RP App | Reformed Perspective

People we should know

J. Gresham Machen (1881-1937)

Stood strong against the tide of liberalism engulfing the Church

*****

One of the greatest theologians of the twentieth century was an American Presbyterian named John Gresham Machen. More than any other individual in the English-speaking world, Machen led the intellectual defense of Biblical Christianity against the attacks of theological liberalism in the early twentieth century. Machen was among the top-ranked Biblical scholars of his generation, and he was the point man for conservative Protestantism when it looked like believing the Bible was no longer going to be plausible for educated people.

Started OPC & WTS

Among Machen’s achievements was the founding of three notable institutions: Westminster Theological Seminary in Philadelphia, the Independent Board for Presbyterian Foreign Missions, and the Orthodox Presbyterian Church. All three of these institutions continue to exist today.

One of the most recent biographies of Machen is J. Gresham Machen: A Guided Tour of His Life and Thought by Stephen J. Nichols. Nichols recounts Machen’s life and also describes the significance of his books.

Machen was born in Baltimore, Maryland in 1881. His father was a successful lawyer and his mother came from a well-to-do family in Georgia. She was a staunch Presbyterian and raised her son to love the Bible. He did very well at school and ended up attending Johns Hopkins University. Subsequently he decided to do graduate studies at Princeton University while taking some divinity courses at Princeton Theological Seminary (PTS).

It’s important to note the historical significance of PTS. That seminary was the leading conservative Protestant seminary in the English-speaking world from about the mid-1800s until 1929 (when it would be taken over by theological liberals). In the latter part of the nineteenth century and initial part of the twentieth century, the best known of the Princeton theologians was Benjamin Breckenridge Warfield the leading defender of Biblical Christianity in his day. Warfield would have a strong influence over Machen, and the two became friends.

In the lion's den

If this short article has whetted your appetite to learn more about J. Gresham Machen, you'll be interested to know there is a 41-page biography by John Piper available online, for free. Gresham's biography is packaged with 2 others, about John Owen and Athanasius, in Piper's Contending For Our All. A free pdf copy of the book can be downloaded here.

During the 1905-1906 academic year, Machen studied in Germany under Wilhelm Herrmann, an influential and articulate theological liberal, who argued, among other things, that it wasn't even vital whether Jesus really lived. Machen’s conservative views were severely challenged at this time, but ultimately he was able to resist Herrmann’s sinister theological perspective.

After returning to America, Machen became a professor at PTS, teaching the New Testament. He was ordained as a minister in the Presbyterian Church (U.S.A.) or PCUSA in 1914. When the United States finally entered World War One in 1917, Machen volunteered to serve in France with the Young Men's Christian Association (YMCA), where he would operate a canteen, serving refreshments to French and American soldiers on the front line. Although he didn’t engage in combat himself, he saw the fighting and its effects first hand.

You can’t split a rotten church

During the first two decades of the twentieth century, the insidious tentacles of theological liberalism were rapidly spreading among the Protestant churches of North America, turning people away from belief in the Bible as a supernatural revelation from God. The stage was being set for a showdown between orthodox believers and the adherents of fashionable unbelief.

Machen discussed with B.B. Warfield the possibility of a split in the PCUSA that would separate real Christians from the theological liberals. But as Nichols records, Warfield, seeing the widespread success of liberalism among the leadership of the PCUSA, famously replied, “No, you can’t split rotten wood.”

In 1921 Warfield died, and with him (in the estimate of many people) Old Princeton also died as the stalwart defender of theological conservatism. Soon the pack of liberal wolves (in sheep’s clothing, of course) would seize control of the seminary and place it in the service of unbelief.

On a more positive note, Machen’s first book entitled The Origin of Paul’s Religion was published in 1921. In each of his books Machen would defend historic, orthodox Christian beliefs against the rising tide of liberalism. Theological liberalism, as Nichols helpfully summarizes it, takes “as a starting point the position that the Bible is not a divinely inspired book, but a human one, deriving from a religious community and traced with legend and myth.” Machen had a thorough knowledge of the current scholarship on the apostle Paul and was able to defend genuine Christianity against its challengers.

Christianity and Liberalism

Besides being a theology professor and author, Machen was becoming increasingly popular as a speaker at various Christian events. In the theological battle between conservatism and liberalism, Machen was beginning to take center stage as the conservative champion in the academic field. In 1923, his book New Testament Greek for Beginners (a text for learning Biblical Greek) appeared to wide acclaim. It’s still in use today.

But it was another of his books published in 1923 that would become his most important: Christianity and Liberalism. “With this book,” Nichols writes, “Machen emerged as the singular spokesperson for the rigorous defense of orthodox Christianity in response to the challenge of liberalism.” It became a classic, clearly demonstrating that historic Christianity and theological liberalism are, in fact, two entirely different religions.

Due to his efforts in defense of the truth, Machen received the support and accolades of fellow believers. From some of those on the other side, however, Machen received hate mail. According to Nichols, one liberal sent him a letter addressed to “Prof. of Bigotry” that referred to his “miserable theology” and instructed him to “learn to be a Christian or else get out.”

The fall of Princeton Seminary

As time went on, momentum was clearly on the side of the liberals within the PCUSA, and in 1929 they managed to “reorganize” the governing board of Princeton in such a way as to give control to liberals. Nichols states that with this development, Machen “was left no real choice but to resign.” As a result, with a small band of supporters he founded Westminster Theological Seminary (WTS) in Philadelphia in 1929, with the intent to recreate a seminary in the image of Old Princeton. Among others who left PTS to join with Machen in this endeavor were Cornelius Van Til and John Murray.

Some PTS board members also resigned in order to be on the board of WTS, including Samuel Craig, the founder of Presbyterian and Reformed Publishing Company (or, as it is more commonly known today, P&R Publishing)

In 1930 Machen produced another significant book, The Virgin Birth of Christ. Liberals, of course, denied that Christ had been born of a virgin because they were unwilling to believe the miracles recorded in the Bible. Nichols writes that this book became “the standard scholarly defense of this crucial, orthodox doctrine for decades to come.”

The final battle

A decisive showdown between conservatives and liberals in the PCUSA finally occurred in the mid-1930s. In 1933 the PCUSA (along with six other denominations) released an official report entitled Re-Thinking Missions. It “advocated a paradigm shift in missions premised on the notion that Christianity is not the exclusively true religion.” This was the liberal view: Christianity should accommodate people of other religions rather than proselytize them.

A battle within the PCUSA ensued between conservatives (led by Machen) who believed that Christianity is the one true religion, and the liberals who were religious pluralists. To make a long story short, the liberals won. In response, Machen founded the Independent Board for Presbyterian Foreign Missions (IBPFM) so that conservative Presbyterians could give money to missionaries who believed in evangelizing non-Christians.

Having a missions board that is not under the authority of the church is not the Biblical ideal, of course, but the intent was good. However, the General Assembly of the PCUSA declared the IBFPM to be unconstitutional and proceeded to discipline its supporters. Nichols notes,

On March 29, 1935, making front-page news in The New York Times – "Presbytery to Try Machen as Rebel," ran the headline—Machen was officially defrocked and stripped of his credentials.

Machen appealed this decision but his appeal was rejected by the General Assembly in 1936.

Then in June 1936, Machen and his supporters founded the Presbyterian Church in America. In 1939 its name was changed to the Orthodox Presbyterian Church (OPC) due to a lawsuit filed by the PCUSA.

Machen had a lot of work on his hands as the leading figure of both WTS and the OPC. He was becoming worn out and exhausted. Then in December 1936 he took a train out to North Dakota to help a struggling congregation there. He caught pneumonia and died on January 1, 1937. His death was a tragic loss for the cause of truth. But he had fought a good fight and left numerous books that would help to strengthen believers in their faith. He also left the institutions he founded that would continue to maintain a testimony against theological liberalism.

Conclusion

Gresham Machen was widely recognized as one of the greatest Christian scholars of his generation. He used his God-given talents, education and social standing to uphold Biblical Christianity in the face of unrelenting attacks from theological liberals who sought to undermine the faith. Machen was the conservative scholar of highest standing in this struggle, and his efforts encouraged many Christians to stand fast for orthodoxy.

Of course, Biblical Christianity would have survived even without Machen, but he demonstrated that genuine Biblical scholarship supported the truth of the Bible. The conflict wasn't between educated, intelligent liberals and uneducated, ignorant conservatives as some believed. The liberal scholars could not refute Machen's work. Christians did not need to fear that their religion was being disproven by modern scientific discoveries, as the liberals alleged. In his own way, Machen lifted high the standard of orthodox Christianity, providing a rallying point for those who continued to believe the historic faith. The tide of opinion in his day swirled furiously against Biblical Christianity, but he was a rock against which the waves of unbelief harmlessly broke.

People we should know

That cloud of witnesses....

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

Homosexuality, News

Opposing rainbow crosswalk results in human rights trial

Contests

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

News

Federal spending increases under Carney

To make a diamond dazzle, a skilled jeweller will slip a black cloth under it. The federal government pulled a similar tactic with its Spring Econo...

News

Radicalized and Reformed? Someone we know tried to kill the president.

The news traveled in Reformed circles like wildfire on a Saturday evening: the young man who tried to kill President Trump and members of his cabinet was one of our own. 31-year-old Cole Tomas Allen, who traveled across the country by train from California to Washington DC with a plan to murder dozens, was a long-time member of Grace United Reformed Church in Torrance, California. How could a young man raised in the church and living under his parents’ roof have become so radicalized that he would attempt such a heinous, violent crime? Allen’s written manifesto, sent out to family members and friends moments before his attack, gives some clues of what type of news and opinions he had been consuming: “I am a citizen of the United States of America. What my representatives do reflects on me. And I am no longer willing to permit a pedophile, rapist and traitor to coat my hands with his crimes.” National Public Radio reported on statements Allen’s sister made to the Secret Service and Montgomery County police. She said he was involved with a “No Kings” anti-Trump protest recently, and was influenced by a group called “The Wide Awakes,” a self-described “open source network who radically reimagine the future… Disruptive, visionary, accountable… We believe liberation is a game and all of us can play now and forever.” It should be noted, however, that “The Wide Awakes” also declare that “we can emancipate ourselves without violence.” No doubt we will learn more about the type of influences that radicalized Allen as he stands trial on two charges related to the assassination attempt. We can wonder how someone who sat under faithful preaching of the Gospel could ignore all the teachings of the Bible and turn to violence and hatred. Because Allen seemed to believe terrible things about President Trump and members of his cabinet, he apparently thought he needed to take justice into his own hands, without a trial, without a judge or jury. From his manifesto: “Turning the other cheek when *someone else* is oppressed is not Christian behavior; it is complicity in the oppressor’s crimes.” Today’s social media and online world is full of conspiracies, outright lies, and malignant forces. Algorithms are designed to feed us more and more of whatever we’ve shown an interest in, and we may find ourselves over time believing the lie instead of the truth. May we guard our hearts and minds, and those of our children, and look for ways to encourage others in our church family to free themselves from harmful influences. Photo of Cole Allen is from an April 25 post to TruthSocial.com/@realDonaldTrumpDonald, the US president’s own Truth Social account....

Pornography

No satisfaction: James’ Epistle on pornography

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

News

Teachers lead the way in adopting, and sometimes restraining, tech

The Spring issue of Redeemer University’s Resound magazine featured an article about Dr. Katie Day Good, a Christian professor who has been researching the history of how tech gets adopted, and what sort of impact it has. “She found that teachers have often been early adopters of technologies including motion pictures, stereographs, records, illustrated magazines and radio to enliven and increase the effectiveness of their teaching…. Teachers around the world were eager to think about how these technologies could help their students think beyond their borders.” Teachers loved the tech, because it was all about connecting their students to the world around them. But today we’re finding something quite different. As Dr. Good put it in that same article, “Hope beyond the screen”: “What we're discovering as we grow and age with these technologies is that they can also stand in the way of meaningful connection. They can even lead us to feel estranged from our neighbours, from our environment, from God.” AI is only going to make that estrangement worse, with reports already of people turning to these super-powered programs for companionship. So how can we deal with the digital distraction, and the social isolation? There’s no one answer, but Good shared what a couple of groups have chosen to do. “Something I've seen is parents banding together to create landline pods, using landline phones to encourage friendship and independence among their children without having to rely on smartphones.” Then there is “The Luddite Club” she learned about – a group of New York students who have chosen to unplug and connect in tech-free ways. Earlier this year, a Cornell University prof made news for getting her students to type their reports. She brought in bunch of old typewriters, and the students had to shift gears entirely – the lack of a delete key had them thinking through what they were going to type before they typed it. With their phones banned, students weren’t distracted by notifications, but also couldn’t research in an instant, and ending up asking each other for help – their class become a place for conversation rather than head-down, isolated scrolling. There there’s what’s happening at Redeemer itself. This past year, faculty at the Christian college who are involved with its “Core Curriculum” – 10 courses that all students have to take – have “adopted a tech-wise approach, encouraging students to swap laptops and tablets for pen and paper.” They aren’t going full Amish – this is just a select number of courses, and while pen and paper are encouraged, laptops aren’t banned. It’s a small but real effort being made to put restraints on tech usage. Why? Because it just makes sense. As Dr. Jonathan Juilfs, Redeemer’s associate professor of English, explained, “many studies have shown that students retain more information and learn better with traditional note-taking methods.” That’s not a startling revelation, but it is news how some schools are starting to act on what we all already know: our screen usage has gotten out of hand, and that even includes our purportedly “educational” usage too. ...

News

Saturday Selections – May 2, 2026

Original Sin rock battle What I absolutely love about these rock/rap battles is that it's no straw man being presented here: Pelagius gets to make his case. And Augustine's response is true, but not at all the "gotcha"-esque "you got owned" moment we see pitched all over the 'Net. Which is what makes this presentation as valuable as it is entertaining. This man tried to disprove God with a box of nails It might have seemed compelling even... at first. But, as Not The Bee put it, this "is what the kids would call a self-own." A fun one worth checking out and sharing. When Christians don’t “get with the times,” they change empires "...Christians would search out and save little girls who were left to die by their pagan families. After a few decades of this life and death dynamic, there was a shortage of women for pagan young men to marry. So many ended up going to church to find wives. Also, because Christian women did not have abortions at the same rates as pagan women, a particularly brutal practice at the time, they also had higher fertility rates. In the end, the explosive growth of Christianity across the empire was all about math. God used the obedience of early Christians to change the world." Why Canada should scrap its plastics ban Jesus condemned the Pharisees for doing things for appearance (see Matt. 23) and warned about practicing "our righteousness before others in order to be seen by them" (Matt. 6:1). That, there, is Canada's plastics ban, implemented to address a problem – plastic trash – that was a problem in Asia, not Canada. And like so many environmental policies, even if you presume the problem the policy was meant to solve really needed government intervention, the actual intervention offered by our government makes things worse: "According to the government, the anticipated reduction in plastic waste—roughly 1.5 million tonnes by 2032—will be outweighed by nearly 3 million tonnes of additional waste from heavier substitutes such as metal, porcelain, glass, wood and aluminum. As a result, the ban would increase total waste overall. (Remember, these are the government’s own projections.)" When can I trust what scientists say? Rob Stadler offers up six criteria to consider, including: repeatability direct observability assumptions disclosed... This is an Intelligent Design presentation, but even in the subsequent articles – When Can I Trust Scientists About Evolution, and On Evolution, Here is What We Can Believe with High Confidence – it's pretty much all material a creationist would love too. A creationist take on climate change (10 min) Is global warming happening? It seems to be. Is it going to be catastrophic, like Greta Thunberg is despairing of? No. Genesis 8:22 says, "While the earth remains, seedtime and harvest, cold and heat, summer and winter, day and night shall not cease..." Is it strange to base your evaluation of secular science on a Bible verse? Not at all. God's Word is authoritative. And we constantly have to test the reliability of secular science against what God says, to decipher what could be or isn't true. "Science" says that girls can become boys, and no, that isn't so, and we could always know so because we know God chooses our gender, not us (Gen. 1:26-27). And some of the same people and organizations who are touting climate change were pushing overpopulation hysteria too, which as Christians we could rebut right from the start (Gen. 1:28; 9:1, 9:7, Prov. 17:6, Ps. 127:3-5, Ps. 113:9, etc.), but which the world has only started to realize as of late. ...

Contests, Your Turn 2026

I Went to Church

I went to church when I was young, Where psalms and hymns were always sung, Was baptized as a baby there, And often went to God in prayer, I knew ...

Contests, Interview with an artist, Your Turn 2026

In its time

Let’s start off with an introduction to one of my closest friends. My Opa was one of my best pals since I was born. We had a special bond, the kind ...

Magazine, Past Issue

The May/June 2026 issue is here - with your chance to vote for your favorite Your Turn entry!

Contests, Your Turn 2026

Child of God

A mother held her newborn son and whispered in his ear, “I love you so much, little one, I hold you very dear. I love exactly who you are, I love ...

Contests, Your Turn 2026

14 Ways of Looking at a Star

I. Star: noun. A fixed luminous point in the night sky which is a large, remote incandescent body like the sun. II. There were no birthday candles, curled chips, dandelions, wells, eyelashes, or bones. But a single star shot across the night sky. III. A star is just a sun, but too far away to keep us warm. IV. On ancient faded sailors’ maps dangerous waters, trading cities, marked with tiny perfect stars. V. Someone once said to find the first star of the night to make a wish. But what happens when it’s cloudy? VI. Some stars are long since dead. The light just hasn’t ceased shining yet. VII. A starry black sky reflects grains of sugar, spilled across a kitchen counter. VIII. A shooting star isn’t shooting. It’s burning up and falling. Nobody makes a wish for such destruction. IX. A single star imprisoned in a frosted window pane pretends not to eavesdrop. X. A fading star at dawn’s edge spreads rumours of daylight. XI. Stars cry out behind city lights, desperate to be seen and admired. XII. Things that can be mistaken for stars: Street lamps Planes Satellites Hope XIII. A million stars reflected in the water’s surface, making it impossible to tell which way is up. XIV. If a star falls and there’s no one around to see it, does it still burn? ***** “The idea and beginnings for this poem started at the end of high school for me, in my Writer's Craft course, around this time last year. We had just studied the poem ‘Thirteen Ways of Looking at a Blackbird’ by Wallace Stevens. It was a very confusing read, but I was inspired by what I could do with the idea behind it. I used a similar formatting and created my own meaning for it. Stars are one of the most majestic parts of God's creation and it's impossible not to feel overwhelmed by beauty standing under a blanket of inky night sky, scattered with them. I also wanted to make this poem to speak to a wide audience, so I wrote it as a brief series of perspectives to reflect how the meaning of a star shifts depending on who we are and how we look at something. So, for me, a star is a beautiful, inspiring representation of God’s creation. But it could also be the twinkle in someone’s eye, a wish, a marker on ‘ancient, faded sailors’ maps,’ or a simple dictionary definition. I didn’t want to go in-depth for each perspective, because I wanted to leave space for the audience to relate or connect with each piece differently than someone else might. I hope you enjoy it!" - Ariel...

Evangelism

The life and death of our campus evangelism project

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

News

1 in 7 dog owners would give up partner to prolong Fido’s life

How much do North Americans love their dogs? Apparently, sometimes more than they love their spouses. A 2025 survey of nearly 2000 American pet owners, commissioned by a high-end dog-food company and cited in the National Post, revealed some intense feelings. Half of owners say they would clone their dog if they could, with ten percent claiming there was “no limit” to what they would spend to do so. Over 90% felt their dog’s health was “as important” or “more important” than their own (though many felt guilty for neglecting their dog’s dental care). And one in seven admitted they’d give up their relationship with their partner/spouse to extend their dog’s life by three years. The survey (and other data) shows a progression through the generations, with millennials more likely than Gen Z or the baby boomers to identify their dogs as full family members, and to consider themselves as “pet parents.” Now, dogs can be a wonderful blessing, providing unique unconditional love and real support. And if we take on the care of a pet, we should certainly be kind and humane owners (Prov. 12:10). But it’s a troublingly upside-down world when pet neglect is met with outrage, while human life is often held cheaply, and when we know how to love our pets well, but not our neighbor as ourselves....

Church history, People we should know

There was a man: Ulrich Zwingli

“Many men are like unto sausages: Whatever you stuff them with, that they will bear in them.” – Russian writer Leo Tolstoy (1828-1910). “Start children off on the way they should go, and even when they are old, they will not turn from it.” – Proverbs 22:6 **** There was a man. But first there was a child. This particular child was born on New Year’s Day in 1484 in the small village of Wildhaus. He lived in a cottage whose roof was weighed down with stones to protect it from gusty winds traveling down from surrounding mountains. Wildhaus lay in a valley and was located in the Swiss canton of St. Gallen. This canton was one of the eight cantons, or territorial divisions, in Switzerland, and was noted for its textile production. Respected for their amazing output of stunning embroidery, many women of the village were expert needleworkers. It is easy to imagine that the child saw his mother embroider intricate and beautiful patterns on cloth and that his eyes were fascinated by the detailed stitching and designs that flourished under her hands. But the strange truth was that when the child stood in the doorway of his home in Wildhaus, his father instructed him in embroidery as well – embroidery, not worked at by his mother, but fashioned and created by the Lord God. There were mountains decorated with glaciers, embellished with gorges, fashioned with meadows and flowers, and flowing with streams and rivulets. “Look,” said the father, “look and see what God has made.” And the child was shown incredible illustrations of the majesty of God. And a wonderful awe for the Creator was planted in the heart of the child. Quite the family The child’s father was the bailiff, the magistrate, of the parish of Wildhaus. He was an upright man and had the respect of everyone in his community. As well as being the bailiff, the father’s calling was that of a shepherd. The child saw his father leave in the spring, together with two older brothers, as they drove a flock of sheep up the mountains to the high pastures. He watched them climb until they disappeared from his sight. When summer began to decline and lengthening nights began, the child anticipated their return and daily watched for them to come back home to the cottage. He knew that a time of village companionship would begin – a time when neighbors would gather together in one another’s homes and fill the evenings with stories and songs. Perhaps they would speak of the Pied Piper, who in the year of the child’s birth, it was said, had carried away 130 children who were never seen again. It was speculated that this piper was the devil. Or perhaps the villagers who were gathered together, spoke of the Inquisition in faraway Spain and shuddered at the tortures being inflicted on those who disagreed with the church. It is also possible that they spoke of long-ago heroes who had defended the Swiss mountains from enemies. And everyone, including the child, would feel patriotism surge through them. The child also had a grandmother. She was a pious woman. At times the child would sit on her knee, and she would tell him stories about heroes of a different kind. Into his small ears, she recited tales of saints in church history – and she told him about heroes in the Bible, heroes who had climbed hills in Judah and who had defended their homeland. She spoke of Jesus, born in a cradle in a stall in Bethlehem; she narrated the story of Calvary; and she took him to the Resurrection. Having no Bible, she could only recount what she had learned from priests but the first seeds of truth were imbedded in the heart of the child. From one school to the next The child had a name. He was baptized Ulrich. Of the eight sons his mother bore his father, he stood out in ability to learn. His parents recognized this as a special gift and sent him to board with his uncle, Bartholomew who lived in nearby Wesen. An earnest and honest priest, Bartholomew sent his nephew to the village school. Soon, however, the child had learned all there was to know in the Wesen village school. Consequently, his father and his uncle arranged for Ulrich to go to a school in Basel. He was now ten years of age. Again, it soon became apparent that the boy outshone his classmates and from Basel he was transferred to a school in Bern when he was twelve years of age. In Bern, Ulrich excelled in debating, poetry, philosophy and music. Indeed, he was so talented in all the subjects he was taught, that the Dominicans of Bern asked him to join their order, young as he was. However, Ulrich’s father and uncle, who had been salted with Reformation ideas, were averse to this. Aware of the child’s potential, they determined they would educate him for the church, but under the tutelage of those acquainted with the new ideas. Consequently, they enrolled Ulrich in the University of Vienna. From Vienna, Ulrich went back to Basel from whose university he graduated in 1506 with a Master of Arts. He was now twenty-two years of age and obtained the position of parish priest in the village of Glarus. Started on the right path, time would prove that he would not diverge from it. Ulrich’s last name was Zwingli. It is said of him that at no time did he use the title “Master of Arts,” but was quick to say: “One is our Master, even Christ.” 67 Articles History records many things about Ulrich Zwingli. Even as Luther wrote ninety-five theses, Zwingli penned sixty-seven. Even as he had seen his earthly father guide sheep up to highland pasture, so he wanted to lead the Swiss people up to the mountain of God, up to the truth of the heavenly Father. Some of Zwingli’s theses read: The sum and substance of the Gospel is that our Lord Christ Jesus, the true son of God, has made known to us the will of His heavenly Father, and has with His sinlessness released us from death and reconciled us to God. Hence Christ is the only way to salvation for all who ever were, are and shall be. He who seeks or shows another way errs, and, indeed, he is a murderer of souls and a thief. The true holy scriptures know nothing of purgatory after this life. Christ is the only mediator between God and ourselves. When the position of leut-priest (preacher and pastor) in the Great Minster (monastery church) in Zurich became vacant in the latter part of 1518, Zwingli became its spiritual guide. Seven years later, in 1525, Zurich’s great council adopted many of his suggestions. The Latin mass was replaced by a simple communion service; a German-language Bible was introduced; the clergy were allowed to marry; the church’s land property was secularized and its jurisdiction heavily restricted; and images were destroyed or withdrawn from the churches. Grace where God allows Mandatory fasting became Ulrich’s first public controversy. The dispute began on the first Sunday of Lent, which meant it was the onset of forty days of mandatory penitential fasting before Easter. During these forty days only one meal a day was allowed in the evening – meat, eggs, and butter were strictly forbidden. It so happened that, on this initial Sunday, a few months after Ulrich’s thirty-eighth birthday, some citizens of Zurich prepared to meet together. In Grabengasse, in a home just a hop, skip, and jump away from Zurich’s city walls, these men knocked on the door of Christoph Froschauer. It was late afternoon, the time folks prepared to eat, and the sun was setting. Christoph Froschauer was a printer and a man of some note in Zurich. He was in charge of all the printing for the city government. Christoph himself answered the door, heartily welcomed the men and ushered them into his parlor. They all sat down. It was a varied group of men in that parlor. Two of them were priests, and one of these was Ulrich Zwingli. Reclining next to the priests was Hans, a tailor, Laurenz, a weaver, Niklaus, a shoemaker, two unnamed printing employees, and Heinrich, a baker. They had these matters in common: they were all tradesmen, they all loved the reforming ideas which Ulrich was preaching, and all were willing to be part of the change they were about to stir up. As the men were talking amongst themselves, Elise, Christoph’s wife, walked in with serving platters. The platters held sausages. Crispy and golden, juicy and flavorful, they smelled and looked good. They tickled the appetite. Everyone (with the exception of Ulrich, who tacitly approved of the events by being present), ate the meat with great relish. Celebrating Christian freedom in the matter of eating and drinking, the men enjoyed their fellowship and then, bidding one another farewell, returned to their homes. Subsequently, after the news of their meal leaked out, all, with the exception of Ulrich, were jailed. As the men sat behind bars, Ulrich took to the pulpit and preached. He exegeted New Testament passages that pertained to fasting, to keeping traditions, and to abstaining from certain foods. He argued that although fasting served a valuable purpose, especially as an act of personal or corporate piety, there was no biblical basis for making fasting obligatory for all Christians. Some of his words were: “…abstinence from meat and drink is an old custom, which, however, later by the wickedness of some of the clergy, came to be viewed as a command.” He summarized by saying, “…if you will fast, do so; if you do not wish to eat meat, eat it not; but leave Christians a free choice in the matter.” The consequence was that the Bishop of Constance sent a delegation to investigate the matter. The Zurich Council called for a debate between Zwingli and a representative of the bishop. In that debate the representative could not refute Zwingli’s scriptural defense and both the Council and the people of Zurich cheered. All sided with Zwingli. Consequently, the child who was now a man, was free to continue his preaching. One year after the gathering in Grabengasse, all mandatory fasting was officially abolished in Zurich. The Council followed, not only Zwingli’s lead in “sola scriptura” as opposed to tradition instituted by men, but also began abolishing other traditions of the Catholic church. Zwingli lived and preached in Zurich until his death in 1531. He was killed in battle during the Second War of Kappel – a battle fought between Catholic and Protestant forces. He was 47 years old. After the Second War of Kappel, Swiss cantons were given the freedom to choose Catholicism or Protestantism and an uneasy peace rested between them. Zwingli believed that a united Protestant Switzerland would represent God's true will for the Church on earth and that Catholics who refused to recognize this were not only standing against Zwingli and his teachings but against God himself. Not the same church Today there is a Swiss Reformed Church. It was begun in 1920. In 2024 it had a total membership of approximately 1.78 million with 982 congregations in various cantons. It allows the ordination of women and has embraced inclusivity by permitting blessings for same-sex civil unions. The rather sad 2000 census in Wildhaus recorded that in Zwingli’s birthplace 468 people were Catholic, while 572 belonged to the Swiss Reformed Church. Of the rest of the population, there were 17 individuals who belonged to the Orthodox Church, and there were 17 individuals who belonged to another Christian church. There were 49 who were Islamic. There were 3 individuals who belonged to another church (not listed on the census), 88 belonged to no church, were agnostic or atheist, and 46 individuals did not answer the question. Done for the Lord We might automatically surmise that Zwingli would be disappointed in the modern day apparent disintegration of his life’s work. Add to this, he did not live to see the amazing results that followed soon after his passing. Yet this Swiss child, who became a man, knew a wonderful surety. He was a child of God. Through the Holy Spirit, he had stood up for Truth; he had faithfully exegeted God’s Word; and he had daily turned to his Father. He had used the time allotted to him well and, consequently, was given contentment. Hebrews 6:10 echoes his reason for living and his hope for the future: “God is not unjust; He will not forget your work and the love you have shown Him as you have helped His people and continue to help them.” Zwingli’s life and his death encourage us to work, to work in these days which often seem rather hopeless in results. They point us to 1 Corinthians 15:58: "Therefore, my beloved brothers, be steadfast and immovable. Always excel in the work of the Lord, because you know that your labor in the Lord is not in vain." Christine Farenhorst has written for Reformed Perspective going back 35 years. Her most recent book is “Upheld: A widow’s story of love, grief, & the constancy of God.” The picture of Zwingli is adapted from a painting by Hans Asper in 1549....

Humor, Satire

Alice in Blunderland

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

Internet

Do we "like" sin?

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

Contests, Photos 2026

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

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

Economics

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

Science - Creation/Evolution

Do leaves die?

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

News

Saturday Selections – April 25, 2026

Why Johnny can't read: not enough phonics Phonics is a part of the solution, but two other key ingredients are, first of all, more parental involvement – to become readers, your kids need to be read to. Parents, whether you homeschool or don't, God has appointed you as your children's teachers (Deut. 6:4-9). Secondly, we need to end the public system, where the State and teachers' unions take on a role God gave to us, pretending to know our children better than we do. Imagine if instead of one school system, individual schools had to compete for students: they'd have to market their results, and parents could then choose from among a menu of schools what was best for their particular child. Instead, governments across North America have decided they know what's best for everyone, and have inflicted learning experiments on children in state-wide and province-wide fashions. Then, if the experiments fail, it isn't just a few children that are impacted but children en masse who are hurt. Wealth "gap" in Canada mostly an age gap The world touts any wealth inequalities between groups as a reason to forgo the 10th Commandment and envy what our rich neighbors have. Envy is, in this scenario, painted as virtuous, because their envy is motivated by a wish to help the less fortunate with the money our neighbor has. But what if we noticed that most of the rich are also old? And most of the poor are poorer because they are younger, and most will be better off in time? That would undercut the momentum to pillage the rich, wouldn't it? Why more legal suicide? Because otherwise suicidal people will kill themselves. The Left doesn't reason, they just emote, such that they don't even need to make sense. Their latest argument for expanded access to euthanasia? Well, "as the National Post succinctly put it: 'Canada told mentally ill must be euthanized lest they kill themselves.'” Actress Christina Applegate shows that liberals know it is a baby Pro-life Christians often approach the issue of abortion like it's a matter of education, rather than proclamation – that it's due to an information deficit, rather than being a sin problem. But that forgets what the devil does. Sure, he uses miseducation too, but always to pursue his sinful ends – as this article shows, abortion is very much a spiritual issue Appreciating the Irreducible Complexity of the human foot We are amazed at the brilliant engineering of the Roman arch, but what of the foot that has 3 separate arches integrated in its design? We are indeed wonderfully made (Ps. 139:14)! The secret religions in your favorite movies (4 min) Expressive individualism – your feelings should be your guide as to what is good, and true, and right – is being pitched at our kids. But what does Jesus say about following our heart (Luke 9:23)? (This one ends abruptly, like there were another 5 seconds cut off, but by then her point is made.) ...

Apologetics 101, Pro-life - Abortion

Apologetics 101: Stay on message

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

Being the Church

Titus 2 young men are not boys

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

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38

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

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

Search thousands of RP articles

Helping you think, speak, and act in Christ.

Get Articles Delivered!

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

Kids

Magazine

Articles

Book Reviews

Movie Reviews

Daily devotional

Contests

More of Reformed Perspective!

Newsletter

Real Talk

Manna

About Us

Advertise

Contact Us

Shop our merch!

Magazine

Book Reviews

Movie Reviews

Articles

Kids

All Contests

Bucket List Book Club

'Your Turn' Voting

Screen Fast

People we should know

J. Gresham Machen (1881-1937)

Stood strong against the tide of liberalism engulfing the Church

Started OPC & WTS

In the lion's den

You can’t split a rotten church

Christianity and Liberalism

The fall of Princeton Seminary

The final battle

Conclusion

People we should know

That cloud of witnesses....

Homosexuality, News

Opposing rainbow crosswalk results in human rights trial

Contests

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

News

Federal spending increases under Carney

News

Radicalized and Reformed? Someone we know tried to kill the president.

Pornography

No satisfaction: James’ Epistle on pornography

News

Teachers lead the way in adopting, and sometimes restraining, tech

News

Saturday Selections – May 2, 2026

Contests, Your Turn 2026

I Went to Church

Contests, Interview with an artist, Your Turn 2026

In its time

Magazine, Past Issue

The May/June 2026 issue is here - with your chance to vote for your favorite Your Turn entry!

Contests, Your Turn 2026

Child of God

Contests, Your Turn 2026

14 Ways of Looking at a Star

Evangelism

The life and death of our campus evangelism project

News

1 in 7 dog owners would give up partner to prolong Fido’s life

Church history, People we should know

There was a man: Ulrich Zwingli

Humor, Satire

Alice in Blunderland

Internet

Do we "like" sin?

Contests, Photos 2026

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

Economics

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