Transparent heart icon with white outline and + sign.

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.

White magnifying glass.

Search thousands of RP articles

Helping you think, speak, and act in Christ.

Open envelope icon with @ symbol

Get Articles Delivered!

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

News

Saturday Selections – Aug 8, 2026

Old books – and old comedy skits – can help us see better

C.S. Lewis encouraged the reading of old books, because, while times past had their own shortcomings, their errors were different than our own. So we can see through their ideological blindspots, and meanwhile they can help us see through our own age's blindspots.

"None of us can fully escape this blindness, but we shall certainly increase it, and weaken our guard against it, if we read only modern books. Where are true they will give us truths which we half knew already. Where they are false they will aggravate the error with which we are already dangerously ill. The only palliative is to keep the clean sea breeze of the centuries blowing through our minds, and this can be done only by reading old books."

Can the same be said of watching old comedy skits? This bit, from a 1987 Saturday Night Live (SNL) skit – about a doctor delivering 4,000 babies, all of which are, amazingly girls – makes the case. Like many an SNL bit, it was never funny, but it highlights what everyone used to know was crazy: the idea that you can be trapped in another gender's body. The clip went viral this past week for highlighting what too few are willing to say out loud today – that mutilating children in the name of this nonsense is monstrous.

In praise of godly mother-in-laws

"My mother-in-law is one of my best friends. When I say so, most mouths pop open like a kernel on a piping hot pan. Before courtesy can get a word in, shock blurts out, 'How did that happen?' Here’s how it didn’t happen: overnight."

Have tongues ceased? A Reformed case for cessationism in 5 points. 

While Pentecostals believe that the special gifts of the New Testament period have not ceased, we don't see Pentecostals regularly healing people, or prophesying (at least not to a Deut. 13:1-5 standard), and even when they speak in tongues, it's in the "tongue of angels" rather than any recognizable language. So have the gifts ceased or not? Here's one Reformed case for saying yes. And we have another here.

Al Gore's Oscar-winning, panic-inducing, global warming documentary turns 20

"Many of Gore’s most alarming predictions have failed to materialize, while the policy response he helped inspire has proved extraordinarily flawed."

This commentator isn't Christian - he is a gay agnostic who believes in global warming – but he holds this with us in common: that mankind is the pinnacle of creation. Therefore he opposes policies that "help the planet" by hurting the people on it. That means he's also not blinded by the climate catastrophists' ideology, and is capable of critiquing their record.

4 things we added to our Bibles

It's good to understand they didn't come from God with chapter and verse divisions.

Can college-age men and women be just friends?

This is a highly unscientific but, I think, still revealing survey conducted with a secular participants that highlights something Christians get confused about too: that guys and girls sure are different. Can there be exceptions? Sure. But is this a general rule at that age? Do your own survey and let me know if your results are any different.

What's the Christian perspective here? Maybe just that, because guys and girls do think differently, this highlights how the Billy Graham Rule is a sensible way to prevent a lot of confusion.

 

Red heart icon with + sign.
Contests, Your Turn 2026

Thoughts from tulips to TULIP: My journey into the Reformed faith and translation

One morning in early April 2025, I am sitting on our back deck, holding a cup of coffee and enjoying the quiet stillness of the day. The air is crisp, and the warmth of the cup settles into my hands. Along the edge of the yard, tightly closed tulip buds push through the damp soil, standing bravely against the lingering grey of winter – like a baby stretching out a tiny hand to reach for the world after a good night’s sleep. Spring is here! As I watch this quiet miracle unfold, the melody of the Doxology – Hymn 8 in the Book of Praise – drifts into my mind. How beautiful! God is the source of every blessing. All that lives and grows on earth shall praise the Lord, the great Creator. As I hum, my thoughts turn to the Chinese translation of the hymn. And speaking of translation, I realize I have work to do. I have been invited to speak at my local Christian school’s assembly about my career as a translator, particularly my work translating Reformed books and sermons, and about the journey that brought me to this point. My memories begin to surface, one after another, as if scrolling back through Google Photos all the way to the 1990s. Time truly does fly. It has been twenty years since I began translating. "The heart of man plans his way, but the Lord establishes his steps." – Prov. 16:9 My translation journey begins in the early 1990s, during a period when China is experiencing rapid growth in foreign trade following its opening-to-the-world policy. As a university English teacher, I am often assigned to interpret for foreign investors and at government-hosted events. These experiences bring me into contact with people from across the English-speaking world and expand my perspective far beyond the boundaries of Chinese culture. What captivates me most is not the act of translation itself, but the people – their stories, their backgrounds, and the ways they think. Around that time, I meet several American couples on campus who happen to live in the same neighborhood as we do. We become friends, and they invite me to join their weekly Bible study. Wanting to better understand Western culture for my teaching, and enjoying learning from people of different backgrounds, I gladly accept their invitation. Later, I learn that they have been sent by Campus Crusade (now called Power to Change) and are serving university students and young professors in China while living there as international students. For years, I question Christianity, challenge their beliefs, and debate with them. Yet even in my resistance, I begin searching for answers to life’s deepest questions. Slowly, as I stand in awe of God, my pride is humbled, and a deep hunger for His Word takes root in my heart. "…for it is God who works in you, both to will and to work for his good pleasure." – Phil. 2:13 Our Bible study group grows as more Chinese friends join us. Because our home is large enough to welcome a bigger group – and with my husband’s permission, though he is not yet a believer – we open our home to host the gatherings. Many of the participants are English teachers like me. God blesses us in ways we do not expect. As the Bible study meets in our home, my husband also begins to hear the gospel. At first, he overhears only fragments from his home office upstairs. Later, he moves downstairs and sits quietly on the edge of the group. Over time, he becomes more engaged and eventually joins us fully. He asks questions, debates ideas, and explores the Scriptures – often approaching them through the lenses he loves most: art and human history. Through listening, thinking, and seeking, he comes to accept Jesus as his Saviour. "…they were harassed and helpless, like sheep without a shepherd." – Matt. 9:36 In 2004, we make a short landing in Canada as new immigrants. British Columbia’s breathtaking scenery immediately captivates us. Yet leaving behind our family, our friends, and our promising careers is deeply difficult. Around the same time, our American friends prepare to relocate to other countries. Our Bible study group is left without leadership and without a connection to a church. Feeling uncertain but determined, we press on – much like the Chinese saying, “a newborn calf is not afraid of a tiger,” meaning that beginners often act with fearless simplicity. We search online for materials and take turns leading Bible studies. At first, this seems to solve the problem. But pulling resources from many different sources soon leads to confusion. Questions multiply, disagreements arise, and discussions turn into heated debates. While reading Matthew 11:12, a difference between the English and Chinese translations sparks a debate over human effort versus God’s sovereignty, and the discussion ends in tears. As similar conflicts repeat, we become spiritually weary and cry out to God for clarity – and it is then that the Reformed faith enters our lives. "When he saw the crowds, he had compassion for them…" – Matt. 9:36 Shortly after we return from a visit to Canada, Rev. F. Vandongen (a pseudonym used for security reasons) embarks on a mission trip to China, delivering his lecture on TULIP – the Five Points of Calvinism. Somehow, he learns about our small fellowship and reaches out to ask if we would help translate sermons for his mission work. We answer immediately and wholeheartedly – yes – and roll up our sleeves to begin. As we translate, clarity grows. What once felt fragmented now comes together like a puzzle, each piece fitting into place. We are like gold miners uncovering hidden treasure, awestruck by the depth and beauty of God’s truth. God is merciful. He hears even our unspoken prayers and shines His light on us as we grow through struggle. As we begin studying the Heidelberg Catechism, clarity replaces confusion. We often hear people say, “That makes sense,” or, “If we had known this earlier, we wouldn’t have argued at all.” Others share their relief: fears of weak faith, of rejection, even nightmares about judgment, begin to fade. "Having gifts that differ according to the grace given to us, let us use them…" – Rom. 12:6 From that point on, I spend countless hours – day after day, year after year – sitting at my computer translating Reformed, faith-based books and sermons. For two decades, the same core truths fill my work: our sin, God’s mercy, and Christ’s saving work on the cross. To others, my work may appear repetitive. To me, it is life-giving. These messages nourish my soul and richly bless our family. Not long ago, I overheard our two sons say, “Mom’s job is pretty solid.” Those words warm my heart – not only as appreciation, but as testimony to God’s faithful care for our family. And beyond our home, countless Chinese-speaking families around the world are blessed through translation work connected to Asia Mission and supported by local churches. When the Chinese translation of the Book of Praise is finally completed and printed, I can hardly contain my joy. I share the news on Facebook, and the response is overwhelming: congratulations from believers across the globe, from China to Singapore, New Zealand, Australia, Russia, and Japan. The Book of Praise is only one of many completed projects. Others include I Belong, The Overflowing Riches of God’s Mercy, Lest Anyone Should Boast, The Covenant of Love, The Elder and the Deacon, Unseen Footprints, and Christ’s Psalms, Our Psalms, as well as many more. "To him belong glory and dominion forever and ever. Amen." – 1 Pet. 4:11 I claim no credit of my own. Translation is never a solo effort – it is always a team endeavor. I am simply grateful to have been part of it. Before I close, I invite you to pause, look at God’s creation, and sing Hymn 8. Perhaps you might even try the Chinese version. I have asked AI to render the pronunciation so it can be sung aloud. And if that feels daunting, simply hum along until “Amen.” After all, Amen is beautifully universal. Dzan may juhn shun wan foo Dzer ywen Dee shahng wan yo doe dahng soong dzan Tien sher tien joon dahng dzan joo meeng Dzan may shuhng foo, shuhng dzer, shuhng leeng Amen!...

Red heart icon with + sign.
Theology

May I judge?

I hear repeatedly that we’re not supposed to judge another.  Young people express themselves this way, and that’s not surprising – after all, not judging others fits hand in glove with the postmodern dogma of tolerance that’s so rampant today. Different strokes for different folks, so let the other be; who am I to say that what you’re doing or thinking is wrong…. I’ve heard Christians appeal to Jesus’ words in the Sermon on the Mount to provide Biblical justification for the position, for Jesus told His disciples: “Judge not, that you be not judged” (Matthew 7:1). Case closed: do not pass judgment on another. Inconsistent But the Internet is full of comments passing distinctly unfavorable judgments. These leave me puzzled.  We’re quick to repeat the mantra "do not judge" but judgments abound. Something is not consistent here. This sort of thing happens more often. In our relatively small community we hear numerous details of what happens in the life of the person in the next pew, or in the congregation up the road.  And very quickly we have a judgment ready on what we hear. It affects what we say to one another, and affects too how we think about or treat the person(s) about whom we heard a story. Do not judge rashly A quick judgment is simply unbiblical. Solomon put it like this: “The one who states his case first seems right, until the other comes and examines him” (Proverbs 18:17). The Lord in the 9th commandment gave the instruction not to “bear false witness against your neighbor,” and the Heidelberg Catechism summarizes the instruction of this command with this confession: “I must not … condemn or join in condemning anyone rashly and unheard” (Lord’s Day 43). That counts for what we say on Facebook too. We do well to repent before God and man of our easy judgmentalism and seek to learn that God-pleasing habit of doing to others as we’d have them do to us (Luke 6:31). As we hate being on the receiving end of perceived gossip or slander, so we need studiously to avoid being on the giving end of gossip or slander. Test the spirits This does not mean, however, that I’m to be neutral concerning all I hear. The postmodern mantra that I’m to be OK with whatever anybody else thinks or does is simply not biblical. Consider, for example, John’s instruction to “test the spirits” (1 John 4:1). So much gets said, and people believe so many things.  But I’m to test whether what they say and believe is “from God.” John emphatically wants us to have an opinion on that – and then reject what is not from God. Testing, of course, involves so much more than hearing one thing and swallowing it dumbly as the final word on the subject. Testing involves listening carefully, understanding the details and circumstances, and then evaluating in the light of the revelation of the Lord of lords. You’re meant to have a considered opinion. That’s why, in 1 Cor. 5, the apostle Paul was emphatic to the Corinthians that they needed to pass explicit condemnation on the brother in their congregation who lived in sin, sleeping with his father's wife. They were not to be neutral on this man’s behavior but were to take a stand and excommunicate him. That’s because in this instance the details were abundantly clear (it wasn’t hearsay but indisputable facts evident to all parties), and so the saints of Corinth were obligated before God to form a judgment and carry it out. That obligation was so self-evident that Paul put the matter in the form of a rhetorical question: “is it not those inside the church whom you are to judge?” (1 Corinthians 5:12). Judging: that’s your duty…. Jesus wrong? Is Jesus wrong, then, when He in the Sermon on the Mount tells His disciples, “Judge not, that you be not judged?” (Matthew 7:1). Actually, Jesus does not tell us not to have a judgment on what we hear or see.  Instead, Jesus’ point is that we’re not to judge rashly. That’s clear from Jesus’ next line, “For” – yes, note that connecting word! “For with the judgment you pronounce you will be judged...” (vs. 2a). If you are quick to condemn another, do not be surprised when others will be quick to condemn you; “...and with the measure you use it will be measure to you” (vs 2b). So if you hear one side of a story and condemn before you’ve heard the other side, be prepared to have folk condemn you on hearsay before they’ve heard your side of the story! Similarly, if you, from a self-righteous height, condemn others' behavior while you are yourself entangled in sin, do not be surprised that you’ll find no sympathy when others find out about your sin. Jesus puts it like this: “Why do you see the speck that is in your brother’s eye, but do not notice the log that is in your own eye?” (vs 3). That, Jesus adds, is hypocrisy (vs 5). As long as you try to hide skeletons in your own closet, you are in no position to draw attention to skeletons you think you see in someone else’s closet. Clincher But Christians are not to hide skeletons in their closets! True Christians are repentant of their sins, and confess those sins to God and to those they’ve hurt by their sins. Then you’ve pulled the log out of your own eye – and at the same time have great understanding and empathy for another’s weaknesses and failures. Then you’ll test the spirits, and you’ll have an opinion on what you hear, and carefully avoid condemning the other in a spirit of lofty self-righteousness – and certainly avoid trumpeting your condemnation to John Public. The person who knows his own weaknesses and failures will instead sit down beside the sinning brother to show him his wrong and lead him on the way back to the Lord. It’s Galatians 6:1: “Brothers, if anyone is caught in any transgression, you who are spiritual should restore him in a spirit of gentleness.” Judge? May I judge another? It depends on what you mean by the word "judge."  I am not to condemn rashly and unheard. But I am to have an opinion on my brother and help him in the way the Lord wants him to help me. This article was first published back in 2014. Rev. Clarence Bouwman is a retired pastor of the Smithville Canadian Reformed Church....

Red heart icon with + sign.
News

Liberal party support highest among boomers

More than any other age group, boomers overwhelmingly support the Liberal Party. A July 2026 poll conducted by Abacus Data asked 4,200 Canadian adults which party they would likely vote for if an election were held that day. 52% of voters who were age 60 and older supported the Liberals, versus 32% voicing support for the Conservative Party. Meanwhile, among all other voting age groups – ages 18 to 29, 30 to 44, and 45 to 59 – support was almost dead even between the Liberals and Conservatives. Why the difference? One possibility was offered up by National Post columnist Amy Hamm, who suggested that seniors are more heavily influenced by left-leaning TV broadcasters such as CBC News than younger age groups, who tend to get news from a wider variety of sources, with a broader ranges of political perspectives. Hamm wrote about the CBC: “Citizens should expect our national broadcaster to engage in nonpartisan news reporting. In years long past, the CBC arguably did… These days, the CBC frames Prime Minister Carney’s failures as successes, and Conservative Leader Pierre Poilievre as an angry parliamentary jester.” While it can be hard to judge what outlets are trustworthy, Christians have the wisdom from the Lord’s Word to guide our thinking and to test our sources for the wrong biases. Scripture tells us, too, to hear out multiple sources before making judgments, because, as Solomon reminds us, “The one who states his case first seems right, until the other comes and examines him” (Prov. 18:17)....

Red heart icon with + sign.
Politics

Alberta separatism: is it wrong to go?

I have deep roots in Alberta, having lived there for the first 30+ years of my life. I was also heavily involved in politics through a half dozen different campaigns, and during those years I thought long and hard about what a better Alberta might look like. I have since been separated from my home province by mileage and decades. While I am still a very interested observer, the distance allows me to act as more of an impartial observer than I would have been able to be two decades ago. I’m going to try here, to make a limited point – that it would be okay for Alberta to go. Not that it should go, but just that going is an option on the table that Christians can consider. Even as I think the referendum is well worth talking about, I don’t think it has any chance of success. A June 5 Ipsos poll had only 19% of Albertans interested in starting the process, and only 18% who actually wanted to go. Angus Reid had support as high as 35% for starting the process, but that was back in May, and their guesstimate was the highest of all the pollsters. So, I’m not writing to sway voters one way or the other. The reason I wanted to write is because some of the issues brought up are universal – they apply not just for Albertans trying to figure out how to vote, but whenever Christians are making any decision. Kevin DeYoung tackled decision-making in his excellent book Just Do Something, so, inspired by him, here are a handful of questions to help shape a Christian’s decision-making process. Q.1 HAS GOD LEFT THE DECISION UP TO ME? Another way to phrase this question would be, is this a wrong/right matter? If it is, then we know what to do – we need to do whatever it is that God commands. Screwing up the courage to do so might be hard, but if we know it is a moral matter then we already know what we should do. God’s will be done. However, as Kevin DeYoung notes in Just Do Something, a lot of our decisions aren’t so simple, precisely because they aren’t about wrong or right. God leaves some pretty big decisions up to us: what kind of job we’ll pursue, where we’ll live, who we will marry, whether we should partner up to start a company. Big stuff. Huge stuff! We can and should look to God for guidance, and talk to our parents and the other wise people He’s gifted us. We can come to Him in prayer and ask Him to make our motivations pure. We can look to His word for wisdom. But then it is up to us; He gives us a decision to make. Take marriage as an example. You can look over every page of the Bible, and you just aren’t going to find the name of the person God has in mind for you. He’s left it to you, to figure out who you have in mind for you. Now, you can’t marry an unbeliever because He’s said we should not be unequally yoked (2 Cor. 6:14). He also offers guidance on the kind of man or woman you should be impressed by. But, if a young man, Timmy, has a couple of those kind of ladies sitting in the pews nearby him each Sunday, then it will be up to him to make a choice. And up to whoever Timmy asks to make her own. Now let’s direct the question above to the separation referendum: is this a matter of wrong and right? The possible answers to the question can go a few different ways: 1. Yes it is, which is why we have to vote against 2. Yes it is, so we have to vote for separation 3. No it is not, so God has left the decision up to us. So which is it? Before trying to answer that, let’s clear away one distraction. That something can be done for the wrong reasons is not proof that it is wrong. Mankind has the sad ability to make just about anything immoral if we try. So, as noted, Timmy could have a couple of wonderful godly young women to consider – either could be a good God-honoring choice. But if he asks out Helen only because she has a cool car he’d like to drive, his selfishness and disregard for her heart would turn a legitimate action into a sinful one. That doesn’t change the fact that Helen is a great girl. So, for our purposes, that people could have bad motivations for voting for (or against) separation is not what we’re trying to figure out. It is no surprise that it could be done sinfully because anything can be done sinfully. But what we’re trying to figure out is whether seeking to leave Canada is sinful all by itself, or whether it’s something God leaves for us to decide. To that end let’s ask a couple of clarifying questions. A) Is there something about leaving that is wrong? Some Christians have invoked Romans 13 to argue that because God calls us to be in submission to our authorities it would be wrong for Alberta to remove itself from being under the authority of the federal government. It’s a good idea to go to Scripture, but let’s dig a little deeper and consider what sort of submission God speaks of here. Under a dictatorship, as Paul and most of the world lived under when this was written, they had no means of changing their leaders. But in a democracy, we do. So, while we know God has placed the Liberals in charge of Canada, we don’t think it would be wrong for us to try, via democratic means, to remove ourselves from being under their authority the next time an election is called. We’d likely thank God for such a result. So, how then, is it so very different for Alberta, via democratic means, to seek to replace this authority over them? Can we characterize such a vote as rebellion against, or disrespect for God’s appointed authorities? No, because, after all, this is simply following the process via the means those authorities laid out. This is an important point – what submission involves – that often gets confused, such that some Christians will characterize taking the government to court as disrespectful, because, again, didn’t God put them in authority over us? But Paul used the courts (Acts 25), and could do so while writing Romans 13, because those courts and that process were a part of the very authority he was in submission to. And what we have in the separation referendum is another government-given process that we can access in submission. B) Would it be wrong not to go? Or in other words, should Christians feel obligated to vote for the referendum? While I think there are reasons that could be offered for leaving, that’s not the same thing as saying Christians must choose to go. To go back to Timmy and his marriage prospects, that there are reasons for him to ask out Susan doesn’t mean he has to. There are, after all, other possibilities to consider, including Helen. So would it actually be wrong to stay? I think that would be a very tough case to make but let’s for the sake of argument, make a hypothetical case where it wouldn’t be so tough. Let’s imagine that the federal government was evil – it was murdering a quarter of its citizens before they were even born, and was now going after the elderly and disabled too. We won’t find that hard to imagine, because that is what’s happening right now. Now let’s imagine Alberta was ruled by wise godly Christians who sought to honor God, and were desperately trying to stop the federal government from pushing abortion and euthanasia in their province but they just couldn’t so long as the province was still under the federal thumb. In those circumstances would it be wrong to stay? Under those circumstances, I think we might well conclude it would be wrong, based on just how many unborn and elderly and disabled lives could be saved if Alberta left. But those aren’t the circumstances we have, are they? Even Alberta at its best is far from godly. Danielle Smith has no qualms about abortion, and euthanasia is paid for by provincial coffers with no protest. Even where the province is out of step with the rest of our Liberal country, it is only a half-step, with the premier’s stance against transgenderism a good example. Yes, she defended kids from this mutilation, but at the very same time she was recruiting doctors from Quebec to better enable confused Albertan adults to mutilate themselves. So this is not some black and white choice between an evil and a godly government. And as such, I don’t think there is a clear case to be made that Alberta must go either. Which would mean God is leaving the decision to us. Q.2 HOW IMPORTANT IS THIS? We make a million decisions every day, and not all of them deserve the same amount of attention. So we need to treat things proportionately. If you are going to buy a new car, that deserves more of your time and maybe prayerful consideration than if you’re buying a coffee. Though if you’re buying a coffee every day, that could warrant some consideration too, because that’s now become a bigger budgetary matter. But not everything is big. If you’re trying to decide between toast and cereal this morning, it’s not worth much brain space. Don’t take forever deciding – that’d be wasting the time that God has entrusted to your care. So, we do need to treat big things as big, but also treat small things as small. And I’d make the case that for the vast majority of us, the separation referendum shouldn’t be a big thing. Why? First, there’s every reason to think the separation vote is going to lose in a landslide. So, give it enough time to go cast your vote, but there are a lot of matters likely to actually happen that are, therefore, more deserving of your attention. Second, even if separation were to happen, would it solve any of our most pressing political problems? No. If it were only the Alberta government in power, God’s people would still need to be just as busy standing up for the unborn, the elderly, and the disabled. So, this isn’t nothing; but it isn’t the big way forward that will save Alberta either. We can give it more brain space and passion than our toast vs. cereal dilemma, but for both practical and prioritization reasons, should it get all that much more? Q.3 ARE MY MOTIVATIONS PURE? As noted, we can do the right thing for the wrong reasons. That’s why Kevin DeYoung suggests (again, in his excellent book Just Do Something) that when we’re making the very decisions that God has left up to us – what job we’ll take, whether we’re going to move, whether we should buy that gaming system – a good prayer we can bring to Him is to ask that He make our motivations pure. So, it’s important that Christians don’t vote for separation with a middle finger in the air aimed at Ottawa. But in our call to love our neighbors as ourselves, someone might vote for separation thinking of what a helpful example a free Alberta could be to the rest of Canada, showing what could be done with a different approach. One Albertan might vote for separation thinking that if only we stop those equalization payments, Albertans, and more specifically him, will now be able to live a life of leisure, rolling in all those extra billions. But another voter might well want separation to end those equalization payments so that the federal government will stop incentivizing people to live where jobs are hard to come by. They could vote out of concern for their neighboring Canadians who are getting harmed by this government program. So, the same act – the same decision – could be done in submission or defiance of God, based on our own motivations. Let’s pray, then, that God be honored in all that we do. Q.4 IN MY ESTIMATION, IS IT WISE? So where do we land when a matter isn’t wrong or right, when we have given it its due consideration, and after we’ve questioned our own motivations? Then we arrive at the point where we have to decide for ourselves whether it is the wise thing to do. Wisdom can be sought in consultation. Ask your parents. Read relevant articles. Debate things with your friends. But it’ll be up to you. CONCLUSION I’m not going to make a case for separation or against, but I hope I’ve made a good case for Christian liberty. And in doing so, I hope I’ve also made the case for charity towards your brothers and sisters who are voting the opposite way you are. We do need to vote to God’s glory. But what I’m arguing here is that in this referendum, that will be done more through the motivation and manner in which we vote, than in what direction we cast our ballot. Honoring God is more than submitting to His will, but certainly not less. When He has expressed His will, then we need to submit no matter what it might cost to follow Him. But we can be bold too, when He leaves the decision-making up to us, knowing that our Heavenly Father will be pleased with whatever we might decide, just so long as we are trying to please Him....

Red heart icon with + sign.
News

Ontario’s “conservative” gov’t opposes bill that would have banned gambling ads

Ontario is awash in new gamblers. As ARPA Canada reported earlier this year: “A recent study found that since iGaming Ontario was introduced, total monthly wagers increased by 654% between April 2022 and August 2025, and the number of active player accounts rose 239%. Calls to Ontario’s mental health and addictions helpline rose at an accelerated annual rate (7% above the previous trend) after iGaming Ontario was introduced in 2022. The highest increase in calls was among young men aged 15 to 24.” The province’s iGaming Ontario reported that in the 2024-25 fiscal year, it oversaw $82.7 billion in total wagers. That amounts to an average of $5,000 being bet, and $180 being lost, by every man, woman, and child in the province. How much revenue does the government get out of this? It’s surprisingly low: a little over $181 million, with the rest going to the private gaming operators. That means the government is overseeing an enormous expansion of gambling, but making only a smidge over $11 per man, woman, and child from it. These iGaming Ontario numbers don’t even account for the billions more spent on the government’s own Ontario Lottery and Gaming. While it’s hard to know just how much is being gambled through its lotteries and other offerings, what is clear is how much it contributes to government coffers: $2.25 billion in 2024-25, or $140 from every man, woman, and child. Earlier this year, billionaire investor Warren Buffett characterized sports gambling as a tax that the rich like because “they don’t have to pay it.” Why don’t they have to pay? Because it is an entirely voluntary tax – if you don’t want to give the government your money, you can simply choose not to gamble. That’s why he also agreed that it was “a tax on stupidity.” But, of course, some people have a hard time not gambling. Various estimates put the number of problem gamblers at 1.1 to 11 percent of Ontarians, or between 160,000 and 1.6 million Ontarians getting hurt by a product their government is pushing on them. As Buffett put it: “I don’t like things that make a sucker out of people. I particularly don’t like them when the government sponsors them. I don’t think the function of the government is to play its people for suckers.” So when a bill was proposed, earlier this year, to ban gambling advertising in Ontario, it was a reason to celebrate. Gambling advertising has gotten inescapable – as ARPA Canada shared, “one analysis in 2024 estimated that Canadian viewers of live sports broadcasts were exposed to 2.8 references to sports betting per minute” (emphasis added). This bill wasn’t going to undo all the damage being done, but it was certainly a step in the right direction. And, all the more remarkably, the bill was being proposed by four members of Ontario’s opposition Liberals. Things are bad indeed when even the Liberals see a need to rein things in. But the ostensibly “conservative” government said no. While they offered up reasons to oppose the Liberals’ bill, what the Conservatives didn’t do was propose an alternative to it – they spoke of the need for moving “thoughtfully and methodically” but in the meantime Ontarians are left with the destructive status quo. What’s wrong with gambling can perhaps be best understood in contrast to other ways we can make money. Gamblers make bets that, should they win, are covered by those who bet the other way and lost – your gain only comes via others’ pain. Meanwhile, if you make money any other legal way, your wealth will come by benefiting others. Whether you are a housepainter or an accountant, the money that you thankfully receive comes from others who are thankful too for what they’ve gotten from you in exchange. Your gain is also their gain. God calls us to love our neighbor, not exploit him, so wealth gained at our neighbor’s expense is an unacceptable way to take in money. More could be said, but for those who think gambling is harmless entertainment I’ll offer up just one more objection. Even if you’ve got your gambling under control, every bet you make is that little bit more motivation for the government to keep at this… to the great harm of many, who aren’t in control of their gambling. If you love your neighbor, you should be lobbying the government to stop pushing, and just simply stop running, such a destructive enterprise....

Red heart icon with + sign.
Adult non-fiction, Book Reviews, Teen non-fiction

The Amazing Generation: Your guide to fun and freedom in a screen-filled world

by Jonathan Haidt and Catherine Price 2025 / 236 pages Rating: Good/Great/GIFT The old blue rocking chair is the most comfortable chair in our house, and my husband and I have built a useful strategy around it. If we casually leave a book on the table beside it – the kind of thing our kids should read, but may not pick up on their own – our kids will eventually flip through it and very possibly read it. That’s how we enticed our two middle-schoolers to check out The Amazing Generation, co-written by Jonathan Haidt (of The Anxious Generation fame) and Catherine Price (author of How to Break Up with Your Phone). This is a positive and helpful book that encourages young people to choose the richness of real life over a shallow, screen-focused existence. Our kids were skeptical about the book at first, and I couldn’t really blame them. The messaging is a little over-the-top – to quote the book, “Don’t let the evil tech wizards hack your brain! Be a rebel instead!” – and is likely to earn some eye-rolling from the target tween/teen audience. Fortunately, much of the content and presentation is compelling enough to keep pulling readers back in. More importantly, it’s hard to argue with the authors’ very convincing arguments that, for example, most apps are “addictive by design,” and many tech companies are very aware that their products are hurting kids. The book is cleverly designed as half informative guide, half graphic novel, with the graphic novel following six kids through a year of their lives. Predictably, the three “low-tech” kids have all kinds of interesting experiences and adventures, developing skills and having fun with their friends, while the three tech-dependent kids’ lives are clearly less rich and fulfilling. That said, the kids’ behaviors ring true – for example, fixating on recording and posting an experience rather than actually living it meaningfully – and will likely hit uncomfortably close to home for many readers, young and not so young. The informative part of the book is designed to grab and hold middle-schoolers’ attention, with fairly short sections of text interspersed with features like “Meet a rebel” (profiles of real young adults who have, in some way, rejected tech), stats and facts, quotes (often quite outrageous or ominous) from prominent tech-company executives, and real-life musings from teens and twenty-somethings about their experiences. Some of the latter are quite impactful – e.g., “I missed out on my entire teenagehood because of social media and my phone” – while others are helpful and encouraging: “I would tell my younger self to get off social media and go make some memories.” The information in the book is also solid (as one would expect from the two authors), and would be interesting for almost any age. For example, the book describes the addictive “dopamine triggers” (like bright colors, unpredictability, and rewards) that are built into many apps, which are easily recognizable, and which in fact mirror the design of slot machines. This type of information can help kids identify when and how they’re being manipulated, and hopefully help them become less susceptible to that manipulation. The overall message of the book isn’t to abandon technology entirely, but rather to “Use technology as a tool – don’t let technology use you,” and “Fill your life with real friendship, freedom, and fun.” (These are the two tenets of “The Rebels’ Code.”) The balance suggested feels reasonable; for example, kids are encouraged to limit and wait to use certain technologies, not to become full Luddite “rebels.” The book also suggests lots of realistic alternatives, and strategies for going low-tech even when kids feel like they’re the only one (including asking their parents if they can blame them for limits and restrictions, to save face in front of their peers). My only quibble is that the book ultimately encourages fairly self-centered motives for choosing a life of real, non-screen experiences, like learning new skills, having fun, and developing good relationships. Late in the book it mentions that you can also feel good by “doing things that matter” – “things that help other people... or make the world better,” but the point feels like an afterthought. Overall, though, this would be a great conversation starter, and is a book that has enough substance to be worth a read for both the older and the younger members of the family... even if you have to use the “comfortable chair” trick to get them to open it in the first place....

Red heart icon with + sign.
News

Saturday Selections – July 11, 2026

If only Steve Jobs had pitched it this way back in 2007... Back in 2007, if Steve Jobs had pitched the iPhone for everything it helps us do, would we have wanted it then? So how about now? To get a little balance restored, why not sign up for RP's 2026 Screen-fast and log out and look up from July 13 to 22. 5 ways your words can be verbal cyanide This is the sort of article that folks who most need to read it won't read it. So, if you don't think this could possibly apply to you, that might mean it is for you :) 5 questions for parents to talk with teens about AI This article begins with a wallop – an account of a teen who, after talking with an AI chatbot, committed suicide – and while I don't think that's the pressing danger we're facing with our kids and AI, these 5 questions seem helpful conversation starters. How does the local church deal with addiction? Tim Challies: "Of all the pastoral issues a church can face, I think one of the trickiest may be addiction..." Pushing euthanasia for organ transplantation A Spanish woman was, reportedly, prodded towards euthanasia by a medical system that wanted her organs for transplants. If this is the direction of organ provision, Christians are going to have to choose death over having any sort of hand in these murders. Don't know it all? Neither do they. When it comes to any sort of discussion or debate, God's people shouldn't always feel the need to do the heavy lifting. Especially when someone, ignorant of the Bible, tries attacking it. Highlighted here is a great tactic – put the onus back on them for them to show what they claim to know. If they know the Bible doesn't make sense because of... well, whatever, ask them to dig into it for you. ...

Red heart icon with + sign.
Contests, Your Turn 2026

Because

What if you were rich as you could be? You owned everything, far as the eye could see. You loved to share these riches with a friend, of your generosity there was no end. They ate with you, the best delights; they walked and talked with you day and night. They shared in all your pleasures, had free access without measure. But there was one thing you told them they couldn’t touch. Such a little thing. It wasn’t much. But if they touched it, it would be the end; you could no longer be considered friends. How would you feel if they couldn’t resist? They considered this one thing that they missed, more important than all their delights; so, they touched it. Gave up all their rights. How would you respond to betrayal like this? Like the betrayal of the Judas kiss. Would you find a way to make amends? Would you lay down your life to again be friends? What a wonder such a sacrifice would be; it would be beyond the comprehension of me. Yet this very thing has taken place, a mightier than all the human race. Laid down His life to redeem His own. Came to earth from His heavenly throne. Came so redemption He could give, Gave His life, so we could live. Ask, and it shall be given you. Seek and you shall find. Do not continue to be stubbornly blind. Take this gift so that you may say I’ve received the unimaginable gift this day. I’ve received the greatest gift of all. I’ve been rescued from my awful fall. Now I live as one set free, because my Redeemer died for me. Genesis 2:15 to Genesis 3:2-12,15 / Matthew 7:7,8 / John 3:16,17 / Romans 5:6 / Romans 6:18, 22 / 1 Corinthians 15:21 ***** When thoughts cross my mind. That turn into rhyme. I feel I need to write it because someone needs to hear it. I usually feel it's not my creation. I just retell what the bible already says. I feel honored when anyone wishes to publish my poetry, and always hope that it will benefit the reader....

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 39 40