Most Recent

Articles, Entertainment, Movie Reviews

Reading films: are Christians as discerning as they used to be?

"Moving pictures" have only the briefest of histories, spreading throughout North America early in the twentieth century. The first movie theatres were converted stores with hard wooden benches and a bedsheet for a screen, and they came to be known as "nickelodeons" because the admission price was five cents. Films were short – in 1906 the average length was five to ten minutes. In 1911 the earliest cinema music was played on tinkling pianos.

During the silent film era, slapstick comedy – which depends on broad physical actions and pantomime for its effect rather than dialogue – was widely prevalent. With the advent of the "talkies" in the 1930s, screwball comedy became widely popular. It was laced with hyper action, was highly verbal, and noted for its wisecracks.

In 1939 the first drive-in theatre was opened on a ten-acre site in Camden, New Jersey.

A brief history of the Church and movies

When movies first because a form of widespread public entertainment, Christians were frequently warned against movie-going. Many "fundamentalist" pastors forcefully exhorted, "When the Lord suddenly returns, would you want to meet Him in a theatre watching a worldly movie?" In Reformed Churches too, Christians were also exhorted not to attend movie theatres.

1. The Christian Reformed Church (CRC)

As early as 1908 the editor of the CRC denominational magazine, The Banner, complained:

"Theatre going supports a class of people that frequently caters to the lowest taste of depraved humanity, actors and actresses and their employers."

A general objection was that the movie industry as a whole tended to be "of the world," and thus against Christian values and the church… and ultimately against God's Kingdom.

The CRC 1928 Report of the Committee on Worldly Amusements paid close attention to the question of worldliness in relation to the movies. The Report stopped short of calling the whole movie industry anti-Christian, but still issued severe warnings against attending movies. CRC Synod 1928 judged:

"We do not hesitate to say that those who make a practice of attending the theatre and who therefore cannot avoid witnessing lewdness which it exhibits or suggests are transgressors of the seventh commandment."

In 1964 the CRC took another serious look at the movies. The CRC realized that its official stance and the practice of its members were at great variance, producing a "denominational schizophrenia and/or hypocrisy." In 1966 a major report The Film Arts and the Church was released. It differed substantially from the earlier studies. Film, it said, should be regarded as a legitimate means of cultural expression, so the medium of film must be claimed, and restored by Christians. The Report was idealistic in hoping that members of the CRC would become discriminating and educated moviegoers, reflecting on and discussing films as part of their cultural milieu.

The review of movies in The Banner began in 1975, but faced strong opposition. But in time the Reformed doctrine of the antithesis (we should not be just like the world) became muted in the choice of movies made by CRC members. There was little difference in what they watched, and what the world watched.

2. The Protestant Reformed Church (PRC)

The PRC was fervent in its denouncement of movies and movie attendance. The PRC considers all acting as evil, as is the watching of acting on stage, in theatres, on television, or on video. PRC minister Dale Kuiper said, "Certainly the content of almost 100 per cent of dramatic productions (movies, television programs, plays, skits, operas) place these things out of bounds for the Christian."

But already in 1967 a writer noted that PRC practice did not match PRC principle: "When I was formerly an active pastor in a congregation, it was always a source of sad disappointment to me that so few of our young people could testify, when asked at confession of faith, that they had not indulged in the corruptions of the movie." And since 1969 and continuing till today, various pastors and professors have lamented that large numbers of PRC members watch movies, either in theatres or, more often, on television.

3. Evangelicals

Evangelicals have a history of making films as a way of teaching Christian values. The Billy Graham organization Worldwide Pictures made modest independent films to evangelize youth: The Restless Ones (1965), about teenage pregnancy; A Thief in the Night (1972), an end-times thriller; and the Nicky Cruz biopic, The Cross and the Switchblade (1970). A reporter dubbed them "religious tracts first, entertainment second."

More recently, evangelicals made new producing sci-fi films about the apocalypse, which critics claim are embarrassingly poor-quality – artistically flawed – productions marketed in the name of evangelism. As examples, they refer to the three profitable Left Behind Movies (2000, 2002, 2005).

There has also been a trend to create "family-friendly" movies. However, these movies tend to depict a world where all issues are plain and simple. Evildoers are destroyed, the virtuous rewarded, and often times the “good” characters have within themselves everything they need to secure their destiny. Clearly, then, this is not the real world.

We've also seen, among evangelicals, a defense of less than family-friendly films. Already back in 1998, the Dallas Morning News ran a story about the growing number of Christians who advocate going to even R-rated movies. The reason? Evangelical filmmaker Dallas Jenkins said, “Non-Christians are just as capable of producing God-honoring and spiritually uplifting products as Christians are, and I've been as equally offended by a Christian's product as I've been moved by something from a non-Christian."

Perspectives

So how should Christians think about films? How can we approach them with discernment?

It begins with recognizing that a film is more than a form of entertainment: it propagates a worldview. Films often:

exalt self-interest as the supreme value
glorify violent resolutions to problems
promote the idea that finding the perfect mate is one's primary vocation and highest destiny

Films also so often promote a view of romantic love as being passionate and irresistible, able to conquer anything, including barriers of social class, age, race and ethnicity, and personality conflicts. But the love it portrays is usually another euphemism for lust. In Images of Man: a Critique of the Contemporary Cinema, Donald J. Drew observes that in contemporary films, the context makes it clear that love equals sex plus nothing.

An underlying assumption in mainstream Hollywood films is that the goal in life is to become rich. And acquiring things is even supposed to make you a better person! But the values of consumerism, self-indulgence and immediate gratification can harm individuals, families, and communities.

Titanic (1997)

Most films depict a world in which God is absent or non-existent. For example, there is nothing in the film Titanic to suggest that God is even interested in the fate of those on board the sinking ship. Whether uncaring or impotent, God is irrelevant in the world of this film. In his book Eyes Wide Open: Looking for God in Popular Culture, William D. Romanowski comments:

"Whatever outward appearances of belief dot the landscape of Titanic, they have little bearing on the faith of the main characters, especially when compared to the film's glorification of the human will and spirit."

The principal character Rose Bukater is engaged to Cal Hockley, who is concerned only with the approval of his social set. He equates wealth and social status with worth and character. Aware of the limited lifeboat capacity, Rose says, "Half the people on the ship are going to die." The snobbish Cal responds, “Not the better half.” These attitudes run against the grain of American values associated with freedom and equality. And because he is the obvious bad guy, the director has so framed things that whoever stands against Cal will be understood, by the audience, to be the good guy. And so we see in opposition to Cal, the free-spirited artist Jack who is the ultimate expression of pure freedom. His character traits, talent, and good looks easily identify him as the hero. And so the scene is set that when Rose and Jack have an illicit sexual encounter, the audience is encouraged to cheer this and want this, because it is for Rose a declaration of independence from her fiancé and her mother's control over her. The now famous sex scene sums up many of the film's themes: Forbidden love, class differences, and individual freedom.

The Passion of the Christ (2004)

There was, not so long ago, a film in which God was included. Mel Gibson's The Passion of the Christ was highly recommended by evangelicals for its realistic portrayal of Christ's suffering and death. But how true to the Gospels is the film? Why did the director have Jesus stand up to invite more scourging by the Roman soldiers? Was the suffering Jesus endured primarily physical, as this film portrays? Is the film historically accurate or is it a reflection of Gibson's theology? Co-screenwriter Mel Gibson said that he relied not only on the New Testament but also on the writings of two nuns, Mary of Agreda, a seventeenth-century aristocrat, and Anne Catherine Emmerich, an early nineteenth-century stigmatic.

The violence in the film became a matter of much debate when the film was released. On the one hand, the head of an evangelical youth ministry said, "This isn't violence for violence's sake. This is what really happened, what it would have been like to have been there in person to see Jesus crucified." On the other hand, many critics cringed at the level of violence in the movie. Romanowski comments, "In my estimation, it is difficult to provide dramatic justification for some of the violence in the film."

Star Wars (1977)

While the inclusion of God in a film is a rarity, the inclusion of spirituality is not. One of the most iconic and controversial film series has been Star Wars. In 1977 it hit the big screens and it was an immediate success. Legions of fans formed an eerie cult-like devotion and the box-office receipts were astronomical. It originated a new genre – the techno-splashy sci-fi soap opera.

The film definitely has a semi-religious theme. In From Plato to NATO David Gress writes that the Star Wars film saga broadcast a popular mythology of heroism, growth, light, and dark sides, wise old men and evil tempters, all concocted by the California filmmaker George Lucas. Much of the inspiration came from the teaching of Joseph Campbell, who claimed there is truth in all mythology. Campbell wrote in 1955 that "clearly Christianity is opposed fundamentally and intrinsically to everything I am working and living for."

Meanwhile, John C. McDowell, Lecturer in Systematic Theology at New College, University of Edinburgh, finds something redemptive in Star Wars. He analyses the "classic trilogy" Star Wars, The Empire Strikes Back, and the Return of the Jedi in his book The Gospel according to Star Wars: Faith, Hope, and the Force. He calls these films a "pop-culture phenomenon" of unprecedented stature and much more than mere entertainment.

He suggests that the films carry even "more influence among young adults than the traditional religious myths of our culture." He argues that these films possess rich resources to change and transform us as moral subjects by helping us in some measure to encounter the deep mystery of what it means to be truly human. He even claims that Star Wars is "a parabolic resource that reveals something of the shape of a Christian discipleship lived under the shadow of the cross." He notes that the theology of the original trilogy is difficult to pin down – though the interconnectedness of all of life does seem to be the fruit of the Force in some way and this is therefore exalted as the movies' "good" or "god." McDowell also discovered pacifist themes in the films – according to him, Star Wars at its best possesses radical potential to witness to a set of nonviolent values.

Critical assessment

Should we warn Christians about the kind of movies they are watching, whether in a theatre or on TV? Some say, "They are only movies. They won't influence us."

I wonder whether the lack of critical thinking by evangelicals is the result of the tendency to privatize faith, confining religious beliefs to personal morality, family, and the local congregation, all the while conducting their affairs in business, politics, education, and social life, and the arts much like everyone else.

Aren't even many Christians overlooking the persistence of evil in human history? We live in a fallen world that is at once hostile to God and also in search for God. Works of art can glorify God – including film art – but they can also be instrumental in leading people away from Him. Ever since the fall, human beings have been in revolt against God, turning their gifts against the Giver. Art, along with nearly every human faculty, has been tainted by the fall. Indeed, one of the first phases of the disintegration brought by sin was the usurpation of art for the purpose of idolatry (Rom. 1:23).

Most people believe they are personally immune to what they see on the film screen or on TV. How do we grow in our faith? Not by watching and observing a steady diet of movies. We must restore the primacy and power of the Word of God. God gave us a book – the Bible – and not a movie. We should be critical in our thinking, and apply our Biblical worldview. Scripture calls us to "test everything. Hold on to the good. Avoid every kind of evil" (1 Thess. 5:1-22).

Rev. Johan Tangelder (1936-2009) wrote for Reformed Perspective for 13 years. Many of his articles have been collected at Reformed Reflections.
This article was first published in November 2019.

Full Article

Education

A load of lumber is a wonderful thing

Back in 2007 Ebenezer Canadian Reformed School here in Smithers decided to supply the students with an “imaginative play kit.” What was it? A pile...

Interview with an artist

Paula Roth loves painting her studio

Hawkins Pond was painted at sunset to capture light sparkling off the leaves of the tre...

Conferences

2026 Summit Reformed Young Adult Conference

Why you (or someone you know) should plan to go ***** I once heard a sermon in which the pastor compared faith to salmon. “A dead salmon floats do...

Politics

Introducing ARPA Academy

A one-month program in Ottawa to sharpen and shape you! ***** RP’s Nov/Dec 2024 issue – the “Get Educated, Not Schooled” edition – describ...

News

Saturday Selections – Oct. 25, 2025

Easiest way to save 175,000 Europeans a year “Every year, around 1,300 Americans die from extreme heat. But in Europe, which has about double the population, 175,000 people die from extreme heat.” Why this huge difference? “…strict environmental regulations to help combat climate change…” Christians are being encouraged – in the name of biblical stewardship – to sign on for the climate catastrophic agenda. It can be hard to know what to do, since the science is beyond most of us. But you can gauge the fruit of that agenda. Here we see how those trying to save the planet aren’t saving the people on it. So that’s not an agenda we should sign up for. Ontario school taught third graders how to “get into drag” We send our kids to Christians schools not, first of all, to shelter them, but rather to teach them to see the world as it really is – as God created it and sustains it. But government schools are a danger we should shelter our kids from. Public schools indoctrinate children to see the world as it isn't – to see it as completely disconnected from God. And that's not enough for the government, as this report shows: they also want children to question their gender, and feel guilt, not for their sins but for their skin color. Parents disrobe to make their point The trans agenda has schools across this continent telling girls they need to be okay with boys in girls' locker rooms, changing in front of them, and watching them change. What we have here is adults refusing to protect girls. So, in what seems to becoming a trend, three parents have gone to school board meetings and, while arguing against this ridiculous policy, disrobed to their underwear or bathing suit. In the first case, in September, the board shut down the meeting, too uncomfortable to continue, and isn't that exactly the point that mother, Beth Bourne, was trying to make? If the board can't take such discomfort, why are they subjecting girls to it? Then, in October, a couple of women did the same, undressing to their underwear, to make the same point. Awkward? Certainly. But is it a sinful way to make a point? After all, God calls us to modesty (1 Tim. 2:9–10). But He has also used immodesty to make a point, having Isaiah walk around naked (or in no more than his underwear) for three years (Is. 20:2-4). God also calls on us to defend our children and take the hit for them (2 Cor. 12:14, 1 Thess. 2:7-9), modeled most clearly in what God had done for us (John 10:11). The school was set on humiliating children, and these parents were willing to be humiliated instead. Neither school seems to have listened. We can only hope these brave parents will also have the sense to pull their kids out. Too hot to be old (10 min. read) There are moons, and planets, and even a former planet, that are way too hot to be 4.6 billion years old. Our solar system gives evidence of being a young one after all. Conservative Anglicans have been liberated The appointment of a female Archbishop of Canterbury has prompted conservative churches to formally split away. Why girls are more susceptible to transgender indoctrination Our kids, girls or guys, need to know that their teen struggles are common – at some point in their teens, everyone feels like a friendless loner who has something deeply wrong with them. They need to know hear that from their parents so they don't start looking for answers on the Internet or elsewhere where they could hear their problem is that they were born in the wrong body. They need to hear from us that yes, they might be broken... as we all are. Thankfully, we can turn to God in our brokenness and in repentance, and He will be a Father to the lonely. ...

Culture Clashes

Jonathan & David and the difference between brave & crazy

The divide between brave and crazy isn’t always easy to see. God wants us to be brave –how many times did He encourage Joshua to be “strong and courageous”? – but our lives and limbs are gifts from Him, not to be carelessly gambled away. So brave is good, crazy is not. But which is what? Some activities are always crazy – don’t stand on a rolly chair to change a lightbulb, don’t do it! – but oftentimes whether a thing is brave or crazy depends on why you are doing it. We see that contrast in 1 Samuel 14 and 2 Samuel 23:13–17. In both, Israelites fight Philistines. In the first we find Prince Jonathan and his armor-bearer climbing up a cliff face to go attack a Philistine outpost, just the two of them. “Jonathan said to his young armor-bearer, ‘Come, let’s go over to the outpost of those uncircumcised men. Perhaps the Lord will act in our behalf. Nothing can hinder the Lord from saving, whether by many or by few.’ ‘Do all that you have in mind,’ his armor-bearer said. ‘Go ahead; I am with you heart and soul’” (1 Sam. 14:6-7). Doesn’t it seem insane? How do you even swing a sword when you’re climbing up with your hands and feet? But this was brave because they were doing it for the Lord. If they’d died doing it, they wouldn’t have had any reason for shame. In 2 Samuel 23:13-17, Israel is again battling the Philistines, who have a garrison at Bethlehem. When David dejectedly declares, “Oh, that someone would get me a drink of water from the well near the gate of Bethlehem!” three of his mighty men go do it. They break through enemy lines and get David his water… which he then pours out. “‘Far be it from me, Lord, to do this!’ he said, ‘Is it not the blood of men who went at the risk of their lives?’ And David would not drink it.” Why not? Because what they’d done was crazy, and he didn’t approve. Had they died, it would’ve been for what? Their leader’s wistful whine? That’s not a good why. And that’s quite the difference....

Parenting

Why it’s good for teens and kids to do chores

We should do chores for the same reason we go to school – preparation ***** Chances are, as a part of the family, you are asked to do various menial (or not so menial) tasks about the house or yard. “Son, will you take out the trash?” “Sweetheart, would you dust the house for me?” “Will you mow the lawn?” “Will you start the laundry?" “Would you put away the dishes?” Or, if, like myself, your mother decides to finish writing a fifty-lesson Bible study in a week flat, then you find yourself generously helping her keep the house running by taking over the role of “housewife” for a week. This should be easy. Now, to most of us, the word “chores” sends us running to our bedrooms where we promptly take solace under the bed where nobody can find us (unless that’s always the first place you go when you’re trying to avoid doing something. Too predictable, mate. Find a new spot). Your parents assign you chores from an early age because you are a part of this family, and so it is your duty to contribute to the running of the house. What if I told you that chores will inevitably prepare you for being an adult? And if you hope to be married, you need to be doing chores for along the same reasons why you do school. It’s imperative that we all learn how to read, write, and calculate arithmetic so we can be better prepared for what the world has in store for us. It would be a bummer if you were not able to read your Bible because you had never learned how to read. Same with chores. What if you had never learned how to load the dishwasher until after you moved out? Any roommates wouldn’t be impressed. Or what if you never learned how to fold clothes until you were finally forced to do it after your marriage? Your husband would come home and find his clothes smelling awful from not being washed, and all his shirts wrinkled after being stuffed carelessly into the bureau (hang them up – Braendlein men’s shirts should be hung up in the closet!). What if you had never dealt with the trash in your life, and now you watch helplessly as your roommate drags the overflowing garbage bag to the apartment hallway, where he leaves it for no other reason than “I don’t know what to do with it!” …and you don’t know either! What if you had never learned how to make a decent peanut butter and jam sandwich, and you starved? Or your kids starved? Or you starved your husband of the nutrition he so sorely needs in order to support his growing family? What if you never learned how to scramble a decent egg, and all you could do, to surprise your wife with breakfast in bed, was bring her the box of Cheerios? Doing chores and learning how to manage a household will get you off on the right foot as you prepare to leave your home and someday get married. And if you think that women should learn how to do women’s chores, like dishes and laundry, while men should learn how to do men’s chores, like mowing the lawn and taking out the trash, then think again. Both sexes should learn how to do all of the aforementioned chores, regardless of whether or not the wives will spend their married days mowing the lawn and the men folding the clothes. You might find that your husband is great at folding laundry, and that you actually love mowing the lawn. My father is terrible at folding laundry and figuring out the difference between his boxers and his son’s (what an awkward day it was when he tried on my brother’s boxers and found that he had put the wrong ones in his own drawer). But he will do it if it blesses my mother (actually, scratch that; he will willingly make his four children fold the laundry if it blesses his wife). So if your mother asks you to move over the laundry and start a load of delicates, or your father asks you to take out all the trash in the house (how many trash cans are there, seriously?), do it with joy, and know that knowing how to do chores will save you a lot of pain when you finally move out or get married. And besides, you get to do all the chores when you’re a grown-up! Pictures by Hannah Penninga....

News

Saturday Selections – Oct. 18, 2025

Should Christians celebrate Halloween? If we do, we should definitely do it differently. Whatever its historic origins, Halloween today has become a celebration of, and the commercialization of, death, the demonic and all things creepy – 5-foot spiders and 8-foot skeletons are on sale now at your local Walmart! Your kids want to dress up as a cute puppy dog or a princess? Downright counter-cultural! Shucks, while trying to find a stock picture for the topic of Halloween, I discovered 99% of the Halloween pictures had skeletons, ghosts, devils, witches, vampires, or the like. Photos of kids dressed up in clever or cute costumes could hardly be had. The most compelling case against tech in schools (10-minute read) This is on "the mounting evidence that computers and tablets on students’ desks are interfering with their education because the distraction effects almost always outweigh whatever educational benefits were promised." As Jonathan Haidt (author of The Anxious Generation) writes, "I banned the use of all screens in all of my classes at New York University several years ago, because it became clear that many college students can’t stay present in class when there’s a laptop or phone on their desk." National Post article highlights the case against term limits and for small, teeny tiny government Citizens, frustrated with politicians who don't deliver on their promises, might well raise the notion of term limits, to ensure that we can at least sweep out the disappointing mass of them every couple of terms or so. But what good is it, if we get rid of the figureheads and not the powers behind the throne? "Nearly one-quarter of Ontario's senior managers appear to have progressive leanings" – so reads the headline. We can debate how conservative Ontario's current government may or may not be, but even if it was headed by the most stalwart of Christian conservatives, it might not make any difference if its bureaucracy – the folks who actually decide how government decisions will be implemented – was run by radicals. So a case could be made then, that if an elected official is ever going to have a chance at draining the swamp, he's going to need to have some time on the job to figure out where exactly the drain is situated. Term limits might just ensure that no one ever has enough experience to take on the swamp. Of course, we already have politicians with plenty of experience, and they haven't righted the wrongs. But what an article like this shows is that our priority shouldn't be to bring in a new batch of politicians, but to just start whacking away at the bureaucracy. If we were to elect some good men, the only chance they'd have against an entrenched bureaucracy is if it were quickly reduced and rooted out. Sports gambling ads are overrunning the airwaves It's called the gambling industry, but there's nothing industrious about it. In true industries, everyone benefits. A farmer grows grain, a builder creates a home, a barista serves up a cappuccino – in each case provider and purchaser are both better off, such that everyone involved can say "thank-you." But in gambling, the only way someone can win is for others to lose – there is no mutual benefit. The government and the gambling industry know the odds are always against the betters. Even the winners, if they keep gambling, are sure to lose in the long run – that's how the odds are stacked. In other words, our government and the gambling "industry" they've partnered with are making their money by encouraging their citizens to do something stupid with their money. This is evil undisguised. Let kids read dangerous stories This is about the rise of "cozy stories" – the Hallmark-movie versions of middle school novels, that don't have grit, chills, or tension – and why we need to steer our kids away from reading too many of these. What is the unbeliever's most compelling argument? Jeff Durbin, on how even the most emotionally powerful argument from an unbeliever has to have power from the Christian worldview to have any power at all. ...

Documentary

12 free must-see docs for Christian families

Documentaries aren’t your thing? Then you haven’t seen these. We’ve got brilliant scholars and scientists sharing, in just a line or two, all th...

Theology

Genesis: theology and history!

A common objection to understanding Genesis 1 as history is that we should instead take it as theology. We’re told that God wants us to learn about ...

Assorted

Charlie Kirk in context

Many will condemn a man for an isolated sentence or two. Christians do it too. Instead, we should assess others just as we would like to be judged (Ma...

News

Saturday Selections – Oct. 11, 2025

Ray Comfort does a stint at a Turning Point USA event Since Charlie Kirk's murder, his organization has been filling his shoes with quite a variety o...

Assorted

Why Charlie Kirk’s death hit so hard

For a time, in September, my Facebook feed – I’m sure yours too – was full of tributes to Charlie Kirk. At this point, I don’t need to tell you that Kirk was big. He was the founder of Turning Point USA, an organization maybe best known for setting up tables at university campuses across the USA, with Kirk, and sometimes his friends too, willing to debate anyone who would take the mic. Some give Kirk credit for Trump’s win in 2024, because of the way Turning Point was so effective in its outreach to young voters. I felt a weight when I heard about his assassination. And the weight increased as I processed. Maybe that’s how you felt too. If you track the news, it’s been a heavy year. Overdoses. Transgenderism. Abortion. Stabbings. Euthanasia. Shootings. Never mind the economy. Now this. But why is this hitting so hard? I only watched Kirk’s videos occasionally. Why am I mourning someone who had so little impact on my day-to-day life? Of course, you have to feel sad for his loved ones – but it’s not that kind of grief. Assassinations are jarring, by nature. Not that I’ve lived through too many. But this is different. Charlie Kirk’s murder crystallized the hatred that I’ve been seeing directed towards Christian ideas and towards prolife activists. The hatred that activist Christians have felt directed our way through the condescension and the shouts, now manifested through murder. Across America, and Canada too, thousands celebrated. Mocked. Laughed. Who watches a man die, and laughs? That scares me. The apostle John equated hatred with murder (1 John 3:15), and I’ve never felt how close that link is until now. In her video commemorating Charlie, Christian commentator Allie Beth Stuckey put it, “We’re bringing words. They’re bringing weapons.” Ultimately, Charlie Kirk was murdered for views that I hold. Probably not all of them, but the fundamentals. Many of those views are non-negotiable Christian convictions that you and I and all God’s people hold. Christianity wasn’t a part of Kirk’s message: it was the driving force behind it. The gap and the bridge For a while, it’s been pretty clear that Christianity stands at odds with secular beliefs. Now, two seemingly contradictory things come to mind: 1. It’s not an “us” versus “them” We can’t just write off everyone on the other side. Christ came and died for us while we were still His enemies (Romans 5:8-10), and if not for Him, we would be enemies still. So, if God can do that for us, what might He be working in those folks over there? So we need to talk. As Charlie put it: “When people stop talking, really bad stuff starts. When marriages stop talking, divorce happens. When churches , they fall apart. When civilization stops talking, civil war ensues. When you stop having a human connection with someone you disagree with, it becomes a lot easier to want to commit violence against that group.” The Christian response is to treat everyone with dignity (Matt. 7:12), and pray for anyone who hates us (Matt. 5:43-44). 2. There are two sides We can’t be confused about how there are two sides (Josh. 5:13-14): God’s side, and everyone else’s. As God’s people we are, and are called to be, fundamentally different. To me, the spiritual battle was brought to light by this assassin’s physical act. Are these two conflicting views? No. These both make sense when we recognize what we share with our enemies: we’re all made in the image of God (Gen. 9:6), and we’re all in desperate need of a Savior. We can look across the divide in humility knowing there but for the grace of God, go I. Social media makes both sides think, “Duh!?” The algorithms selecting what’ll show up in our social media feeds only sharpen the division, making it difficult to actually have compassion for others. Everyone wonders: How can anybody support ____? It’s just so obviously wrong! Then we all click on what we want to see, and afterwards the algorithm feeds us more and more of the same. My liberal friend commented, “He shouldn’t have been killed. But he said the gun deaths are worth it, so it just feels ironic.” Worth it. Worth what? Did he really say that? What did he mean? But the internet clip stops right there. “Hah,” laughs an anti-gun activist. The assumption is that had Charlie known he would be killed by a gunman, then his tune would’ve changed. I disagree, largely because I got to see what else Charlie said. Another thing Kirk said was: “I don’t believe in empathy,” and since his murder that quote has been pasted across the Internet. “How heartless can you be?” thinks the social studies student. Missed is the next phrase that isn’t included: “I prefer sympathy.” And Kirk went on from there to explain why. One student asked him, “If your ten-year-old daughter was raped, would you want her to have the baby?” Kirk answered: “Yes.” Some stop listening at “yes.” Those who listen longer hear a compassionate “why.” Explanations on immigration and marriage aren’t heard, but clips “proving” xenophobia, transphobia, and homophobia dominate YouTube. Charity is dead. Assumptions of good intent are gone, and undiscerning scrolling forms a worldview. Those who hear only what they want call him a hateful, dangerous fascist. When that’s your belief, then all redeeming qualities fail. They’re not redeeming qualities at all – they’re manipulation tactics. And assassinating a fascist is a heroic act. One spray-painted billboard read: “Death to all Charlie Kirks.” That’s enough Internet for me today. Can we get back to normal life? It’s tempting to dismiss this as a one-time event. A crazy person shot a MAGA activist. We’re not American. Most people aren’t crazy. Right? Maybe we could start to be discerning again. More neutral. The words “He had it coming,” will always be wrong. But we might reflect, “Should he really have linked his Christianity so closely with partisan politics?” or “He was unnecessarily controversial… if he just spoke the Gospel, this wouldn’t have happened.” Not quite victim blaming, but maybe we should adjust the halo a bit? Should we really call him a martyr? If he is one – if that’s what we were to conclude – we’d also have to conclude that Christianity itself is hated, not just some Christians who don’t put a good face to it. Then it’s not just about Charlie; you and I are hated. And I think the 100+ church burnings across Canada in the last 5 years bear witness to Who is really hated. So no, this wasn’t a matter of tone. We don’t look at prophets in the Old Testament, and suggest perhaps their tone was off. Sorry, Jeremiah. You were a bit harsh there - a little too blunt on that one! Watch any of his videos – in whole – and listen to those who knew him; Charlie Kirk was incredibly patient and well-versed. He was grounded in the Gospel, in both public and personal life. Many young people attribute their own shift to conservatism to Charlie Kirk, and many are now opening their Bibles for the first time while navigating the loss. Charlie Kirk was targeted because he was effective. The turning point I’m not the first to say this – it’s ringing all over the Internet: in the bullet, hate took a physical form. And this is how Charlie’s wife responded: “You have no idea what you have just unleashed across this world and across this entire nation.” Erika Kirk is right, God has so used this that in Charlie’s death his voice has been amplified. His videos are being watched even more. And I’m excited for all the new voices who have been emboldened to speak. Christian voices. As I’m writing this, a lot has already been said. An insane amount of commentary. But the hate felt personal, so I wrote too. I’ve done outreach – speaking up for the unborn – some of it on university campuses. My life hasn’t been in danger, but the hate’s been the same. The people in Kirk’s videos are the same sort that pro-life activists talk to every day on the streets. Like Charlie Kirk, I enjoy talking to someone who radically disagrees with me; I get to show my own humanity, and I get to tear down the image of heartless, ignorant pro-life monsters that they’ve crafted about us in their minds. Conclusion Charlie’s assassination brought it home: they hate us – they really hate us. And there are so many of them. I wrote a poem a few years ago, while struggling with the weight of others’ opinions of me. I find it a good measure for checking my own heart and actions. Am I doing something wrong, or am I just scared of being ridiculed? Am I hesitant to speak because I think it’s prudent, or because I fear the opinions of others? Strive, at the end of the day When fingers are pointed my way, To have no fault but Thine. Let them hate my faithfulness, I say. Your laws, they laugh at. Your love, they despise. I pray, they find those in me, And be not me, they criticize. You and I both know we’ll do it imperfectly. But that’s not the calling. We don’t have to worry about perfection – Jesus has accomplished that for us. The outcome of evangelism isn’t on us either. But obedience is. May God grant us the courage to speak out boldly and patiently to a world that so desperately needs to hear His Good News. Picture is adapted from one by Gage Skidmore and used under a CC BY-SA 2.0 license....

News

ARPA condemned in BC legislature

On the very first day of the fall legislative session, British Columbia MLAs debated the “views and policies of Association for Reformed Political Action” for almost an hour. The debate was over a motion tabled by the NDP: “That this House condemns the intolerant views of the Association for Reformed Political Action (ARPA), including its harmful discrimination against transgender people, its belief that homosexuality is ‘immoral’ and its explicit policy goal of restricting abortion access in British Columbia.” The NDP’s motive for the motion seemed to be to condemn the Conservative opposition for attending ARPA’s MLA reception at the BC legislature back in April. However, the debate never talked about the two issues that ARPA specifically raised at that reception: medical gender transitioning for minors, and euthanasia. By what standard? Several NDP, Green, and independent MLAs rose to condemn ARPA’s positions on gender identity, sexual orientation, same-sex marriage, conversion therapy, abortion, IVF, and surrogacy. They argued that ARPA’s views violate various rights and freedoms and run counter to principles of diversity, equity, inclusion, and tolerance. Now, it goes without saying that ARPA – and all Christians – are in favor of all of these things when viewed in a proper way. In fact, a recognition of rights and the practice of tolerance only really arose in the Christian West. What this debate exposed is what happens when these things are unmoored from their Christian anchors and made our ultimate political goals. If the expansion of freedom becomes the most important aim of politics, then medical transitioning for minors makes sense. If diversity is the legislature’s most sacred value, then opposition to gay marriage is indeed out of place. But orthodox Christians know all of these values – rights and freedoms, equity and tolerance – are not the ultimate basis for morality or justice. Rather, the ultimate basis for just laws is God’s revelation to us in His Word and creation. MLAs spent a whole lot of time talking about rights in this hour of debate. But they spent virtually no time talking about what is right. They refused to acknowledge how removing the breasts of a fourteen-year-old girl in the name of “gender-affirming care” is not in her best interest. They refused to consider whether providing euthanasia to the mentally ill might be a step too far even for them. They refused to contemplate whether pre-born children at 35 weeks of age deserve any protections in law. Calling good evil (Is. 5:20) Instead, MLAs voted 48-3 to condemn ARPA’s “intolerant” views. (The text of the motion uses “intolerant,” but the word “hateful” was bandied about the most.) Here’s how the vote broke down: The entire NDP and Green caucuses, along with independent Elenore Sturko, voted to condemn ARPA. The two MLAs from OneBC, and another independent, Jordan Kealy, voted against the motion and spoke up to defend ARPA. None of the Conservative MLAs opted to be present for the vote. The lone Conservative speaker to the motion accused the motion of being a “political trap.” All of this might remind us of the words of Jesus in John 15:18-21: “If the world hates you, know that it has hated me before it hated you. If you were of the world, the world would love you as its own; but because you are not of the world, but I chose you out of the world, therefore the world hates you. Remember the word that I said to you: ‘A servant is not greater than his master.’ If they persecuted me, they will also persecute you. If they kept my word, they will also keep yours. But all these things they will do to you on account of my name, because they do not know him who sent me.” If Reformed Christians were of the world – if we supported medical gender transitioning, same-sex marriage, or abortion on demand, or kept silent about them all – these MLAs would not have condemned ARPA. Reformed Christians strive to stand publicly for what God reveals to be true. God says that He created two sexes? That’s how it is. He designed marriage to be between one man and one woman for life? That’s our definition too. God created human life to begin at conception and commands us not to murder? Then abortion is wrong. Recognizing and honoring these truths is good for everyone. What true love looks like Our motivation, then, for raising these issues is one of love. Earlier in John 15, Christ says: “This is my commandment, that you love one another as I have loved you. Greater love has no one than this, that someone lay down his life for his friends. You are my friends if you do what I command you. No longer do I call you servants, for the servant does not know what his master is doing; but I have called you friends, for all that I have heard from my Father I have made known to you. You did not choose Me, but I chose you and appointed you that you should go and bear fruit and that your fruit should abide, so that whatever you ask the Father in my Name, He may give it to you. These things I command you, so that you will love one another.” And that’s what ARPA and all Reformed Christians should intend to do. We endeavor to love our fellow citizens. This includes not just the fellow brothers and sisters in Christ that Jesus has in mind here, but all people, as Jesus taught in the Parable of the Good Samaritan. We call for a law against abortion because we love pre-born children. We love children who are confused about their gender. We love the same-sex couple next door. And yes, we ought to love the MLAs who voted yesterday to condemn ARPA. For, as John wrote later, “we love because He first loved us” (1 John 4:19). And so, in this condemnation of ARPA in the BC legislature, as Reformed Christians we might feel “afflicted in every way, but not crushed; perplexed, but not driven to despair; persecuted, but not forsaken; struck down, but not destroyed” (2 Cor. 4:8-9). For we know that “we are more than conquerors through Him who loved us” (Rom. 8:37). But in light of the fact that few MLAs stood up to defend ARPA – much less defend the bodily integrity of gender dysphoric children or the lives of those threatened by euthanasia or abortion – our provincial representatives need to hear from us. Encourage them not to be afraid to discuss the issues that desperately need our government’s attention, but to boldly hold the government to account. A version of this article was first posted to ARPACanada.ca...

People we should know

Cornelius Van Til: his life and impact

Cornelius Van Til may not have seemed a likely candidate to accomplish a "Reformation of Christian Apologetics," but God is in the habit of utilizing unlikely candidates to mount great victories for His kingdom. Van Til "wanted to be a farmer.... Instead he became one of the foremost Christian apologists of our time," to use the words of David Kucharsky in Christianity Today (Dec. 30, 1977, p. 18). Early life Van Til was born May 3, 1895, in Grootegast, Holland, as the sixth of eight children to a devout dairyman-farmer. At the age of ten his family sailed to America and settled in Indiana. Cornelius enjoyed the soil and animals, but his evident intellectual strengths got him sent to Calvin Preparatory School in 1914. He worked his way through as a part-time janitor and wholly loved the study of philosophy. By the time he enrolled in Calvin Seminary in 1921, he was already familiar with the works of Abraham Kuyper and Herman Bavinck and had added a knowledge of Hebrew, Greek, and Latin to his Dutch and English! He studied systematic theology under Louis Berkhof and Christian philosophy under W. H. Jellema. During his first year of seminary J. Gresham Machen - the man who stood head and shoulders above others as presenting a Christian faith worthy of scholarly defense – published The Origin of Paul's Religion. The next year Van Til transferred to Princeton where he could study with Machen as well as at the philosophy department of Princeton University (under the Scottish personalist, A. A. Bowman). At the seminary Van Til managed the student dining club, and lived on the same floor in Alexander Hall with "Das" Machen, who was busy publishing numerous apologetical studies (including his monumental Christianity and Liberalism ). Van Til's seminary adviser, C. W. Hodge Jr., was a grandson of Charles Hodge and the successor to B. B. Warfield. Van Til profited from the solid Biblical instruction of men like Hodge, Robert Dick Wilson, William Park Armstrong, and Oswald T. Allis, but the professor closest to his heart was Geerhardus Vos, the respected Dutch scholar who championed the method of "Biblical theology." Van Til won the prize-winning student papers for both 1923 (on evil and theodicy) and 1924 (on the will and its theological relations). The seminary granted him a Th.M. in systematic theology in 1925, after which he married his long-time sweetheart, Rena Klooster. At the university Van Til's prowess in metaphysical analysis and mastery of Hegel's philosophy had gained high praise from A. A. Bowman, who offered him a graduate fellowship. In 1927 the university granted him the Ph.D. in philosophy for a dissertation on "God and the Absolute." In the same year his first published piece (a review of A. N. Whitehead's Religion in the Making) clearly exhibited the salient lines of presuppositional analysis: a) locating an opponent's crucial presuppositions b) criticizing the autonomous attitude which arises from a failure to honor the Creator-creature distinction c) exposing the internal and destructive philosophical tensions which attend autonomy, and then d) setting forth the only viable alternative, Biblical Christianity. When J. Gresham Machen declined the chair of apologetics at Princeton Seminary, deciding to remain in the New Testament department, the Board of the seminary was encouraged by William Brenton Greene (1854-1928), the retired professor of apologetics, to invite Van Til to lecture in the department for the 1928-1929 academic year. Following the reception of his doctorate and his first visit back to the Netherlands (1927), Van Til had accepted the pastorate of the Christian Reformed Church in Spring Lake, Michigan. Although installed for only a year, he took a leave of absence from the congregation and taught apologetics at Princeton, impressing everyone so favorably (even though the youngest instructor there) that at the end of only one year the Board elected him to assume the Stuart Chair of apologetics and ethics. The decline of PCUSA and the beginning of the OPC However, within weeks the General Assembly of the Presbyterian Church in the U.S.A. reorganized Princeton Seminary in such a way that control of the once conservative bastion of Reformed orthodoxy was turned over to men who desired to see many different viewpoints represented at Princeton and who favored a "broad church." Machen resigned and immediately started work to establish Westminster Theological Seminary in Philadelphia. Van Til likewise resigned and returned to Michigan. In the mean time, Machen handpicked Van Til to teach apologetics in the new seminary, even traveling with Ned B. Stonehouse to Michigan in August to plead for Van Til's acceptance of the position – after a previous visit from O. T. Allis had not secured it. After declining at first, Van Til took up teaching duties at Westminster Seminary in the fall of 1929, where he continued in that ministry until retiring more than forty years later. When Machen was unjustly forced out of the Presbyterian Church in the U.S.A. in 1936, Van Til supported him in the founding of the Orthodox Presbyterian Church, where he came to have a decided influence for years to come, both as a scholar and as a powerful pulpit preacher. Presuppositional publishing From the outset of his teaching career Van Til sought to develop a distinctively, consistently Christian philosophical outlook. He wanted to see everything in terms of a Biblical world-and-life-view. The first major syllabus produced by Van Til at Westminster Seminary, (now titled A Survey of Christian Epistemology) came out in 1933. In it he traced through history various epistemological positions, noting the bearing of metaphysical convictions upon them, and advanced the necessity of a transcendental, presuppositional method of argumentation. He insisted that Christians must reason with unbelievers, seeking to reduce the non-Christian worldview (whatever form it takes) to absurdity, by exposing it to be epistemologically and morally self-contradictory. Van Til's insight, a brilliant and apologetically powerful one, was that antitheism actually presupposes theism. To reason at all, the unbeliever must operate on assumptions which actually contradict his espoused presuppositions – assumptions which comport only with the Christian worldview. Van Til's presuppositional approach has been a powerful impetus for reform in Christian thinking. Outwardly, it directs a transcendental challenge to all philosophies which fall short of a Biblical theory of knowledge, demonstrating that their worldviews do not provide the philosophical preconditions needed for the intelligible use of logic, science, or ethics. Inwardly, it calls for self-examination by Christian scholars and apologists to see if their own theories of knowledge have been self-consciously developed in subordination to the word of God which they wish to vindicate or apply. It has likewise cut a wide swath through a large number of relevant areas of interest, requiring that every area of life be governed by the inscripturated word of God. Conclusion Those who knew Dr. Van Til personally will testify that he was not only a man of principle and conviction, a towering intellectual, but equally a man of warmth, humor, and compassion. On April 17, 1987, he joined all the saints who from their labors rest. This article was first published in the May, 1995 issue of Penpoint (Vol. VI:5) and is reprinted with permission of Covenant Media Foundation, which hosts and sells many other Dr. Bahnsen resources on their website www.cmfnow.com. It appeared in the November 2014 issue....

News

90,000 legal homicides in Canada since 2016

According to calculations from the Euthanasia Prevention Coalition (EPC), as of September this year approximately 90,000 Canadians have been euthanized since this form of homicide was legalized by the federal government in 2016. Homicide is defined under Section 222 of Canada’s Criminal Code as an act causing the death of a human being. The staggering number of euthanasia deaths have been steadily increasing, from 1,018 in 2016, to 15,343 confirmed cases in 2023. Based on the reports available for 2024, the EPC projects there were 16,500 euthanasia deaths that year, an increase of 7.5 percent. EPC drilled in on BC’s 2024 data and found that 35 percent of the 2,767 euthanasia deaths were approved based on “other conditions.” Of these, 65.9 percent were related to “frailty.” They noted that “frailty” isn’t defined and can encompass euthanasia for a “completed life” – in other words, an elderly person is not sick or dying but simply wants to die. The increasing numbers, and broad standards for qualifying, are a far cry from what the Supreme Court of Canada ruled in Carter v. Canada (2015), when it allowed euthanasia for a competent adult who “has a grievous and irremediable medical condition (including an illness, disease, or disability) that causes enduring suffering that is intolerable to the individual in the circumstances of his or her condition.” Behind each of these statistics is a human being made in the image of God, many of whom left this earth without hope. As ARPA Canada and others communicated to Parliament and to the courts prior to the legalization of euthanasia, as soon as we remove the sacred line of the Sixth Commandment to not murder, it becomes impossible to maintain any other line. Sure enough, Parliament is now considering further expansions of euthanasia for those whose suffering is solely psychological, as well as for children....

News

Saturday Selections – Oct. 4, 2025

Bahnsen vs. Hitchens, the Rap Battle Here's AI put to its weirdest and most wonderful –the late Reformed apologist Greg Bahnsen taking on the late ...

Assorted

Dominee’s friend

There is style and there is class. Dominee may not have had much style, as the world considers style, but he had class. Dominee had accepted a call...

Science - Creation/Evolution

FALSE DILEMMA: Is Genesis 1 Historical or Poetic?

News

Saturday Selections – Sept 27, 2025

Voddie Baucham (1969-2025) spoke to Christian Nationalism shortly before his passing This past week, Voddie Baucham passed away at the age of 56. A R...

Assorted

Veya’s story

The fight for her life in a broken and biased healthcare system – one that sees doctors perpetrating euthanasia and abortion and calling them both medical care. ***** “Our sweet Veya Hope ran into the arms of Jesus yesterday.” So shared Veya’s mother, Krystal Vanderbrugghen, on her Instagram page on August 2, 2025. Krystal continued: “Her name was her calling – Hope. She carried it with her every single day she spent inside those hospital rooms and gave it to all who knew her.” Veya was first introduced to the waiting world, and to the arms of her parents Krystal and Jeremy, just a year and a half earlier, on December 4, 2023. Although the LORD didn’t have many days allotted for Veya here on Earth, her life touched tens of thousands of hearts. And her experiences here also exposed just how difficult it can be to fight for care in a broken world and medical system. “We pray that Veya’s story continues to encourage other families who are given this same precious gift – the gift of loving and raising a child with Down Syndrome,” Krystal explained. Hope born Jeremy and Krystal, along with their other children Ivylee, Irelyn, and Lincoln, live in Caledonia, Ontario. In the fall of 2023, as they were eagerly awaiting the birth of another child, they learned that their baby had a congenital heart defect which would require surgery at some point after birth. “While this is a lot to process, we know without a doubt God truly has a perfect plan for this baby even though the road ahead is filled with uncertainties.” That’s what Krystal shared at that time on Instagram, not realizing just how true these words would be for her and her family. She would continue to share, with all who took an interest, the challenges of the road they were on. In an appearance on RP’s Real Talk podcast earlier this year, talking with Lucas Holtvluwer, Krystal explained that hospital stays brought their own problems. “She was born with Down Syndrome and a cardiac defect – pretty straightforward – but she has now encountered some medical complexities from living her life in a hospital this long and from delayed treatments.” One complication and delay led to another, and Veya was transferred from Hamilton’s McMaster Hospital to SickKids Hospital in Toronto, which is one of the leading children’s hospitals in the world. Crumbling care “Our journey started off really great, like we had teams that were really invested,” Krystal explained to Lucas. “But then we experienced her care declining January of this year, so that kind of set her on a totally different trajectory.” “Specifically with her last ICU admission, you could just tell through the conversations with the doctors that they were really just trying to wrap things up with her and kind of coerce us into letting her go rather than help her,” she shared on the podcast. “I feel like the team coach, trying to keep the spirits alive…. But they all just kind of vanished.” Krystal was particularly confused when Veya was denied a necessary liver transplant. She asked their Pediatric Advanced Care team if it was Veya’s Down Syndrome that was influencing their decision-making. “They can never say yes or no, but they said, ‘Mom, I think you know the answer to that deep down in your heart.’ And I said, ‘well, that is the confirmation.’” One particular incident really broke Krystal’s trust in Veya’s care. “Right after her liver surgery, she got RSV , and then a few days after that, she got overdosed with a lethal amount of potassium. It wasn't just a little bit, it was 10 times the regular amount that she normally gets, and it was during the evening when none of us were there.” Veya’s heart rate went to 350 beats per minute, and she had to be shocked three times to stabilize her. “I do have questions whether it actually was an accident or not, because these sorts of things happen when families step away. So, the timing of it, but also the amount. You know, it's one thing, if you gave a little extra, but 10 times the amount, like, an actual lethal dose?” Growing support Krystal shared the ups and downs of Veya’s journey on her Instagram account. Her photos, videos, and touching words lit a fire in many hearts around the world, and she ended up with close to 40,000 Instagram followers, many of whom were praying for Veya, and encouraging Krystal and her family. “For me, social media was like an open diary and a way for me to process but also a way for me to be able to connect with others that were raising children with Down Syndrome, because I knew nothing about it, and so it's been a really great place for resources and connecting.” But the care hasn’t only been virtual. Krystal and Jeremy are members of Trinity Canadian Reformed Church in Glanbrook, Ontario. And as she told Lucas back in July, “Our church community, they're phenomenal. I'll tell you this, we had a meal train set up for Veya when she was born, and we are 19 months into this and that same meal train is still going.” She added that the amount of support they have received allowed them to be fully present and to advocate for Veya, because everything else was being taken care of. The many prayers that were raised for their family carried them. “I don't think my husband and I really understood that till we lived this experience. Like you really feel carried by prayers. There's just this indescribable peace that comes with it.” Growing faith We read in James 1:3 how “the testing of your faith produces endurance” and Krystal attested to this when speaking about their journey prior to Veya’s death. “As much as we want to enter the next season of life and be off of this medical journey, there's a part of you that doesn't, because of the experience you have with God's nearness. Because it forces you to slow down and really lean into Him. “….The ways we've experienced God's goodness and care over these 19 months, we're forever thankful for that. Faith is not without pain. It's there to give you the courage to face it, right? And a lot of times this journey has really forced us to our knees.” She later added that, as hard as it has been, they have seen so much good come from this journey already, particularly with the many interactions with people in the hospital. Seeking justice After Veya’s promotion to glory, Krystal shared with Reformed Perspective that they hope to have further meetings with SickKids Hospital regarding the neglect that Veya experienced, which Krystal sees as a push to end Veya’s life rather than care for it. “What was happening was the team was trying to 'stealth euthanize' Veya through means of denying life-saving measures.” They are working with other families who experienced similar harms for their medically complex children at the same hospital, seeking to raise their concerns collectively. Her hope is to see a formal acknowledgement of harm, public reporting requirements, independent investigations, disability rights training, and whistleblower protection so that staff can report unsafe practices without fear of losing their jobs. Although she has devoted much of her past couple of years to being an advocate for Veya and others with disabilities, she also understands that she can only do so much. And that is OK. “Our God, The Creator of Life has the final say.” Advice for others When asked by RP what advice she would have for other families who may face similar situations, she urged them to document everything, including conversations and decisions, names, and copies of medical records. She also advised to never go into important meetings alone. Bring someone to witness and support you. Further, use clear and assertive language like “can you explain in writing why you are denying this treatment?” And if there are concerns, escalate them by asking to speak with a patient’s relations person or ombudsman, or even filing a complaint with the hospital leadership or licensing board. She encourages others to seek a second, or third opinion, and not be afraid to transfer care to another institution, even if it feels scary. And “trust your instincts – God gives them to us for a reason!” You know your child best so “if something feels wrong, it probably is.” Most soberly, she warns “know that Canada has become a death culture.” In an age where it has become legal to end the life of someone who requests it simply because they are suffering, it becomes all the more important to be on guard for the care of our loved ones, particularly those who are more vulnerable. “Instead of offering care, too many hospitals offer ‘comfort care only.’ Instead of fighting for life, they push families towards giving up and will blame you for your loved one’s suffering.” Her final advice is most encouraging. “You are not alone, God goes behind you and before you…. When you are battling the medical system for your child never forget to stop and ask God for guidance, strength, wisdom and peace. He sees, He knows, and He will lead you step by step.” A tribute for Veya In the weeks following Veya’s death, Krystal paid tribute to Veya with these words: “I didn’t have to look into your eyes to fall in love with you. I didn’t need to hear your soft, raspy cry to know you loved me too. I didn’t have to hold your hands to cherish you forever – because from the very beginning, within my womb, our hearts were already intertwined. “Veya, you changed me. Through you God gave me a deep perspective. You touched my soul and awakened a love so deep that can only be explained by His goodness. You gave me countless memories that I will hold close for the rest of my life. My heart aches in a way words can’t fully capture, and I know that ache won’t leave until we’re together again. …Though the longing never fades, each day moves me closer to the joy of holding you in Heaven.” Pictures used with permission of the Vanderbrugghens....

News

Charlie Kirk’s funeral spreads the Gospel

On Sunday, September 21, an estimated 100,000 people gathered inside State Farm Stadium in Glendale, Arizona, for the funeral of Charlie Kirk, with an overflow crowd outside also in the tens of thousands. Kirk, just 31 years old, was an extremely popular and influential Christian leader, especially among young people; he was assassinated on September 10 while debating with “those who disagreed with him” in front of a large group of students and onlookers on the campus of Utah Valley University in Orem, Utah. Turning Point USA, the organization founded by Kirk, stated that over 100 million people streamed portions of the service or watched it on cable or other broadcast services. More remarkable than the size of the audience was the message they heard. Speakers included powerful politicians, sitting White House cabinet members, President Donald Trump, ministers of the Gospel, friends of Charlie Kirk, coworkers, and, touchingly, his wife Erika. Almost without exception, each orator brought the Gospel message to the millions of ears listening, often with Scriptural exegesis and explanation, all pointing to Jesus Christ as the answer to all of mankind’s problems. Apologist Frank Turek, a mentor to Kirk who was with Charlie on stage when he was shot, told the crowd: “I want you to know that Charlie right now is in heaven, not because he was a great husband and father, not because he saved millions of kids out of darkness on college campuses, not because he changed minds and chased votes to save the country, not because he sacrificed himself for his Savior. Charlie Kirk is in heaven because his Savior sacrificed himself for Charlie Kirk.” The Vice President J.D. Vance, a close friend of Kirk, said, “I always felt a little uncomfortable talking about my faith in public, as much as I loved the Lord, and as much as it was an important part of my life. I have talked more about Jesus Christ in the past two weeks than I have my entire time in public!” Vance also reminded the audience that “It is better to be persecuted for your faith than to deny the kingship of Christ.” He quoted John 16:33: “I have said these things to you that in me you may have peace. In the world you will have tribulation. But take heart, I have overcome the world.” Even the President’s son, Donald Junior, who quipped that Charlie knew way more about the Bible than he did, took the Scriptures seriously in speaking about the martyrdom of Stephen in the book of Acts, pointing to the vision of Jesus standing, not sitting, at the right hand of God the Father to welcome Stephen into Heaven. Secretary of State Marco Rubio summarized the essentials of the Gospel, focusing on our sin, our salvation in Jesus Christ (through His historical and actual life, death, and resurrection), and our service and thankfulness to God for our salvation. Does that sound at all familiar to Reformed Christians? Other notable speakers with Gospel messages included podcaster Tucker Carlson, Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard, and Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth. Some of the praise heaped on Kirk bordered on deification (and sounded out of place), and President Trump could not bring himself to follow the example of forgiveness of our political foes, as illustrated by widow Erika Kirk, who publicly forgave her husband’s murderer. But overall, the nearly five-hour event was a remarkable witness to millions of the power of the Gospel message – only our Lord Jesus can redeem us from the mess of fallen mankind. If you’ve only seen clips or highlights of the funeral service, it is worthwhile to watch the whole event: you can find the complete stream below, ...

Theology

What does fleeing sin look like?

Despite endless attempts to do so, fleeing sin can’t be done halfheartedly – that only sets the stage for failure. A tepid turning away is like a drunk who doesn’t buy beer anymore but still goes to all the same parties and hangs out with the same drunken crew. He’s pushed off his sin, but only a short distance. So what does fleeing sin look like? It’s radical. It involves complete commitment. In Genesis 39 we find an example of this radical commitment. When Potiphar’s wife propositions Joseph first he refuses her, and, when that isn’t enough and she grabs hold of his garment, Joseph takes off running. Now, grown men don’t run away, do they? It’s undignified. And they certainly don’t shed clothes to get away. But that’s what Joseph did. She was holding his cloak, so he let her keep it. We don’t know exactly what state of undress this left Joseph – was he naked, or did he just lose his outer layer? – but we do know this was no calm and cool departure. This was a man desperate to do what God wanted, even if it left him clothed only in righteousness. This is complete commitment. Matthew 5:29 outlines another radical response to sin: “If your right eye causes you to sin, tear it out and throw it away. For it is better that you lose one of your members than that your whole body be thrown into hell.” This passage is most often explained as a figure of speech, not to be taken literally. And that’s true enough – Jesus’ point here is to highlight just how important it is to flee sin but He isn’t prescribing the specific means of doing so. However, we shouldn’t “explain away” the radical nature of what’s being said. God can’t stand sin and we need to do whatever it takes to fight our entrapping, entangling sins. The reason that we don’t go plucking out eyeballs is because there are other means – more effective and less harmful – of fleeing sin. But these other means can be painful too, and we may be tempted to dismiss them as too radical. But if that leaves us trapped in our sin, then we need to hear what Christ says next: better a one-eyed man in Heaven than a two-eyed man in Hell. This is about our salvation! If your smartphone causes you to sin… Computers and smartphones are a part of our daily lives – most jobs involve them, and almost everyone has one. But they are also portals to pornography. If that’s a problem for you, then in Matt. 5:29 Christ prescribes a radical, and vital, solution: “if your computer/smartphone causes you to sin, pluck it out.” But how can we manage without a computer? How can we keep in touch with our friends without a smartphone? Is it even possible today to do without these devices? Well, plucking in this case might not mean doing completely without. They can be managed via various technological and practical means. A person can: install accountability software like Covenant Eyes on their computers that monitors where they go on the Internet and then shares it with an accountability partner get filtering software that will block most (but not all – nothing is 100% effective) of the harmful content on the Internet use software or hardware means to limit the time your computer is hooked up to the Internet place their computer in a public area in the home, where other can see what you are up to when you are online install monitoring software on their smartphone swap their smartphone for a simple cellphone (some still allow you to text friends, but not surf the Internet). What if none of this is sufficient? Then, Christ tells us to remember, better computer-less and on your way to Heaven, than a social media king on your way to Hell. If your friends tempt you to sin... Temptation comes in all sorts of forms, and some of us will find it harder than others to resist peer pressure. If your good buddies are into all the wrong things, and you find yourself pulled in again and again, then you need to give up on this group of friends (Prov. 13:20, 1 Cor. 15:33). It doesn’t matter if you’ve known them since elementary; don’t place your friends above God. If your job tempts you to sin... Some jobs involve travel, leaving you alone in your hotel room with the porn channels, or maybe it’s simple risqué R-rated films, readily available. Maybe all that time alone on the road causes temptation. Or maybe you work in an office where there is a growing pressure to conform to their politically correct culture (and in doing so deny your Lord). Or you work with coarse colleagues who have nude pics on the walls. Or you have dishonest colleagues who pressure you to fudge figures. There’s any number of ways your job can be a source of temptation. There is also any number of ways of managing this. It could involve creativity, and a willingness to make strange requests. I heard of one man who required that any hotel room he stays at have the TV removed from his room. Maybe it means speaking to colleagues and asking them to take down their girlie pictures. It could be embarrassing. But that’s the level of commitment God calls us to. If a workaround isn’t possible, and temptation at your job is unavoidable and causing you to sin, then don’t think it too radical to quit…even if you don’t have another job lined up (this is what deacons are for). If your “me time” is causing you to sin... We are called to flee from more than just sexual temptation and drunkenness – Matthew 5:29 applies to all of life. So, for example, God also wants us to control our anger…even if you are a parent running on very little sleep. Tiredness can leave anyone short-tempered, and some of us have to watch out for this even more than others. Maybe it’s been a long day, the kids are finally in bed, and now we just want a little “me time” before we head to bed – just an hour of TV, or a couple chapters. We just want to unwind. Except, that we’re exhausted. And that exhaustion has meant that instead of being a loving disciplinarian, we’ve been a ticked off grump every time our kids have been kids. So it might only be nine o-clock, but if your “me time” is causing you to sin, you need to pack it in early. Flee to Now there is more to fleeing than simply fleeing from. Running from can give us only the temporary sort of victory that Jesus speaks of in Matthew 12:43-45. Here He describes a man who has a demon leave him. Success? Well, no, because after the demon leaves, the man doesn't replace it. When the demon comes back he finds his former abode "unoccupied" and so brings seven other demons to come join him, and "the last state of that man becomes worse then the first." This is what comes of fighting sin on our own. Our fleeing can't simply be an aimless fleeing from but must be deliberate fleeing to our Saviour. He can help us not only put off our old sinful ways, but renew us, so we can put on a new self (Ephesians 4:22-24) "which in the likeness of God has been created in righteousness and holiness of the truth." Conclusion When we are entangled in sin it may feel like there is no way out. It can feel like we are caught in such a complicated situation we are unable to get free. It’s important then to understand that fleeing sin isn’t complicated…but it is radical. And while fleeing sin isn’t complicated, that doesn’t mean it’s easy. Proverbs 22:6 says that if we train up a child in the way he should go, when he is old “he will not depart from it.” That works both ways, for good or evil. If you’ve been partaking in the same sin again and again, you’ve “trained” yourself – you’ve carved some deep ruts that will be hard to get out of, and easy to fall back into. That means fleeing from sin may be hard to do. But it isn’t hard to figure out what to do. It is a matter of placing God as first and throwing off everything that hinders (Hebrews 12:1). The reason we fall into sin, then, is because we count everything as too high a cost. Now anyone who has been entangled in sin knows they can’t get free on their own; that’s why in setting out the radical nature of what fleeing from sin involves, it’s vital we not forget the radical nature of what has already been done for us. Those entangling sins? Jesus has paid for them, so He can loose us from them. We need to flee from sin, yes, but more importantly, we need to run to the God who loved us so much He died for us to set us free. So what does fleeing sin look like? It means running from temptation and putting off every sin and weight that hinders us. It means turning and sprinting full out – arms flailing, legs churning, spittle flying, maybe even cloak leaving – towards our Father and his secure embrace. For more, see John Piper on Hebrews 12:1 and running. This article was first published in August 2017....

News

Saturday Selections – Sept 20, 2025

Charlie Kirk one week later The link above heads to Tim Challies' collection of the week's best articles on Charlie Kirk. My favorite was by Barry York on how we should deal with the inevitable clips that will and have surfaced, where Charlie Kirk evidences less patience or less grace than was his norm. I've my own thoughts. I've got liberal social media friends who are happy to cancel Kirk for a stray word... but is it really the stray words they are bothered by? In one of their posts a reference was made to how Charlie Kirk supported the stoning of homosexuals (which Stephen King also claimed and got in trouble for). The Christian response has mostly been to protest how anyone could ever possibly think that. But the better response is, I will suggest, to double down with the Gospel truth that it isn't just homosexuals who stand condemned, but every single one of us – before our just Judge we would all be found guilty of actions that warrant not simply stoning but the lake of fire (Matthew 5:21-22). I think what actually made Kirk offensive to many is how he shared that we are sinners in desperate need of a Savior. That's offensive indeed, both to the world and to the liberal church. It is also a very needed preamble to the good news of the Gospel. Bach's music as the fingerprints of God Defending the Christian faith can sometimes be awfully simple. So here's one simple defense of the faith that amounts to an "argument from beauty." There is the music of Johann Sebastian Bach. Therefore there must be a God. As philosopher Peter Kreeft notes, you either get this one or you don't. But that doesn't make it any less true. IVF may have killed more than 250 million since 1978 "In vitro fertilization is destroying hundreds of millions of human embryonic children, according to a new estimate. This further shows why pro-lifers must be as opposed to IVF as they are to abortion." To put that in some kind of context, the Encyclopædia Britannica estimates the total number of people killed in World War II, including the Jews murdered in the Holocaust, the soldiers on both sides, and the civilians too, as being between 35 million and 60 million. In other words, the IVF deaths you aren't hearing about anywhere may amount to four times the number of those killed in the biggest war ever waged. If books are too indecent to show in the paper or read out loud at meetings, what are they doing in Alberta public schools? Alberta opposition leader Naheed Nenshi has been challenged to read out loud the horrific graphic novels he is defending. Guns and statistics Statistics are said to be one of the three big classes of lies, so it should come as no surprise that government statistics often align quite closely with whatever narrative it is that they are trying to push. The FBI has reported that armed civilians stopped active shooters in just 3.7% of the time over the last 10 years. But a watchdog group says that this low number has a lot to do with how the FBI chose to tabulate the data. They counted things up quite differently, and, if you excluded shootings taking place in "gun-free zones" (where no one other than the shooter was going to have a gun), then 52.5% of these events were stopped by a civilian with a gun. That number has its own spin, but this is an important article to read to really understand the need for taking a Prov. 18:17 approach to statistics. Chris Gordon: a word to young people over the death of Charlie Kirk Too many of us actually saw Charlie Kirk die – the videos of his death, videos of people celebrating his death, videos of nihilists preaching chaos, were streamed all over the Internet. Pastor Chris Gordon begs young people to look away. We are not meant to dwell on this brutality and darkness. Look to Christ instead! Charlie Kirk picture is adapted from one by Gage Skidmore and is used under a CC BY-SA 2.0 license....

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32

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

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

Search thousands of RP articles

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: RP App

Articles, Entertainment, Movie Reviews

Reading films: are Christians as discerning as they used to be?

A brief history of the Church and movies

Perspectives

Critical assessment

Education

A load of lumber is a wonderful thing

Interview with an artist

Paula Roth loves painting her studio

Conferences

2026 Summit Reformed Young Adult Conference

Politics

Introducing ARPA Academy

News

Saturday Selections – Oct. 25, 2025

Culture Clashes

Jonathan & David and the difference between brave & crazy

Parenting

Why it’s good for teens and kids to do chores

News

Saturday Selections – Oct. 18, 2025

Documentary

12 free must-see docs for Christian families

Theology

Genesis: theology and history!

Assorted

Charlie Kirk in context

News

Saturday Selections – Oct. 11, 2025

Assorted

Why Charlie Kirk’s death hit so hard

News

ARPA condemned in BC legislature

People we should know

Cornelius Van Til: his life and impact

News

90,000 legal homicides in Canada since 2016

News

Saturday Selections – Oct. 4, 2025

Assorted

Dominee’s friend

Science - Creation/Evolution

FALSE DILEMMA: Is Genesis 1 Historical or Poetic?

News

Saturday Selections – Sept 27, 2025

Assorted

Veya’s story

News

Charlie Kirk’s funeral spreads the Gospel

Theology

What does fleeing sin look like?

News

Saturday Selections – Sept 20, 2025