Recent Articles | Reformed Perspective

Browse By Topic

Amazing stories from times past

Apologetics 101

Assorted

Being the Church

Christian education

Christian education - Sports

Church history

Conferences

Culture Clashes

Dating

Dying Well

Economics

Economics - Home Finances

Education

Entertainment

Evangelism

Gender roles

History

Homosexuality

Human Rights

Humor

In a Nutshell

Indigenous peoples

Internet

Interview with an artist

Letter Writing

Marriage

Media bias

Music

Parenting

People we should know

Politics

Pornography

Pro-life - Abortion

Pro-life - Adoption

Pro-life - Euthanasia

Pro-life - Fostering

Religion

Religion - Mormons

Religion - Pentecostal

Religion - Roman Catholic

Remembrance Day

RP Speaks

Science - Creation/Evolution

Science - Environment

Science - General

Sexuality

Soup and Buns

Theology

Transgenderism

Most Recent

Assorted

Our forever home

Reflections on finding permanence from someone who has lived in 27 homes.

*****

Home is Where the Heart Is.
God Bless Our Home.
Home Sweet Home.

Have you seen or heard these slogans lately? Maybe on a plaque or as an embroidered craft on your grandmother’s wall? Maybe on a hand-painted sign? Or how about this. You’re searching real estate online and a beautiful property is described as “your new forever home!” Recently, I heard a Christian podcaster use that term – forever home – in reference to where she was living. It made me think a little deeper about how we bandy those words about. Perhaps a little carelessly?

God understands

Although the idea of finding the perfect place to live is universally appealing, what should our perspective as Christians be? We’re all going to die one day so the concept of finding a permanent place on this planet is fundamentally flawed. So where is our forever home? As believers we know that “our citizenship is in heaven, and from it we await a Savior, the Lord Jesus Christ” (Phil. 3:20).

And yet God understands our earthly desire for home here and now. He promised the Israelites that one day they would enter a land flowing with milk and honey. They would build houses and dwell securely.

Psalm 132:13-14 says, “For the LORD has chosen Zion; He has desired it for His dwelling place; ‘This is my resting place forever; here I will dwell, for I have desired it’” .

If God desired an earthly dwelling place, then surely, He understands our desire for one. How do we live with our own intense longing and need for an earthly home, knowing that this planet ultimately is not where we will spend eternity? The conundrum set before us is to create loving spaces where we can raise families, practice the art of hospitality, and honor God… all the while remembering the words of Jesus in Matthew 6:19-21.

“Do not lay up for yourselves treasures on earth, where moth and rust destroy and where thieves break in and steal, but lay up for yourselves treasures in heaven, where neither moth nor rust destroys and where thieves do not break in and steal. For where your treasure is, there your heart will be also.”

Did you catch that last part? Sounds a lot like Home is Where the Heart Is, doesn’t it?

My parents did an amazing job of keeping the tension between our earthly and heavenly homes foremost in the hearts and minds of their five children. Whenever we drove home from an afternoon of shopping, a visit to another family, or our annual camping trip, my mother sang an old-fashioned song…

‘Mid pleasures and palaces though we may roam,
Be it ever so humble, there’s no place like home.

But she always followed that up with…

There's a land that is fairer than day,
And by faith we can see it afar.

To an impressionable, often sleepy young child, sitting squished between her older siblings in the backseat, that balance struck home. The yearning for a safe place at the end of a long tiring day became permanently intermingled with the conviction of knowing this world isn’t our final abode.

Citizenship?

Fast forward through the years and I’m in a car again. Over our 40+ years of marriage I’ve moved many times with my husband and have given a lot of thought to this subject. Each time we moved into a new place, I prayed for God’s hand of protection to cover us. Each time we moved out, I learned to hold our earthly possessions lightly, letting go of material things and clinging ever more tightly to heavenly treasures.

My car is parked beside a booth. A uniformed guard perches on a stool inside. “Citizenship?” he asks brusquely.

I’m at the border. Crossing the invisible line between two nations. On my way to visit our daughter who married an American and moved there fifteen years ago. Every time I’m asked that inevitable question, I want to answer “my citizenship is in heaven.” But then I remember that the agent posing the question has the authority to lawfully detain me or send me on my way. I dutifully answer “Canadian.”

How much more can God, who has the ultimate authority, welcome us one glorious day into His everlasting kingdom… or banish us from His presence. Our forever home is not and never can be here on earth. One day, at the brink of eternity, we will all stand before His judgment throne, and our citizenship will either be in heaven or hell. Let’s be diligent to lay up our treasures where they rightfully belong. In our true forever home.

Entertainment

“What can I do anyways?”

35 screen-alternative ideas ***** You can’t beat something with nothing (as Eph. 4:28, Matt. 12:30, and Matt. 12:43-45 make clear). That means ...

Assorted

Sliver Mustard's journey

Perhaps as many as a million people lived in Noah's Grove. A thriving community, it had begun small but had grown over decades and centuries. Children...

Interview with an artist

Rachel VanEgmond is exploring God’s general revelation

Politics

Man Up: ARPA leaderboards and the call to courageous action

Internet

How to stay sane in an overstimulated age

Reconnect information and action ***** In today’s hyperconnected world, information comes at us fast and furious, from every direction, 24-7. We wake up to news alerts about a major earthquake in Japan or a political assassination in Ecuador. We open our social media feeds and, within the first minute of scrolling, see the latest grim headlines about war or rumors of war, the latest anger-inducing missive in this or that culture war debate, and the latest foolish oversharing from this or that uncle or college friend. Because we are human and emotionally wired, it’s natural that these things provoke us and inflame our hearts to want to do something. Yet what can we do with this abundance of troublesome information aside from being informed about it? We are overstimulated but underactivated. Information bombards us but action is elusive. I’m convinced this dynamic is one of the major sources of anxiety and mental unhealth in today’s information age, and it’s something Neil Postman warned about. More info than we can do anything with Postman talked about it in terms of what he called the “information-action ratio.” For most of human history, there was a high correlation between the information that filled human brains and the tangible actions they could take in response. “News of the world” was inaccessible to most people. The information that concerned them was closer-to-home realities of family, farm, or community: information with direct bearing on the actions of everyday life. But this all changed, Postman argued, with the invention of the telegraph. Suddenly, the “news of the world” was much more accessible to average people, who found it an amusing novelty. The problem, however, is that this influx of far-flung information “gives us something to talk about but cannot lead to any meaningful action.” As Postman observed, “For the first time in human history, people were faced with the problem of information glut, which means that simultaneously they were faced with the problem of a diminished social and political potency.”1 If Postman’s observations about “information glut” were accurate forty years ago, how much more are they today, when we’re speeding down the “information superhighway” faster than ever via our ubiquitous smartphones and ever-present Wi-Fi? And the resulting problem of impotence is even more pronounced than it was in Postman’s era. In today’s world, it’s not just occasional televised traumas that burden our souls; it’s the constant feed. “Breaking news” is no longer the alarming verbiage that signals a rare calamity; it’s the everyday parlance of twenty-four-hour news and social media publishers skilled at the art of clickbait. These media publishers are eager to garner eyeballs by any means necessary. Another school shooting. A salacious scandal. An election “shock poll.” A helicopter-filmed police chase. An Amber Alert for a missing child. But what are we to do with all these alarming headlines and triggering dings of “breaking news”? Media outlets don’t care about this question. Their only interest is that we have tuned in, clicked, and fallen for the pseudo urgency of the Important Information they’ve put on our radar. Making audiences “aware” – at best, helping them become “informed citizens” – seems to be the chief value proposition the news industry can offer in its defense. But awareness to what end? Is this tidal wave of chaotic information informing us merely for the sake of us “being informed”? Awareness as an end unto itself We’ve come to a point where, yes, the primary goal of most information mediated to us is that we should be informed and aware of it. Not educated or activated about important things happening in the world, mind you; merely aware. The benefits of an informed citizenry have long been trumpeted as a valorous purpose of the free press (and indeed, the benefits are real). But we also need to talk about the liabilities that come with an overinformed or trivially informed citizenry. In Amusing Ourselves to Death, Postman argued that TV had altered the meaning of “being informed” by “creating a species of information that might properly be called disinformation.” This is not the same as outright misinformation, he said. It’s rather misleading information, which “creates the illusion of knowing something but which in fact leads one away from knowing.”2 In Postman’s view, mass media (led by television) created a world of dilettante experts whose absorption of vast amounts of information – packaged to them as entertainment – gave them a false sense of know-how about the happenings of the world. Referencing this know-how (e.g., “I saw this news story about ____” or “I read this Atlantic article about ____”) became status markers. Information awareness took on a cultural cachet quite apart from its actionability. Fast forward four decades, and we now take it for granted that “awareness” is a value in its own right. The conversation starters might be different today (“I saw this TED Talk on YouTube about ____” or “I saw this TikTok about ____”), but the status it brings has only increased. Our ability to cite, allude to, or summarize secondhand information about a breadth of things (even if our grasp of the “thing” is actually wafer thin) turns information into a means of signaling our claim on that most coveted virtue, relevance. For digital natives who’ve lived their whole lives in a hyperaware, globally connected information ecosystem, it’s understandable that a word like woke would come into prominence as a shorthand for social justice. In the twentieth century, social justice “activism” involved tangible actions like volunteering or picketing in a real physical place; in the twenty-first century, someone can be an “activist” without ever getting off his or her phone. Activism (or “slacktivism”) moves from being primarily about doing to largely about saying: participating in the correct lingo, hashtags, and accepted speech (e.g., preferred pronouns) becomes the means of activism more than, well, actions offline. “Doing justice” becomes a discursive activity more than a tangible one. In this upside-down world, people can – and often are – accused of apathy and inaction for being silent (“silence is violence”) on social media, even if their offline, unpublished activities are thoroughly oriented around addressing the injustice they’re being accused of ignoring. So it goes in a world where discourse about a problem (talking about it publicly) occupies a higher social standing than actual efforts to solve the problem. This is problematic. Problem of being overinformed Five years after publishing Amusing Ourselves, Postman gave a speech to the German Informatics Society that elaborated on the information-action ratio. In the talk, titled “Informing Ourselves to Death,” Postman described how, for the average person in 1990, “information no longer has any relation to the solution of problems.” The way he described it could just as easily describe the average person in 2025: The tie between information and action has been severed. Information is now a commodity that can be bought and sold, or used as a form of entertainment, or worn like a garment to enhance one’s status. It comes indiscriminately, directed at no one in particular, disconnected from usefulness; we are glutted with information, drowning in information, have no control over it, don’t know what to do with it.... Our defenses against information glut have broken down; our information immune system is inoperable. We don’t know how to filter it out; we don’t know how to reduce it; we don’t know how to use it.3 Remember, Postman observed this “information glut” problem in the pre-internet era. How much more are we glutted with information today? If we didn’t have good “information immunity” defenses back then, we’re even worse off now – especially in the age of ChatGPT, deepfakes, political misinformation campaigns, and the resulting epistemological crisis. The information crisis we face is at least threefold: too much information that moves too fast and is algorithmically tailored to be too focused on me.4 In a sense, “being informed” is more of a liability than an asset in today’s world. The quality of digitally mediated information is simply too untrustworthy. What happens to us when we’re overinformed but underactivated? From my experience and observations, some common side effects occur. We become anxious – When a world’s worth of “breaking news” calamities, injustices, and apocalyptic headlines steadily feed our souls, we naturally feel anxious and on edge. We become angry – Rising blood pressure and seething anger follow when we’re constantly exposed to partisan clickbait, triggering troll provocations, and other forms of foolish talk. We become addicted – Algorithms easily figure out what types of information each of us can’t resist. Soon we’re scrolling and clicking like addicts, unable to resist the intoxicating allure of our favorite genres of “news,” trivia, or juicy gossip. We become numb – A diet of information disconnected from tangible action makes information abstract and surreal, disconnected from our real life. Eventually, headlines about a horrific mass shooting become things we scroll past as casually as we glance at a friend’s vacation photo. We become lonely – When we spend large segments of our lives binging on digital information far removed from local, embodied communities – even if it’s information we debate or discuss with others online – we become lonelier. The online influencer we listen to, or the interlocutor avatars we fiercely debate, are hardly substitutes for the know-and-be-known community we really need. We become delusional – Because of the algorithmic shape of information today, no two of us live in the same information universe. We all see things differently, in ways tweaked to please our preferences and biases. Naturally, this further entrenches us in echo chambers, deepening our confidence in our own rightness (however wrong we are). We become detached from reality – The cumulative effect of all the above is that an overinformed life becomes a pseudo real life. When awareness trumps action and we’re more compelled by narratives than by reality, our sense of the world becomes ever more surreal. Perhaps C. S. Lewis sums it up best in this letter to a friend, when he laments the dynamics of an information-action disconnect: It is one of the evils of rapid diffusion of news that the sorrows of all the world come to us every morning. I think each village was meant to feel pity for its own sick and poor whom it can help and I doubt if it is the duty of any private person to fix his mind on ills which he cannot help. (This may even become an escape from the works of charity we really can do to those we know.) A great many people do now seem to think that the mere state of being worried is in itself meritorious. I don’t think it is.5 Not only is Lewis right to challenge the social merit attached to “the mere state of being worried” (i.e., the social capital of awareness), but he hits the nail on the head when he says we should avoid fixing our minds on problems we can’t solve. This not only burdens us in all the ways described above but tends to distract us from the local problems we can help fix. Neglecting the local With all the energy we devote to keeping up with the goings-on of the world, we might neglect the people we can love and the problems we can address in our own backyards. For Christians called to love our neighbors and tangibly pursue mercy and justice, this is the crux of what’s wrong with an imbalanced information-action ratio. Such is the state of our mass-mediated information environment that your average twenty-first-century young person can tell you far more about national politics than local politics. He develops strong opinions about presidential candidates and Supreme Court cases but couldn’t tell you the name of the mayor or a city council member in his city, nor identify the most pressing challenges facing his proximate community. Of the millions of Gen Zers who posted a blank black square on Instagram in June 2020 (#blackouttuesday) to protest police brutality, how many have ever had a conversation with a police officer in their own neighborhood? Of the millions who changed their social media avatars to the Ukrainian flag in February 2022, how many have tangibly helped refugees or immigrants from war-torn nations in their own cities? Online hashtag actions are well intentioned. And maybe the viral power of such “collective online action” makes some difference. But as Lewis points out, the danger is that such actions “become an escape from the works of charity we really can do to those we know.” There are many reasons why everyone should strive for a more balanced information-action ratio. It’ll help your mental health and ground you in local life and embodied community. For Christians specifically, it’ll remind you of your creaturely limits and deepen your trust in a sovereign God who is omniaware in ways you can never be. And it’ll present more fruitful avenues for loving your neighbor and being a faithful witness in the particular place where God has situated you. Bringing balance to the ratio Christians should be countercultural by striving to reconnect information and action, modeling a healthier way of living for a world out of balance. How can we do this? Here are ideas for individual Christians and ideas for churches and leaders. For Individual Christians Audit your news and information diet – Make intentional efforts to reduce your intake of national and global information while increasing your intake of local information (which has more potential to be actionable). Don’t turn your ears off to the cries of the world. But listen more eagerly to the cries closer to home. Embrace your limits – As you become more “unaware” of the steady hum of information in the news that might be making others anxious, angry, and stressed, see this as an opportunity for resting in God’s sovereignty and praising him for his power. A world’s worth of burdens is too much for you – but not for God. Contemplating our limits in contrast to God’s unlimitedness is a fruitful path toward wisdom (see Ps. 90). Rejoice in how God designed you – You are an integrated mind and body. What comes into your brain has a natural outlet in your physical activities. You weren’t made to just be aware of faraway problems and global chaos about which you can’t do much. You were made to bring order to the chaos in your immediate vicinity. You weren’t made to be a gawker but a gardener (Gen. 2:15). Pray – Prayer is an important action we can take. When you inevitably encounter information about an injustice or tragedy in some far-flung part of the nation or world, don’t let the information sit idly in your troubled brain. Take it to the Lord in prayer. As much as our secular culture demands more than “thoughts and prayers,” Christians know prayer is actually potent and crucial. If we can’t do anything else in response to troublesome information, we can pray to the one who can. For Churches and Church Leaders Disciple people in media habits – Information intake should be a subject addressed in discipleship – not in a legalistic sense but as part of wisdom. Help the people in your church think through the amount and type of information they consume and how it’s shaping their souls. Promote localism – Church leaders should lead people (especially Gen Z and Gen Alpha) to prioritize the local, proximate, and offline as much or more than the distant, disembodied goings-on of the online world. Make the case for why a balanced ratio of information and action is not only a recipe for improved mental and spiritual health but conducive to a more effective Christian mission. Gather people for prayer – When some national or global calamity does occur, in such a way that most in your Christian community will be aware of and troubled by it, prayer is an appropriate communal response. Both in the regular church gathering and in impromptu meetings, the church can and should take the action of prayer. It’s an “action” in the truest sense, and one we should never neglect. Call people to take action – Churches should regularly organize opportunities for people to tangibly solve real problems in the community. Often this works best by establishing long-term partnerships with organizations already doing specific work that aligns with biblical neighbor love: crisis pregnancy centers, foster and adoption agencies, homeless shelters, food distribution centers, and so forth. There is no end to the needs in your own backyard. And if a national news headline happens to be about something happening in your city or community, then your church should spring into hands-on action. This is a rare opportunity for burdensome information about calamity to directly translate to tangible community service, in partnership with local organizations and civic authorities. Beauty of activated Church For much of my adult life, I was an overinformed news junkie. The onset of social media amplified this addiction – and my soul suffered as a result. Thankfully, I found a healthier way to live, in no small part because I rediscovered the beauty and necessity of the local church. Once I gave myself wholeheartedly to local church life, I came to see that the burdens and griefs of ten people in my small group were far more important for me to carry than the burdens and griefs of countless sufferers on social media. Not only could I see the actual tears on actual faces as they shared, but I could hug them and know them in their suffering – and help them through it. I also came to see that the tangibly activated local church is a far more satisfying and functional community than the virtually aware community of social media. Whether they’re distributing food in partnership with local food banks, mobilizing volunteers for a local foster and adoption agency, or simply rallying the congregation around the needs of the community (single moms, meal trains for sick families, house cleanup for elderly members, and so forth), a church’s localized, tangible action is beautiful to behold. And when troublesome news from distant places does reach our corner of the world – as it invariably will – the local church is where I go first to process and pray through it, even if no other “action” is possible in response. For centuries, the church’s “prayers of the people” liturgies have borne witness to the fact that in those instances where we can’t “do” anything with our hands to help, we can always drop to our knees and pray. Christians can model a different mode of living in an over-informed, underactivated world. It’s a mode that isn’t numb or ambivalent to the countless problems that plague our world but realistic about our limited scope and where we can best be used. It’s a mode that leads to calmer minds, more focused souls, and more engaged bodies. It’s a mode that syncs up with how we were created and resists the digital era’s many temptations toward god-like limitlessness. Content taken from “Scrolling Ourselves to Death” by Ivan Mesa and Brett McCracken, ©2025. Used by permission of Crossway, a publishing ministry of Good News Publishers, crossway.org. Endnotes 1 Neil Postman, Amusing Ourselves to Death, 20th anniversary ed. (1985; repr., New York: Penguin Books, 2005), 68. 2 Postman, Amusing Ourselves, 107. 3 Neil Postman, “Informing Ourselves to Death” (address to the German Informatics Society, Stuttgart, Germany, October 11, 1990), https://web.williams.edu/HistSci/curriculum/101 /informing.html. 4 I devote chapters to each of these three challenges in my book, The Wisdom Pyramid: Feeding Your Soul in a Post-Truth World (Wheaton, IL: Crossway, 2021), chaps. 1–3. 5 C. S. Lewis, letter to Dom Bede Griffiths (1946), quoted in Paul F. Ford, ed., Yours, Jack: Spiritual Direction from C. S. Lewis (New York: HarperCollins, 2008), 119....

Religion - Roman Catholic

The Way

Jesus told his disciples, “I am the way, and the truth, and the life. No one comes to the Father except through Me” (John 14:6) **** Many years ago, my husband and I, plus some of our children, traveled from Owen Sound, Ontario to Michigan, USA. We attended the wedding of a close friend and had a wonderful time. It was late afternoon when we left Michigan and I was assigned the task of holding the map and marking out the route we were to take back to Ontario. It was in those ancient days before cars were equipped with GPS. The beginning of our way home was fairly easy. The children were quiet and relaxed, and no one had yet attained the “Are we there yet?” syndrome. However, as it grew darker and the small print on the map became more and more difficult to read, things grew a little trickier. Eventually, as the hours drifted by, questions from my husband, such as: “Are you sure we turn left here?” and “Things don’t look familiar,” and “I don’t recall this town at all,” waxed stronger and stronger. Truth be told, it totally altered the atmosphere in the car from cheerfulness and unconcern to one of uncertainty and skepticism as to my abilities to be a pilot. The climax of this trip was reached when we drove under a blue, overhead sign which welcomed us, in large white letters, not to Ontario, but to Indiana. We, consequently, arrived home a little late, but our marriage was intact. *** Pope Francis, the 266th pope of the Roman Catholic Church, went on the last lap of a journey in April of this year, 2025. He died. His journey, like the journey of all living souls, had been woven throughout his life with many twists and turns. He had been equipped with a map as well. However, the map he chose to carry was a trifle skewed. Consequently, his direction resulted in being a little lopsided, a trifle off kilter and amazingly crooked. There were a number of turns Francis should have totally avoided. When he came to the “Sola Scriptura” sign, he wrongly headed toward “Scripture and Tradition.” When there was a clear indication that no tolls would be required at the “Sola Gratia” causeway he calmly swerved off into “Grace and Cooperation.” At the neon lights proclaiming “Solus Christus” he shrugged, turned his steering wheel the opposite way, repairing to “Christ and the Church.” At the roundabout, which clearly pointed to the fact that the first right, “Sola Fide,” should be taken, he took the left turn, pushing for “Faith and Good Works.” And when he came to a flashing yellow light indicating “Soli Deo Gloria,” he braked, scratched his head and sighed. Then, although he took the flashing yellow light into account, he turned back and took the alternate route of “Glorification of the Saints.” Francis’ driving ability was almost certainly hampered by his bound hands. They had a rosary wrapped around them. Or perhaps the pallium he wore – the sleeveless cape bearing six black crosses and made with the wool from two lambs – somewhat hindered his arm movements. Or, most probably, the white cloth draped over his face, weighed down with a collection of medals and coins from his reign as pope, blinded and handicapped his capacity for sound judgment. Jesus told His disciples in the specific map instructions of John 14:6 (and He is also telling us): “I am the Way, and the Truth, and the Life. No one comes to the Father except through Me.” This was an excerpt of a devotional chapter from an upcoming book by Christine....

Being the Church

Christians don’t pray

Who says that Christians don’t pray? Of course, Christians pray, don’t they? Isn’t prayer one of the essential characteristics of Christian life? Every time the family sits at a meal someone prays asking God to bless the food. When they go to church, the preacher prays and people bow their heads and join him in prayer, don’t they? What kind of nonsense is this to say that Christians don’t pray? Wow, what a way to start an article! Let me see if I can explain. ***** It is Friday evening and a missionary has come to your church to present the situation in Upper Castelia. He says that the national leaders are in some distress, the people are poor and mistreated, the missionaries are understaffed, and the government is refusing to grant visas to new missionaries. They are also having difficulty with their financial support. The people need Bibles, food, medical help, and national pastors. But his main concern is the need for prayer for the people. He asks the congregation to pray for him and his family as they will be returning to Upper Castelia Castelia next month. The appeal strikes a chord in your heart and mind. You say to yourself, “By God’s grace, I will pray.” As the pastor closes the service, he mentions the need to pray for “our sister Martha” in the hospital with cancer. After the service you shake hands with the missionary and give his wife a hug. You whisper to them, “I’ll pray for you.” You get into your car and drive through traffic rehearsing in your mind the words of the missionary. You are a careful driver but there are so many bad drivers who speed or forget to signal. And some guy seems to be glued to your back bumper. Aloud, you say, “Why aren’t there any police around to arrest him for tailgating? Drivers these days need to take a refresher course on driving courtesy.” When you arrive home a little frustrated, you have things to do. The kids have to get to bed on time because Saturday is a busy day. After you tuck them in you can relax. This will give you some time to check a few things on Facebook. A few hours later, you pull yourself away from the computer and turn on the television evening news. Looks like taxes are going to increase. Cost of living is up. There was an accident on the major highway. An offender was released on parole after serving only half of his sentence. The fire crews were called out to a blaze on Main Street. There’s a hint of some impending scandal in the government. The sports scores show that your team is not doing nearly as well as it should. Ahh, here’s the weather. Tomorrow is going to be pretty much the same as today with the slight possibility of precipitation. After the news you tidy up the place, put the few empty snack dishes into the sink, yawn, and get into bed ... too tired to pray. Saturday is another busy day. The children are up early. Bob needs a ride to sports practice and Barb needs to go to swim class. The Thompsons are coming over for the barbecue. You’re too busy to pray. On Sunday morning you rush around getting the family ready for church. During the service, your pastor mentions the good meeting last Friday with the Upper Castelia missionaries. Yes, you silently agree, “We need to pray for them.” Apart from church, Sunday’s routine doesn’t differ significantly from the other days. You said you would pray for the missionaries, but you haven’t. You are irritated by bad drivers, but you don’t pray for them. You are disturbed by what you hear and see on the news, but you don’t pray. You complain about the government, but you don’t pray. Since Martha wasn’t in church, you forgot all about her. And I say, “Christians don’t pray.” ***** I hate to say it (having been a pastor, now retired) but even some pastors don’t pray. They lead in prayer in church services, they pray at the bedside of suffering people, and they promise to pray for you. But with all the cares of the church, they don’t spend time praying in their offices or in their homes. Again I say, “Christians don’t pray.” Jesus prayed. Many times He went off alone to pray. The disciples watched the Lord pray and came to the realization that compared to Him they really didn’t pray. They heard the self-righteous prayers of the Pharisees, but Jesus prayed differently. They came to Jesus with a simple request: “Lord, teach us to pray” (Luke 11:1). They wanted a life of prayer. The Lord’s response was just as simple as their request. In the Sermon on the Mount, He told them to avoid the way that their leaders prayed. Then He gave them a template for prayer. You have probably memorized it. “Our Father in heaven, Hallowed be Your name. Your kingdom come. Your will be done on earth as it is in heaven. Give us this day our daily bread. And forgive us our debts, as we forgive our debtors. And do not lead us into temptation, but deliver us from the evil one. For Yours is the kingdom and the power and the glory forever. Amen” (Matt. 6:9-13, NKJV). The ancient Greeks argued about which was more important: form or content. To a thirsty person, form without content is like a cup with no water. Content without form is like a splash of water in the face. Both form and content (cup and water) are necessary. When it comes to a life of prayer, the same is true. The words and requests are the content, but the structure is the form. A prayer list needs some structure. The Lord’s answer to the request of the disciples provides us with a very comprehensive structure. “Hallowed be Your name.” Begin with exalting God. When Jesus died on the cross, “the veil of the temple was torn in two from top to bottom” (Matt. 27:51). And now we who believe in Jesus Christ have free access to God. We can approach God’s throne of grace boldly to “obtain mercy and find grace to help in time of need” (Heb. 4:16). Prayer, therefore, begins with adoration of God as your heavenly Father who invites you into His presence. “Your kingdom come.” Pray for the extension of the Lordship of Christ in the lives of your relatives, friends, and neighbors. Pray for missionary work around the world. Be specific. “Your will be done on earth as it is in heaven.” God has set leaders over us so that His will might be done here. He has given the church pastors and elders to give spiritual guidance. Pray for them. We are to be subject to the civil authorities, too. Pray for teachers, police, firemen, wardens, medical people, employers, and political leaders. “Give us this day our daily bread.” Notice that our needs are not first in the list and it is not “my” need but “our” need. What are the daily needs of your family, church, friends, co-workers, and neighbors? The elderly need safety and health. Parents need wisdom. “Forgive us our debts, as we forgive our debtors.” In the same way that we forgive others, we want God to forgive us. Remember the story of the steward who would not forgive the man who was under him although he himself had been forgiven a vast amount (Matt. 18:23-35). The man who has truly been forgiven cannot help but to forgive others. “Lord, forgive me for my sin.” “Do not lead us into temptation, but deliver us from the evil one.” This is a prayer for spiritual safety as well as physical safety for you and all those you know. We ask to be kept from temptation, including the temptation to waste our time that keeps us from our prayer time. Your temptation may be different from mine, so ask for the Holy Spirit’s guidance for spiritual victory. Early in our marriage, we spent a few days with my wife’s parents. Her father was a successful pastor. I asked my mother-in-law, “What is Dad’s secret?” She said, “I have patched the knees of his long johns many times, but I have never patched the seat.” On a personal note, every day for the 60 years of our marriage, we have spent at least 30 minutes each evening as our devotional time. I will read about two chapters of the Bible aloud and my wife will follow along in her Bible, then she will pray aloud. The next night it’s her turn to read two chapters and I pray. We have read the Bible through cover-to-cover many times in many versions. We have several pages of prayer requests. Each page follows the pattern of the Lord’s prayer. May I encourage you to turn off the computer and the TV half an hour before bedtime. Dedicate that time to reading aloud and praying. I started this article with the words, “Christians don’t pray” but after reading what I have written, I hope you can say, “Some Christians don’t pray, but with God’s help, I pray.” John Barach has been a pastor and Bible college professor and still runs a biblical Greek tutorial website at GreekDoc.com. He and his wife look to celebrate their 60th anniversary in August....

Internet

How to use AI like a Christian boss

Imagine you’re the boss of your own company. After months of searching, you’ve just landed the most brilliant assistant in the country. He’s lightning-fast, top of his class in every subject, and available 24/7. He never sleeps, never complains, and never forgets a deadline. You can ask him for ideas, outlines, editing help – even technical research – and he’ll give you an answer in seconds. Best of all? He’s already sitting at your desk. His name is AI. Now here’s the catch: he’s not human and doesn’t share your values, or know right from wrong, and he always speaks with confidence even when he’s completely wrong. If you hand over your work to him, he might give you something that sounds smart, even impressive. But he might also serve up something misleading, shallow or just plain false. And because you’re the boss, it’s your name – and your integrity – on the line if anything goes wrong. Most of us aren’t bosses of our own companies…but every Christian has a calling to steward time, talents and resources. From the beginning, God made man to rule over creation (Gen. 1:26), and that includes ruling – rather than being ruled by – technology. There are valid reasons to approach AI with caution (as we’ve seen in previous Reformed Perspective articles like “Will AI Replace Reading?” and “Is AI Just Another Tool – or Something More?”). Even so, AI is here to stay, and it’s already reshaping the job market, communication, and everyday life for many people. One global management group says AI has the potential to be as transformative as the steam engine. AI is a tool unlike anything we’ve seen before, but at its core, that’s what it remains: a tool. And like any tool, it can be used for good or evil, depending on the people designing and directing it. Used wisely, AI can be an excellent assistant, capable of drafting hundreds of words in a short time. However, not all that AI produces is wise, relevant or true. That is why it’s important to think critically and test everything it says. Proverbs 14:15 reminds us, “The simple believes everything, but the prudent gives thought to his steps.” Just as it would be unwise to operate heavy machinery without proper training, Christians should not use AI without preparation and thoughtfulness. Quick answers can be tempting, but Proverbs 21:5 reminds us: “The plans of the diligent lead surely to abundance, but everyone who is hasty comes only to poverty.” Rushing to use AI without wisdom or careful review can lead to shallow or even dangerous results. I work as a project coordinator for a company that produces curriculum and I use AI almost daily in my work. It’s helped me draft content, edit writing, brainstorm ideas, and even develop Christian material (it does know a thing or two about Reformed theology). But I’ve also seen how quickly it can go off course. Used wisely, AI can be part of faithful stewardship. If you’re considering AI – or already using it – these seven principles can help you use it to the glory of God without compromising convictions or integrity. 1. Be the boss – not the bystander AI is here to assist, not lead. Think of it like a new apprentice: helpful, fast, and tireless – but not wise. AI can draft an article, summarize a report, or give you a list of ideas, but it doesn't know whether those ideas are any good. That’s your job. Use AI to boost your productivity, not replace your discernment. If you're an engineer or electrician, you know how this works already. An apprentice can be a huge help – they might prep materials, run calculations, or handle basic wiring to save you time. But when it's time to sign off on the plans or certify the work, it's your name that's on the line. If the apprentice makes a mistake and the building collapses or catches fire, you're the one held responsible. That’s why every detail needs to be carefully checked and approved by the licensed professional. AI is no different. It's an assistant – not the one who signs the final plans. 2. Think critically and watch for mistakes AI tools are designed to sound convincing – but convincing doesn’t always mean correct. Sometimes they generate information that looks polished but is actually shallow, misleading, or outright wrong. This is known as a “hallucination.” For example, a US lawyer who used AI for legal research is now facing his own court hearing after using false AI-generated information in court. The lawyer didn’t realize that several of the legal cases that AI had cited for him didn’t actually exist. He passed them along unchecked. I’ve experienced many hallucinations myself, such as when I asked AI to clarify a punctuation rule and it said one thing in the rule and presented the opposite in the example it gave. That’s why you can’t just copy AI’s response and hit “send.” You need to review the results carefully. If you’re using AI to explore a topic you don’t know well, make sure you double-check the facts, confirm the logic, and – if possible – ask someone with more experience to give it a second look. AI has saved me significant time researching unfamiliar topics, but before finalizing anything, I verify the sources or have someone with expertise review it. Ideally, you should have at least some grasp of what good work looks like in the area you’re using AI for. If not, treat the AI’s output as a starting point, not a finished product. Use it to learn, refine, and check your thinking… but don’t assume it’s right. 3. Train AI like an apprentice What AI gives you after your first prompt is often just a rough draft. The result might be serviceable, but it’s rarely great unless the task is very simple. After all, apprentices need training. Here are some key tips for getting better results from AI: • Tell AI the role it should take on (math teacher, history professor, writer, business expert, travel agent, event planner, etc.). • Outline as many details as possible – task, tone, purpose, websites it can research, intended audience, length. • Provide examples. • Ask AI what questions it has for you. • After reviewing the output, point out how AI can improve the results. • Do a few edits of your own and let AI know what you did for future reference. For example, a first prompt for writing could look like this – you would tell ChatGPT: “Assume the role of an expert copywriter, familiar with Reformed theology as taught by John Calvin and R.C. Sproul. You are deeply familiar with the Heidelberg Catechism, Canons of Dort and Belgic Confession. Your job is to write articles for Reformed Perspective magazine. Here are some writing guidelines for this magazine… “I'd like to write an article for this magazine titled ‘How to Use AI Like a Christian Boss.’ In it, I'd like to compare AI to a smart apprentice. You can use what they come up with, and it might be very good, but before an engineer or architect can put a stamp on it, they have to go through every detail and make sure that they stand behind it… “Write this article in prose, but structured with numbered points for how to use AI like a Christian boss. Start with an outline. But before you do that, what questions do you have for me?” The first prompt is just the beginning. After that, a “Christian boss” process would look like: • Answering AI’s questions. • Instructing it to draft the outline for the article. • Carefully reviewing the outline, making some refinements yourself and/or telling AI to make refinements. • Instructing AI to draft the article. • Doing a detailed review and editing. The edits can be done on your own or by prompting AI (see the next point for some tips on that). I usually do a mix of both personal and AI-prompted edits. With refinement, specific instructions, and key edits, working with AI can turn a mediocre first result into a solid piece of writing. Note that because getting an excellent AI response often requires multiple rounds of prompting and giving feedback, it’s not always faster to use it for a task that you only need to do once. 4. Use AI like a creative sidekick AI can be a great help when you need a creative boost. You might ask it to: • Rewrite a sentence five different ways so you can choose the best version. • Give practical examples to strengthen a concept you’re trying to explain. • Help you generate ideas for starting or improving a project. • Reword a section of text for clarity, flow, or tone. • Give feedback and ideas for improvement on something you’ve written. • Ask you questions to help you think about something in new or deeper ways. Sometimes AI comes up with something surprisingly helpful. Other times it completely misses the mark. The key is to use it as a creative partner, not a crutch. Be prepared to write things yourself if AI just doesn’t give you what you need. (Yes, AI can have an off-day too.) 5. Protect your privacy – and your mind AI tools aren’t generally private. What you type may be stored or used to train future models, depending on the platform. That means anything personal or sensitive might not stay confidential. So be cautious. Don’t share anything you wouldn’t want repeated or misunderstood. Because it can mirror your tone and affirm your ideas, AI can start to feel personal, to the point that some people have started treating it like a friend, therapist or romantic partner. However, hearing exactly what you want from a machine can pull you away from real, God-given relationships. God calls us to grow in community, where we can be encouraged in our faith and held accountable when we wander. Proverbs 27:17 says, “Iron sharpens iron, and one man sharpens another” (ESV). AI can echo your own voice, but it will never call you to repentance, speak truth in love, or walk alongside you in genuine discipleship. 6. Train for discernment before you use it Just as students need to understand what 2 + 2 means before using a calculator, Christians need foundational knowledge before turning to AI. Skills like reading, writing, theology, math, and logic help us recognize when AI is inaccurate, shallow, or biased. AI is trained on massive amounts of data, and although it can recite the Heidelberg Catechism, most of its data likely didn’t come from a Christian perspective. One English teacher shared that when her students used an AI tool to give feedback on their writing, it consistently flagged Christian content as “too one-sided.” Romans 12:2 warns: “Do not be conformed to this world, but be transformed by the renewal of your mind, that by testing you may discern what is the will of God, what is good and acceptable and perfect.” God calls us to use discernment. Without a strong grounding in Scripture, truth, and general knowledge, we won’t have the tools to spot harmful ideas or use AI wisely. 7. Don’t let AI replace real mentors AI can be a useful support for learning, without replacing skill development. It can offer feedback, generate ideas or ask helpful questions to deepen your thinking. But it should never replace the guidance of real people. For Christians, learning isn’t just about improving skills or producing results. It’s about growing in wisdom and character. AI can’t be trusted to help you think biblically, challenge you in love or walk you through real-life decisions. That happens best in relationships. God commands, “Train up a child in the way he should go; even when he is old he will not depart from it” (Prov. 22:6). That is not a task we should trust to AI. If young people are going to use AI, they need a strong biblical foundation and wise guidance. Without that, AI becomes a shortcut rather than a tool – and we can’t shortcut godly wisdom and discernment. Conclusion Used wisely, AI can strengthen our work and spark new ideas. But as Christians, we don’t just care about what works, we care about what honors God. “The fear of the Lord is the beginning of wisdom” (Prov. 9:10). Faithful stewardship isn’t measured by cleverness or creativity, but by our trust in Christ and obedience to His Word. AI reflects the priorities of the person using it. So let’s bring ours under the lordship of Christ. Take responsibility. Stay alert. “Whatever you do, work heartily, as for the Lord and not for men” (Col. 3:23). Whether you use AI or not, let this be your aim: to honor God in all things, rule over creation, and never let created tools rule over you. P.S. In case you’re wondering, I did use AI like a Christian boss to write this article. See the short article below. ***** WHOSE SPEECHES WERE THEY? A quick conversation on having AI, and others, writing for us JON DYKSTRA: The one question I know readers will be asking, so let’s give them an answer, is, approximately what percentage of the article is AI written? Or is that even something you can put a percentage on? VALERIE VANDENBERG: That percentage question is a tough one. My process with AI involves a lot of back and forth. To give some more details, by the time AI drafted the article, I had already given it about 1,500 words of my own instructions (including the ideas I had for the article and answering AI's questions for me) in addition to giving it your writing guidelines from the Reformed Perspective website. JD: Can you get into the process just a bit more? VV: My first prompt included my ideas for the article and detailed instructions for my vision for it. Then I had AI draft an outline, which I adjusted until I was satisfied. After that I instructed AI to draft the article itself, which was followed by detailed editing (sometimes done by me, sometimes prompting AI to edit a section, and usually a mix of both). I often have AI write things a few different ways so I can glean the best ideas from the list. Or I just write it myself if I think my idea is better than what AI suggested. JD: This is something Reformed Perspective staff have been wrestling with, trying to think through the extent or limits we’d want to use ChatGPT or other AI. To this point I haven’t used it to generate text, but that’s been more a hesitancy – I’d like to listen in on the debate some more before coming to a firm conclusion – than any specific principled objections. Your article is a part of that debate, and I’m grateful for it. My initial take is that using AI to generate text, as in this article, is akin to a president using a speech writer. The writer crafts the words, but the president sets the direction, and adds in his own tweaks and orders rewrites, such that at the end he will so completely own these words, that we will fully attribute this speech to him, and not the writer. VV: Yes. The key Christian boss part of the process is that by the time I hit send to submit the article, every aspect of it (tone, content, structure, wording, etc.) is something I can stand behind, and as good as I could do alone or ideally better....

Assorted

Fun is something you make

11 tips for family road trips ***** “Bored” is a curse word in our house. Say that word, and my mom is liable to wash your mouth out with soap. ...

Pro-life - Euthanasia

Ontario shows why euthanasia “safeguards” can’t work

In a Nutshell

Tidbits – June 2025

A one-question test During an episode of the TV drama West Wing, the President of the United States has to figure out whether a boatload of Chinese r...

Assorted

Our family’s trip to the Ark

Ken Ham’s creationist organization Answers in Genesis has built a life-size replica of Noah’s Ark in the State of Kentucky. These Christians are p...

Culture Clashes

Get out of the game

Christians need to steer clear of sports gambling ***** When I was a kid, I remember my aunt asking, whenever we were traveling somewhere, “Are we having fun yet?” Of course, we usually said “Yes!” However, by the time I reached my teens, I thought (briefly) that my leisure activities needed just a little bit more to really be entertaining, so I came up with a way to make a pinball game at the neighborhood arcade more interesting – bet on the outcome. My idea was that whoever had the lower score would pay the other player a certain amount, based on the difference in the scores. Math must not have been my strongest subject at the time, and I wasn’t any better at pinball, because after just one game, I owed my friend six hundred dollars. Thankfully, he was a generous soul, and never did make me pay up. That is not the case for sports betting online. Countless commercials play up the excitement of being more involved in what’s happening out there on the ice, or field, or track. We’re told we can “get in the game” if only we put money down on the score, or how many points or penalty minutes a player will get, or what minute the first goal will be scored – there are dozens of betting possibilities for every game. But the company on the other end of your bet is not going to forgive you if you get in over your head. Still, what if you’re not as foolish as I was? What if you bet small, and you even use apps that restrict how much and how often you can bet? Is “just a little” sports gambling online still a problem? Yes it is. And God’s Word gives us several reasons to stay away from any sports gambling. 1. Christians are called to productivity An article on ARPACanada.ca titled “Gambling: Value or Vice” points to several risks of gambling, based on Lord’s Day 42 of the Heidelberg Catechism. Among other reasons, the article notes that in the unlikely event that you do happen to be successful in betting online or any other form of gambling, you are making money without creating anything of value – the exact opposite of the creation mandate of Genesis 1 – and at the expense of others. Any money you won could only come because many others lost. Your gain is their pain. 2. Love your weaker brother And that pain can be of the life-destroying kind. Saagar Enjeti, an American anti-gambling activist, notes that online sports betting companies make about half of their revenue from about five percent of their clients, because they are targeting the problem gamblers: the addicts. Enjeti cites the notorious example of a man whose wife is suing a sports betting company, because her husband gambled away his salary, his wife’s retirement account, and even the money he got by selling a baptism present for his children. For a Christian, if you know of any brothers or sisters in the Lord who are gambling addicts in your congregation, this is even more serious, since your (extremely unlikely) success is made at the expense of someone who is not only going into debt, but destroying their family, and even possibly endangering his relationship with God by making money, that next win, their god instead. In 1 Cor. 8:13 Paul writes, “Therefore if food makes my brother stumble, I will never eat meat, lest I make my brother stumble.” When Paul makes this commitment, it is in regard to an activity – eating food sacrificed to idols – that is not wrong in itself. How much worse it is when you continue to indulge a sinful habit that destroys your brother! 3. Don’t be a fool The same ARPACanada.ca article shares how gambling is just plain old unwise, since “the house always wins.” Saagar Enjeti notes that as foolish as gambling in a casino is, since the odds are stacked against you, sports betting generally offers much worse odds. Our provincial governments look to betting as a major revenue source – they’ve got billions dependent on you losing …and that you’ll eventually lose is still the only sure bet in all of gambling. 4. Do we really need to “get in the game” more? When I asked an Edmonton-area pastor about sports gambling, he could, thankfully, share that the young people he worked with most (from the pre-confession class) are not, by their own account, involved in any online or sports betting. However, he did address another, related, issue. In his preaching and catechism classes, he warns against the potential for idolatry in viewing sports. If your team is heading to the NHL finals, there’s a vibe in your city that is hard to describe as anything short of a religious devotion. If you don’t have God, a winning team becomes a stand-in for many. For them, “Hockey is life,” as one t-shirt proclaims. Obviously, if you are tempted toward an obsession with watching professional sports, the opportunity to bet on them is not going to help you overcome that. Are we having fun yet? As I am writing this, “my team” is winning in the second-last round of the NHL playoffs. Obviously, I will not be betting on the results, but the games will be just as exciting. Just how enjoyable is watching sports when there is money on the line anyway? Even the sports betting companies themselves are, ironically, admitting how corrosive betting is to the real enjoyment of rooting for your team. Slogans like “Your loyalty is real, but so are the odds” and “Sometimes it pays to be a bad fan” speak to how in the world of sports betting, money is the only thing that many fans now care about. Are we having fun yet? In a recent broadcast of The Agenda on TVOntario, entitled “Is Business Ruining Sports?” Morgan Campbell, from CBC Sports, notes, “We’ve seen coaches like J.B. Bickerstaff saying that they open up their social media, …their email, and there are these angry fans in here berating them about, ‘You made me blow my parlay’…. And… the specter that’s overhanging all of this is match-fixing…. And so what we don’t want is this idea that this match is fixed, that the outcome is predetermined.” Are we having fun yet? With all of the problems that we could criticize in professional sports, there is inspiration in seeing “your team” play with heart. Paul even uses sports as a metaphor for the Christian life, exhorting the Corinthians to emulate the athletic virtues of self-control and self-discipline (1 Cor. 9:24-27), just as the writer to the Hebrews commands them to “run with endurance” (Heb. 12:1). With proper discernment, we can admire honorable, excellent (Phil. 4:8) sports competition, but not if we are focused on the financial payoff for ourselves. Conclusion ARPA Canada has more articles on its site about recent provincial responses to sports betting (in Alberta and Ontario), but we do not need to wait for the government to react (wisely or unwisely) to the rise in sports betting to make up our minds. We do not want to test God by placing even small bets, thinking that we can beat temptation. We also shouldn’t want to take advantage of the weakness of others by gaining their money without working for it. Instead of trying to make the game more interesting – whether pinball or polo – let us “flee youthful passions” (2 Tim. 2:22) and follow the example of Christ: “We who are strong have an obligation to bear with the failings of the weak, and not to please ourselves. Let each of us please his neighbor for his good, to build him up. For Christ did not please himself….” (Rom. 15:1-3a). ...

News

Saturday Selections – May 24, 2025

Whiter than snow - Jimmy Clifton and Haddon Some high-energy Christian folk coming at you. Kevin DeYoung on why struggling with difficult doctrines is good for us "One of the reasons that doctrine is in Scripture is to reshape us from an anthropocentric view – a man-centered view of the world that asks, What do I think? How does this make me feel? – to a theocentric view of the world, where God calls the shots and God’s pleasure is ultimate. That is a painful journey for many people, but ultimately it’s good for us and it’s for God’s glory." 4 ways to squash your child's imagination (5-minute read) "In the early 1900s, a classmate described future Nobel Prize winner William Faulkner as 'the laziest boy I ever saw . . . he would do nothing but write and draw.' Albert Einstein was such a daydreamer that his teacher declared he would amount to nothing. Over centuries and across the globe, the wonder of a child’s imagination has clashed with the hard, iron-cold realities of a grown-up world." Is TikTok the ultimate contraception? "Recently, Finnish sociologist Anna Rotkirch published an article in the Berlin Review entitled, 'The TikTok Baby Bust.' In it, she explains how the introduction of the app coincided with a rise in 'anti-natalist values memes,' worsening mental health (especially for girls), and degrading social skills. Specifically, TikTok users became 'more likely to embrace the idea that "I want to do other interesting things in life besides having a child."’” Anal sex linked to incontinence Not the Bee had an article this week about how a woman, Sarah Stock, gave a pretty solid argument against homosexuality to a homosexual, while the two of them debated on camera. What struck me was a 2016 article Not the Bee linked to, to back one of her points – it noted that anal sex among men is linked to more than a doubling in incontinence among men. That might strike you as such a predictable result it almost isn't worth reporting, but it startled the young man who Sarah Stock was debating. What was also notable about the Reuters news service article that reported this finding, was its oh-so-cautious conclusion: "More research is needed to understand how anal sex might lead to incontinence, though it’s possible that the practice contributes to decreased anal sphincter tone that leads to stool leakage in some people, Whitehead said." Just possible? I wonder if Reuters is similarly timid about claims they report concerning global warming, evolution, and gender? Yes, parents are qualified to teach their children There is a certain sense in which we are all homeschoolers, whether you send your child to a Christian school or teach them at home. That's because you are responsible for their education. Teachers are there to help, and a big help they can be, but they didn't make our parental baptismal vows for us. ...

News, Politics

What if we said what we mean? – political party edition

Another election campaign has come and gone, and one of the bigger disappointments might simply be, did anyone defend anything that really mattered? The Conservatives ran a slogan promising "Canada First – For a Change,” but the changes party leader Pierre Poilievre promised were practical, more than principled. What did he stand for? Change and Canada? The Liberals could have run with that too – Carney, after all, ran on the platform of not being Trudeau. And that seemed change enough for the electors, who gave his party yet another term. But where were the unborn left in this campaign? And what about the many vulnerable elderly or disabled Canadians who, in our culture of death, are now seen as having lives not worth living? Who is going to stand up for them? The mainstream parties weren't going to go there. There's a trend working its way around the web asking, what if companies had to use "brutally honest slogans" that told the truth about their products? What might that look like? Some of the suggestions include: IKEA: Come for the meatballs. Stay cause you can't find your way out. Facebook: Come procrastinate YouTube: Don't let your kids read the comments What if political parties had to do the same and say what they actually meant? If they had to be blunt and truthful, what would their slogans look like? I'd suggest they might look something like this: LIBERALS Vote for us and get the government you deserve Pitching you a bright future, hoping you’ll forget our seedy past Abortion…done! Gay marriage…done! Euthanasia…done! Transgenderism... Swaying Fourth Estate coverage with your tax dollars We listen; We care; We pass out your money everywhere At least we aren’t the scary Conservatives! Proudly aborting the next generation of voters UNDER NEW MANAGEMENT!!! Serving the same old menu. CONSERVATIVES When it comes to moral issues…that’s all we have to say. With Trudeau gone, we'll have to focus on the CBC Christian voters should be seen but not heard Money matters. Unborn children don’t. Still the lesser of two evils! Fiscally? Conservative! Morally? Well... At least we aren't the scary Liberals Christians welcome…at the back of the bus. NEW DEMOCRATS The tenth commandment was only meant for rich people. More government is always the answer. Every child deserves two loving… daycare workers Liberals delivered euthanasia, but we thought of it first! We deny the unborn are people. We won't deny Steve is a girl. When we say “free” we mean your grandkids pay On-call Liberal lapdog We spell “Compassion” M-O-N-E-Y CHRISTIAN HERITAGE PARTY We're not in it to win it. Your vote is your voice; what are you saying with it? As long as "lesser evil" is enough, you'll never get better When you vote pro-choice, you aren’t pro-life Our goal needs to be volume, not victory... but we keep forgetting C'mon! How bad do the Conservatives have to get? If only we got a vote whenever someone said, "I agree with you, but..." Shutting up about God to be winnable is not a good trade The only wasted vote is for something you don't believe in Pictured generated with ChatGPT....

Apologetics 101

Forewarned is forearmed: Seeing through 5 common logical fallacies

“I have no other but a woman’s reason; I think him so, because I think him so. That’s Shakespeare poking fun at the irrationality of a female character in his comedy The Two Gentlemen of Verona. It’s the lack of logic that makes this a bit funny. But that sort of illogic is found just as often among men. How many times have you heard a man pontificate and yet really say no more than “I feel that is what the Bible teaches. I don’t really know why, but that’s what I believe.” In other words, “I think it’s so, because I think it’s so.” Now when it concerns the Bible, that sort of illogic isn’t even a bit funny! Fun with fallacies Illogical thinking and logical fallacies came with sin. The two illustrations above are both examples of a fallacy called Circular Reasoning. A classic Peanuts cartoon that you might remember had the following dialogue: First Panel Lucy: “You don’t believe me, do you? Well it’s a scientific fact that girls are smarter than boys.” Linus wisely say nothing Second Panel Lucy: “And do you know who discovered it?” Again Linus maintains his detachment and says nothing. Third Panel Lucy: “Woman scientists!” Linus loses the argument and his composure. In this circular argument Lucy asserts girls are smarter than boys because scientists have proven it. We know these scientists are right because they are girls, and girls are smarter! Obviously the comic strip is humorous because of the logical fallacy. So we don’t have to be one hundred per cent logical all the time – we can have some fun with illogic. Nor must we always draw the same conclusion from the same scenario. I married a beautiful woman. Now, forty years later, she has a few grey hairs and maybe even a wrinkle or two. To me she is more beautiful than ever. You may think that’s illogical, but that’s because you don’t see her the way I do. I have a son who is convinced Coca Cola has more flavor than Pepsi, but in a blind taste test he always picks Pepsi as the best. That has never changed his conviction, because, as he puts it, “the Coke sample must have been stale.” I shake my head at his pig-headedness – but his delusion is not of material significance. Nevertheless, logical fallacies came with sin, and it is important to recognize them when they are used to mislead or misrepresent. Ad Hominem In the book The Fallacy Detective readers are taught to recognize various techniques used commonly to mislead or misdirect an argument. One of these has a fancy Latin name, Ad Hominem, which means literally “to the person.” In practice it is a personal attack, questioning the motives or the reputation of the opponent, instead of disproving his position. Already in the Garden of Eden we see this technique used successfully. God told Adam and Eve that if they ate from the tree of the knowledge of good and evil they would surely die. Satan denied this, and claimed that God had a hidden motive to lie to Adam and Eve – Satan attacked God’s character: “You will not surely die. For God knows that when you eat of it your eyes will be opened and you will be like God knowing good evil.” An absolute lie, but in Eve’s eyes God’s credibility has been undermined and she falls for Satan’s whole scenario. In politics we see this technique used so often that the term “smear campaign” has become part of our vocabulary Red Herring Another frequently used tactic is the Red Herring, an irrelevant point brought in to divert the attention from the real problem or matter at hand. A red herring is a dead fish, an over-ripe dead fish, which a trainer uses to test tracking dogs. The dog is to follow the moose trail, or whatever you’re tracking, and not be diverted by the scent of the red herring that has been dragged across the primary trail. Now reflect on the behavior of Moses when the angel of the LORD appeared to him in flames of fire from within a bush. God has for him an assignment that Moses does not want. Does he say so? Oh no! “Who am I that I should go to Pharaoh…?” “What if they do not believe me or listen to me…?” “I have never been eloquent… I am slow of speech.” Finally, after God has armed him with an assortment of signs and miracles to overcome all his so-called objections, Moses reveals the real problem – he just does not want to go: “O LORD, please send someone else to do it.” That’s what it was all about! The objections were just red herrings! As kids we have all use this tactic in its most elementary form. Mom asks “How come your boots have water in them again?” The reply invariably is something like “Oh mom, you ought to see Johnny’s. His boots were filled right to the top.” Genetic Fallacy The Genetic Fallacy is another personal attack fallacy. Yet it does not attack the person, but attacks the argument for where it came from: it condemns the argument because of where it began, how it began, or who began it. For example, a couple of years ago I read an excellent article on biblical headship. It was good solid scriptural material. Yet it was criticized by a few because it had been written by a bachelor. On one occasion Moses too received that sort of criticism. Two Hebrew men were fighting and Moses asked the one in the wrong “Why are you hitting your fellow Hebrew?” The man avoided the question by criticizing the source: “Who made you ruler and judge over us? Are you thinking of killing me as you killed the Egyptian?” A few years ago I listened to author Scott Klusendorf speak eloquently against abortion. Said one woman in the audience: “What do you know about this? You are not a woman.” She found it necessary to attack the person who brought the message because she was unable to undermine the message itself. Faulty Appeal to Authority One fallacy that is of particular importance to us as Christians is the Faulty Appeal to Authority. In our debates and discussions we, as Christians, properly appeal to the authority of the Word of God. Similarly, we use quotes from The Heidelberg Catechism, The Canons of Dort or The Apostles’ Creed, again quite properly because they have an authority derived from their faithfulness to the Scriptures. Likewise, we quote Synod decisions as authoritative because, as stated in Article 31 of the Church Order, “whatever may be agreed upon by a majority vote shall be considered binding (i.e. authoritative), unless it be proved to be in conflict with the Word of God.” All of these are examples of a proper appeal to authority. A faulty appeal to authority, for example, is demonstrated by the Pharisees when they appealed to the traditions of men as authoritative. In Mark 7 we read of one such tradition: goods that could have been used to support needy parents could be withheld from them by pledging the goods to the temple service. Such a pledge did not have to specify a date of fulfillment. Thus the unfaithful son continued to profit from the property withheld from his parents. It was all quite legal according to the tradition of the elders as taught by the Pharisees. Christ warned them that their teachings were a faulty appeal to these traditions as authoritative, because these traditions were in conflict with God’s Word. He said to them “…Moses said, ‘Honor your father and your mother,’ …but you say that if a man says to his father or mother: ‘whatever help you might have received from me is a gift devoted to God’, then you no longer let him do anything for his father or mother. Thus you nullify the word of God by your tradition that you have handed down…” In everyday discussions we have all run into the same difficulty. “We’ve always done it that way” is sometimes the final determination, no matter what the pros or cons of the considerations. More frequently a faulty appeal to authority is an appeal to someone who has no special expertise in the area being discussed. Simply put, if you want to quote someone on the best way to treat an enlarged prostate, quote an urologist, not a young auto young mechanic who has neither studied nor experienced the problem. Yet that sort of thing happens all the time. Movie stars tell us about the benefits of particular toothpaste, hockey players hype the nutrition value of a popular cereal, or bishops are interviewed about military strategy or economic plans. The Either-Or Fallacy In this short essay we only have room to tackle one more bit of illogical thinking – the Either-Or fallacy (in their book, The Fallacy Detective, the authors tackle about two dozen different fallacies). When someone asserts that we must choose between two things, when in fact we have more than two alternatives, he is using this fallacy. You’ve heard or used it, I’m sure: “If I do the chores I won’t be able to finish my homework and the teacher will fail me.” One of the options, failing, is so absurd or unthinkable that we are being manipulated to choose the other option. This fallacy is obvious to any experienced mother. She realizes that there is another possibility: Don’t procrastinate, and you’ll be able to do both. Conclusion So what’s the point of all this? Every day we are faced with questionable logic in our secular newspapers and even in our Christian publications. Often we accept their conclusions intuitively, because our own reasoning skills are very poor. Learning to recognize the most common logical fallacies will enable us to listen and to read more critically and analytically. Forewarned is forearmed! This was originally published in the July/August 2004 issue under the title “Forewarned is forearmed: how to recognize the most common logical fallacies.”...

Amazing stories from times past

On conmen and other masters of deceit

God made man upright, but they have sought out many devices (Eccl. 7:29) There are vagabonds and there are villains; there are crooks and there are v...

Internet

Is TikTok the ultimate contraception?

The social media app that’s convincing youth that babies are boring, and other such lies. ***** A hundred years before the invention of the telev...

In a Nutshell

Tidbits – May 2025

Joke o' the month Two cars were waiting at a stoplight. When the light turned green, the man in front didn’t seem to notice. The woman in the car b...

News

Saturday Selections – May 17, 2025

Micah Tyler's "Praise The Lord" It ain't always easy following God, but His goodness is certain. The daily battleground we often ignore in our t...

Assorted

“It’s only a dollar!” – on bingos and raffles

Some churches hold bingos and sell raffle tickets, so can gambling really be wrong? ***** “I think we should have a bingo night to raise money for our community.” “All you spend is $1.00 on a ticket and you could win $1,000,000!” “Our organization is having a raffle to raise money for the handicapped; will you buy a ticket for only $1.00? You might win a 10 speed bicycle!” “I just won $2,000 in the lottery – isn’t that great?” Often we have friends and neighbors and perhaps even relatives who participate in the lottery, raffles, or other types of games of chance. And among secular and some professing Christian groups, games of chance are popular fundraisers because they are a fairly easy way to raise a large amount of money fast. I once came under quick attack in a neighbors’ meeting for refusing to participate in a raffle. “What do you mean it’s against your Christian principles? St. Whoever’s church at the corner has bingo every week, and raffles twice a year to raise money. How could it be wrong?” It was too difficult on a moment’s notice in a suddenly hostile group to formulate and express my reasons. I finally stated that I was not going to defend myself there in front of an entire group; however I would be willing to explain to them individually at another time just why I was against all forms of gambling. Happily, one Baptist neighbor spoke her agreement with me and the issue ended. It is sometimes difficult to give a quick answer because there are no specific Bible verses which state, “you shall not gamble.” Is it “only a dollar” and therefore unimportant whether we participate? Or are there principles from God’s Word which regulate even this small purchase? Does it become acceptable when the recipient is a worthwhile cause? Furthermore, how do we react to a friend or relative’s big winnings? Though the odds are ridiculously high, you might know a winner from time to time. Should someone feel so generous as to spread his/her newfound wealth in our direction, what should be our reply? (The questions only get harder, for instance: what if a relative won a large sum of money – what about accepting a Christmas gift of a new car?) I spoke with our minister, the Rev. Kenneth A. Kok, concerning how to express an answer to the basic question, “What’s wrong with gambling?” He provided three answers: 1. It encourages a “something for nothing” mentality Throughout the Bible, we clearly find that God expects us to work to provide for our material needs: “By the sweat of your face you shall eat bread…” (Gen. 3:19) “He who tills his land will have plenty of bread, but he who pursues vain things lacks sense. The wicked desire the booty of evil men, but the root of the righteous yields fruit.” (Prov. 12:11,12) “He who tends the fig tree will eat its fruit; and he who cares for his master will be honored.” (Prov. 27:18) “…give her the product of her hands, and let her works praise her in the gates.” (Prov. 31:13-31) Why would we want to get something for relatively nothing? Aren’t we thankful to God for all He has given us? Doesn’t He provide us with all that we need? And as LD 42, Q 111 of the Heidelberg Catechism states in regards to the commandment “You shall not steal,” here we also learn, “In addition God forbids all greed…” Perhaps we are tantalized with the thought of what we would do if we could only have $1,000, or maybe $5,000, or better make it $10,000, or what if we got a million? With the character Tevye, from “Fiddler On The Roof”, we inwardly pray: Lord, who made the lion and the lamb You decreed I should be what I am But would it spoil some vast, eternal plan If I were a wealthy man? Does this reflect the same sentiment expressed by Paul in Philippians 4:11-13: “Not that I speak from want; for I have learned to be content in whatever circumstances I am. I know how to get along with humble means, and I also know how to live in prosperity; in any and every circumstance I have learned the secret of being filled and going hungry, both of having abundance and suffering need. I can do all things through Him who strengthens me.” It is one thing to work hard and have God bless your endeavor. It is another to look for an easy break. 2. It encourages poor stewardship Gambling often encourages the people with the least amount of money to be irresponsible with what they have. Much money is wasted on chances and this money could be put to better use – saved, spent well, or given to a worthy cause. As Heidelberg Catechism question 111 goes on to say, “…God forbids all greed and all abuse or squandering of His gifts.” Numerous references are listed there. By participating in even a small way, we promote an activity which may be weakening the financial status and even the family life of others. Only one or a few win, at everyone else’s expense. Is this loving our brother as we love ourselves? As Question 112 further states, “I must promote my neighbor’s good wherever I can and may, deal with him as I would like others to deal with me, and work faithfully so that I may be able to give to those in need.” Even if the “chances” benefit a worthy cause, we still have the question from point 1 regarding our attitude. In this case, if we want to help, we should simply donate the money and not take the raffle ticket. 3. It encourages seeing money as one’s savior People begin, with the larger gambling items, to see money as their savior. Their hope is placed upon money, rather than God. This is evident in the long, long lines which form as the state lottery “pot” soars to $24 million or more. People call friends in other states requesting the purchase of these tickets for them, just for that chance – that possibility of being one of the ones to win. Conversations at the office turn to: “What will you do with it if you win?” Smiles and sighs. “Pay off all my debts.” “Buy a fabulous house.” “Quit working here.” “Take a trip to Hawaii.” Or perhaps even “Make a large donation to the school/church/hospital.” It seems, in those few moments of dreaming, as though our main problems in life, i.e., financial ones, would be solved. We do not believe the various accounts we’ve read or heard about money causing new problems. But the point here is this: “My God shall supply all your needs, according to His riches in glory” (Phil. 4:19). We must behave as children of God, children who present our needs and desires to Him, who work diligently for them as far as possible, who trust Him to provide, and who accept with thanksgiving, not as a young child asking after Christmas, “Is that ALL I get?” “But realize this, that in the last days difficult times will come. For men will be lovers of self, lovers of money, boastful, arrogant… ungrateful, unholy, unloving… without self-control… reckless, conceited, lovers of pleasure rather than lovers of God; holding to a form of godliness, although they have denied its power; and avoid such men as these” (II Tim. 3:1-5). The next time we are faced with the temptation to “get rich(er) quick,” to spend “only a dollar” with the mostly false promise that we might gain much more, let us ask ourselves, “Why am I doing this? Does this reflect a godly, thankful attitude? Am I looking for a different savior?” God’s Word answers the whole question the best: “Now there is great gain in godliness with contentment, for we brought nothing into the world, and we cannot take anything out of the world. But if we have food and clothing, with these we will be content. But those who desire to be rich fall into temptation, into a snare, into many senseless and harmful desires that plunge people into ruin and destruction. For the love of money is a root of all kinds of evils. It is through this craving that some have wandered away from the faith and pierced themselves with many pangs. But as for you, O man of God, flee these things. Pursue righteousness, godliness, faith, love, steadfastness, gentleness. Fight the good fight of the faith. Take hold of the eternal life to which you were called and about which you made the good confession in the presence of many witnesses.” (I Tim 6:6-12). This article was originally published in RP's March 2006 issue....

Theology

Celebrating the Sabbath

“Many people see the Sabbath or the Lord’s Day, as an infringement of their personal liberty – a day that God has taken from them, instead of a gift that He has given to them, for rest, worship and celebration” – Rev. Bruce Ray ***** Scientists and secular historians can account for the division of time into years, seasons, months and days on the basis of ancient observations of the cycles of nature. The year and the day obviously are tied to the cycle of the sun and the rotation of the earth. A month finds its origin in the cycles of the moon. But secular historians are puzzled by the week. There is no natural basis for the week, and since they reject Holy Scripture as a historical source they can’t turn to it for an explanation. However, whether they acknowledge it or not, the weekly, seven-day pattern of work and rest has its origin in God’s work of creation. We have the week because God ordained it, and indeed this is the origin of Time, not only of the week, but all divisions of Time. God is the Sovereign over Time. This is one of the first points that Bruce Ray makes in his book Celebrating the Sabbath. And he notes that if God is sovereign over time, then it only makes sense that He is sovereign over what we do with time, both work and rest: "Six days you shall labor" God said, “but the seventh is the Sabbath of the Lord your God. In it you shall do no work.” The Sabbath through time Now many people assume that work is the result of the Fall, but Adam had a job assigned to him before the Fall (Gen 2:18-20) so that assumption is wrong. And just as Adam had work do before the fall, so too there was a Sabbath rest before the fall. In fact Bruce Ray identifies from the Scriptures four distinct stages in the Sabbath: 1. Creation Sabbath – Sabbath rest before fall into sin 2. Exodus Sabbath – Sabbath rest given to Israel 3. Resurrection Sabbath – New covenant, new Sabbath 4. Final Sabbath – Christ’s return ushers in this final rest Intention of the Sabbath "The Sabbath was designed as a day of gladness and not as a day of gloom," notes Ray. It was intended by its Creator to be a day of rest and worship in celebration of God’s wonderful works. The Sabbath promised both physical and spiritual refreshment for the whole man. The Sabbath was a day off from work, a day when men and women, their families and servants, visitors, and even livestock could enjoy the gift of rest from God. It was a day for "complete rest" (Exodus 35:2), a day to leave the briefcase at the office, and the tools locked up in the shed. Even during the busy times of the year, during the plowing season and the harvest (Ex. 34:21) the people were commanded to rest on the seventh day in honor of, and in obedience to, the Lord who made heaven and earth. "Moonlighting" was prohibited on the Sabbath. The worker who tried to get ahead of others by working on the Sabbath was even subject to the death penalty! Exodus 23:12 reads: "that you may REST" and rest here isn’t only about “not working." The Sabbath was appointed to minister to the whole person, and it was therefore also a day of spiritual rest. Legalism Bruce Ray writes an interesting little chapter on the "Babylonian Sabbath." During the Babylonian Captivity the elders and Rabbis of Israel became very interested in spelling out precisely what people could and could not do on the Sabbath. Eventually they came up with over 1000 rules. The spirit and intention of the law became lost in a sea of technicalities. When Jesus came, that is, when God, the eternal Son, took upon Himself the nature of a man and visited His people, He came to set the captives free, including the captive Sabbath. Jesus challenged the Pharisaic distortions of His holy day. He repeatedly and purposely did things on the Sabbath that violated their legalistic understanding of Sabbath keeping. But make no mistake, Jesus came to restore the Law, including the fourth commandment, not to dismantle it (Matt 5:17-20). So Jesus blasted the Pharisaic Sabbath, but in doing so, he did not harm the biblical Sabbath at all. Indeed He liberated it, restored it, and filled it full of meaning once again (Matt 5:17) Ray examines one by one, the six skirmishes Jesus had with the Pharisees over the Sabbath Day: 1. The Battle of the Wheat Field (Mark 2:23-28) 2. The Shrivelled Hand skirmish (Mark 3:1-6) 3. The crippled-woman conflict (Luke 13:10-17) 4. The Dropsy disaster (Luke 14:1-6) 5. The Battle of Bethesda (John 5: 1-9) 6. The Spit Spat (John 9:1-41) These texts are well worth looking up and show, as Ray puts it, how "the conflict was not so much a conflict between Jesus and the Pharisees, as a conflict between the Holy Sabbath of God and the painfully distorted Pharisaic Sabbath. It was part of Jesus’ mission to liberate, heal and redeem the Sabbath from captivity.” Do’s and Don’ts? Coming to our modern day celebration of the Sabbath/Lord’s Day, Ray speaks about keeping the Sabbath "Holily and Happily," saying: "In the fourth commandment, God declares that He is sovereign over time (He made it), and over our use of it (He made us!). He has from the very beginning of time appointed one day in seven as a day for rest and refreshment in Him" "All people observe the Sabbath, all people everywhere do. Sunday comes along once every week without fail, and we all do something with the day. The question is not whether we observe, but how we observe it." Now, finally the reader may be thinking to yourself: "He is going to get to what I wanted in the first place. I can still have my laminated, wallet sized card with "do’s and don’ts" after all." Sorry folks – as author Bruce Ray writes, life just is not that simple. It is about thinking out principles. That is the real hard part. Many of us would like to have someone in authority – a pastor perhaps – tell us what to do and what not to do in great detail. That would certainly make life simpler and tidier. May I jog on Sunday? Go sailing in the afternoon? Mow my lawn? Go shopping at the Mall? Fire up the grill for a barbeque? And so on. But don’t despair. The good news, Ray writes, (that is if you are a Christian), is that you have everything you need to figure out what God wants you to do on the Sabbath. God has given you His Word and His Spirit. What then are the general principles that will help us to keep the Sabbath as the Lord wants us to? The author mentions four: Keep it Holily, Happily, Honestly and Humbly. Keep it Holily This includes gathering with the Lord’s people on the Lord’s Day and realizing that corporate worship is necessary, not optional. Keep it Happily The author stresses the great importance of bringing joyful worship to our God, and quotes Psalm 100 "shout for joy to the Lord, all the earth. Worship the Lord with gladness; come before Him with joyful songs." Keep it Honestly The Sabbath is also a day for physical, emotional, and even intellectual "rest." God is concerned with our bodies as well as with our souls. On the Sabbath we need to cease from our works and pause and refresh in God’s rest. Rest, however, does not require idleness. Rest can also be active. Throughout the Old Testament rest is defined as refreshment. The prophet Isaiah zeros in on the essence of the Lord’s Day (Is. 58:13-14 – this is another great text to look up). He brings into clear and bold focus: whose Day is it? Who is the Lord of the Sabbath and will I bow before Him? How does the Lord of the Sabbath want me to use the day for my good and His glory? Keep it Humbly The Sabbath is admittedly a problem for many Christians, but that problem is primarily spiritual in nature. That is because of the rebellion in our hearts. We must remember not to come into our King’s presence and to our spiritual family reunion tired, late and unprepared to worship Him Conclusion In conclusion: Sabbath keeping is a means of Grace to all who love the Lord. Someone said about this book:" Bruce Ray’s book is a wise and balanced book, helpful, biblical and encouragingly, taking a fresh look at what the Lord’s Day should be for every Christian." Definitely recommended....

Theology

Will animals go to Heaven?

What happens when animals die? The question of whether animals exist in heaven has been debated for centuries. Do people share the same spirit and afterlife destination as animals? Will pet owners see their beloved pet again? Will their pet go to heaven? For many these are sentimental, frivolous questions. For others they are important. Children especially will want to know about the fate of their dead pets. What are we going to tell them when they ask? Cats, dogs, birds and more Children are routinely told that their pet has gone to heaven. Someone wrote to Randy Alcorn, the author of Heaven, "My children are hoping extinct animals will be in Heaven, maybe even dinosaurs." Alcorn thought it a possibility, arguing that the primary beings shown articulating God's praise in Heaven, along with the angels and human beings, are animals. Even in secular society many people tend to believe in an afterlife for our fellow creatures. Gift shops sell collector plates depicting “feline paradise” showing that the lost kitten enjoys a magnificent afterlife in paradise. A Hollywood version of dog afterlife is described in the full-length feature film All Dogs Go To Heaven. Evangelical author Angela Hunt argues in her 2005 novel Unspoken that birds and horses and creatures are in heaven now. For proof she refers, for example, to Elijah being taken to heaven by a chariot of fire and horses (2 Kings 2:11). She says that when her “buddy Justus” (a 275-pound mastiff dog) died, she promised him that she would meet him in heaven. “My heavenly Father loves me, he loves his creatures, and I am almost certain I'll meet my beloved Justus in eternity.” Cute little furry almost humans? Why have so many people in North America become so sentimental about their pets? Some suggest that the growth of cities and suburbs has deprived most North Americans of instrumental contacts with animals. Many suburbanites have never spent time on a farm and with farm animals. They have not seen what they are like. Consequently, they romanticize animals as quite human-like, though more innocent and pure. This humanization of pets encouraged sentimentalism. Many pet owners keep photos of their pets in their wallets or on their desks; some celebrate their pets' birthdays. Estates have been left to cats and dogs. Some even use the services of pet psychologists. While no one would wish to denigrate pets, our modern affluent society frequently puts more value on pets and even wild animals than on people. The current trend toward the humanization of animals contributes to the blurring of the boundaries between man and animals. The theory of evolution, New Age philosophy, and the rhetoric of the animal rights movement have greatly impacted our society's attitude toward animals. The recent movement for the protection of animals usually labeled "animal liberation" or "animal rights" is often in the news. The more uncompromising among the animal liberationists have demanded equal moral consideration on behalf of cows, pigs, chickens, and other apparently "enslaved and oppressed" animals. Many animal liberationists put their ethic into practice by becoming vegetarians. In Rattling the Cage. Toward Legal Rights for Animals Steven M. Wise, a lawyer promoting animal rights, declares that it should be obvious that "the ancient Great Wall" that has for so long divided humans from every other animal is biased, irrational, unfair, and unjust. He believes it is time to take it down. Consequently, in his book he strongly argues for the extension of personhood to chimpanzees. The “talking” gorilla But if chimpanzees are supposedly people, why can't we communicate with them? This type of thinking led to research on animal communication and intelligence. Several historic attempts were made to teach human language to animals. In the 1960s R.A. and B.T. Gardner, in extensive studies carried out in America, considered the possibility that although primates might be unable to vocalize speech, perhaps they could learn to communicate with their hands via sign language. So they set out to teach an eleven-month female chimpanzee – Washoe – the sign language used by deaf people. But it should be noted that the sign language they taught (called Ameslan) is constructed differently from spoken or written language, so direct comparison with human speech is difficult. Experiments have also been made with a gorilla. The American Gorilla Foundation portrays gorillas as part of the human family. In 1972 Penny Patterson began to teach sign language to Koko, a gorilla born in the San Francisco Zoo. This experiment promoted the idea that animals have human qualities. It also contributed to the animalizing of man. The Gorilla Foundation's funding appeal stated that Patterson's experiment resulted in "an astonishing breakthrough in our understanding of the world. The news is that a very remarkable gorilla named Koko has changed myth into fact...by speaking to humans." The public was invited to "become part of Koko's extend family." Christian author Angela Hunt expresses some interesting but speculative thoughts about animals in her novel Unspoken, a story about a talking gorilla. In the novel Unspoken Christian author Angela Hunt writes that many years ago she saw a video about Dr. Penny Patterson and Koko, and she thought then that their story contained the seeds of a novel. Recently she saw an updated version of the video and that's when she knew the time to write had come. Besides the video inspiration, Hunt's novel shows indebtedness to the views of Randy Alcorn, who combines Biblical exegesis, evangelical theology, and imaginative speculation about heaven and the new heaven and earth. It is not surprising, therefore, that Unspoken is highly recommended by Alcorn. The main characters in Hunt's novel are a young woman named Glee Ganger and Sema, a western lowland gorilla, who was entrusted to the care of Glee. Glee – not a Christian in the beginning of the book, conducts unique research in the field of interspecies communication. She teaches Sema, who is fascinated with words, how "to talk" by using American Sign Language. She says that her research has proven that Sema not only understands the words for most common things and activities; she also has a firm grasp on many abstract concepts. Glee believes that Sema is a thinking animal. She frequently evidences signs of advanced intelligence, even intuition. Glee treats Sema as her child and calls the young gorilla "sweetie" and other endearing names. She reads picture books aloud to her. She even asks, which book do you like to read? Sema answers: "Pumpkin Patch." Sema also knows God and communicates with Him. Glee asks, “Sema? Why did you talk about God?" Sema replies, "Because God is." Sema also says, "Word made world, word loves Sema, word made gorillas people apples bears." "Sema good gorilla Sema loves God thanks." Will Sema go to heaven? To be with God? Sema believes she will. "God make trees sky. God make home gorillas people." How does she know? Sema says a shiny angel had told her these things. At the novel’s conclusion Sema meets a tragic, but heroic end. She dies protecting Glee from a tiger which got loose in the zoo and charged at Glee. She saved Glee's life by tackling the tiger. As Sema is dying she says, "Shiny man say... Sema go now. Sema happy. Sema love." Glee, therefore, believes she will see Sema in heaven. Sema's sacrificial death is also instrumental in Glee becoming a Christian. And Glee testifies, "How ironic that animal could be used to bridge the gap between me and God." Many questions The humanization of animals, pretending they are so much like us, is also an animalization of humans. The humanization of animals and the belief that they go to heaven raises many questions. Historically, people didn't always view animals in a positive light. Negative qualities of animals are often mentioned in reference to humans such as "as evil as a hyena," "as sly as a fox." In the early fourteenth century, Dante had condemned to the eighth circle of his Hell those guilty of "the sins of the wolf": seducers, hypocrites, conjurers, thieves and liars. In the Bible there is also a reference to animals capable of being possessed by an evil spirit. Jesus allowed a demon to enter a herd of pigs who rushed into the lake and were drowned (Mark 5:1-13). William Barclay adds his comments about those who criticize Jesus for allowing the death of the pigs: "We do not, presumably, have any objections to eating meat for our dinner, nor will we refuse pork because it involved the killing of some pig. Surely if we will kill animals to avoid going hungry, we can raise no objection if the saving of a man's mind and soul involved the death of a herd of these same animals.... in God's scale of proportions, there is nothing so important as a human soul." Are animals able to "talk"? Alcorn claims that this is possible. He refers to the account of the serpent speaking to Eve in the Garden of Eden. He argues, "There's no suggestion Eve was surprised to hear an animal speak, indicating that other animals also may have spoken." He also mentions the story of Balaam and his donkey (Numbers 22). He suggests that the wording of the text doesn't suggest God put words in the donkey's mouth, as in ventriloquism – He "opened the donkey's mouth," permitting it to verbalize what appears to be actual thoughts and feelings. I believe Alcorn and Hunt are mistaken. For example, the vocal tracts of gorillas are constructed so they can't speak. They can be trained to make signs. But they can't produce verbalized speech. They do not have structured grammatical language. They are deprived of reason and forethought. And they cannot, which may be highly significant, draw representational pictures. Newspapers have reported on monkeys daubing on a canvass and receiving an art award. But at best they only doodle. Furthermore, it is not possible for them to search for a solution to a puzzle, let alone ask them what they see or hear or smell, or what they think of their cage-mates, or of us and our experiments. Man can verbalize his thoughts in speech. The uniqueness of human language reveals man's intellect, will, emotion and general ideas about space and time, and abstract concepts. It is man's key to communicate concerning the past, the present and the future. Calvin brings human speech in its proper Biblical framework. He notes: "The use of the tongue and ears is to lead us into the truth by means of God's Word that we may know how we were created incorruptible and that when we are passed out of this world there is a heritage prepared for us above, and in short to bring us to God." Do animals have a soul that continues to exist after death? On the one hand Alcorn argues that they have "non-human souls." On the other hand he says that though man continues to exist after death, it "may not be the case for animals." But the Bible does not say that animals have souls. But neither does the Bible deny this. The question whether animals have a soul is not new. The medieval theologian St. Thomas Aquinas decreed animals were soulless, and graded them according to their utility to people. Wolves, bears, and hairy beasts useless to human comfort were demonic. The twentieth century Reformed theologian R.C. Sproul observes: "Traditionally many have been persuaded that there is no future life for animals. The Bible does not teach that animals go to heaven. One of the key arguments against the idea that animals do not survive the grave is the conviction that animals do not have souls. Many are convinced that the distinctive aspect that divides humans from animals is that humans have souls and animals do not." Will animals be with the Lord in the intermediate heaven, the stage of eternal life before the coming of the New Heaven and Earth? An animal is not religious. Man is incurably religious. Even in his denial of God man struggles with the God question. Dr. J.H. Bavinck comments that: "in his religion man is aware that he is not alone because he knows that he is living in the immediate presence of someone who is infinitely greater than he." Only in man do heaven and earth meet each other. Animals were not created for a life in the heavenly realms. The Bible clearly states that eternal life is not merely "life after death" (cf. John 3:16). The twice born have eternal life right now. But the Gospel does not only mention heaven, but also hell. Apart from the saving work of God carried out when He gave his Son for our sin on the cross of Golgotha, He would have to assign us the agony of hell. The Gospel also proclaims that there is only one way to God the Father. "Salvation is found in no one else, for there is no other name under heaven given to men by which we must be saved" (Acts 4:12). Our Lord Jesus said, "No one can come to me unless the Father who sent me draws him" (John 6:44). These texts do not include animals being drawn to the Father through Jesus Christ. Only man is capable of having a personal relationship with the infinite personal triune God. Man created in the image of God The Bible affirms the dignity of man. Man is sharply distinguished from the rest of God's creation. He is unique! Nothing in creation can be greater or have more dignity than man, for God alone is greater (Ps. 8). Man is different from all other creatures; he is created in the very image of God. Man, as God's image bearer, is elevated above animals and destined to have dominion over all the world (Gen.1:16, Ps. 8:5-9). Of all God's acts of creation recorded in Scripture, this is the only one preceded by the statement that God, as it were, consulted Himself before acting ("And God said, 'Let us make man'" (Gen. 1:26)). This formal fact alone is of great importance because it shows that this creative act differs from all the others. It is the fact that God created only man and woman in His image and likeness (vv.16-27). In the New Testament mankind is also referred to as being "made in God's likeness" (Jam. 3:9). The apostle Paul describes Christ as the perfect image of God. He says, “And we, who with unveiled faces all reflect the Lord's glory, are being transformed into his likeness with ever increasing glory, which comes from the Lord, who is the Spirit" (2 Cor. 3:18). Scripture testifies that man is a worker and developer. He is the steward of God's world and has been called by God to responsibly enfold creation through his work. Animals and plants are under his dominion. Adam named the animals (Gen. 2:19,20). Scripture also shows that people are allowed to use animals as work animals and for food (Gen. 9:3). Man is the scientist at work in God's laboratory – earth. People may speculate whether animals go to heaven. But Scripture shows that the world is to be understood only in relation to man. Calvin notes, "The Lord Himself by the very order of creation has demonstrated that He created all things for the sake of man." The world created and endowed as a habitation for man in such a way as to serve his true destiny in the worship and adoration of God. The first question of The Westminster Larger Catechism asks, “What is the chief and highest end of man” The answer? “Man's chief and highest end is to glorify God, and fully enjoy him for ever.” The same belief is expressed by John Calvin. He states that God made man erect, unlike the other creatures, that he might know and worship God. He wrote, "God created us after His own image in order that His truth might shine forth in us." The New Heaven and Earth When our Lord establishes the New Heaven and Earth upon His return with renewed men and women, will animals also be redeemed? According to Hunt the new earth will be populated with animal life. Alcorn argues that animals will be on the New Earth, which is a redeemed and renewed old earth, in which animals had a prominent role. He believes that on the New Earth, after mankind's resurrection, animals (pets included) who once suffered will join God's children in glorious freedom from death and decay. Alcorn refers to Romans 8:21-23 for proof text. He assumes animals – as part of a suffering creation – are eagerly awaiting deliverance through mankind's resurrection. As I see it The first chapter of Genesis reveals that God's purpose was that nature in paradise be at peace with itself. Isaiah 66:22 says that the Lord will make the New Heaven and the New Earth. It is making something new from the old. Therefore, no new creation, but recreation, renewal. The New Earth will be the renewal of the old. Isaiah anticipates an eternal Kingdom of God on the New Earth. He describes the glorious future which God's people prayerfully and eagerly anticipate. He points to a time of the renewal of the old paradise where predator and prey will lie down together and be at peace. “The wolf and the lamb will feed together, and the lion will eat straw like the ox...They will neither harm nor destroy in all my holy mountains, says the Lord” (Is. 65:25). Will there be animals on this new world? Apparently there will be plants, rocks, trees and animals on the New Earth. But asked exactly what it will be like, we cannot say because Scripture has not revealed it to us....

News

Saturday Selections – May 10, 2025

Gray Havens' Ghost of a King A lyric video seems a good idea for this, one of their harder-to-understand songs. A little mystery then, accompanied by a wonderfully haunting melody... Jamie Soles on the Genevan tunes " highlight the male voice. Men can lift their voices and sing these songs. They cannot do this with almost any modern music. Even the folks who have rediscovered the gospel of grace, and who make songs about it, sing in a feminine voice. I have sat and listened to whole services in Reformed Baptist circles, in Charismatic circles, in modern Mennonite circles, in Bible Church circles, where men were never allowed to lift their voice above a G. Women’s voices dominate. Not so with the Genevans...." Defending Jesus' divinity on the back of a napkin If you're talking to Jehovah's Witnesses, or any Arians, you can sketch this argument out on a napkin. A dyslexia-friendly Bible edition? I did not know such a thing existed – might this be just the version for you, or someone you know? Tolkien's "take that!" to Shakespeare Did you know Tolkien wasn't the biggest Shakespeare fan? As Harma-Mae Smit explains, a couple scenes in Lord of the Rings are Tolkien's go at one-upping what he thought was something lame from the Bard's Macbeth. Penguins are cool but not cold (9 minutes) Penguins survive in the coldest temperatures on earth. How do they do it? They are built for it, from the ground up, and then operate together with their God-given instincts! ...

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28

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

Equipping Christians to think, speak, and act

Get Articles Delivered!

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

Kids

Magazine

Articles

Book Reviews

Movie Reviews

Daily devotional

More of Reformed Perspective!

Newsletter

Real Talk

Manna

About Us

Advertise

Contact Us

Shop our merch!

Search CATEGORY: Recent Articles

Browse By Topic

Amazing stories from times past

Apologetics 101

Assorted

Being the Church

Christian education

Christian education - Sports

Church history

Conferences

Culture Clashes

Dating

Dying Well

Economics

Economics - Home Finances

Education

Entertainment

Evangelism

Gender roles

History

Homosexuality

Human Rights

Humor

In a Nutshell

Indigenous peoples

Internet

Interview with an artist

Letter Writing

Marriage

Media bias

Music

Parenting

People we should know

Politics

Pornography

Pro-life - Abortion

Pro-life - Adoption

Pro-life - Euthanasia

Pro-life - Fostering

Religion

Religion - Mormons

Religion - Pentecostal

Religion - Roman Catholic

Remembrance Day

RP Speaks

Science - Creation/Evolution

Science - Environment

Science - General

Sexuality

Soup and Buns

Theology

Transgenderism

Assorted

Our forever home

Reflections on finding permanence from someone who has lived in 27 homes.

God understands

Citizenship?

Entertainment

“What can I do anyways?”

Assorted