log out of your social media accounts so that it isn’t easy to quickly open them. Hide your app icons. If you need still need to use your phone, hide all the icons of the apps you want to steer clear of. Come up with a plan. When you find yourself wanting to reach for a screen, what'll you do instead? Make a plan. It doesn’t have to be hard or complicated. Perhaps say a prayer, take a drink of water, try to memorize a verse, do a set of 10 jumping jacks, or read a couple of pages of a book you’ve been meaning to get to. Have alternatives ready and waiting. You and your children are going to need something else to do with your screen time, so you need to have options, otherwise you'll just spend your time pining for your phone. Get out books, magazines, art supplies, a soccer ball, or whatever. For more ideas be sure to check out our article "What can I do anyways? 35 screen-free alternatives. Invite accountability. Let loved ones know what you are doing, and ask them to check in on you regularly to see how it is going. Tell them not to let you off the hook! Don't let this opportunity pass you by. Don't we all need help on this front? So don't let yourself off the hook - let's do this together! Register for the July 13-22 nationwide by filling in the form below. Loading…...

Pornography

No satisfaction: James’ Epistle on pornography

If I were to do a sample of readers to ask what they think is the driver behind pornography, my guess is that the most common answer would be just one word: lust. As far as it goes, this is true. But we need to get behind that word, so to speak, to find out what we actually mean by it. A good place to start is by studying the words of James in his Epistle: “From whence come wars and fighting among you? Come they not hence, even of your lusts that war in your members? You lust and have not. You kill, and desire to have, and cannot obtain. You fight and war, yet you have not, because you ask not. You ask, and receive not, because you ask amiss, that you may consume it upon your lusts” (James 4:1-3). I have highlighted out three phrases here, because it seems to me that they are key to understanding lust (and incidentally not just lust, but all sorts of other sins that James alludes to). Now, I don’t always use the King James Version but did here, because it uses the word “lust” where other translations use “passions” or “desires.” “Lust” gives the better flavoring here, because while desires and passions can be both good or bad, lust is what happens when passions and desires go awry, which is what is happening here. Lust, according to James, is at root a desire to have something that we haven’t got and which isn’t rightfully ours, to seek to obtain it but always fall wide of the mark, and consequently to fail to be satisfied. It is a vicious circle in which failure to obtain the satisfaction we desire drives us to seek it again in other places. This, by the way, at least partly explains why pornography, as with drugs, is often a gateway habit, with users going on to seek harder and harder stuff in order to be satisfied. But of course true satisfaction never comes. Sexual desire isn’t bad, until porn twists it Like all other vices, pornography is driven by the twisting of good and noble inclinations in a direction to which they were never meant to go. Pardon the pun, but there are no “original sins.” There is “Original Sin,” but there are no “original sins” in the sense of actions that are entirely thought up by the devil or by man with no reference to God. Rather, all sins are perversions and mockeries of something good that God has given to man. Imagine a father who buys his son a toy drum, only to later find him using the stick to whack his little sister. The stick was meant to be whacked. It was meant to beat something. But it wasn’t meant to beat people. And so, although some of the actions involved are nearly identical to what the stick was meant to be used for, in his mind and in his actions he has twisted it out of all recognition so that it is now actively used for vastly different purposes than the one intended. This is how pornography works. God has given us the good and noble inclination to want to be satisfied. Physiologically, he has given most of us the good and noble need to be sexually satisfied. Why do I call it good and noble? Because it is the consummation of and the most intimate part of the marriage relationship, which the writer to the Hebrews tells us is honorable (Hebrews 13:4). And without it, humanity would die. What pornography does it to take this God-given desire for satisfaction, and the physiological need for fulfillment, and wrench it out of all recognition, fixing the gaze on another object than the one intended. Twisted, it can’t satisfy Yet the irony is that by using the gifts that God has given us for entirely different and incompatible purposes than the ones intended, we find that fulfillment eludes. If the sexual drive was created to lead us towards intimacy, how can pornography, which is entirely non-relational and involves people who have never even met, fulfill? The answer, as hinted at by James, is that it can’t. To the extent that it appears to users to provide some fulfillment, it does so only in the way that scratching an itch does – entirely temporary relief, but with the catch that when the itch returns, it will be even harder to appease than before. Herein lies the pornography trap. We are designed to find fulfillment in a real relationship, but it is partly the fact that pornography is non-relational that makes it so appealing. Relationships are hard. Life is often a monotonous routine. Living with another sinner is often far from easy. But as for the people in the pictures or the video, you don’t need to worry about their sins. You don’t need to live with them and deal with their issues day after day. And so the thrill and excitement of being taken out of normal life into some fantasy world where real satisfaction apparently resides can become intoxicating. No faithfulness is required to obtain satisfaction there. No commitment is required to achieve satisfaction there. No dealing with another person in an ongoing relationship is required to get satisfaction there. And yet the irony is that true, lasting satisfaction is the one thing it can never bring. Lots of reasons to stop, one remedy What then is the remedy? That might seem like an odd question. Surely I’m not about to suggest that there is one remedy for all of this? Actually I am. There are plenty of reasons and inducements for somebody who has a pornography habit to break it, but ultimately there is only one remedy, which I’ll come on to that in a moment. But first here are some reasons and inducements. 1. Come to see how much it dehumanizes, both yourself and others Pornography is by its very nature dehumanizing. Not just for the people who make it, but also for the one viewing it. By its nature it objectifies and commoditizes people, which means that if you are a user of pornography, you are both an objectifier and commoditiser of people. That’s not a good thing to be. 2. Understand that it cannot bring you the satisfaction you desire As mentioned, the use of pornography is rooted in a desire to be satisfied. Yet as any counselor of those with a porn habit will tell you, it has never yet brought anyone true joy or lasting happiness. If you are looking for satisfaction in something which demonstrably cannot bring you what you are looking for, it’s probably a good time to question whether you are seeking satisfaction in the right places. 3. Recognize how ridiculous it looks There’s something to be said for just sometimes stepping out of yourself and your circumstances, so to speak, and looking at what it is you are actually doing. What do you call fantasizing about having some sort of sexual encounter with a person you’ve never met, never will meet, and if you did meet them it would never take place? Isn’t it about as absurd a scenario as it’s possible to conjure up? 4. Stop referring to your habit as an addiction The word addiction has become one of the most abused words of our day, and is often used as an excuse for responsibility avoidance. While I have no doubt that pornography produces certain chemicals in the brain that can take a powerful hold on us, the idea that we become passive victims is not borne out either biblically or practically. Biblically, pornography falls into the category of sexual immorality, and Scripture is plain that this is a sin that we should avoid, can avoid, and must avoid, chemicals notwithstanding. Practically, the fact that many “porn addicts” break their “addiction” shows that, though undoubtedly hard, it can be done. “Porn addiction” is in reality a “porn habit,” and it is there to be broken with willpower and determination. 5. God tells us that those who don’t break with it will be excluded from the Kingdom of God In 1 Cor. 6:9-10, the Apostle Paul says this: “Or do you not know that the unrighteous will not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived: neither the sexually immoral, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor men who practice homosexuality, nor thieves, nor the greedy, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor swindlers will inherit the kingdom of God.” Despite the wonderfully elaborate attempts of many modern Christians to ignore, twist, deny, camouflage or dispute much of this, there it is. Seems pretty clear to me. Make of it what you will. The solution? No half measures Yet finally, as I mentioned above, whilst these are all good reasons and inducements to break the porn habit, they are not the remedy itself. What is that then? Biblically speaking there is only one, which is this: “Flee from sexual immorality” (1 Corinthians 6:18). That’s it. All the reasons and inducements in the world will not help the user of porn to break his or her porn habit unless they are prepared to do the one thing necessary. Flee from it. Don’t walk, run. Don’t dabble, don’t skirt along the edges, don’t case furtive looks. Get away from it. Have nothing to do with it. This article was first published in Reformed Perspective in the July/Aug 2017 issue of the magazine. Rob Slane lives with his wife and six children in Salisbury, England, about 90 minutes drive from Wales. He is the author of A Christian and Unbeliever discuss Life, the Universe, and Everything and contributes to the Samaritan Ministries blog where a version of this article first appeared under the title "The pornification of society, part 2."...

Evangelism

The life and death of our campus evangelism project

When someone says, “Hey, we should do some outreach in our own community,” it's an awkward situation since it's so very hard to tell whether they are just saying the right, polite thing, or whether they really mean it. At a Bible study some years ago the man making this particular statement did indeed mean it. Someone else in the group then went a step further and described a small campus outreach project they’d seen a Christian Reformed evangelist do. It was really simple. You set up an information table on campus on a regular basis, and from the contacts you make you set up a Bible study. People became enthused, and after a couple of meetings a small group of Canadian Reformed University of Alberta students was organized and recruiting their fellow students. The recruiters were trying to get people to man the information table on campus in the university's mall in teams of two, for one hour a piece. The response was amazingly enthusiastic on the part of the students, and so the following term a second information table was set up in the Student Union Building. The Bible study generally did well, attracting one or two people from the general campus population that didn’t know these Canadian Reformed students. A couple of them even came to church for a while. Areopa-what? The project needed a name. In Acts 17 Paul goes to a place of learning in Athens called the Areopagus to explain his God to all who wanted to who wanted to hear, and so the campus outreach effort was dubbed “The Areopagus Project.” While it was a clever name, it was sometimes confusing. When members of other Christian groups on campus asked about our efforts, they didn’t understand why we chose the name “Areopagus.” When we called the Bible supplier for a new case of Bibles to be sent to “The Areopagus Project,” she could hardly pronounce, let alone spell the name. Even so, somehow it stuck. The project was, in a way, kind of amazing. It was organized, and run by students. There was no paid missionary, campus outreach worker, or other ministerial help to backstop our efforts. It was just average students enthused about spreading the gospel. However, we soon realized we needed some help so we took advantage of a rare opportunity. Edmonton was one of the few places in the world where our own Canadian Reformed denomination had a denominational “sister church” in the same city. We brought in Rev. Tom Reid and Dr. Peter Heaton, minister and elder of the local Free Church of Scotland congregation to give us advice and additional manpower. In a very practical way, members from the two denominations cooperated in campus outreach. Without synodical committees or letters shuttling back and forth, we experienced a practical, communion of saints with Christians from a different background. Reformed and Presbyterian Calvinists learned to cooperate despite having different histories, songbooks and traditions. Hard questions Though a lot of neat things happened, it wasn’t all easy. When people stopped by our information table to talk, they asked tough questions. “Does God hate homosexuals?” “My best friend doesn’t believe in God, is she going to hell?” “Since there is no God, why do you waste your time worshipping him?” In a comical way, there was one question that summarized people’s attitudes. Noticing the banner on our table, with a cross and the word “Reformed,” one woman asked, “Should I be offended by that?” Though she was genuinely puzzled, and we couldn’t help but smile, there was something to what she said. The truth of the gospel is offensive to those who don’t believe because it challenges everything they stand for. By sitting at that table and honestly trying to answer people’s difficult questions, we learned that the Bible does offend people, and that what we believe is radically different from what most people believe. Any Christian who ever steps onto a secular university campus soon learns that at least every once in a while his faith will be challenged. He will have to learn to stand up for his Father. In that way, The Areopagus Project was not so unusual. A Christian is always somewhat visible at a university, and this just made us more visible. By being visible, it meant that, in a small way, we did learn to stand up for God. We lost a little bit of the nervousness and the fear that comes from being the only one in a crowd who’s obviously different from the rest. Measuring success There were unexpected results from The Areopagus Project. Members of the three congregations involved got to know each other much, much better. In fact, they got to know each so much better after sitting at the table together, that two of them got married. Another member of our group married a Bible study participant who was an ESL student from Korea, and a member of a sister church out there. Friendships between Canadian Reformed and Free Church members persisted. Most of them started at the Areopagus, but continued into regular, everyday life. These sorts of projects are usually measured in terms of “souls saved.” Honestly, we couldn’t tell you, for certain, of a single soul that was saved as a result of our work. So was it worth it? Were the hours spent hunting down pamphlets, manning information tables, making phone calls to set up schedules, and helping out at Bibles studies productively spent? Without a doubt, yes they were. We put Bibles in the hands of 150 people who might never have seen them otherwise. We challenged hundreds of people to think about their beliefs and presuppositions, and we learned a little bit about defending our own beliefs. We can’t say that we saw the plants grow up, but we certainly sowed the seeds, and God may cause them to grow in the years to come. All good things… The students who started The Areopagus Project graduated and many moved away. And without them, the work didn’t continue. While that’s kind of sad, there are now former students and “graduates” of The Areopagus Project who know that evangelism isn’t the sole duty of missionaries but can and should be carried out by average church members. In a small way they’ve started to see the possibilities. While the death of The Areopagus Project may close one door to bringing the gospel to our community, the fact that so many university students worked in this project will undoubtedly open others. This article was first published in the September 1999 issue under the title “The life and death of the Areopagus Project.”...

Church history, People we should know

There was a man: Ulrich Zwingli

“Many men are like unto sausages: Whatever you stuff them with, that they will bear in them.” – Russian writer Leo Tolstoy (1828-1910). “St...

Humor, Satire

Alice in Blunderland

"I can't believe that!" said Alice. "Can't you?" the Queen said in a pitying tone. "Try again: draw a long breath, and shut your eyes." Alice laughed....

Internet

Do we "like" sin?

Welcome to the Information Age. With apps like Facebook, Instagram, and Twitter, we now have a window into the lives of our friends, family, acquainta...

Contests, Photos 2026

RP's 2026 Summer Photo Contest: Let's get real!

The fascination with AI media creation, be it pictures, videos, and music, has turned sour for many of us. AI images are increasingly felt to be easy,...

Economics

Why family businesses still matter (and why the Church should care)

I grew up with dirt under my fingernails and the sound of machinery in my ears. My grandparents’ farm sat on the arable land; our house was tucked into the wooded corner next door. Spring meant climbing onto my grandfather’s tractor while he disc’d the field, then four boys with a pipe planter each, dropping seed by hand, row after row. We were working the same ground my family had farmed for five generations, learning to fix the pump when it failed and to weed, then weed again. The harvest fed us and brought in a little extra cash, but the real yield was teamwork, patience, diligence, and a sense of responsibility for land that fed our own people. My father’s piano tuning/software business taught the same lessons with different tools. We learned to refurbish old computers, solder battery packs, fold brochures, pack shipments, and we learned to run a lathe and mill to fabricate specialty tools, where precision mattered because it could mean the difference between a salable part or wasted time and material. The wage was modest; the education was not. None of that looked glamorous. It was just what our family did to survive. But those long days in the field and in the shop gave us children real work to do in a family economy where the stakes were tangible. Children need to learn that their contribution isn’t busywork but real help that is needed and valued. If we slacked off, we harvested less; if we cut corners, customers noticed. The consequences showed up in food on the table and the ability to keep the lights on. On the good days, when we’d done especially well, the reward was just as concrete: we might be chosen to pick raspberries – a rare treat for any eight‐year‐old who could mind the thorns. Where I live, those conditions are becoming rare as family businesses are thinning out. And when they do, the church is losing not only jobs and independent income, but one of the most natural training grounds for Deuteronomy‐6‐shaped discipleship. How we got here The family that works together…. This is a picture, back in the day, of the author’s father out logging with his own father and grandfather – three generations. In my case, the farm and the shop were simply how our family made it. We were German‐Irish by blood, but living in the Dutch‐Reformed belt of West Michigan meant our views on work, worship, and family life ended up much the same. From the 1930s to the 1950s, many Reformed immigrants landed in a bind. Industrial jobs were tied to unions whose class‐warfare ethos and loyalty oaths a confessional Christian could not accept in light of Christ’s command not to swear oaths beyond a simple yes or no (Matthew 5:34, 37). So men did what they had to do: they started small construction crews, repair shops, trucking companies, print shops, and farms – not glamorous or easy, but theirs, and answerable only to Christ and His church. Two and three generations later, those necessity businesses have grown into a dense ecosystem of family firms that roof our churches, pour their foundations, insure their buildings, employ their young people, and help fund the Christian schools scattered across our denominations – an ecosystem we have largely taken for granted. But it won’t continue, at least not automatically. Family businesses today are being squeezed from three sides. Economically, many smaller outfits live in the shadow of consolidation. Regulations, insurance costs, and succession planning all get more complex as the founder ages. In some sectors, the only viable “exit strategy” is to sell to a larger competitor or investor – or, in the case of farms, to sell rich soil for development instead of fields. Culturally, we have quietly absorbed the assumption that “success” means leaving the shop behind. We push sons and daughters toward university and white‐collar professions as the default measure of maturity. Staying in dad’s plumbing company or grandpa’s trucking business is too often presented as “settling.” Ecclesiastically, we sometimes thin out the link between fathers, work, and children. A man may run a firm by day, then spend his evenings on church and school responsibilities – good things in themselves – while his kids mostly see him tired and absent. In that environment, the business becomes just a source of income and perhaps a donor to the school, not a shared life. The next generation experiences it as background noise rather than as the place where they belong and are needed. Deuteronomy 6 and the economy of the home Deuteronomy 6 is one of those passages we know so well we stop seeing it. “Hear, O Israel: The Lord our God, the Lord is one. Love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your strength. These commandments that I give you today are to be on your hearts” (Deut. 6:4-6, NIV). So far, so familiar. But notice where the text goes next: “Impress them on your children. Talk about them when you sit at home and when you walk along the road, when you lie down and when you get up” (Deut. 6:7, NIV). Brothers get ‘er done: Aaron (right) and his oldest brother Nate (left) using their new CNC machine to begin building new piano keyboards. The picture is not of a family scattering to separate spheres every morning and reconvening briefly at night. It is of a household whose work, meals, travel, and rest are woven together enough that the commands of God can be explained “on the way” without scheduling a special event. When the Lord warns Israel about forgetting Him, He does so in economic terms: “when you eat and are satisfied, when you build fine houses and settle down... then your heart will become proud and you will forget the Lord your God” (Deut. 8:12–14, NIV). Climbing the corporate ladder might give us nicer things, but it is hard to impress much of anything on our children if we aren’t there to do it. A family business can better allow us to mix vocation, wealth, and worship. Parents are able to disciple their children in the middle of their actual labor – plowing, harvesting, buying, selling, paying wages, and resting on the seventh day. Family businesses, at their best, have been one of the most natural ways for that kind of life to happen in a modern economy. In the farm and shop I grew up in, we didn’t schedule a seminar on honesty; we watched my father explain to a customer why a job would cost more than he’d first estimated. We didn’t need a lecture on Sabbath; we saw machines sit idle on Sunday even if the weather was perfect. In many Reformed communities, the stories are similar. Children stand next to their father on a jobsite and see how he handles an unreasonable client. They hear their parents talk at the supper table about whether to take on a contract that will overload the crew and crowd out worship. That is Deuteronomy 6 discipleship: not just catechism questions at the table, but a whole economy lived under the Lordship of Christ, with children close enough to see it. When our work is hidden from our children – behind factory walls, office towers, and a firewall of “confidentiality” – we don’t just lose an apprenticeship. We lose one of God’s ordinary means for teaching the next generation what it looks like to love Him with heart, soul, and strength in the real world. Inheritance is more than money It’s tempting to think of succession almost entirely in financial terms. A business is an asset. It can be passed on, sold, or wound down. All of that matters. But if we think only in those categories, we miss the deeper covenant issue. The fruit of their labors: The family farm roughly 20 years ago – in front of the stacked pumpkins are Aaron’s grandparents Larry and Janic, with his father. On our five‐generation farm, we never inherited a corporation with a boardroom. What we inherited was a way of being in the world: • You get up when the work needs you, not when you feel like it. • You tell the truth about your work, even if it costs you. • You remember that the land and the tools are the Lord’s first, yours second. Similarly, in my father’s piano business, we didn’t learn a brand so much as a posture: • Take difficult jobs seriously. • Serve people who can’t quite afford you with the same care as those who can. • Build something that will outlast your own two hands. For many in Dutch‐Reformed circles, the inheritance has similar contours. A grandfather who refused a union oath starts a small firm. His children grow it. His grandchildren now run companies that sponsor the local Christian school and employ young people in the congregation. Selling such a firm when there is no successor, the burden is crushing, or health demands a change, is not automatically wrong. But to treat the business only as a commodity, with no conversation about whether God might be calling a son, daughter, or son‐in‐law to shoulder the responsibility, is to miss the covenant dimension. Inheritance, biblically, is not just “what you get when dad dies.” It is the whole package of land, vocation, name, and reputation that one generation entrusts to the next. It is the field where you teach your children to drop seed at the right depth and the shop where you let them solder their first shaky connections. If we have sons and daughters who could, in principle, step into that inheritance – on the shop floor, in the office, or by reshaping the business for a new age – have we spoken to them about it as a calling question, not just a career option? Why the Church should care At this point someone might object: “Isn’t this just nostalgia? Not everyone can or should work in a family business. Many faithful Christians are employees, teachers, nurses, civil servants.” That’s true. Scripture honors all honest work done as unto the Lord. Not every household will own land or a company. Not every child should take over dad’s trade. But we should be honest about what we lose when family enterprises quietly disappear or become indistinguishable from any other professionalized asset. We lose visible catechism in work. Children learn less from lectures on diligence than from watching their parents do good work under pressure. When work is invisible, that formation weakens. We lose natural apprenticeship for the non‐academic. In many of our churches, there are young men and women whose gifts lie in their hands, eyes, and instincts rather than in essays and exams. Family businesses are often the first place those gifts are noticed, valued, and harnessed for the kingdom. We lose a dense network of employers who “get” covenant life. When Christian schools rely on tuition flexibility and bosses who understand a young person might need time off for a cadet camp or a profession‐of‐faith class, they are often leaning on owners shaped by our own churches. If those owners sell to distant corporations, the culture changes, even if the logo stays the same. This is not an argument that every elder must cut back on evenings or every father must start a company. It is a plea to recognize that in God’s providence, our churches and schools stand on the shoulders of men who, rather than yielding to certain pressures, built businesses that now sustain us. If that ecosystem decays, the fallout will be spiritual long before it is merely financial. Where do we go from here? What might it look like to take this seriously without turning it into a new law? A few modest proposals. For business owners: Bring your children in intentionally – not as free labor to exploit, but as sons and daughters to form. Give them real responsibilities at age‐appropriate levels and show them how their contribution matters. Narrate your decisions. When you refuse a dubious deal, honor a warranty that technically expired, or decline work that would compromise Lord’s Day worship, explain why and tie it to the character of the God you serve. Talk about succession as calling. If there is a realistic path for a child or in‐law to carry the business forward, invite them into that discernment early. If there isn’t, be honest about that too, and help them see how the skills and instincts they learned can bless the broader church. For churches and schools: See ordinary vocation as God does. Pray by name, from the pulpit, for tradesmen, small business owners, and farmers as you do for missionaries and office‐bearers, knowing that we all need God’s grace and support in every one of our endeavors. Encourage apprenticeship. When a young person is drifting, consider whether what they need is not another program but a place at someone’s side from 7–3, five days a week. Be realistic about meeting loads. If a father steps back from a board so he can spend one more evening a week in the shop with his teenagers, that can be a wise, praiseworthy choice – but it shouldn’t be beyond gentle questioning. Some men need encouragement to make family a priority; others need encouragement not to neglect the church. Wise elders will help discern which is which, so that neither the household nor the congregation is quietly sacrificed. None of this is a guarantee that every family business will survive, or that every child will embrace the inheritance offered. In a fallen world, some shops will close and some children will walk away. God’s kingdom is bigger than our particular enterprises. But Deuteronomy 6 will not be repealed. Until Christ returns, God will continue to call parents to teach their children when they sit, walk, lie down, and rise. The question before us is not whether we can recreate the 1950s, but whether we will steward the structures He has already given – farms, shops, firms, and offices – as places where that kind of life is even possible. When a family business dies, it is not only a sign that comes down and a building that goes dark. A small ecosystem of covenant life dies with it: a place where children could see faith, work, risk, generosity, and repentance played out in real time. We won’t all reopen shops. We won’t all farm five‐generation land. But we can all fight, in our own callings, to keep work, wealth, and worship from drifting apart – and where God has given our communities family businesses with deep roots and wide branches, we can at least pause before we cut them down and ask whether the next generation might yet learn to climb them. Aaron Reyburn grew up on a multigenerational family farm and now serves as shop foreman in a three generation piano service and rebuilding shop. He also enjoys writing, and owns a small Christian publishing house, Reyburn Press. The picture at the very top is of Aaron and his dad, while receiving training at the Steinway and Sons Piano Factory in New York, to further their education in the industry. Those are piano rims drying after being pressed into shape....

Science - Creation/Evolution

Do leaves die?

Was there death before the fall into sin? It all depends on what you mean by "death" ***** Fall in America and throughout much of the Northern Hemisphere is a beautiful time of year. Bright reds, oranges, and yellows rustle in the trees and then blanket the ground as warm weather gives way to winter cold. Many are awed at God’s handiwork as the leaves float to the ground like Heaven’s confetti. But fall may also make us wonder, “Did Adam and Eve ever see such brilliant colors in the Garden of Eden?” Realizing that these plants wither at the end of the growing season may also raise the question, “Did plants die before the Fall of mankind?”1,2,3,4 Before we can answer this question, we must consider the definition of die. We commonly use the word die to describe when plants, animals, or humans no longer function biologically. However, this is not the definition of the word die or death in the Old Testament. The Hebrew word for die (or death), mût (or mavet), is used only in relation to the death of man or animals with the breath of life, not regarding plants.5 This usage indicates that plants are viewed differently from animals and humans. Plants, animals, and Man – all different What is the difference between plants and animals or man? For the answer we need to look at the phrase nephesh chayyah.2 Nephesh chayyah is used in the Bible to describe: • sea creatures (Genesis 1:20–21) • land animals (Genesis 1:24) • birds (Genesis 1:30) • and man (Genesis 2:7).3 But Nephesh is never used to refer to plants. Man specifically is denoted as nephesh chayyah, a living soul, after God breathed into him the breath of life. This contrasts with God telling the earth on Day 3 to bring forth plants (Genesis 1:11). The science of taxonomy, the study of scientific classification, makes the same distinction between plants and animals. Since God gave only plants (including their fruits and seeds) as food for man and animals, then Adam, Eve, and all animals and birds were originally vegetarian (Genesis 1:29–30). Plants were to be a resource of the earth that God provided for the benefit of nephesh chayyah creatures – both animals and man. Plants did not “die,” as in mût; they were clearly consumed as food. Scripture describes plants as withering (Hebrew yabesh), which means “to dry up.”2 This term is more descriptive of a plant or plant part ceasing to function biologically. A “very good” biological cycle When plants wither or shed leaves, various organisms, including bacteria and fungi, play an active part in recycling plant matter and thus in providing food for man and animals. These decay agents do not appear to be nephesh chayyah and would also have a life cycle as nutrients are reclaimed through this “very good” biological cycle. As the plant withers, it may produce vibrant colors because, as a leaf ceases to function, the chlorophyll degrades, revealing the colors of previously hidden pigments. Since decay involves the breakdown of complex sugars and carbohydrates into simpler nutrients, we see evidence for the Second Law of Thermodynamics before the Fall of mankind.6 But in the pre-Fall world this process would have been a perfect system, which God described as “very good.” A Creation that groans It is conceivable that God withdrew some of His sustaining (restraining) power at the Fall when He said, “Cursed is the ground” (Genesis 3:17), and the augmented Second Law of Thermodynamics resulted in a creation that groans and suffers (Romans 8:22). Although plants are not the same as man or animals, God used them to be food and a support system for recycling nutrients and providing oxygen. They also play a role in mankind’s choosing life or death. In the Garden were two trees – the Tree of Life and the Tree of the Knowledge of Good and Evil. The fruit of the first was allowed for food, the other forbidden. In their rebellion Adam and Eve sinned and ate the forbidden fruit, and death entered the world (Romans 5:12). Furthermore, because of this sin, all of creation, including nephesh chayyah, suffers (Romans 8:19–23). We are born into this death as descendants of Adam, but we find our hope in Christ. “For as in Adam all die, even so in Christ shall all be made alive” (1 Corinthians 15:22). As you look at the “dead” leaves of fall and remember that the nutrients will be reclaimed into new life, recognize that we too can be reclaimed from death through Christ’s death and resurrection. Endnotes 1 See a refutation of unbiblical teaching about plant death at www.AnswersInGenesis.org/docs2005/0221plant_death.asp. 2 Strong’s Concordance, Online Bible, Online Bible Foundation, Ontario, Canada, 2006. 3 Many creation scientists do not include invertebrates as nephesh chayyah creatures. 4 Sarfati, Jonathan, The Second Law of Thermodynamics, Answers to Critics, www.AnswersInGenesis.org/docs/370.asp. 5 See a refutation of unbiblical teaching about plant death at www.AnswersInGenesis.org/docs2005/0221plant_death.asp. 6 Sarfati, Jonathan, The Second Law of Thermodynamics, Answers to Critics, www.AnswersInGenesis.org/docs/370.asp. This article is reprinted with permission from the 2006 October-December issue of Answers Magazine. You can find thousands of other great articles addressing the creation/evolution debate on their website AnswersInGenesis.org. It appeared in the December 2014 edition of Reformed Perspective....

Apologetics 101, Pro-life - Abortion

Apologetics 101: Stay on message

Step 1. Figure out what you’re really trying to say Step 2. Don’t let anyone or anything distract you from saying it ***** Scott Klusendorf is a full-time pro-life apologist, which means he gets screamed at a lot. One of the more common squawks goes something like this: “You aren’t pro-life; you’re just pro-birth! You want to tell women what they can do with their bodies, and don’t give a rip what happens to the kid after it’s born!” How would you respond? God tells us that sometimes silence is the best response. He warns us that trying to be heard over a red-faced, spittle-spewing, murder-marketer’s screams will only make us look just as foolish (Prov. 26:4). But what about when the accuser really wants a response? What about when there is a listening audience gathered round? How should we answer then? We could point to the pro-lifers we know who donate to, or volunteer at, pregnancy centers. We could list everyone we know who’ve adopted or fostered children. And for good measure we might mention the way our churches care for the elderly and the sick, and the unemployed, and just generally show love for our born neighbors too. If we’re feeling feisty, we might even go on the offensive and ask, “How much time and money do you donate to care for others?” knowing that the typical critic is doing nothing or next to it. That’s an answer that might shut them up. But it’s not the answer Scott Klusendorf gives. He goes a different direction because he understands the abortion debate is largely one of truth versus, not simply lies, but evasion. The other side doesn’t want to debate whether the unborn are precious human beings like you and I; instead they sidetrack the discussion to any other topic. They’ll talk about how poor some mothers are, and how unwanted some babies are. They’ll attack men for daring to speak on the issue. In the latest pro-abortion stunt, groups of women will parade around in red dresses patterned after victims’ attire in a dystopian novel about political leaders who get away with ritual rape. The accusation that loving unborn babies is akin to rape is as bizarre as it is repugnant. But as much as insults hurt, they don’t do the same damage as suction machines. That’s why our focus has to be on the unborn, and sharing where their worth comes from. As much as abortion advocates want to sidetrack the issue, we can’t let them divert us from highlighting how our country’s smallest citizens are being murdered. How do we stay on message? By absorbing the insult. If they want to argue that pro-lifers don’t give a rip about children once they are born, we can grant their point and play a game of “what if…” Klusendorf’s response to attacks goes something like this: “What if I was the cold-hearted jerk you’re making me out to be? What if I was the worst human being in the world? How does me being a jerk have any impact on the humanity of the unborn?” When Kristan Hawkins, president of the Students for Life of America, was asked why pro-lifers weren’t offering solutions for the foster-care crisis she played the “what if” game too. What if the accusation was true? What if pro-lifers were only concerned with the unborn? She asked her accuser: “Are you upset that the American Diabetes Association doesn’t fight cancer?” She continued: “There is no other act of violence that kills more people every single day in America and across the world, than abortion. There’s nothing wrong with me fighting, and spending 100% of my time doing it. Just like there’s nothing wrong with the American Diabetes Association putting 100% of their money, their research and time behind curing Juvenile Diabetes…. The reality is, you don’t really care what I do. That I support children in third world countries. Or that I might be volunteering in a soup kitchen.... It’s just an argument to stop the actual discussion from happening, which is that abortion is a moral wrong and it should be stopped.” There’s an old joke about a pastor who, in his sermon’s margins, wrote: ”Point weak here; thump pulpit harder.” The world has no strong points, so they have to pound the podium till they bleed, shrieking their insults to try to drown out the Truth. They don’t want to have the debate. We can’t let them distract us from it. As the Westminster Shorter Catechism explains, we’re on Earth to glorify God and enjoy Him forever. When we make His glory our first concern, we won’t sweat it when someone attacks our name – that won’t stop us from talking about God’s Truth. When we’re enjoying His love we won’t worry about having the world’s approval – that can’t stop us from defending unborn children made in His image. And when we recognize the world only hates us because they hated Him first (John 15:18) we will rejoice in the good company we are keeping. This article was first published in the May/June 2019 issue of the magazine....

Being the Church

Titus 2 young men are not boys

"Likewise, urge the younger men to be sober-minded." – Titus 2:6 ***** In Titus 2 Paul gives instructions to older women, younger women, older men and younger men, and gives instruction concerning the care of children. Every age group is covered... except for one. Why doesn't Paul say anything about adolescents? Adolescent males typically have the strength of adult men, and in many ways the freedoms and opportunities of adults too. And at the same time these adolescents have nowhere near the responsibilities of an adult; we say of them, they're "boys who shave." We’ve accepted that the teenage years are when boys do dumb things, and we're quick to forgive them because, well, they’re just kids so what can we really expect? However Scripture speaks of just two main age brackets: children and adults. This third grouping, adolescents, is simply not Scriptural. And that, of course, is why Paul makes no mention of them in Titus 2. In God’s eyes teenagers are responsible for their conduct (as is a tween!), and needs to repent of sin as much as any 50-year-old. The Bible simply does not know of a "boy who shaves." In the Bible, if you are no longer a child you are a man, albeit a "young man." So when, in Titus 2:6, Paul talks of the need for younger men to be self-controlled, he has in mind any male who is not a child and not yet an “older man.” So let's take a closer look at what Paul has to say in Titus 2 to the younger men of the church in Crete, and take from it what we can for the instruction of our own younger men. While our focus is on the younger men, we should note that the Lord has preserved this passage of Scripture for the benefit of more than just the “younger men.” In this same chapter older men (Titus 2:2) are to give leadership, and part of the leadership they provide is surely that they ensure that younger men are what God wants them to be. Older women (Titus 2:3) are to teach the younger women to love their husbands (Titus 2:4,5) – and those husbands are invariably included in the group described as “younger men.” Both the older women and the younger women, then, have a vested interest in what the Lord expects of the younger men. The whole congregation, then, can and must learn from God’s instruction to the younger men. Source It is important to remember that Paul’s instruction to Titus in this chapter, in relation to what Titus must teach the “younger men,” did not come out of the blue. As in all his teaching, Paul is building on God’s earlier revelation – what he says here must be understood in the context of the Old Testament, and of the example of the perfect young man Jesus Christ. So let's consider first the instruction from Genesis, then the instruction from Jesus Christ. Paradise Adam was surely no child when God created him, and surely no old man either. In the eye of our minds we see Adam in Paradise as a “younger man” of some 20 to 30 years old, in the prime of strength and ability. Notice what responsibilities God expected him to satisfy. In Genesis 1:26-2:18 we learn he was to: Image God – Just as the almighty Creator was loving and just and holy and kind and generous, so Adam was to be loving and just and holy and kind and generous. Creatures, angels, even God Himself should be able to see in the young man Adam something of what God was like. Rule over all creation – This young man received a kingly function, with all creatures under his dominion. Please note that God did not let Adam hang around for many years until he was older and/or wizened through a lifetime of experience before all creation was placed under his feet. Right away God put him in the Garden with the mandate to “work” it and “keep” it (Genesis 2:15). The term “keep” describes the function of protecting the Garden from enemies – and God knew full well that Satan would attack the Garden through his insidious temptation. Yet God entrusted the Garden to the care of this young man! Be fruitful – The command to be fruitful does not refer simply to making babies, but includes the responsibility of raising the children so that the next generation has learned how to image God and be effective rulers of God’s world too. Be a leader – God said too that it was not good for the man to be alone, and so God created a woman to be “helper” to the man (Genesis 2:18). The man in turn was to accept the helper God gave him, and give her leadership and protection. God’s instructions to Adam in Genesis 1, then, point up that Adam was expected to embrace responsibility. Young men of subsequent generations were, obviously, to do the same. The Biblical picture of manhood is not characterized by loafing or playing games, let alone letting things happen. Rather, a Biblically faithful man welcomes responsibility and takes initiative. This is what older men are to impress on the younger, and what older women are to teach younger women to encourage in their husbands. Fall The fall into sin made carrying out this glorious responsibility immeasurably difficult. Work became a slog and a burden and weeds appeared not only in gardens and fields (Genesis 3:18-19), but also in one’s character and in inter-personal relations. Tensions characterized marriage (Genesis 3:16b), and children would reduce a man to tears (Genesis 4). We can understand why the Preacher describes all as vanity, a burden, a groan (Ecclesiastes 1:2). “What has a man from all his toil and striving of heart with which he toils beneath the sun?” (Ecclesiastes 2:22). After the fall the creature that had been fashioned to image God, rule over God’s world, and raise more image-bearers, now bumps into so much frustration. How humbling for a creature endowed with such glorious responsibility! Understood Despite the destructive effects of the fall into sin, several figures of the Old Testament demonstrate that they fully understood God’s intent for young men. Consider the examples of Joseph, David and Daniel: Joseph – He was 17 years old when his father sent him to check up on how his brothers were faring as they tended the family flocks (Genesis 37:2). He was also, then, 17 years old when he was sold as a slave to Egypt. As a young man he ended up in Potiphar’s house and readily embraced the responsibility his master entrusted to him when he “put him in charge of all that he had” (Genesis 39:4). Not too many years later, perhaps in his early 20s, Joseph was imprisoned “where the king’s prisoners were confined" (39:20), yet even there he took the initiative to embrace whatever responsibility rolled his way. So “the keeper of the prison put Joseph in charge of all the prisoners” (39:22). He took control of his feelings so that he did not waste his energy with feelings of anger at his brothers or pity for himself. When his family came to Egypt 20 years after he was sold, he was still a relatively “young man” – but now ruler over the entire country. David – Already as a teenager he was entrusted with his father’s sheep. As a teenager he fought off a lion and a bear, and was called to play the lyre to King Saul. As a youth he volunteered to fight Goliath (1 Samuel 17:42). In his 20s he led Israel out to battle as Saul’s commander, then fled from Saul and, though persecuted, refused to kill him. Young though he was, he understood what manhood was about; he embraced responsibility and so made hard decisions. By the time he was 30, he was king over God’s people Israel. Daniel – He was a young man, likely yet a teenager, when he was taken as prisoner to Babylon. Young though he was, he refused to eat the food the palace prescribed (Daniel 1:8ff). Again, though young he made use of the opportunities he received to learn what he could learn. So, when God elevated him as a very man to a position of power and leadership in a foreign land, he was ready for the challenge. These three young men acted in line with God’s expectation as revealed in Paradise. They understood that youth was not a time for loafing, nor a time to live off others; being young men meant that they were to embrace responsibility to image God and rule over what was entrusted to them – especially themselves. Jesus The Biblical example of what a “young man” is to look like is none other than Jesus of Nazareth. He was “like his brothers in every respect,” and that includes the reluctance some have to embrace responsibility. But the Scripture says of this young man that though he was tempted in every respect as we are, He never gave Himself to sin (Hebrews 4:15). That’s to say that in his teenage years, and in his 20s too, He made it His business to image God in all He did, and made it His business too to rule over whatever God entrusted to His care – including first of all Himself, be that in guarding His mouth or restraining his sexual urges. At 30 years of age – truly a young man still! – He took up His public ministry in Israel, preaching the good news of the kingdom of God, healing the sick and raising the dead. In the process He denied Himself for the benefit of those the Father entrusted to Him, even embracing the cursed cross and the heavy judgment of God for the benefit of the undeserving. Herein He demonstrated precisely what God intended for all men back in Paradise already; they are to embrace responsibility, and so take initiative to further the Lord’s kingdom. Paul drew out for the Ephesians what this means for men. Husbands, love your wives, as Christ loved the church and gave Himself up for her, that he might sanctify her…. In the same way husbands should love their wives as their own bodies… (5:25ff). Jesus’ embrace of the responsibility that belongs to being a man means that, “the grace of God has appeared, bringing salvation for all people” (Titus 2:11). Jesus is the (young) man, whose example all men are to follow. Titus 2:6 - "sober-minded" Let's return now, to Paul's instructions for young men in Titus 2. Paul's objective is to build up church life in Crete. He turns to God’s Old Testament instruction and to Jesus’ example to consider what gifts the Lord has given to His church and what this example needs to look like in practice. It is this material he unpacks as he tells Titus to “urge the younger men to be sober-minded.” The term Paul uses to describe what young men are to be is difficult to translate. The NIV and the ESV render it with the term "self-controlled," the NKJV has "sober-minded," the NASB has "sensible." The same term appears in Mark 5:15 in relation to the demoniac man – after the pigs, driven by the demons that used to possess the man, were drowned in the sea, the locals found the man “in his right mind.” In Romans 12:3 Paul instructs his readers “not to think of himself more highly than he ought to think, but to think with sober judgment.” The point is this. God created us to “rule over” all creatures, including ourselves. With the fall into sin we became slaves to sin so that Satan ruled over us. However, Christ – perfect man that He was – conquered sin and Satan and so brought salvation for all people (Titus 2:11). Sin, then, is no longer our master, no more than the exorcised demons were now master of the demoniac of Mark 5. Instead, Christ has poured out His Spirit so that we can again be the men God wants us to be. Men are meant to embrace responsibility. The victory of Christ has given renewed opportunity to embrace responsibility. Paul would have Titus urge younger men to take seriously the victory of Jesus Christ as they make decisions day by day about what to do. They are, in other words, to think of themselves with the "sober judgment" that comes with believing the gospel of Calvary: since you are no longer slaves to sin – that’s real! – but once again God’s possession through Jesus Christ – that’s reality, too! – you don’t have to give in to sin and temptation; you can resist the evil one. Factoring that victory into one’s decision-making process is being sober-minded, and yes, it leads to a life of self-control. Titus 2:12 Titus 2:12, logically follows what we read in verse 6, and works out what this level-headedness looks like in the midst of life’s temptations. We read there than Christ’s victory, train us to renounce ungodliness and worldly passions, and to live self-controlled, upright, and godly lives in the present age. And yes, the word translated as "self-controlled" in verse 12 is the same critical word as the apostle used in verse 6 about the younger men needing to be “self-controlled,” “sober-minded,” level-headed, realistic. Christ has broken Satan’s back; let younger men factor that reality into their decisions. That’s taking responsibility properly. I need to add: “the present age” is not a reference to the younger years but is instead referring to the time before Christ’s return in glory (see vs. 13). His victory on the cross guarantees the final great act of history, the day when He comes to judge the living and the dead. That reality again prompts the “young man” to a particular level-headedness as he factors this return into the decisions he makes – whether driving his car, spending his money, raising his family, deciding on his recreation, etc., etc. Crete This sort of lifestyle represented a huge challenge for the younger men Paul was writing to on the island of Crete. The culture of the island is caught in that proverb Paul earlier quoted: “Cretans are always liars, evil beasts, lazy gluttons” (Titus 1:12). It’s a mindset that encourages the more energetic to do whatever they feel like doing. With the Christian faith new to the island, the “younger men” had very few role models to look up to. That’s why Paul told Titus that he needed to be a good example for these young men. We read in verse 7: “show yourself in all respects to be a model of good work, and in your teaching show integrity, dignity, and sound speech that cannot be condemned.” Titus was the apostle’s “true child in a common faith” (Titus 1:4), which is to say that Titus learned how to do the Christian life, and teach it too, from the apostle himself. As preacher on the island, and a young man at that, Titus needed to be aware that other young Christian men on Crete would be watching how Titus himself lived out the gospel of Christ’s victory in his daily responsibilities. His own way of factoring in Christ’s triumph in his daily decisions needed to demonstrate that he said "No" to ungodliness and worldly passions, and instead gave himself to good works. Moreover, his teaching couldn’t have the empty ring of liars’ big talk (1:10ff), but needed to exude integrity, dignity and soundness. Here is a reality true for every preacher/teacher of all times, indeed true of all office bearers and leaders. Anyone entrusted with the task of preaching and teaching the gospel of Christ’s victory needs be aware of his role as a model of Christian living. Brothers, we are created and recreated to image God, and so to rule over whatever God has entrusted to our care in the same way as the Lord does it. Christ Jesus emptied Himself for the sake of His bride, the church. As teachers and preachers of this good news, we must – if we wish the gospel to be credible – obviously factor in the reality of Christ’s victory into all our conduct and our words. Vital role Paul, then, sees a vital role for younger men in building up church life, be it on Crete or be it in Canada. Younger men are to take seriously whatever responsibility God gives them (be it for a vehicle, a house, a wife, children, themselves, work, etc) and consistently factor in the victory of Jesus Christ on the cross as they make decisions pertaining to the responsibilities God has given. Then there’s no place for ungodliness, and plenty of place for godly lives. Such a lifestyle advertises the church wonderfully. Conclusion What do we see of today’s younger men in the churches? From teens to 50s, are these men making responsible decisions, and so contributing positively to church life? There is, I’m convinced, so very much for which to be thankful on this point. We see young men making profession of faith and presenting their children for baptism. We see younger men devoted to their wives and families, and stretching themselves for service in God’s kingdom. It’s reason for gratitude. We also see younger men who do not stretch themselves all that far at all. We see some younger brothers content with a basic job, content to come home from work and chill in front of TV or on the Internet, and we see some, too, who pour themselves into sport. There is nothing wrong with sport, nor with relaxing in front of the TV, or even doing simply a "hands on" job. But there is a problem if one spends no time or energy to prepare one's self for increased responsibility tomorrow. It’s for responsibility that God created men, so men must read, study, and prepare for leadership roles tomorrow. Manhood is not to be measured by how much hair you can grow, or how big a truck you can drive, or how much beer you can drink, or how good you are on your skates, or how big a fish you can catch. Without knocking any of these things, none of them catch what God created men to do. What God wants of men is that we embrace responsibility, to the point that we work with Christ’s victory in every decision we make, 24/7. What does that look like? It follows the example of Jesus Christ in His self-emptying for His bride. He is the younger man who took responsibility for those God entrusted to His care, and so he laid down His life for His own. That’s the sensible, sober-minded, levelheaded example the Lord gives us. This article first appeared in the March 2013 issue....

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 28 29 30 31 32

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.

Search thousands of RP articles

Helping you think, speak, and act in Christ.

Get Articles Delivered!

Helping you think, speak, and act in Christ. delivered direct to your Inbox!

Kids

Magazine

Articles

Book Reviews

Movie Reviews

Daily devotional

Contests

More of Reformed Perspective!

Newsletter

Real Talk

Manna

About Us

Advertise

Contact Us

Shop our merch!

Magazine

Book Reviews

Movie Reviews

Past Articles

Kids

All Contests

Bucket List Book Club

Screen Fast

Parenting

Give your kids a super power

Reading to your kids will give them something better than the ability to leap tall buildings

A soccer lesson

In love with reading

How does this help?

Wait, there's more

12 tips

Being the Church

Love thy neighbor. Love thy neighborhood encampment…?

Interview with an artist

Laura Kroesbergen’s hyperrealistic animals

Technology

Less screens = more life

Internet

Is AI helping you, or dumbing you down? Yes.

In a Nutshell

Tidbits – June 2026

Science - Creation/Evolution

The day is not an age

Interview with an artist

Trees, rocks, water, sky, wildlife - Sheila Van Delft paints refreshment for the soul

Music

When the Church stops singing

Science - Creation/Evolution

Perfect planet

In a Nutshell

Tidbits – May 2026

People we should know

J. Gresham Machen (1881-1937)

People we should know

That cloud of witnesses....

Homosexuality, News

Opposing rainbow crosswalk results in human rights trial

Contests

RP’s "Log out and look up" screen-fast challenge is July 13-22

Pornography

No satisfaction: James’ Epistle on pornography

Evangelism

The life and death of our campus evangelism project

Church history, People we should know

There was a man: Ulrich Zwingli

Humor, Satire

Alice in Blunderland

Internet

Do we "like" sin?

Contests, Photos 2026

RP's 2026 Summer Photo Contest: Let's get real!

Economics

Why family businesses still matter (and why the Church should care)

Science - Creation/Evolution