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

Articles, news, and reviews that celebrate God's truth.

Get Articles Delivered!

Articles, news, and reviews that celebrate God's truth. delivered direct to your Inbox!



News

Saturday Selections – Mar. 23, 2024

How to undermine election trust

The title of this video – "how to steal an election" – isn't as much the issue here as the fact that results become more disputable, and more controversial, when in-person voting is replaced with mail-in balloting. This is an American case, but applicable to Canada and elsewhere.

Why chromosomal differences do not create additional sexes

The Christian apologetic group Stand to Reason has made this short and to the point, but with plenty of links to go explore deeper.

Sadly, Jordan Peterson still isn't Christian

Aaron Renn argues that Peterson is basically New Age.

Only God as Trinity can offer Atonement

Richard Dawkins, Christopher Hitchens, and other prominent atheists have equated Good Friday as nothing more than a case of "cosmic child abuse" – a vengeful Father venting His wrath on His innocent Child. That's a charge shared by Jehovah's Witnesses and Mormons (so lock this in for the next time you hear a knock at your door) and others who deny that God is indeed Three in One, because then the Cross is indeed a god punishing some "entirely other" being. But, as we know, at the Cross it is a just God also showing mercy by voluntarily taking on our punishment.

In the linked article, Jeremy Treat explores this truth from two other analogous angles.

Yes, teens, virginity is good for you

Virginity doesn't just provide freedom from sexually transmitted diseases, but it also lowers incidences of all sorts of other risky behaviors, such as smoking and drug use.

Are biblical counselors unbiblical? (20 minute read)

Secular psychologists who ignore the spiritual world can, at best, treat only half the person: their material body. Biblical counselors can turn to the wisdom God has written in His Word to treat the soul too.

But how much should biblical counselors rely on, and turn to, what God has also revealed in His Second Book, the "book" of Creation? That's where an important debate is being had.

Astonishing fly can breathe underwater even after losing its underwater lungs (6 min)

This fly as a larvae has organs that allow it to breathe underwater, but it loses those in its adult stage. But it still lives underwater using a completely different system to get its needed oxygen. That all happened by chance? You have to be willfully blind to miss God's creative genius here.

In a Nutshell

Tidbits – March 2024

The world’s only pro-life comedian? Nicholas De Santo is an Iranian-Italian who performs what he calls the “only pro-life stand-up act” which, he notes, also means it is “the world's funniest pro-life stand-up act.” Here’s a good bit from a set he did at London’s Backyard Comedy Club to a very receptive audience. “So, in the US the Supreme Court overturned Roe v. Wade and that was a serious blow to casual dating and casual sex, but it was a major victory for babies who want to live so, that's half full. And it was a major victory for Catholic biology. Do you guys know Catholic biology? I was born in Italy; I went to Catholic school. According to Progressive biology, they say “my body, my choice” because according to Progressive biology a woman, at some points in her life, she has a second beating heart, an extra pair of kidneys, and four extra limbs. But according to Catholic biology, a woman throughout her life has only one brain, one heart, and so forth so. In other words, if you are a woman and you ever find a second beating heart in your body, it's not your body! And if you're a man and you ever find a second beating heart in your body, it's not your body…and also you are not a man.” On the point of being open-minded “My friend said that he opened his intellect as the sun opens the fans of a palm tree, opening for opening’s sake, opening infinitely for ever. But I said that I opened my intellect as I opened my mouth, in order to shut in again on something solid.” – G.K. Chesterton English: that weird and wonderful language I’ve wondered if dad jokes might be a particularly or at least especially English thing. As a mishmash of so many other languages, there’s so much potential for wordplay. Here are just a few puns and ponderables: Before was was was, was was is. The word queue is just a Q followed by four silent letters Jail and prison mean the same thing, yet jailer and prisoner are opposites You have fingertips, not toetips, and yet you can tiptoe, not tipfinger How can wise man and wise guy be antonyms? We have players in a recital, and reciters in a play. Cough, rough, dough, bough, and through should rhyme but don’t. While you can drink a drink you can’t eat an eat or food a food. Your nose can run and your feet can smell! Why English is so hard They say Albert Einstein didn’t speak in full sentences until he was five. Maybe he just didn’t have anything to say, or perhaps learning English is hard enough to challenge even a genius. Just consider one small part of the process that, at first glance, might seem easy: creating plurals. Dog becomes dogs; cat becomes cats – it’s as easy as adding an S, right? Not so fast! Below is a part of a poem, credited only to Anonymous, that tackles the problem of plurals. This is just one verse, but there are many more plural problems where this came from! If the plural of man is always called men, Why shouldn’t the plural of pan be called pen? If I speak of my foot and show you my feet, And I give you a boot, would a pair be called beet? If one is a tooth and a whole set are teeth, Why shouldn’t the plural of booth be called beeth? Why English is hard - part II A native English speaker knows never to speak of a “red massive bull.” Instead, he’d describe it as a “massive red bull” …but he wouldn’t know why. That’s because there is a rather precise ordering of adjectives that we all mostly know, even though we don’t know that we know. While it isn’t absolutely fixed, the order of adjectives most English folk agree to goes roughly like this: quantity, opinion, size, age, shape, color, origin, material. So, for example, we might ask for three Grade A eggs (quantity, opinion) but not Grade A three eggs. Or we’d talk about one hundred, enormous, old, round Englishmen (quantity, size, age, shape, origin) but not English, round, old, enormous, one hundred men. This knowledge is a gift to you as a native speaker, but it’s quite the challenge for any latecomer to our country. So, the next time you hear your Dutch grandmother, or maybe some newer immigrant, talk a little peculiarly, you’ll know why (and you’ll be sure to cut them some slack). How English is going to become easy While our native tongue does sometimes tie us up, the next generation can look forward to a much-simplified version. I had my own ideas for streamlining things that involved doing away with the letter C completely, substituting K where it was a hard sound and substituting S everywhere else. Kan’t we all agree that’d be niser? I took the idea to Merriam Webster (the dictionary lady) and she asked what I was going to do with the C in CH and I kouldn’t kome up with mukh of an answer for her. Anyways, Merriam did share with me her own simplification plans, giving me a peek at an upcoming edition of her dictionary. She’s managed to do what I could not – they’ve streamlined everything! She wasn’t sure exactly when this edition was coming out, but she knew it would be very soon. Here are a few entries from the first page: a noun Anything that identifies as the letter A Aaron noun Anything that identifies as Aaron ABBA noun Anything that identifies as ABBA asinine adjective Anything that identifies as being asinine Why today’s temperature? Those that hold to a millions-of-years-old earth also hold that the earth has been both vastly warmer and enormously cooler during that time. So why then do the global warming proponents among them think that the temperature we have now is the one we must maintain? This is an urgent question, as it is on the basis of today’s temperature being the right one that carbon taxes are being implemented, fossil fuels are being made more expensive, and consequently energy, and all that requires energy to produce (i.e., homes, food, heating, clothing, and, well, everything) more expensive as well. That’s even making things tough in Canada, but it’s that much worse for those around the world who have much less. Equal pay laws hurt those they are supposed to help There's both a theological and practical objection to "equal pay for equal work" laws, no matter how well-intentioned they might be. The practical objection is laid out by Milton Friedman in the quote below: "...the actual effect of requiring equal pay for equal work will be to harm women. If women's skills are higher than men's in a particular job and are recognized to be higher, the law does no good, because then they will be able to compete away and can get the same income. If their skills are less, for whatever reason...and you say the only way you are able to hire them is by paying the same wage, then you're denying them the only weapon they have to fight with. If the unwillingness of the men to hire them is because the men are sexist pigs... nonetheless you want to make it costly to them to exercise their prejudice. If you say to them you have to pay the same wage no matter whether you hire women or men then here's Mr. Sexist Pig: it doesn't cost him anything to hire men instead of women. However, if the women are free to compete and to say 'Well now, look, I'll offer my work for less,' then he can only hire men if he bears a cost. If the women are really good as a man, then he's paying a price for discrimination. And what you are doing, not intentionally but by misunderstanding, when you try to get equal pay for equal work laws is reducing to zero the cost imposed on people who are discriminating for irrelevant reasons. And I would like to see a cost imposed!" The theological objection is covered in the "Parable of the Workers in the Vineyard" (Matt. 20:1-16). While the parable is about grace, not economics, what it illustrates is true: “Don’t I have the right to do what I want with my own money? Or are you envious because I am generous?” If an employer wanted to pay the last worker more than the rest, but pays others what he agreed to, what business is the last worker’s wages to us? Or the first? Mo Willems’ sage advice Mo Willems, the author of the delightful Elephant and Piggie children’s book series, has some good advice for adults too. Here’s a trio: You only have one chance to make a twenty-third impression. Better to say, “I love you more than ever” than “I used to love you less.” Better to say, “You are one in a million” than “There are 7,960 others just like you out there.” Some truths are simply written on our hearts In a 1998 debate with atheist Peter Atkins in which Atkins touted science as the ultimate arbitrator of truth, William Lane Craig highlighted how there are fundamental truths that science can’t prove. Craig is a theistic evolutionist, but does well here. “I think that there are a good number of things that cannot be scientifically proven, but that we’re all rational to accept. Let me list five. “Logical and mathematical truths cannot be proven by science. Science presupposes logic and math so that to try to prove them by science would be arguing in a circle. “Metaphysical truths like, there are other minds than my own, or that the external world is real, or that the past was not created five minutes ago with the appearance of age are rational beliefs that cannot be scientifically proven. “Ethical beliefs about statements of value are not accessible by the scientific method. You can’t show by science that the Nazi scientists in the camps did anything evil as opposed to the scientists in Western democracies. “Aesthetic judgments cannot be accessed by the scientific method because the beautiful, like the good, cannot be scientifically proven. “And, most remarkably, would be science itself. Science cannot be justified by the scientific method, since it is permeated with unprovable assumptions.” Just one issue? “If you're pro-life, you realize abortion is murder. How can you say ‘it's one of many issues’ and vote for a pro-choice candidate? What policy of theirs could be so good that it's worth allowing millions of babies to be killed?” – Seamus Coughlin...

News

Saturday Selections – Mar. 9, 2024

Click on the titles below to go to the linked articles... College isn't for everyone (3 min) Christians listening to this Mike Rowe clip might hear echoes of Paul's message in 1 Cor. 12:12-31, about how the Body has many members. We're not all the same, so we shouldn't presume that university is for everyone. This is a clip from Rowe's free 20-minute mini-documentary called The Case for Trade School. Good news: the Earth is getting greener Even NASA is sharing this, though with a negative spin (they can't get away from their cataclysmic take). Millions of Americans are banned from pumping their own gas Under the pretense of "safety" millions of Americans are prohibited from pumping their own gas. But is it really so unsafe? No, as all of us who manage to pump our own gas without blowing ourselves up can attest. So then what's the real reason for the ban? It's a case of private interests using the levers of state power to fight off their competition. And that's far from unusual. When is a question better than an answer? John Stonestreet – riffing off of Christian apologist Greg Koukl – offers 6 simple, great questions that'll help you stand up for the truth. "Time to admit genes aren't the blueprints for life" Have you heard that your cellular DNA is the instruction sheet or blueprint for your cell and body? Well, now it seems that was a gross oversimplification. This article is complex too, but here's the key: scientists keep discovering the life is more and more complex than they'd previously thought. And evolution only makes sense if we are simple enough to have come about without design or direction. Equal pay for equal work laws hurt (4 min) Milton Friedman offers up a practical objection to "equal pay for equal work" laws, no matter how well-intentioned they might be. ...

News

Lawyer learns she should double-check ChatGPT’s work

Last month, a BC lawyer was caught submitting an AI-generated legal application to a family court. Chong Ke was representing a father asking that his children travel to China so he could have parenting time with them there. Ke used ChatGPT, a text-based generative Artificial Intelligence (AI), to write the application, which cited two fake cases. ChatGPT does not provide links to its sources which makes its fabricated content hard to spot. To the AI’s “success,” the case was won, finding it was in the best interest of the client's children to visit their father. Although the fake cases were put into the application, they were never presented in the hearing, so the courts kept the initial ruling. Shortly after the ruling, the lawyers for the mother tried to track down the cases referenced, even asking for copies from the opposition. After not receiving any copies the team hired a researcher to find the cases. This matter was then taken to court where Ke apologized for her actions. "I acknowledge that I should have been aware of the dangers of relying on Al-generated resources, and been more diligent and careful in preparing the materials for this application. I wish to apologize again to the court and to opposing counsel for my error.” The process of preparing legal documents can be arduous, and although AI technology might be a tool to help with this, we should not be naive about its capabilities. Ke was ordered to pay the costs associated with the time and resources the other counsel used to discover the fake cases. In attempts to make court applications easier, the lawyer ended up doing the opposite, deceiving others in a scramble to seek truth in the application. In the court case against Ke, the judge reminds us that AI is not a replacement for humankind. “As this case has unfortunately made clear, generative AI is still no substitute for the professional expertise that the justice system requires of lawyers."...

Internet, RPTV

Talking to teens: How does social media fit into a Christian worldview?

TRANSCRIPT Welcome to Reformed Perspective; I'm Alexandra Ellison. Did you know that in Canada almost everyone is on social media? About 89% of the population uses it, making Canada one of the most online countries in the world. Given the prominence of social media in our society it's crucial to understand how it's being utilized. For Christian parents it's especially important to be aware of their kids' online activities. In today's video, I visited a high school to talk with Christian teenagers about their experiences with social media. Q. 1 Are you on social media? If so, what apps do you use? Student 1: "Not too much but I am on YouTube and Messenger Kids." Student 2: "Not really. A little bit. I have Google Chat so I can text my friends; they live like an hour away from me so I don't get to see them too often, so I text them sometimes and sometimes do a video call with them." Student 3: "Yes, I am. I use Tik Tok quite a bit, as well as Instagram." Student 4: "Yes I'm on social media. Mostly Instagram and Snapchat." Q. 2 What are the benefits of social media? Student 2: "I get to talk to my friends. If I didn't have it I wouldn't be able to communicate with them too much." Student 1: "I get to catch up with my friends because I don't live close to them and I get to just be entertained and, um, find out a little bit about like movies that are coming out that I might like or just, um, stay current." Student 3: "I mean, it's entertaining. I also have communication with some of my friends as well via social media, so it's a good way to stay in contact with them. Also, with Instagram, I'm able to look at my family's posts to see what they're up to, especially if I'm not able to see them. I have a cousin overseas so I'm able to see what she's up to overseas, via her posts on Instagram." Student 4: "Most of the benefits are communications; I've been able to communicate with one of my Bible studies that happens on social media, and also a lot of my friends: church friends, school friends." Q.3 What are some of the negatives? Student 2: "If you are with a person, sometimes they're too busy with their phone to actually be with the person. When you're with the person they're too busy on their phone, not with you." Student 1: "There are a lot of downs to all of these different websites, so you need to be careful on them." Student 3: "I know people think that they can handle it, so it lessens my time doing other more productive things. As well, it does have things on there that one should not look at." Student 4: "The negatives of social media are distractions. Sometimes it can just be really distracting, like you want to go do your work and then you just get distracted looking at something on Instagram and then you get down a rabbit hole, down there for an hour." Q. 4 What should parents be aware of? Student 2: "Make sure that what they're watching is good content not bad." Student 4: "They should be aware of who their kids are following 'cause there's a lot of people who maybe seem like they're good people but then they give false information or just a lot of things that can be not honoring God on social media. Sometimes they post something inappropriate that you don't want to see in your feed, or randomly comes up. You especially don't be following those type of things." Q.5 How does your Christian faith guide you in using social media? Student 3: "My faith comes into play for what I'm looking at so that I don't look at the negative things. As well, it keeps me honest with what I'm looking at, and how I use my time on social media, and what I use it for spreading God's Word, or at least not getting into different areas of social media where they would be putting God down or just not following Him." Student 4: "Well, when I use social media my faith can come into play through communications with friends. Especially since I'm at a Christian school, so I can talk with Christian friends, have good conversations, as well as being able to have my Bible study that we have on Instagram. And we meet up and stuff, so it helps me communicate with others and helps me grow in that. And I think that's pretty good, to have that space to be open, when sometimes you can't communicate with others." Q.6 Can social media be used to glorify God? Student 2: "I think so. You can tell your opinion on your worldview; share your views of the world on social media." Student 1: "Well I would say they would have to be extremely careful, and pretty much not really interact with it that much at all. And maybe just talk about the Gospel and all the benefits and all the good things to spread the message because God wants us to spread His Word to the world. There are adults and other people that also do that on YouTube and other platforms, but young kids can also try to do that, to show that the youth also love God as well. But there are risks to that – major, major risks – because some people do, when they're on these platforms, they might get caught up with the fame that they might be getting, and more want what the public wants instead of what God wants them to want." Student 3: "I think that they can use social media to their benefit and to our benefit as Christians, as you can spread the word of God via social media to a large group of people especially if you have a large platform like these influencers do. As well, you can find communities on Facebook, for example, you can join a Facebook group of Christian people, whether they're doing a Bible study or they just talk about their views on Christ." Student 4: "Pages like I follow, a few that put a Bible verse a day, or follow like YouVersion, the Bible app. Ways like that. And then also through communication with other Christians, like if you're just find spaces through different apps, you can find people on things like Discord or Facebook. There's just many ways you can connect with others." It's important for us to reflect on the profound impact our digital interactions can have on our faith and our relationships. Just as we are called to love our neighbors as ourselves, let us extend that love into the virtual realm remembering that every interaction carries the potential to glorify God. In a world often filled with noise and distraction if we do choose to use social media maybe use it as a tool for spreading the light of Christ for building up one another, and for fostering genuine connections rooted in love and grace. As we navigate the ever-changing landscape of technology, may our faith serve as a compass guiding us towards discernment and ultimately towards God's eternal truth. Thanks for watching this episode of Reformed Perspective. Make sure to subscribe and share this video with family and friends....

Assorted

What makes a person instantly unattractive?

I asked this question on a Facebook page for secular women over 60 years of age: “What makes a person instantly unattractive?” I was intrigued by the breadth of answers, but not surprised at those at the top of the list. Within two days I received more than 150 answers. There were trends – answers could be grouped together in 12 different characteristics, so I compiled what I had and ordered them according to the number of answers that were received for each characteristic. Why undertake such a study? I did it for a couple of reasons: A desire to share Christ – In this data, I was hearing from mainly non-Christians. So what types of behavior might make us immediately repugnant to them? Let’s take a look at ourselves and determine whether we are acting in loving ways in order to share Christ. A desire for friendship – Many people are lonely, and some have difficulty building friendships. While it isn’t always our fault, it might be helpful to compare these unattractive traits and prayerfully analyze whether we might find room in ourselves for improvement. Being attractive Proverbs 16:21 says: “The wise of heart is called discerning, and sweetness of speech increases persuasiveness.” Here is a clue towards being a witness for our Lord. And Peter tells us in 1 Peter 3:15-16: “But in your hearts honor Christ the Lord as holy, always being prepared to make a defense to anyone who asks you for a reason for the hope that is in you; yet do it with gentleness and respect, having a good conscience, so that, when you are slandered, those who revile your good behavior in Christ may be put to shame.” Being unattractive Let’s take a look at the top twelve characteristics that make a person instantly unattractive, in the order of the number of votes received: Bad attitude Potty mouth/cursing Smoking Body odor/poor hygiene/dirty or unkempt clothes Bad breath Arrogant/entitled/rude Lying Boasting/bragging Complaining/ungrateful spirit Being unkind Bad manners Being bossy/loud/yelling To be honest, years ago it never occurred to me that people might dislike my loudness and yelling, or what I eventually discerned to be my bossiness. These are the top twelve characteristics that may make us instantly unattractive to other people. Where might we improve? Is it possible that some of these characteristics are making us less lovely to be around? Do we come across in any of these ways to our neighbors, coworkers, fellow church members, or prospective friends? How is your attitude when life isn’t going as you would prefer? Working on it Think about 1 Corinthians 13: “Love is patient and kind; love does not envy or boast; it is not arrogant or rude. It does not insist on its own way; it is not irritable or resentful; it does not rejoice at wrongdoing, but rejoices with the truth.” This description of real love is a tall order, but it is not beyond what we can learn through the power of the Holy Spirit working in our lives. Without love, we are a noisy gong and a clanging cymbal; we are nothing. This chapter goes on to get rid of nearly half the list immediately: arrogance (6), boasting (8), unkindness (10), and being bossy (12). It pretty well covers bad attitudes (1), lying (7), and complaining (9) as well. Manners (11) are just a culturally agreed upon way to show respect and love for one another. For example, no one wants to watch someone’s food roll around inside his mouth, or be commanded without a please and thank-you. In regards to potty mouth/cursing (2) and hygiene (4), we could say that these come under the law of kindness as well. If we put others first instead of ourselves, we will consider the language that we use, and not make others uncomfortable. We will “do unto others as we would have them do unto us” by not causing others to have to put up with a stench in our presence. A smoker can at least be courteous around those who are sensitive to the odor of tobacco (3). And we can make the effort to clean our teeth and mouths as well as possible (5) to consider the sensitivities of others. Conclusion None of us enjoy being around people who exhibit unattractive characteristics. Now that we know what many other people find obnoxious, we can all take a look at ourselves to see how we can become lovelier....

Assorted

A lament for our nation

Lament is not a common word today. It is rare to hear of lamentation in our secular culture, and even within the Church we don’t often speak of lament. And yet, I believe lament is one of the most important – and biblical – postures that we can take as Christians in the public square today. Why lament? Consider our situation. We see (at least) 87,000 abortions every year here in Canada. Over 13,000 died by euthanasia last year, and that number grows every year. We’ve seen our fundamental freedoms eroded. Conscience rights for health care workers aren’t adequately protected. Our governments have redefined marriage by liberalizing divorce laws, recognizing same-sex marriages, and even starting to legitimize polyamorous relationships. The entire concepts of motherhood and fatherhood are fractured by our country’s policies on in vitro fertilization and surrogacy, and jurisdictions like Ontario are recognizing that kids can have many (not just two) parents. Hundreds of kids are pursuing medical gender transitioning, rejecting the bodies that God has given them. Counseling children to love the body and identity they have been given has been outlawed by conversion therapy legislation. Human trafficking, pornography, and prostitution are rampant in society. And our country, ostensibly still founded on the principle “that recognizes the supremacy of God,” has insisted that all cultures and all religions by-and-large are equal. Sin and brokenness are pervasive in all aspects of Canadian society. Let’s consider some potential unbiblical options of how to respond to this sin before coming to why we need to lament for our nation. Unbiblical responses 1. Do not grumble One response – the most unbiblical response – is to grumble. We can be tempted to complain to God, to each other, and to ourselves. But complaining is antithetical to the Christian life. The Israelites of the Old Testament were famous for grumbling. They complained about bitter water or a lack of water (Ex. 15:24, 17:3), about a lack of food (Ex. 16:2), their misfortunes (Num. 11:1), the strength of the Canaanites (Num. 14:2), and their leadership (Num. 16:11, 41; 17:5). In most of these instances, God punished His people. He had just brought them out of Egypt with a mighty hand and an outstretched arm and, rather than worshipping and praising Him, they complained. Rather than “grumbling or disputing,” Paul calls on Christians to be “blameless and innocent, children of God without blemish in the midst of a crooked and twisted generation, among whom you shine as lights in the world” (Phil. 2:15). We confess that “it is impossible for those grafted into Christ by true faith not to produce fruits of gratitude” (HC Q&A 64). 2. No need to fear Another response to a bleak political situation is fear and anxiety, but this too is an unbiblical response. We may fear persecution from our culture, tyranny from our government, or censure from media companies. But in Philippians 4, Paul instructs followers of Christ, “do not be anxious about anything.” Christ Himself commands us “do not be anxious about your life, what you will eat or what you will drink, nor about your body, what you will put on” or about anything else for that matter (Matt. 6:25-34; Luke 12:22-31). The most frequent command found in Scripture is “do not be afraid.” 3. Do not be angry Another common response to this sin-filled world is anger. Anger can be a powerful motivator to inspire people to speak up and to act. And, unlike complaining or anxiety, there is some biblical justification to be angry (e.g., Eph. 4:26). When people sin and transgress the law of the LORD, there is a reason for righteous anger. Jesus Himself became angry on occasion with a righteous anger (Mark 3:1-6 and Mark 10:13-16). Scripture, however, portrays human anger as a negative phenomenon in almost every instance. Proverbs often counsels the wise and the righteous to refrain from anger (Prov. 14:29, 15:18, 16:32, 19:11, 22:24, 29:22). The apostle Paul commands believers to put away anger on several occasions (2 Cor. 12:20; Gal. 5:20; Eph. 4:31; Col. 3:8; 1 Tim. 2:8). Our fallen anger makes us susceptible to sin. (Perhaps why Eph. 4:26 says “be angry and do not sin.”) Anger can easily lead to hasty and thoughtless words and actions. Perhaps this is why James admonishes believers to be “slow to anger; for the anger of man does not produce the righteousness of God” (James 1:19-20). Like fire, anger can be a beneficial and God glorifying tool when used in the right way, yet it can easily grow out of control and cause great spiritual (not to mention temporal!) damage. So instead of complaining, fearing, or being angry about the state of our nation, a more biblical response is lament. An example of lament Scripture is full of laments, but the best example of lamentation flows from the prophet Jeremiah and the people of Judah in exile. Put yourself in their shoes. Close your eyes. Take a deep breath. Clear your mind. Imagine you are a young Jew living around 609 BC. You and your people are led by King Josiah. Your life revolves around a divinely inspired calendar of feasts and sacrifices. In fact, you just celebrated a Passover the likes of which hadn’t been observed since the days of the judges. You observe a weekly Sabbath day of rest, a year of Sabbath rest of the land every seven years, and a year of Jubilee every 50 years. You periodically visit the glorious temple of Solomon in Jerusalem, perhaps the most ornate, beautiful, and costly structure on earth. There the Levite singers and musicians make music to God and the priests offer sweet incense to the LORD. God has promised that a descendent of David would sit on the throne of Judah forever. In fact, the current king “turned to the Lord with all his heart and with all his soul and with all his might” so that there was never a king that came before him or after him that pursued the LORD with such fervour (2 Kings 22-23). Life is good. During your lifetime, all that comes crashing down. The Egyptian Pharoah Neco kills godly King Josiah, hauls his successor, King Jehoahaz, in chains to Egypt, exacts a heavy tribute from Judah, and sets up a puppet king, Jehoiakim, on the throne. After a stint under Egyptian oppression, King Nebuchadnezzar of Babylon puts your country under tribute. When King Jehoiakim rebels against Babylon, bands of Chaldeans, Syrians, Moabites, and Ammonites begin raiding your country. King Nebuchadnezzar comes back with a vengeance, besieges and conquers Jerusalem, carries away all the treasures of the temple and the king’s house, and carries away all the royal family, all officials, all the mighty men of valor, all the smiths and craftsmen, and 10,000 more captives. Only the poor remain under another puppet king, Zedekiah. Thankfully, the temple, the center of Jewish life, still stands. But your religious leadership pollutes this temple. Then Zedekiah rebels against Babylon too, prompting Nebuchadnezzar to return again to besiege Jerusalem and trigger a terrible famine in the city. When the city falls, Nebuchadnezzar slaughters Zedekiah’s sons in front of him, gouges out Zedekiah’s eyes, and carries him off to Egypt. But at least the temple still stands. A few years later, Nebuchadnezzar attacks Jerusalem a third time, destroying every building in Jerusalem, including the temple, and tearing down the walls. Even the poor people who were originally left in Jerusalem are carried off to Babylon, except for the poorest of the poor who are left to work the land.  And even after all this, the poorest of the poor rebel against Nebuchadnezzar, murder the governor, and flee in fear to Egypt, the very place that God had led them out of slavery 890 years before. And so, the land lays desolate. Your nation is utterly destroyed. Your whole religion revolving around the temple, sacrifices, and feasts is impossible. There is no descendant of David seemingly on the throne. It’s a horrific state of affairs. What was the response of the Jews carried off to Babylon? They responded with lament. We get a glimpse of this in Psalm 137: “By the waters of Babylon, there we sat down and wept, when we remembered Zion.” But the main lamentation over the exile is written by the prophet Jeremiah. While there isn’t a book of Complaining, of Anxiety, or of Anger in Scripture, there is a book of Lamentations. For almost the entire book, Jeremiah recounts and laments the destruction of Jerusalem. The book opens, How lonely sits the city that was full of people! How like a widow has she become, she who was great among the nations! She who was a princess among the provinces has become a slave. She weeps bitterly in the night with tears on her cheeks; Among all her lovers she has none to comfort her; All her friends have dealt treacherously with her; They have become her enemies. Judah has gone into exile because of affliction and hard servitude; She dwells now among the nations but finds no resting place; Her pursuers have all overtaken her in the midst of her distress. What is a lament? Lament, properly speaking, is a uniquely Christian activity. It isn’t complaining, though it certainly recounts all the evils of this present age. It isn’t anxiety, although the situation certainly seems bleak and full of uncertainty. And it isn’t primarily angry, despite the calls for judgement on Babylon found in the final verses of Psalm 137. And lament isn’t just mourning what has been lost. A lament has hope. That’s why, smack dab in the middle of the book of Lamentations and in the middle of perhaps the most hopeless period of Judah’s existence, Jeremiah confesses, “But this I call to mind, and therefore I have hope: the steadfast love of the LORD never ceases; His mercies never come to an end; they are new every morning; great is Your faithfulness” (3:21-23). One hundred and one years ago, Thomas Chisholm plucked these words out of Lamentations to create the hymn Great Is Thy Faithfulness. It is a beautiful hymn of hope and praise. But it helps to remember its scriptural context. God’s faithfulness is wonderful indeed when we consider how He changes not; how all nature witnesses to His great faithfulness, mercy, and love; and how His presence cheers and guides us, as the hymn’s verses recount. But those truths aren’t the context for Jeremiah’s confession when he says, “great is thy faithfulness.” Lamentation over the destruction of Judah and the captivity of the Jews (Jeremiah is in captivity himself) is the context. God’s faithfulness is always important, but it tastes the sweetest when it is juxtaposed with the evils of this world. Lamentation today Politically, culturally, socially, economically, religiously – really any way you can think of – we are in a far better position than Judah was at the start of the exile. As we’ve already recounted, we certainly face many evils in this dark world that tempt us to respond with complaints, fear, or anger. But I think that the best response is lament. We can lament instead of complaining about the failure of political leaders to follow God’s will. We can lament rather than fear the cultural hostility to orthodox Christianity. We can lament rather than rage about the injustices in the world. And lament does more than just look around at others. It confesses our own wrongdoings, remembers the faithfulness of our sovereign God, and prays for His intervention. And so, I lament for our nation. And I’ll do it with a song, a Jeremiah lament-style version of Great Is Thy Faithfulness: O LORD, our nation reviles and forgets Thee. We have departed from thy righteous law. We deserve judgement and none of thy favour, But I call this to mind and so have hope: Great is thy faithfulness! Great is thy faithfulness! Morning by morning new mercies I see: The steadfast love of the LORD never ceases – Great is thy faithfulness, LORD, unto me! Levi Minderhoud is the BC manager of ARPA Canada....

News

Saturday Selections – Feb. 17, 2024

Failing at failure? This could be a great way to bring up an important conversation with our kids. The fear of failure stops many children from trying new and hard things. God gave them talents, and if they are going to develop those skills (and not bury them - Matthew 25:14-30) our children will need to push their limits. That might mean running so hard they start tripping, stumbling, and even eating some dirt. They need to know there is such a thing as God-glorifying failure... but not God-glorifying cowardice. Marriage makes men better Though he doesn't acknowledge God, this evolutionist has discovered that God's plan for the family – marriage – works best, reining in men's antisocial behaviors. There is a really great metaphor here, too, about our rational self being a rider trying to control an elephant that represents our impulses. Those impulses – or, in Christian terms, sinful desires – can be easier or harder to control depending on where we take them. So, for example, a rider troubled by alcohol shouldn't "take his elephant" into a bar. To extend this to the family realm, a dad or mom trying to deal with a kid that pushes their buttons shouldn't indulge in watching the late show – they'll have to put their elephant to bed early each night to better enable them to be calm and controlled. The Swiss Family Robinson: a return to the classics Jonathon Van Maren makes a plug for this great book. Parents, if you get your kids a copy, be sure you get an attractive one: a great cover, good font, and a few illustrations thrown in here and there can really help by making a classic so much more appealing. G.K. Chesterton on AI If you want to understand AI, then who better to ask than someone born two hundred years before it was invented? This is a good one! And for an in-depth dive check out what's on offer at Creation.com. The most bizarre experience of my life When theologian E. Calvin Beisner was invited to do an interview about climate change, he never expected to be interviewed by a clown. Who knows how this will end, but some people certainly are desperate to try to make Christians look bad. "He Gets Us" takes a big "L" in the Super Bowl Among the Super Bowl commercials last week were two to promote the "He Gets Us" evangelistic campaign. Many Christians have defended them as "pre-evangelism" – sure, they didn't hint at the Good News, but they did tell people that Jesus gets them. That's a start, right? There's some truth to that – they had a minute, and if you had just a minute would you be able to present the whole of the Gospel to someone? To say it another way, an incomplete message isn't wrong... it just needs more. But the problem comes when we say the easy part and stop. And a lot of "churches" are content with just telling folks that Jesus gets them. But they don't want to offend anyone. Telling people they need to repent? Jesus as Saviour is offensive indeed. Now someone has shown how it is possible, in just a minute, to tell people quite a lot about Jesus and their need for a Saviour. And Ray Comfort gives his own version here. ...

Science - Creation/Evolution

My dog ate the evidence for evolution

3 evolutionary theories that are based on the lack of evidence for evolution ***** There are plenty of great, readable books that expose the many problems with evolutionary theory. These include Gordon Wilson’s Darwin’s Sandcastle, Change Laura Tan and Rob Stadler’s The Stairway to Life, and Marcos Eberlin’s Foresight: How the Chemistry of Life Reveals Planning and Purpose (just to name a few). But what about something shorter? My daughter is sometimes allowed to take a notecard full of key facts with her into a test. That’s what I was looking for: not a book-sized rebuttal, but something short enough to remember and use. That meant it couldn’t involve stacks of studies and countless facts to counter the evolutionists’ mountain of materials. Those facts can be had, and include revealing quotes, like this infamous admission by one of the world’s leading evolutionary biologists, Richard Lewontin (1929-2021). Back in 1997 he acknowledged that it wasn’t the evidence that drove evolutionists to accept evolution, but their ideology: “Our willingness to accept scientific claims that are against common sense is the key to an understanding of the real struggle between science and the supernatural. We take the side of science in spite of the patent absurdity of some of its constructs, in spite of its failure to fulfill many of its extravagant promises of health and life, in spite of the tolerance of the scientific community for unsubstantiated just-so stories, because we have a prior commitment, a commitment to materialism. “It is not that the methods and institutions of science somehow compel us to accept a material explanation of the phenomenal world, but, on the contrary, that we are forced by our a priori adherence to material causes to create an apparatus of investigation and a set of concepts that produce material explanations, no matter how counter-intuitive, no matter how mystifying to the uninitiated. Moreover, that materialism is absolute, for we cannot allow a Divine Foot in the door.” As impressive as that admission is, it’s just one guy. I was after something bigger, and also simpler – an argument where, even if I didn’t recall all the details, I might still be able to recall and relay the gist of it. What I found are three instances where evolutionists have accidentally acknowledged the lack of evidence for their theory. That acknowledgement comes, not from anything they’ve said, but instead by the “sub theories” they’ve offered to explain away the missing evidence. And what’s the evidence for these “sub theories”? Only that Evolution needs them to be true. This is akin to the student who, to explain why he hasn’t handed in his homework, claims his dog ate it, and when he’s asked for proof that his dog did indeed chow down on the assignment, he points to what’s missing: “My dog must have eaten it, because my homework’s not here, right?” As his teacher knows, the missing paper isn’t proof at all; the boy is simply presuming the very thing – that he actually wrote a paper – he was being asked to prove. And when he resorts to this kind of logical contortions, all it really evidences is that he has nothing better to offer. I think the same is true in the three evolutionary examples that follow. The most compelling evidence on offer is only the lengths evolutionists are willing to go to, to prop up their theory. Two pillars When it comes to the Theory of Evolution we all know the basics: once there was no life on this planet, but then simple cells formed in the primordial soup. After millions of years, and through the process of natural selection, these simple cells eventually spawned more complex cells and even more complex organisms, until finally we arrived. Greg Koukl has called this the “Molecule to Man Hypothesis.” And as Koukl also noted, if we’re going to take this nice story seriously, then evolutionists would have to prove two key things: 1) That life can come from non-life 2) That transitions from one kind to another do happen. These two ideas are so pivotal to evolutionary theory that if they can’t both be proven, then Evolution wouldn’t have a leg to stand on. 1. Life from non-life The Stanley Miller experiment (also known as the Miller-Urey experiment) consisted of a closed system with tubes connecting a heated water (ocean) chamber down below, with a gaseous chamber above, with sparks simulating early Earth lightning.        One of the problems with the Stanley Miller experiment is that it turns out amino acids come in left-hand and right-hand varieties – mirror images of each other – and the experiment produced equal quantities of each.         But our bodies don’t use both. Living creatures use the left-hand sort, and just as you can’t fit your right hand into a left glove, the cell can’t use right-handed amino acids – they aren’t a good fit. In fact, their presence can harm cells, and at a minimum, they would need to be sifted out. That means, even before the first cell ever formed, there would need to be some sort of mechanism present which could separate the righties from the lefties. That separation can be done in a lab through intelligent intervention. But who or what could do the selecting on early Earth after that lightning bolt blasts out that first batch of amino acids? Cells don’t exist yet, so there are no cellular mechanisms present to do the separating – there’s nothing in place. It’d be more accurate to say the Stanley Miller experiment didn’t produce building blocks of life so much as a muddled mess. The idea that life came from non-life used to be known as Spontaneous Generation. Maggots, it was thought, were spontaneously formed in dead rotting meat, and many believed that mice and flies were formed the same way. After a bit of investigation this was shown to be untrue. Today the idea persists under a different name: Abiogenesis (literally life from not life). Everyone knows maggots could never spontaneously form from non-living matter, but what if the organisms being formed were much simpler? What if it was only a single cell? And what if we gave it millions and millions of years to develop? Could it happen then? Well, if you read the scientific literature you’ll hear that yes, under those circumstances abiogenesis could happen, and indeed did happen. However, even though scientists are very sure it happened, even they’ll admit they haven’t worked out exactly how it happened. But isn’t evolution supposed to explain the “how” part? To be fair, they do have a variety of interesting ideas, but all of their proposals have serious problems. Let’s take a look at the best-known example – the Stanley Miller experiment in 1953. Though it happened 70 years ago, this experiment is still getting in the news today, because it was so influential. For decade upon decade the experiment has been cited in textbooks as proof that life could arise through a series of random chemical reactions. It’s so pivotal, that many a time it is presented as the proof for life from non-life, with no others given. So what happened in the experiment? Miller subjected a mixture of chemicals to an electric spark. The mixture of chemicals was supposed to mimic Earth’s early atmosphere and the electric spark was supposed to represent lightening. A week later, Miller discovered that some amino acids had been formed, which was significant because amino acids are a vital component of living cells. It should be noted though, that amino acids are not living themselves, but are merely a necessary component of cells. So they are a basic building block of life in much the same way that steel is a necessary building block for cars. These amino acids were presented as proof that life could arise from random chemical interactions. Consider for a moment how overstated this claim was. Miller hadn’t shown how life could be created from non-life, he had only shown how one necessary component might be formed. Going back to the car analogy, this is akin to someone zapping a rock of particularly pure ore and then declaring that the puddling blob of molten metal that results proves a car could come about by chance. Overstatement aside, there were other significant problems with the experiment and its results. For example, at one point many evolutionists thought that Earth’s early atmosphere was in some ways the opposite of what we have today: they believed back then it was hydrogen rich and lacking oxygen. Why? Well, at least in part because they needed it to be that way; oxygen would have interfered with the chemical reactions that they needed. And yes, to work, Miller’s experiment required a lot of hydrogen and absolutely no oxygen. But today even evolutionists will concede that our environment has always had oxygen in it. And that means that the amino acids could never have formed here on Earth via anything remotely resembling Miller’s method. The fix: extraterrestrial life from non-life So here’s where things get interesting. Put yourself into the shoes of an atheistic scientist who knows that Abiogenesis couldn’t have happened here on Earth. What “logical” conclusion will he be forced to draw? That’s right – life must have originated on some other planet first, and then come to Earth! This idea is known as Panspermia and while it’s not evolutionists’ consensus position, that it is seriously discussed at all only emphasizes the problem that evolutionists have with life arising here on Earth. The only “evidence” for Panspermia is that life exists here on Earth and it seems impossible for it to have started via evolutionary processes on Earth… therefore it must have started elsewhere. So Panspermia – this theory of an extraterrestrial origin for life – is actually an acknowledgement that evolutionists can’t explain how life could have arisen on Earth. 2. Transitions from one kind to another Things don’t get any easier for evolutionists when it comes to transitional forms. Evolutionary theory says that molecules evolved into man over millions of years and via millions of tiny changes. So when we start searching through the fossil record we should come across literally millions of transitional forms as one species turned into an entirely new one. Now, depending on which side of the creation/evolution debate you are talking to, the fossil record either doesn’t provide any examples of these transitional forms, or there are museums’ worth of such fossils. The Archaeopteryx has often been mentioned as a transition between dinosaurs and birds, and you can go to Creation.com or AnswersInGenesis.org, to learn about how it and other supposed transitional forms fails as a true transition. (The short summary: if birds evolved from dinosaurs or reptiles, then feathers must have evolved from scales and their wings must have evolved from arms. The Archaeopteryx has true wings and detailed advanced feathers, similar to those of bird species today. It only seems fair that when evolutionists are asked for transitional forms between reptiles and birds they should have to produce the half feather, half scale versions – the true transitional forms. The Archaeopteryx is at best a questionable example of an intermediary stage.) But what I want to highlight is the kind of argument evolutionists have to resort to if they acknowledge that there aren’t good examples of transitions. How would they explain away that lack of evidence? The fix: transitions few and far between Well, if someone absolutely refuses to believe in Creation, what “logical” conclusion will they be forced to come to? Then evolution must have happened in quick spurts, leaving few evidences of transitions in the fossil record! This theory is called Punctuated Equilibrium and was first proposed by Stephen Jay Gould and Niles Eldredge in 1972. Again, this theory is not based on the evidence, but rather the lack of it: we’re missing the transitional forms that would be needed to prove Evolution, but since Evolution must be true – that presumption is beyond question – then Evolution must not need transitional forms all that badly after all. Punctuated Equilibrium is an acknowledgement that evolutionists don’t have the abundance of transitional forms they expected to find. It’s also worth noting that until Gould and Eldredge, the lack of transitional forms was not really acknowledged. As Gould put it in 1977, “The extreme rarity of transitional forms in the fossil record persists as the trade secret of palaeontology.” Creationists were pointing out the lack of transitional forms long before Gould and Eldredge…but secular scientists don’t listen to creationists. 3. The Anthropic Principle At this point we should see the beginnings of a pattern in the Evolution/Creation debate. And the Anthropic Principle only makes that pattern all the more evident. The phrase “Anthropic Principle” was first coined to describe the amazing way in which our universe seemed to be designed specifically for human life. For us to live here on Earth it seems we need physical constants, laws, and properties to fall within certain narrow ranges. In Designer Universe: Intelligent Design and the Existence of God, authors Jimmy H. Davis and Harry L. Poe give these three examples: Protons and electrons have to have just the right charge. Atoms are composed of two charged particles: a positively charged proton and a negatively charged electron. The proton is 1,836 times larger than the electron and yet these two particles have exactly equal charges. If the two charges weren’t exactly equal in magnitude, if say, there was a charge difference of only one part per billion, all the pieces of your body would fly apart. Our Sun has to be just the right type of star. The Sun is not a typical star, being bigger than 95 per cent of all other stars. These smaller stars aren’t as hot so a planet would have to orbit much closer to stay warm enough. But at closer distances the rotation of a planet becomes locked so that one side always faces the star. This would cause one side of the planet to freeze and the other side to burn (sort of like our moon, or like Mercury). Additionally, our sun is a single star. 70 percent of stars are estimated to be binary or multiple star systems. It is hard to imagine how habitable planets could exist in such systems. Jupiter is just what we need, just where we need it. Jupiter turns out to be in just the right orbit and the right distance away to protect Earth from bombardment by killer asteroids or comets. Jupiter’s large size and high gravity makes it act as an asteroid and comet catcher. Some other stars have Jupiter-like planets orbiting them, but in most cases they are either in the wrong orbit, or are too near the sun, or may be spiraling inward toward the sun. While our Jupiter is necessary for life on Earth all the other “Jupiters” detected so far would prevent life from living in those systems. These are just a few examples of the anthropic (man-centered) nature of our universe. When you add all the factors together that would have to be just so for life to exist in our universe it turns out the odds against life are astronomical. The odds are so amazing even evolutionists are astounded. This makes the Anthropic Principle a powerful piece of evidence for a universe Designer. The fix: An infinite multiverse But imagine you are an atheist and evolutionary scientist who has been confronted with the Anthropic Principle and the astronomical odds against life in this universe. What logical conclusion are you going to be forced to draw if you want to remain an atheist? That’s right – if the odds are infinitely stacked against life in any one universe, wouldn’t the odds even out considerably if there was an infinite number of universes? This universe would then just happen to be that one universe in a million billion where the odds all worked out in our favor. This multiverse theory has become a staple in Star Trek and Marvel superhero movies, but once again there is no actual evidence for it. None at all. It’s another evolutionary story used to fill in for a lack of evidence. Thus the Multiverse Theory is an acknowledgment of just how implausible it is that an undesigned universe would be so well-suited for life. One last example I'll include one bonus example of an evolutionary theory based on a lack of evidence: the Oort Cloud. This is a theorized cloud of icy planetesimals that are said to be on the outer fringes of our Solar System. This cloud is beyond the limits of our current observational technology, so how do we know it is there? Because evolutionists need it to be. We still have comets, and if our Solar System is 4.6 billion years old, as the evolutionists presume, then any icy comets passing around the Sun should long ago have melted away. So, the continuing existence of comets would seem to be evidence of a Solar System that is much much younger – just thousands, not billions of years old.. But, no, evolutionists see them instead as evidence of a comet breeding ground way, way out there, where billions of icy chunks will sometimes bump into each other in just such a fashion as to direct an ice ball inward towards the Sun, starting a new comet. So the evidence for the Oort Cloud is lacking, and based only on the fact that evolution needs it to exist. Conclusion I haven’t tried here to provide facts to counter the evidence for evolution. Instead what we’ve explored is how evolutionists themselves have highlighted the lack of evidence for their theory by coming up with theories to explain away that lack. Evolution’s two pillars – life from non-life, and species’ transition to new species – were supposed to have lots of proof to back them up. But evolutionists have had to come up with “sub theories” – Panspermia and Punctuated Equilibrium – to explain why that proof is missing. And these sub theories are themselves supported, not by evidence, but by the lack of it. When Christian scientists pointed out the amazing odds against a universe supporting life, evolutionists answered this evidence with another unsupported story – the Multiple Universe Theory. Finally, the Oort Cloud is yet another example of evolutionists, instead of relying on evidence, turning to stories that already assume Evolution is true. Reflection questions What are the two pillars of evolution? Explain "Abiogensis." Is it possible? Explain "Panspermia." What does the theory of Panspermia show? What problem is there with the theory of transitional forms? What is meant with "Punctuated Equilibrium”? Why have evolutionists come up with the idea? What is the "Anthropic (man-centered) Principle”? What is the "Multiple Universe Theory"? A version of this article was first published in the January 2003 issue under the title “The Science is underwhelming.”...

In a Nutshell

Tidbits – February 2024

Financial potty training While the illustration mentions a VCR tape, the point is as sharp as ever. The late Gary North (1941-2022) got this from a subscriber to his “Tip of the Week” email newsletter. “Once, when our daughter came home from college, she rented a couple of movies and failed to return them before heading back to school. I called her and told her that I returned the movies but there was a late fee which I paid. To teach her a money lesson, I told her I did not want her to repay me, but I did want her to take the fee (a couple of dollars) and flush it down the toilet! “She was shocked, of course, and begged and pleaded with me to let her mail me the money, but I insisted. I did not want her money. I wanted her to learn a lesson. It would have been all too easy for her to give Dad a couple of bucks to shut him up. Instead I wanted her to take a couple of dollars, walk to the toilet, lift the lid, throw them in and then flush the toilet, and then stand there and wave to her money as it went down the toilet. “After several minutes of discussion about how crazy that was and more begging and pleading, she finally agreed and promised me that she would do it. I am proud to say that she is much more responsible about her money. I think it was the most creative parenting I ever did. Well worth a couple of bucks! As North explained, “The reason why this worked is because of the graphic nature of the ritual - and it surely was a ritual. It required an action. This action (1) drove home the economic point; and (2) sealed the point into the memory.” SOURCE: www.garynorth.com/public/4465.cfm I got permission to reprint it at the time. Inviting invitations I once heard a minister (might have been Rev. Paul Murphy) claim he could tell how ready a church was for evangelism based on just one thing – how their bulletin announcements are written. He noted you can tell quite a lot from the blurbs contained therein. For example many churches announce their study groups this way: We will meet tonight at the Smith’s. Come one, come all! This invitation might seem inviting, but it isn’t helpful for anyone visiting for the first time, or someone who hasn't been coming long enough to get a church directory. They won’t know where the Smiths live, and they won’t know what time the meeting normally starts. And since there's no phone number or email listed, they can’t text to find out. It’s small things like this, the minister said, that show a church isn't thinking about the strangers in their midst. On complaining Can Christians complain or not? We are told, on the one hand, not to grumble (Philippians 2:14, 1 Cor. 10:10) and on the other, we can read accounts of David, Jeremiah, and others (Ps. 12:1-2, Micah 7:1-2) laying out complaints before the Lord. So, what's the difference? Intent. One sort – let's call him "the grumbler" – just wants to vent. They overlook all that is good and wonderful, and just focus in on what faults they can find. They are ungrateful. The other sort – let's call this one not a "complainer" because that is not his identity, but rather, the one who has a complaint – has had something serious happen to them. He is facing real difficulties. But rather than just vent, he does whatever he can, and even when it is something beyond any of his own abilities to address, the Christian can still bring his complaint to God, who he can trust will make everything right in the end. "It is better to light a candle than curse the darkness." – Unknown "Any fool can criticize, condemn and complain - and most fools do." – Dale Carnegie “If you don’t like something, change it. If you can’t change it, change your attitude. Don’t complain.” – Maya Angelou Homosexuality as evidence against evolution Homosexuality is a sin but how do you communicate that to someone who isn’t religious? Well, whatever you do, don’t make the mistake of arguing that it isn’t natural. Sexual perversion extends even to nature where homosexual behavior has been observed in over 450 species. Christians shouldn’t be surprised; sin didn’t limit its effects to just man. On a more positive note, evolutionists should be surprised, since evolution has no good explanation for homosexuality – they can't pass on their genes unless they engage in heterosexual behaviour, so under the survival of the fittest theory, it really should have disappeared long ago. Good ol’ Shoey As a child I learned that it was never a good idea to complain to grown-ups about being bored. “Bored?” would be the response, “How can you be bored with all those toys? Why when I was a child the only toy I had was an old leather shoe, and that was good enough for me. Ol’ Shoey and me had loads of fun.” But now it turns out that the older generation, with their scarcity of toys, may have been better off. Research has found that too many toys can actually overwhelm children and stifle creativity. The large number of toys seems to distract children and keep them from playing with any one toy long enough to learn from it. And while a child with fewer toys may complain about being bored, that too may be a good thing. Child psychiatrist, Bruce Perry, insists that a little boredom forces kids to draw on their own imagination and invent games and read to pass the time. He suggests children need at least a couple of hours of this downtime per day. SOURCES: Edmonton Journal, Dec 2/2000 & Feb 25/2001 “How much do you have to hate a person…” “I don’t respect people who don’t proselytize; I don’t respect that at all. If you believe there is a heaven and hell, and people could be going to hell, or not getting eternal life, or whatever, and if you think it’s not really worth telling them this because it could make things socially awkward, and atheists who believe people shouldn’t proselytize – ‘just leave me alone, keep your religion to yourself’ – how much do you hate somebody to not proselytize? How much do you have to hate somebody to believe that everlasting life is possible, and not tell them that? ...I mean, if I believed beyond a shadow of a doubt that a truck was going to hit you and you didn’t believe it, and that truck was bearing down on you, there’s a certain point that I tackle you… and this is more important than that.” – Entertainer and avowed atheist Penn Jillette on evangelism. Why trust flukey engineering? "Supposing there was no intelligence behind the universe, no creative mind. In that case, nobody designed my brain for the purpose of thinking. It is merely that when the atoms inside my skull happen for certain physical or chemical reasons to arrange themselves in a certain way, that gives me, as a by-product, the sensation I call thought. But if it is so, how can I trust my own thinking to be true? It's like upsetting a milk jug and hoping that the way the splash arranges will give you a map of London. But if I can't trust my own thinking, of course I can't trust the arguments leading to atheism, and therefore have no reason to be an atheist, or anything else. Unless I believe in God, I can't believe in thought; so I can never use thought to disbelieve in God." – C.S. Lewis On marriage and headship “The woman was made of a rib out of the side of Adam; not made out of his head to rule over him, nor out of his feet to be trampled upon by him, but out of his side to be equal with him, under his arm to be protected, and near his heart to be beloved.” – Matthew Henry All equally unworthy before God Though Europe can hardly be called a Christian continent, it does have a Christian heritage and tradition that, on some occasions, still shouts out the Truth. One such occasion was the funeral of Empress Zita, the former ruler of Austria who died in 1989. She received a royal funeral that lasted 2 hours, and was attended by more than 6,000. Afterwards, her body was loaded into a hearse and pulled by a team of horses, and accompanied by 600 soldiers to the church of the Capuchins, where many other royals are buried. When the procession arrived at the church, the doors were closed. The chamberlain stepped up and knocked three times. A voice from inside cried out, “Who requests entry?’ The chamberlain’s reply was impressive: “Her Majesty Zita, Empress of Austria, crowned Queen of Hungary, Princess of Bohemia, Grand Duchess of Lodomerai, Dalmatia, Croatia, Slavonia, Galizia, Illyria, Queen of Jerusalem, Archduchess of Austria, Grand Duchess of Tuscany and Cracow, Duchess of Lorraine, Salzburg, Carinthia, Krain and Buconia, Grand Duchess of Transylvania, Marchioness of Moravia, Duchess of Upper and Lower Silesia, of Modena, Parma, Piacenza, of Dubrovnik and Zara.” "I do not know her,” came the reply. “Who requires entry?" The chamberlain offered a simpler response: “Her Majesty Zita, Empress of Austria, Queen of Hungary.” The response was the same: “I do not know her. Who requires entry?” This time the chamberlain replied: "Our sister Zita, a poor sinning mortal." And the gates were thrown open to receive her. SOURCE: A half dozen newspaper and website accounts which all differed slightly on the details (perhaps due to translation problems), such as all the titles the chamberlain listed, but which corroborated each other on the core of the story. Among the newspapers and magazine were: People, April 17, 1989; The Guardian, July 10, 2006; The New York Times, April 2, 1989. Joke of the month Q: How many bass-baritones in a church choir does it take to screw in a light bulb? A: Three: One to climb the ladder and do the job, and the other two to sit there and say, “Isn’t that a little too high for you?”...

Internet

Demystifying ChatGPT

Lots of potential, but the output is only as valuable as the input ***** About a year ago, the research firm OpenAI made a version of its text-generation tools available for free use from its website. The chatbot, called ChatGPT, accepts a prompt from the user, such as a question or a request for a piece of writing, and responds with a seemingly original composition. If you have experimented with this tool, you may be impressed with its ability to produce natural-sounding English paragraphs – or perhaps you find it eerie and wonder what changes tools like this will bring. How large language models work To demystify what language tools like ChatGPT are doing, here’s a game you can try at home. To play, you’ll need to select a book and pick a letter of the alphabet. I’ll play along while I write. A) One letter I have a copy of Pilgrim’s Progress handy, and I choose the letter m. Open your book at random and find the first word on that page that contains your letter. For me, the word is mind. In the word that you found, what letter occurs immediately after the letter you were looking for, just as i comes next in mind ? That letter is your new letter. Now flip to a new page and repeat. The first i that I see is in the word it, so that means t is my next letter. Do it again. On the next page that I turn to I see t in the word delectable, so a is my next letter. So far my letters have been m-i-t-a. On my next turn, I find a in about and take the letter b. I then find b in Beelzebub and take the letter e. Finally, I find e in the word be, and since it’s followed by a space rather than another letter, this ends the game. Looking back, the letters of the game make the word mitabe. That’s not a real word, of course, but it’s not completely random either. The letter-level statistics of the English language led this process to make something that looks more English-like than we are likely to have gotten by grabbing six tiles out of a bag of Bananagrams. B) Two letters This game becomes more interesting if we level it up. Instead of looking for the first occurrence of our most recent letter, what if we searched for the first time our last two letters occur together? If my last two letters were be, then I would need to a look for a word like become and take c as my next letter. The effect is that we are using a larger context as we string out our sequence of letters. This version of the game is tedious to do by hand, but we can automate it using a computer. Drawing from the text of Pilgrim’s Progress and using two letters of context, an algorithm replicating this game generates the text: SETTERE HEY IST ING TO WAS NOR HOUT SAY SUPOSTIANY If we sift through the gibberish, we find five real English words – and the rest are at least pronounceable. C) Four letters If we try again, but this time with a context of four letters, we get: WOULD BUT THIS ONE COUNTRY AND SMOKE TO HAD KEPT Although this is nonsense, all the words are real, and shorter strings of words could make sense together. D) Nine letters Finally, if we level up the game to use nine characters of context, sentences begin to take shape: SO CHRISTIAN AND HOPEFUL I PERCEIVE IS AGAINST A WALL Grammar aside, this is remarkably close to real English. When it gets bigger still To get a layman’s understanding of how technology like ChatGPT works, imagine a great leveling-up of this game. Instead of being played on one laptop, it is run on giant server farms of leading tech companies. Instead of using Pilgrim’s Progress as a source text, it is trained on humankind’s entire digitized corpus. Instead of using a few letters of context, it uses a sophisticated model of human language. And instead of using a starting letter, the process is induced by a question or request from a user. When you enter a prompt into ChatGPT, you are really asking a statistical question: Based on information gathered from innumerable digital texts, what is the most likely response to this prompt? I tried giving ChatGPT the prompt: “Versify the first question and answer of the Heidelberg Catechism into common meter so that it could be sung by a congregation.” It responded with: In whom is all my trust and joy, My comfort and salvation? In Jesus Christ, the sinless One, The source of my redemption. My only comfort here on Earth, My only hope in heaven, Is that I am not my own, but His, For all my sins are forgiven. The meter is forced, but one has to admit that many would-be hymn writers have done worse. Benefits and risks of text-generators ChatGPT and similar tools that generate text or images are one example of advances in technology that use algorithms built from data rather than being human-handcrafted. You probably have used some of them: data-generated algorithms can identify faces in photographs, control autonomous vehicles, make medical diagnoses, and detect fraudulent transactions. One effect of this trend is that the technologies become more difficult to understand, even for experts, since the tools are often shaped by deep patterns in the training data that are beyond human perception. They exude something of a magical quality, especially when they are presented with evocative terms like artificial intelligence. Yet it is important for Christians not to attribute anything magical to unfamiliar technologies. Even without precise expertise in trending technology, we still can develop an informed awareness of the benefits and risks. 1) Output only as good as the input For one, technology generated from data is only as good as the data it is generated from. A tool like ChatGPT reflects the attributes of the texts that it is trained on. I gave ChatGPT the prompt, “Explain how the Auburn Affirmation affected the career of J. Gresham Machen” . It responded with a page and a half of text that got the basic facts right and read like an answer on an essay test. But what stood out to me was the uniformly positive terms it used when referring to Machen. He was a “staunch defender of conservative, orthodox Christianity,” to which he had “unwavering commitment,” making a “courageous stand against the Auburn Affirmation” and founding the OPC, “where he could continue to champion conservative Reformed theology.” No doubt readers will be sympathetic to this portrayal. But it is worth asking why ChatGPT would give Machen heroic verbs and adjectives while describing the proponents of the Auburn Affirmation in dry, factual terms. My speculation is that people interested enough in Machen to write about him have tended to be his admirers, and so ChatGPT is imitating the dominant sentiment in material about Machen. But does this pass the shoe-on-the-other-foot test? What would ChatGPT produce if we gave it a prompt for which most of its source material was written by enemies of the gospel? 2) Truth isn’t a particular priority Furthermore, the fact that these tools produce the most probable response to a prompt, based on the data they are trained on, means that truth itself is not a particular priority. I once asked ChatGPT who was the most famous person to play against the eighteenth-century chess-playing automaton known as the Turk (actually an elaborate hoax). The response mentioned Napoleon Bonaparte and Benjamin Franklin – each of whom did face off against the Turk at one point – but it went on to claim that “one of the most famous opponents of the Turk was the Austrian composer Wolfgang Amadeus Mozart,” describing their chess match in dramatic detail. This appears to have been synthesized whole cloth – I can’t trace down any verification that Mozart ever encountered the Turk. One of my colleagues at Wheaton College, where I teach, described how he caught a student passing off a ChatGPT-generated term paper as his own work. The paper was more-or-less B+ quality, and its bibliography had respectable-looking citations. As it turned out, though, ChatGPT had made the citations up: the claimed authors were real scholars and the journals were real, but the articles themselves didn’t exist. This is what we can expect when the most probable response is not the most truthful response. 3) Temptation to students This serves to highlight the most obvious risk induced by ChatGPT and similar tools: it provides a new and perfectly convenient way to plagiarize. A student – or a professional writer, for that matter – can whip out a paper in seconds by giving a prompt to a free online tool. At present, teachers can use services that detect AI-origin of text (itself an application of data-driven algorithms), but we can expect that successive generations of text-producing tools will prove to be better at eluding detection. One can imagine an arms race ensuing between text generators and generated-text detectors, with teachers never being able to trust their students again. And what of the rights of the original authors whose work is used to train these tools? 4) Do away with drudgery On the other hand, it is all too easy to bemoan the potential harms in a new technology and to overlook how it can be used for good. Tools like ChatGPT can be used not only as a cheat for writing, but also as writing aides: You can feed it a paragraph you have written and ask it to polish it up – make it more formal, or less formal, or more succinct, or with a more varied vocabulary. It can act, in a way, as a smart thesaurus. Another colleague of mine told of a student who defended the use of ChatGPT in writing a paper as a natural progression from tools that are already accepted: If we use spellcheck to eliminate spelling errors and Grammarly to fix syntax, then isn’t it only wise to use the latest tools to improve our rhetoric as well? One may quibble with this student’s logic, but technological changes throughout history have automated menial tasks, allowing humans to focus on things that are more meaningful. After all, some writing tasks are so much drudgery. You do not want your pastor using ChatGPT to write a sermon, but perhaps you wouldn’t begrudge a businessperson using an automated writing tool that can turn sales data into a quarterly report. A Christian response Text-generation tools are part of a suite of data-derived technologies that have gotten much media attention and that seem to have the power to change society as much as the internet and smartphones have done, if not more. How should we live in light of advancements in science and technology? There are many ways Christians should not respond: we shouldn’t idolize technology or make a false gospel out of it – we should not share the world’s fascination for the next new thing or hope for scientific deliverance from life’s problems. But neither should we approach it with fear or regard it with superstition. I also would argue that it’s irresponsible to ignore it. First, to any extent that we use tools like ChatGPT, we should see to it that we work with complete integrity. This is in the spirit of Paul’s exhortation to Timothy that in his ministry of the Word he should be “a worker who has no need to be ashamed” (2 Tim. 2:15) – whatever our calling, our work should be worthy of approval. Students at any level of schooling should note their school’s and teachers’ policy on writing assistants and follow them scrupulously. The Christian school that my children attend has ruled that no use of ChatGPT is appropriate for any of their schoolwork, and, with admirable consistency, they have banned the use of Grammarly as well. Some of my colleagues have experimented with allowing limited use of ChatGPT as a writing aide in college courses, but with clearly-defined boundaries, including that students must cite to what extent ChatGPT was used. For any professional or personal use of these tools as writing aides, we should ask ourselves whether we are presenting our work honestly. Second, we should exercise a healthy skepticism toward material generated by tools like this. One use of ChatGPT is as a replacement for a search engine when looking up information. You can Google “how to keep wasps out of my hummingbird feeder” and receive a list of websites, each website giving advice about bird feeder maintenance; alternately, you can ask the same question to ChatGPT and receive a single, succinct summary of tips that it has synthesized from various sources. There is a pernicious draw to attributing authority to information delivered to us by computers. We should remember, though, that ChatGPT’s answers are only as good as the fallible human-produced text it is trained on. Moreover, for the sake of loving our neighbors, we should bear in mind that tools trained on data will reflect, if not amplify, the biases and prejudices of its input. Finally, if we use algorithms to manipulate text, we must treat the holy things of God as holy. In the experiment at the beginning of this article, I sampled letters from the text of Pilgrim’s Progress. When I do a similar experiment in one of the courses I teach, some students are curious what would happen if we sample from a book of the Bible. But I believe that is not a respectful use of God’s Word. Earlier I showed the result of asking ChatGPT to versify part of the Heidelberg Catechism, but I certainly do not advocate using AI-generated texts in congregational singing. One feature of ChatGPT is that it can imitate the style of an author or genre. You could ask ChatGPT to write a story in the style of the Bible, but don’t – that would be blasphemous. I find the Westminster Larger Catechism’s words about the sixth commandment – that it requires “a sober use of meat, drink, physick, sleep, labour, and recreations” – to be applicable to many other areas. Let’s pray for wisdom to discern the sober use of humanity’s tools in every age. The author is a member of Bethel Presbyterian in Wheaton, Illinois, and professor of computer science at Wheaton College. This is reprinted with permission of the OPC denomination magazine New Horizons (OPC.org/nh.html) where it first appeared in their January 2024 issue....

News

All votes are not equal

Come the next election, the House of Commons is set to add five more seats and see the ridings redistributed. These changes flow from a requirement in our Constitution to do this after each census, to try ensure that each vote in Canada counts about the same when it comes to electing Members of Parliament. Populations change from movement within Canada and immigration, and a representative democracy is supposed to account for this. Yet Globe and Mail columnist Andrew Coyne has shown that the new boundaries don’t come close to representing where Canadians live, resulting in some votes being worth far more than others. Some of his findings included: Labrador, the smallest riding, has just 27,000 people. Contrast this with Edmonton-Wetaskiwin, which has more than 209,000. Both ridings send one MP to Parliament, so a vote in Labrador is worth eight times as much. The average Alberta riding has more than 125,000 people. Contrast this with PEI, where the average riding size is 39,000 people. The four Atlantic provinces and the three northern territories have a population below 2.8 million, yet they have more seats than Alberta, which had 4.8 million as of the 2021 census. The smaller ridings tend to vote Liberal. A total of 43,848 votes elected six Liberal MPs in Newfoundland, PEI, and the territories. This is less than the average number of votes to elect a single MP in the six largest Conservative ridings. Canada’s population has grown by 10 percent since the 2021 Census, with three-quarters of the growth in Alberta, BC, and Ontario, which are all already under-represented in Parliament. This means that the new distribution is already far out of date, even before it takes effect. These inequalities resulted from a series of decisions by our leaders. One of the most significant was the “grandfather clause” of 1985 which decided that a province cannot have fewer seats than it had that year. The most recent redistribution decided that Quebec can’t ever get fewer seats. This means that the only remaining option to restore proportionality is to add seats. But for this to be truly fair, based on Labrador’s population, our House of Commons would need to grow from 337 MPs to 925! That is clearly unrealistic. But adding a measly three to Alberta and one to Ontario and BC doesn’t even come close to being representative. If we were aiming for genuine proportionality, they should be getting 24 new seats. It would be difficult to change the representation in the Senate, as a change to the constitution requires approval from all provinces. But Coyne noted that it could be done in Parliament: “the ‘grandfather clause’ and the rest could all be amended or abolished by simple act of Parliament. Or are we incapable of living up to the same basic democratic principles that apply in other countries?” Of course, other countries aren’t our ultimate standard. A better standard is the basic biblical principles of fairness, justice, and impartiality. As Proverbs 16:11 instructs, “a just balance and scales are the LORD’s.”...

Articles, Book Reviews

Scout makes a comeback with new audio streaming service

Entrepreneurial spirit meets Christian family values with tech startup Whillo.com ***** Reformed Perspective’s last issue featured a back cover ad that caught my eye. It introduced Whillo.com, a new audio streaming service featuring books like Scout and Wambu that were read to me by my father when I was a boy, and which I have since read to my own children. But weren’t these books rather “niche” to the Dutch Reformed community? Who would have turned them into audiobooks? Would the quality be any good? Streaming music and audiobooks continues to grow in popularity, also among Reformed households in Canada. But this was the first time I had seen a specifically Christian streaming service, let alone one that would feature classic Dutch Reformed books that many in the newest generation likely have not heard of, like Anne de Vries’ Journey Through the Night series. I have my own entrepreneurial itch, so I set up a Zoom meeting with Whillo’s founder and owner Layne van Rhijn to learn more about this new service and the vision behind it. From drones to audiobooks The van Rhijn family. Layne and his family live in Diamond City, Alberta, just outside of Lethbridge, and are members of a local Netherlands Reformed congregation. He works full-time as a paramedic firefighter. One of the perks of the job is that he gets regular blocks of time off. With an entrepreneurial spirit and a propensity to get things done, he has turned this time “off” into a number of vibrant business ventures. It started with his interest in, and growing collection of drones. He started an online drone store out of his garage, expanded into a store, and then eventually sold that company to an investor. This was followed by a new venture, focused on the used market for commercial drones. “So I built an app for drone traders, like an Auto Trader for selling used drones,” shared Layne. That has grown to become a marketplace for used drones throughout North America and quickly led to many more opportunities. “So then we started doing apps and different websites for clients.” Over time, he grew a portfolio of companies which provide income streams and he continues to grow and scale them. In 2021 Layne and his wife Melinda created Whillo, “to scratch an itch….We have three young kids ourselves, and are always looking for good audio content for them. And we found ourselves proof-listening a lot.” A librarian at their local Christian school then expressed interest in putting good books online in audio form. So Layne put together a proposal of what it would take, with them providing the tech help and the librarian (also an aunt) helping with the narrating. As Layne explains: “Initially, we were going to keep it small and kind of internal, and then it started growing on its own. So then we actually did a proper app and have grown it from there.” Growing an audio library Whillo was more difficult to get off the ground than Layne expected. “You can't just use any book, right? You have to use something either in the public domain or set up licensing agreements. So we were initially quite limited in what we could do.” They began to grow their collection with licensing agreements, and they also started hiring professional narrators from across the world. A skim through the catalog of Whillo’s website reveals over 200 audiobooks, many of which are for children and largely unknown beyond Dutch Reformed immigrants and their children. Layne noted that “we’ve significantly expanded our teen/adult selection over the past months and the more recent books we’ve added are well known across Christian circles.” I downloaded the app on my phone to give it a try, as our family was about to embark on another 12-hour road trip. This allowed our family of eight to listen to two books for about four or five hours total. I was pleasantly surprised by the listening experience. I guess I expected an amateur reader, or someone with a Dutch accent, but was treated to a professional and dynamic reading, comparable to what I get with a mainstream resource like Audible. But I also quickly learned that my children didn’t share the same interest that I had in most of the books available on Whillo. And looking at the music selection, it was apparent that it would be a hard sell for me to have my family listen to the entirely classical and choral genre. In recent decades, a lot has changed when it comes to the music being listened to in many Reformed homes, including in my own. Overcoming obstacles But Whillo has found a receptive audience not just with some conservative Reformed families, but among conservative families from other Christian traditions as well, including the Mennonites and Hutterites, and have noticed a large uptick in traffic from various homeschool groups. Layne’s expectation is that it will keep growing in content and reach. For example, it can become a place where choirs and musicians can get their content out to those who will appreciate it. He acknowledged that choosing content is incredibly difficult as there is no shortage of differing opinions of what is appropriate or good. Another challenge is the sheer cost, as some of his larger titles require between $2,000-$5,000 each to produce, and then half of the proceeds from subscribers go to royalties. But the enterprise has recently crossed the line where it is being profitable, and is also beginning to attract larger publishers like Youth With a Mission (YWAM). Over 33,000 hours have already been streamed since last January, when Whillo began tracking, with about seventy percent of the listeners coming from Canada. “It's been the hardest business, by far, that I've ever tackled. And I didn't expect that at all. Every part of it has been hard and but also very rewarding.” Layne cited examples where he receives emails or message from families who tell them how much they appreciate it and listen to it. “It keeps us going.” You can check out Whillo’s selection at Whillo.com. Picture courtesy of Layne van Rhijn....

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14