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

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

Open envelope icon with @ symbol

Get Articles Delivered!

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

Log In Create an Account Contact Us

Save articles for later, keep track of past articles you’ve read, and receive exclusive access to all RP resources.



News

A new lead in the search for life beyond Earth

Is there life beyond our earth? And are there planets out there waiting to be inhabited? Dating all the way back to ancient Greece, philosophers and scientists have sought answers for these questions. More recently, there has been a concerted push to advance space technology. We now have: 

But even with these incredible tools, scientists still have not been able to answer these questions. However, a group of scientists at the University of California, Irvine (UCI) think they may be getting closer. Ana Lobo, Aomawa Shields, Igor Palubski, and Eric Wolf believe that they have found planets that have the potential for liquid water and thus, in their minds, potential for extra-terrestrial life. Their study was summarized in a March 16, 2023, ScienceDaily.com piece: “‘Terminator Zones’ on distant planets could harbor life.

A "terminator zone" is a dividing line on a planet that always has one side facing its star and the other side in constant darkness. On the dark side of the planet, temperatures would always be extremely low, causing any liquid water to freeze. On the planet's dayside, temperatures would be scorching hot, causing any liquid water to evaporate. The terminator zone, where the dark meets the light, has the potential to have temperatures suitable for liquid water and, thus, for extra-terrestrial (ET) life. These types of planets do not occur in our Solar System but are common enough among planets orbiting the stars seen in our night sky. 

So what should we think about this search for ET? Well, we know all of Creation has been affected by Man’s fall into sin. The key question then is, would God allow intelligent life on other planets to be judged because of Man’s fall on this planet? That seems implausible. However, even if intelligent extra-terrestrial life is unlikely from a biblical perspective, there wouldn’t seem to be any biblical reason to rule out the possibility of non-intelligent lifeforms existing outside of Earth. 

As Christians, we can view UCI’s work and other studies like it with curiosity, and also a lot of skepticism. Secular scientists look around our planet and see an abundance of life, so they presume that life coming into being is relatively simple. However, if it is so simple, then why can’t they find life anywhere else? Surely, it has to be somewhere out there! So they begin the cycle of searching, possible discovery, and eventual failure. Then their desperate search begins anew. And as it does, Christians can simply sit back. We have nothing to prove, and no need to find extra-terrestrial life – unlike evolution, our biblical worldview doesn’t require (or rule out) life on other planets. 

Red heart icon with + sign.
Politics

The Rhinoceros Party: politics has always been absurd, but 30 years ago, even more so

Politics may seem especially absurd these days, but it didn’t start here. In Canada, the wackiness goes back at least a few decades, to the founding of the Rhinoceros Party. Founded in 1963 by Jacques Ferron, this party claimed to be inspired by a Brazilian rhinoceros, Cacareco, who had been elected to a city council in Brazil in 1958. The Canadians needed a rhino closer to home though, so the movement chose Cornelius the First, a rhinoceros in the Granby Zoo near Montreal as their leader. The party existed from 1963 until 1993 when it was officially dissolved, but it was resurrected in 2007, though with an arguably cruder edge to its humor. That edge might reflect the new times in which the party found itself. Big promises The Rhinoceros Party promised what some would say any other party did: the completely impossible. For example, at one time or another the Rhinoceros Party promised to: Abolish the Law of Gravity. They also hoped to give the unemployed the right to strike. They sought to reduce the speed of light since it’s much too fast. The Rhinos wanted provide higher education by building taller schools. They promised to end crime by abolishing all laws. They were in favor of adopting the British system of driving on the left instead of the right. This would be brought in gradually starting with large trucks, then buses, and then small cars and bicycles. They sought to Declare war on Belgium. In one of the Tintin books, the Belgian hero killed a rhino. War could be avoided if the Belgian embassy in Canada delivered a case of mussels and a case of Belgian beer to the head office of the Rhino Party. Interestingly, though the Rhinos never elected a single representative to Parliament, the Belgian embassy did come through on the mussels and beer. They wanted to impose an import quota on cold winter weather. The only seasons that would be allowed were to be salt, pepper, mustard and vinegar. Preying on Canadians distrust of their southern neighbors, the Rhinos promised to count the Thousand Island in case the Americans had stolen some. Perhaps the only promise that the Rhinoceros Party might have kept was that if they were ever able to form the government, they would promptly resign thereby forcing a new election. Just cursing the darkness In its attempts at humor, the Rhinoceros Party sometimes descended into crudity. Arguably, they were no worse than many of the politicians who currently grace the world stage. They did point out the absurdity of the promises made by many politicians who make promises they have either thought out poorly and find they cannot keep, or who may make ones so grandiose they know in advance they’ll never be able to follow through. But while humor points out the absurd and the weaknesses of Canadian parties and politicians, it doesn’t suggest an alternative. The Rhinoceroses in the party tore down the pretensions of the proud, but failed to replace them with anything more reasonable. Retiring the Rhino The original Rhinoceros Party met its demise in 1993. In order to stay a registered party, each party had to run candidates in 50 electoral districts, a feat that was too difficult at the time for the Rhinos. Consequently, in protest, the party chose to abstain from the 1993 election. The chief officer of Elections Canada ordered that the party be dissolved and money from the sale of assets was to be sent to the Canadian government’s Receiver General. Party leader Charlie MacKenzie refused, and after two years of back and forth, Elections Canada declined to prosecute MacKenzie making him Canada’s self-described “least wanted fugitive.” James Dykstra is a sometimes history teacher, author, and podcaster. This article is taken from an episode of his History.icu podcast, “where history is never boring.” Find it at History.icu, or on Spotify, Google podcasts, or wherever you find your podcasts. IF RHINOS JOINED THE CHP by Jon Dykstra One of the best policy proposals the Rhinoceros Party of Canada ever made went something like this: “Currently, convicted murderers get life, and unborn babies often get death. We’ll swap that around.” It was a good policy told with punch, and short enough to fit on a t-shirt. The only problem? I’m not sure it ever happened. I thought it did, but when I started searching for the when and where, I found there’s nothing online to back up my hazy recall. It also strikes me as being out of step with the rest of the party’s generally frivolous stands – it’s too emphatically pro-life. So if it wasn’t the Rhinos, might it have been the Christian Heritage Party (CHP)? They are pro-life – Canada's only pro-life party – but it struck me as a bit too "quippy" for them. It almost seems like a combination of the two parties: a satiric Rhino-ish take but one that doesn’t just tear down, but offers a Christian alternative. And yes, a CHP vet remembers them running something like this in years past. Turns out the CHP has a little Rhino in it.  ...

Red heart icon with + sign.
Science - Creation/Evolution

Big Bang Christianity?

Can we fit the Big Bang into the Bible? **** Cosmology is the most important subject in the world. Why? Because it is the story of the world: its origin, structure, purpose, and destiny. Our cosmology forms the basis for our response to the most fundamental questions regarding our existence. Our cosmological beliefs shape our morality, religion, and culture. Our cosmology is closely linked to our worldview. I contend then, that to make Christianity plausible, we must critique the current secular worldview and particularly its Big Bang cosmology. And then we must present Christianity as a comprehensive worldview with its own, Christ-centered, cosmology. TRYING OUT A BIBLICAL BIG BANG? Unfortunately, many Christian scientists and theologians accept Big Bang cosmology as gospel truth, established beyond any reasonable scientific doubt. They believe that, to make Christianity plausible to our society, Christians should embrace Big Bang Cosmology. Far from seeing “Big Bang Cosmology” (BBC) as a threat to Christianity, prominent apologists such as William Craig and Stephen Meyer believe it provides compelling evidence of the biblical teaching of creatio ex nihilo, thus offering a useful step in proving the existence of a transcendent God. For example, Meyer concludes: "Taken jointly, general relativity and the Big Bang theory provide a scientific description of what Christian theologians have long described in doctrinal terms as creatio ex nihilo – creation out of nothing (again, nothing physical). These theories place a heavy demand on any proposed causal explanation of the universe, since the cause of the beginning of the universe must transcend time, space, matter, and energy."1 Christian apologist Gregory Koukl goes even further, "I know the Big Bang idea is controversial with some Christians, but I think that’s because they haven’t realized how well it fits the Story , which basically says the same thing."2 Of course, since BBC forms an integral part of the naturalist worldview, Christians must first “baptize” BBC. This involves insisting that the biblical God is the creator of the universe, that BBC merely describes how God created, that God can act miraculously at times, and so on. However, regarding the history of the physical universe, baptized BBC is factually identical to the naturalist version. So, how well does BBC fit the Christian worldview? Are there really no clashes? Is there no theological price to pay? Let’s examine more closely how the Bible and BBC compare regarding the past, future, and present structure of the universe. CONFLICTS REGARDING ORIGINS 1. Astronomical evolution Big Bang Cosmology and Genesis certainly agree on a few things: the universe began a finite time ago, light was one of the first things created, and humans the last. Yet, they differ hugely on the timescale (billions of years versus thousands of years) and the order of events (Sun, then Earth, then vegetation, versus Earth, then vegetation, then Sun). They differ also regarding the mode of creation. In BBC everything arises gradually through evolutionary processes, based solely on the operation of natural laws. According to the Bible, God acted directly at each step, bringing in something new. And this happened quickly: He spoke, and it was. Further, they differ in that BBC assumes natural laws have never changed whereas, according to the Bible, rebellion against God subjected the entire creation, including astronomical objects, to distortion and decay, affecting even natural laws. To harmonize the Bible with BBC one could simply re-interpret Genesis 1 (and Ex. 20:11; 31:17), treating the creation days as merely a literary device (e.g., the Framework Hypothesis) conveying theological rather than historical truth, and re-interpret those biblical texts speaking of the universal effect of sin (e.g., Isa. 65:17, 2 Pet. 3:13; Rev. 21:1; Heb. 12:26-27). This may seem like a small price to pay to harmonize the Bible with modern cosmology. Unfortunately, this introduces the hermeneutical principle that perceived scientific truths should control our reading of Scripture. Once that hermeneutic is granted legitimacy, it becomes difficult to restrain. 2. Geological evolution ADAM CONTEMPLATING HIS ANCESTOR? The Big Bang brings with it ancestors for Adam who would have lived and died millions of years before he ever came to be. One could stop here, adopting an old universe/young earth position. This, however, is rarely done. Having accepted mainstream astronomy, why not likewise accept mainstream geology? Both are based on the same naturalist presuppositions. If the naturalist picture of the history of stars and planets is deemed reliable, why not also the naturalist picture of the history of planet Earth? Consequently, BBC-accepting Christians generally accept also mainstream geology as giving a reliable account of Earth history. But now the cost is much higher. Mainstream geology claims fossil evidence for pain, suffering, predation, disease, earthquakes, and the like, millions of years before Man. Such natural evil could therefore not be due to Adam’s Fall, but must be part of God’s initial “very good” creation. Much else in Genesis now becomes implausible. Thus William Craig considers Genesis 1-11 to be “mytho-history,” having “fantastic elements” that are “palpably false” if taken to be literally true, including the ideas that God created the world in six days, that there was a snake that could talk, that there were actual cherubim with a flaming sword, that Noah’s flood was global, that linguistic diversity can be traced back to the Tower of Babel, and that the earth is only thousands of years old.3 Ironically, Craig’s stress on God’s transcendence, needed for his cosmological argument, aids his mythologizing of Genesis: "If Genesis 1–11 functions as mytho-history, then these chapters need not be read literally. The accounts of the origin and Fall of man are clearly metaphorical or figurative in nature, featuring as they do an anthropomorphic deity incompatible with the transcendent God of the creation account."4 The greatest problem, however, is mainstream geology’s placing the existence of humans, or human-look-alikes, more than a million years ago, as primitive cave-dwellers, lacking language skills. This is hard to square with the biblical account of Adam and his fall into sin. The biblical Adam does not fit plausibly within naturalist geology. Hence, the proper Christian approach is to rebuild geology, taking due account of biblical history. 3. Biological evolution This brings us to the next logical step. Having accepted mainstream astronomy and geology, why not also mainstream biology? If mainstream science is right about the ages of things, why should it not also be right about the evolutionary origin of things? Most Christian biologists are evolutionists. They consider the evidence for evolution overwhelming. So does theologian Bruce Waltke, who said, “if the data is overwhelmingly in favor of evolution, to deny that reality will make us a cult…some odd group that is not really interacting with the world...To deny scientific reality would be to deny the truth of God in the world. For us as Christians, this would serve as our spiritual death because we would not be loving God with all of our minds. It would also be our spiritual death in witness to the world because we would not be seen as credible..."5 Where does that leave Adam? Adam has been variously considered as a neo-lithic farmer, a tribal chief, a representative human, the first homo sapien, or a member of an even earlier hominid species. He is viewed as either fully created, physically evolved with a created soul, or fully evolved. Craig takes Adam and Eve to be two evolved members of Heidelberg Man, in whom God implanted rational souls at least 750,000 years ago.6 Given the difficulty of fitting the biblical Adam into mainstream science, many theologians now deny his actual existence. Theologian Peter Enns considers Adam to be merely a literary figure.<sup>7</sup> So does theologian John Schneider, who believes that humans were never morally upright, that death is not due to sin, and that Christ’s atonement was not a payment for human sin. Blaming evolution (and thus implicating God, who drives evolution) for making humans selfish and sinful, he ends up with a universalism where all humans are saved.8 Clearly, major theological matters are now at stake; this has become a salvation issue. Few Christians may want to go that far. Yet once we start adapting the Bible to mainstream science the stopping point becomes arbitrary, as is reflected in the wide spectrum of views on origins among Christians. THE BIG BANG AND HEAVEN The Bible depicts Heaven as a physical place created directly by God, in time and space, and containing angels, God’s throne, Christ in His human flesh, the departed souls of saints, etc. Normally invisible to us, Heaven seems to be a three-dimensional subspace embedded in a larger-dimensional space containing also the celestial cosmos. It may well have its own natural laws. Yet Heaven is closely linked to Earth, where heavenly agents can cause physical effects. This Heaven is hard to reconcile with modern cosmology, which assumes there is no space or time beyond our physical universe. It considers the celestial universe to be a closed system. It literally has no place for Heaven. It is hard to imagine Heaven originating from the Big Bang singularity, partaking of any expansion of space, or undergoing any sort of physical change. Christians upholding Big Bang Cosmology rarely discuss Heaven or angels. When they do, they seem to think of Heaven as a vague spiritual abstraction. Thus, for example, William Craig believes that Heaven is a purely spiritual realm, beyond space-time, inhabited entirely by non-physical beings, so that even Christ presently has no physical body.9 THE BIG BANG AND THE FUTURE The contrast between Big Bang Cosmology and Christianity is most stark regarding the future. Modern cosmology predicts the eventual extinction of all life in the universe, whether by freezing, frying, or the “big rip.” Further, modern biology asserts that dead is dead; there can be no resurrection of dead individuals. Against such despair, the central hope of Christianity is the impending return of Christ, the resurrection of the dead, the Last Judgment, and life everlasting in a renewed heaven and a renewed earth. These essentials of Christianity cannot be compromised by any Christian worthy of the name. Hence, many Christian believers in Big Bang origins will reject Big Bang eschatology. For example, William Craig,10 as well as physicists-turned-theologians John Polkinghorne11 and Robert Russell,12 all profess that Christian hope for a personal, as well as a cosmic resurrection must be grounded upon God and His mercy rather than in science. To justify their rejection of Big Bang eschatology, they all note that God’s sovereignty enables him to change natural laws or personally intervene whenever He wishes, invalidating scientific predictions based on uniformity assumptions. Therefore, they urge, we should trust the Bible about God’s future eschatological acts, rather than the predictions of mainstream science. Such a Bible-first epistemology is commendable. Yet it is highly inconsistent with their belief, following mainstream science, that Gen. 1-11 is largely mythical, or “palpably false,” to use Craig’s words. If we can trust God’s word about the future, why not also about the past? If God’s radical actions in nature can nullify scientific extrapolations into the future, why not apply the same limits to scientific extrapolations into the past? The cosmic reconciliation will involve much continuity, in that the Earth and heavenly bodies will not be destroyed but renewed. But also there will be also discontinuity, in that the renewed cosmos will likely not be subject to physical decay. Russell speculates that the natural laws may be modified, so that thermodynamics may be included only to the extent that it contributes to natural good, but not to natural evil.<sup>3</sup> Russell’s proposal regarding future thermodynamics is remarkably similar to the modified thermodynamics suggested by some creationists as applying to the initial “very good” creation before its distortion due to sin. Indeed, the biblical eschatological terms of “renewal,” “redemption,” “reconciliation” all imply a restoration back to an original good state. It seems that the entire cosmos was adversely affected by sin, from which it will be cleansed and recreated into a new heaven and earth (e.g., Rom. 8:18-25, 2 Peter 3: 5-13).14 Finally, Russell does not question that this transition will take place very rapidly: after Christ’s return but before the new Jerusalem comes down from heaven. The apostle John's vision of the new heavens (Rev. 21:1-2) suggests that the cosmos will be instantly transformed so that renewed galaxies billions of light-years away will be immediately visible to an observer on the renewed Earth. Just like in the initial creation, where God spoke “and it was so.” If distant starlight is not a problem in the renewed cosmos, why should it be a problem in the original cosmos? CONCLUSION To sum up, Christians should be wary of embracing Big Bang cosmology. Although this in itself may involve only minor revision of the Bible, it introduces a science-driven hermeneutic. This opens the door to acceptance also of geological and biological evolution, leading to the loss of the biblical Adam, and raising numerous weighty theological problems. It is hard to square modern cosmology with the existence of Heaven as a physical place in space and time that interacts with the visible cosmos. Most importantly, Christians must certainly break with Big Bang cosmology regarding its future predictions, which rule out a future restored cosmos and our bodily resurrection. Therefore, since we must ultimately place our trust in God's written Word, and in the power and faithfulness of our Lord, regarding our future salvation, should we not likewise apply this same trust to other matters that God has revealed to us? Christians should develop their own comprehensive cosmology and worldview, rather than trying to placate worldly wisdom. If, in the eyes of the world, Christianity is ultimately viewed as foolishness anyway, we may as well be consistent "fools." Dr. John Byl blogs at Bylogos.blogspot.com where this first appeared. He is a Professor emeritus for Trinity Western University, and the author of “God and Cosmos: A Christian View of Time, Space, and the Universe” and “The Divine Challenge: On Matter, Mind, Math & Meaning.” END NOTES 1 Stephen C. Meyer 1999. “The Return of the God Hypothesis”, Journal of Interdisciplinary Studies 11 (1-2):1-38, p. 8. 2 Gregory Koukl 2017. The Story of Reality: How the World Began, How It Ends, and Everything Important That Happens in Between, Grand Rapids: Zondervan, p. 51 3 William Lane Craig 2021. In Quest of the Historical Adam. Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans, p. 101, 105. 4 Ibid. 5 Quoted in Morris III, H. 2010. “Creation by Evolution”. Acts & Facts. 39 (6): 4-5. 6 William Lane Craig, “The Historical Adam,” First Things 316 (October 2021): 47-48. 7 Peter Enns 2012. The Evolution of Adam. Brazos Press. 8 John R. Schneider, “Recent Genetic Science and Christian Theology on Human Origins: An ‘Aesthetic Supralapsarianism,’” Perspectives on Science and Christian Faith 62:3 (Sept 2010): 197. 9 https://www.reasonablefaith.org/writings/question-answer , #714 Zygotic Jesus (Jan.11, 2021), accessed Nov.3, 2022. 10 William Lane Craig, “The End of the World.” Available at: www. reasonablefaith.org/writings/popular-writings/science-theology/the-end-of-the-world/. Accessed March 6, 2023. 11 John Polkinghorne 2002. The God of Hope and the End of the World, Yale University Press: New Haven, CN. 12 Robert J. Russell 2008. Cosmology: From Alpha to Omega. Minneapolis, MN: Fortress Press. 13 Russell, op.cit. pp. 307-310. 14 See, for example, Cornelis Venema 2000. The Promise of the Future, Edinburgh: Banner of Truth, ch.13....

Red heart icon with + sign.
Indigenous peoples

Truth & reconciliation is possible, but not as it is being popularized

Until recent decades, “victimhood” was definitely not a status that people would deliberately embrace. In fact, many who were actual victims would do their very best to avoid being labeled as such. Instead, they sought to be heard and understood not as members of some “victim class,” but as unique individuals who had suffered injustice, but who were not defined by that suffering. For example, Rev. Martin Luther King Jr., who gave his life in his struggle for civil rights for African-Americans, said this in a 1953 radio broadcast: “We are not responsible for the environment we are born in, neither are we responsible for our hereditary circumstances. But there is a third factor for which we are responsible, namely, the personal response which we make to these circumstances.” But as the civil rights movement evolved, and with the advent of identity politics, victimhood itself has become a means of attaining power. Many individuals and organizations have turned victimhood into something of an industry, and have sought victim status as a means of gaining influence. Real sins occurred Now, there certainly is no shortage of genuine victims in this world – people who have been oppressed, abused, mistreated, excluded from society, persecuted, and even killed simply because of who they are. This cannot and should not be denied. Grave injustices have been committed throughout history in this fallen, sin-stained world. The question that we face is this: how can these injustices (past and present) be dealt with? Real guilt isn’t apportioned by skin color, gender The answer that has predominated over the past generation is that of Critical Race Theory (CRT), which has become the dominant ideology in the “civil rights” arena. Identity politics has taken center stage in public discourse. According to identity politics, people can be divided into two basic classes: the transgressor, and the innocent. Within these two classes are a myriad of sub-classes, understood according to the sociological perspective known as “intersectionality,” an aspect of CRT that has its roots in feminist sociology. According to the doctrine of intersectionality, all individuals can be categorized according to where they stand on the “victim” scale. On the one end of the scale stands the white, heterosexual, Christian male. This individual is categorized as the transgressor, as a member and representative of the oppressor class. The white heterosexual Christian female can be considered as somewhat less of a transgressor, while on the opposite end of the spectrum stands the person who is the most “marginalized,” the non-cisgender person of color. The absurdity of this categorization scheme becomes apparent when one considers that a white man who depends on welfare to survive and lives in a run-down shack in the Appalachians of West Virginia is still viewed as a member of the "oppressor" class, while a multi-millionaire African-American whose resume includes an education in elite private schools and Columbia University is still identified as a member of the "innocent" class (as long as his political views are considered to be appropriate). Real forgiveness isn’t on offer REAL SINS OCCURRED: This “memory blanket” was displayed at the final Truth and Reconciliation Commission event in 2015 and included statements from former students’ writings. Several noted that students were given numbers rather than names. Among the messages: “My new name is 7,” “Today I got beaten for speaking Mi’kmaq. It slipped out at the lunch table, as I was asking another girl for some bread. I don’t understand what the problem with…” “Today I saw one of the older girls had a black eye. I tried to ask her about it, but she wouldn’t say,” “This is my last time writing in this book. I’m going to kill myself. Why because I hate it here, the white people are getting worse and worse every day,” “It’s this certain serenity you feel when you know something terrible will happen. My grandfather said you feel this before you die,” “I want to go home.” (Picture credit: Susan G. Enberg / Shutterstock.) Ultimately, it is impossible for the “transgressor” to either redeem himself or be redeemed, and even members of the transgressor class who sympathize with and identify themselves with those on the opposite end of the spectrum can never truly rid themselves of CRT's version of original sin. In the end, it appears that apologies and reparations and expressions of contrition can have no result until perfection is achieved in this life, and every wrong is righted according to the dominant standard. When it comes to Indigenous issues in Canada and elsewhere, it is the theory and outworking of Critical Race Theory and identity politics that is currently guiding public policy and shaping public discourse. As mentioned, there is no doubt that grave injustices have occurred since the first contact was made between European explorers and settlers and the indigenous populations of the lands where they settled. Sadly, but truly, the experience of the native inhabitants of the Americas, Australia, and New Zealand is not unique to them. The history of the world is replete with examples of colonization, empire-building, what we would now define as “war crimes,” and even genocide. In fact, yesterday's oppressors often become tomorrow's victims, and vice versa. In all of human history, is there a single ethnic group that can honestly claim to have an unstained record in this regard? This does not excuse more recent evils, but it does put them in the proper context, and allow us to consider how to answer the question that I posed above: How can these injustices best be dealt with? Those who adhere to the tenets of Critical Race Theory believe that all change must be accomplished using a top-down approach. It is the State that must right previous wrongs, and the State that must enforce “reconciliation.” The populace must be trained to think correctly about the issues at play. This training is being done at every level of the educational system through the Indigenization of curricula, in which an “Indigenous” worldview must be included in every subject. It is reinforced through special events and days of commemoration, like the Day of Truth and Reconciliation. And finally, the message is inserted into everyday life by means of repetitive “liturgical” acts, such as the repeated land acknowledgements which have become an essential element of many public events. Through these techniques, the “transgressors” are constantly reminded of their ongoing guilt and responsibility, and the “innocent” are encouraged to remain in a perpetual state of victimhood. It seems that there is nothing that either the transgressor or the innocent can do to rectify this state of affairs; this rectification must be accomplished by the State. Real repentance comes from the right heart How should we, as Christians, think about what can only be described as the massive cultural shift that is happening all around us? First of all, we must recognize Critical Race Theory and identity politics for what they are: ideologies that have highjacked certain Christian concepts (like justice, reconciliation, transgression, and innocence) and turned them into radical distortions of the truth of Scripture. According to God's Word, all of us are transgressors. There is only One who was truly innocent, our Lord Jesus Christ. True justice is connected with righteousness, and absolute justice will never be accomplished in this world, try as we might. Heaven will never be created on earth, and apart from the redeeming work of Christ, true reconciliation between God and man, and between human beings themselves, cannot happen. All attempts to implement a utopian vision of society are doomed to fail, because they begin, as CRT and identity politics begin, with false beliefs about the nature of the world and about human nature itself. Neither can true reconciliation and justice be implemented from the top down. It is very possible for the State to convince the entire population to recite what it deems to be the appropriate words and avoid expressing (at least publicly) “inappropriate views.” But the State cannot change the human heart, and neither can it legislate love, which is vital to reconciliation and the redressing of wrongs. Love must be expressed on a personal level, in the context of interpersonal relationships, and cannot be implemented through impersonal programs and activities imposed from above. We are called to love our neighbor, regardless of his or her ethnicity. As Christians, we are called to show that love, the love of Christ, through our own actions, in a very personal way. Real repentance might be costly This is a costly attitude. It will take us out of our comfort zone. It requires sacrifice. It doesn't offer any kind of “quick fix,” nor does it imagine that it will solve all of the world's problems once and for all. But it is genuine, and the outworking of the Holy Spirit's presence in our lives. Institutional programs and policies are impersonal, often completely ineffective or even counter-productive, and history shows that they do not accomplish the goals that they set out to achieve. They allow individuals to pass on responsibility to others while perhaps saying the right things and expressing virtuous opinions, but in the end they can neither bring about genuine reconciliation nor bring about lasting, positive change. This is something that can only be done through the hard work of getting to know our neighbors – whatever their ethnicity – and building living relationships with them. In this way, beginning with the first great commandment, to love the Lord with all our heart, we will put into practice the second: to love our neighbor as ourselves. This is one of several articles we’ve published about Canada’s history with its Indigenous peoples, with the sum of the whole being even greater than the parts. That's why we'd encourage you to read the rest, available together in the March/April 2003 issue. You can listen to Rev. Jim Witteveen’s podcast on his website. His latest book, “How in the world did we get here?” is available there and at ReformedChristianBooks.com....

Red heart icon with + sign.
News

Upcoming documentary asks, how can we end abortion in Canada?

Two Canadian filmmakers want to know: how can Canada get a win for the unborn like the US experienced in 2022? And Josie Luetke and Ruth Robert are making a documentary to figure it out. They've titled it Roe Canada: The True North in a Post-Roe World, a reference to the US Supreme Court's 1973 Roe vs. Wade decision that legalized abortion across the country 50 years ago. The reason we are now in a "Post-Roe" era is because of the stunning Dobbs decision last year, in which the Supreme Court overthrew Roe and declared that the US Constitution does not protect a right to abortion. When their ruling was issued, pro-lifers on both sides of the border could hardly believe it was real. We'd almost forgotten that with God nothing is impossible. Then, in the immediate aftermath of Dobbs, individual states like Idaho, Texas, and South Dakota started offering protections for the unborn right from conception. Now these two filmmakers want to know, how can it happen here? The documentary will feature the Babylon Bee's Seth Dillon, former Planned Parenthood director Abby Johnson, Reformed Perspective contributor Jonathon Van Maren, activist Stephanie Gray Connors, and many others. Together they are trying to craft a roadmap for the end of abortion in Canada. Luetke and Robert plan to finish Roe Canada by the fall but already have a trailer available, which you can check out below. And if you want to help fund the film, visit RoeCanadafilm.com to find out how. ...

Red heart icon with + sign.
In a Nutshell

Tidbits - April 2023

Media-created news If you feel a need to know all that’s going on in the world around you, it’s important to understand how little the media account may actually represent reality. Jonathon Van Maren makes that point in his article “Malcolm Muggeridge on Christ and the Media”: In his slim 1977 volume Christ and the Media, Malcolm Muggeridge describes a scene instantly recognizable to anyone familiar with political protest in our TV age. He was in Washington, D.C. working as a correspondent and came across a group of protestors moping about, holding slackened signs, chatting. Bored police were also present. What were they waiting for? The cameras, as it turned out. Once they showed up – action! “Whereupon placards were lifted, slogans shouted, fists clenched; a few demonstrators were arrested and pitched into the police van, and a few cops kicked until, ‘Cut!’” Moments later, the streets were again silent. On TV that evening, it all looked very impressive. “On the television screen,” revolutionary Jerry Rubin once observed, “news is not so much reported as created.” Reasons to read “A man who has lived in many places is not likely to be deceived by the local errors of his native village; the scholar has lived in many times and is therefore in some degree immune from the great cataract of nonsense that pours from the press and the microphone of his own age.” – C.S. Lewis, The Weight of Glory If Dad told only dinosaur jokes As you might expect with dinosaur jokes, all of these are oldies. And some of them are even goodies. What do you call a dinosaur that never gives up? Try-try-try-ceratops What dinosaur makes a good police officer? Tricera-cops. What did the dinosaur call her blouse shop? Try Sarah’s Tops. Why don’t dinosaurs drive cars? Too many Tyrannosaurus wrecks. What do you call a T-rex in a cowboy hat? Tyrannosaurus Tex How do you invite a dinosaur to a cafe? “Tea, Rex?” Where does the T-rex spend its money? At a dino-store What do you call a sleeping T-rex? A dino-snore What do you get when a dinosaur scores a touchdown? A dino-score What did the dinosaur use to build his house? A dino-saw Why did the dinosaur wear a bandage? It had a dino-sore SOURCE: Charles Keller’s Colossal Fossils: Dinosaur Riddles, and the world wide web A need for the outrageous? There’s a fellow I read occasionally because he has some unique insights into our culture. But I rarely quote him, because the way he talks is generally outside the bounds of what even Christians find acceptable. I’m not talking about truly offensive speech, but more that he’ll call spades spades right when everyone else is avoiding mention of dirt-moving equipment altogether. He explained: “…I personally decided to say things that are outside the Overton Window, knowing that this came with risks. My bet was that the good I could do was likely to outweigh the possible negative outcomes. You might make similar choices. The idea then is not to live in fear, but to be smartly and strategically courageous.” The “Overton Window” is a term to describe the range (window) of acceptable discourse – what makes for polite conversation. And this Window can be shifted. For example, publicly stating that homosexuality is sinful fell inside this Window when I was kid, but it doesn’t anymore. Why did things shift? Because some on the outside were willing to publicly state outrageous things like “homosexuality is good!” By repeatedly making these “out of bounds” statements they normalized the thought, and started pulling the Window in their direction. The eventual result was that what they were saying wasn’t viewed as outrageous any more. This Christian writer has taken that lesson, and decided to state his positions baldly, even when they fall well outside the Overton Window. He’s doing so in an attempt to pull that Window back where it belongs. The problem with his approach is that he’ll sometimes sound rude and crude, even to the Christians who agree with him. I’ve had a different approach, generally trying to make my case in as winsome a manner as possible. I want to frame what are becoming outrageous positions – that euthanasia is murder, the unborn are as valuable as you and me, etc. – as if they actually fall within the Overton Window, as they obviously should. But the problem with my approach is that no matter how reasonably I might present something today, unless God brings our country to repentance, it’s only a matter of time (only a matter of weeks?) before what was once acceptable is deemed bigoted. And then I’ll either have to be okay with being outrageous, or I’ll have to take back what I’d previously said. So whose approach is better? Well, when saying “what is a woman?” will get you in trouble, then the time might be now for all of us to get comfortable with being outrageous. Don’t go it alone "In more than a decade of pastoral ministry, I've never met a Christian who was healthier, more mature, and more active in ministry by being apart from the church. But I have found the opposite to be invariably true. The weakest Christians are those least connected to the body. And the less involved you are, the more disconnected those following you will be. The man who attempts Christianity without the church shoots himself in the foot, shoots his children in the leg, and shoots his grandchildren in the heart." -- Kevin DeYoung, The Hole in our Holiness A turn of a phrase “Paraprosdokians” take a common figure of speech and put a twist on the ending. Comedian Groucho Marx (“I’ve had a perfectly wonderful evening, but this wasn’t it”) was a master, but the authorship of the very best examples is hard to track down. And what makes the very best good too, is that they are in fact true, the proof being in how they parallel Scripture. Don’t argue with an idiot. He will drag you down to his level and beat you with experience. (Prov. 26:4) – Mark Twain? When tempted to fight fire with fire, remember that the Fire Department usually uses water. (Prov. 15:1) – unknown Since light travels faster than sound, some people appear bright until you hear them speak. (Prov. 17:28) – attributed, probably incorrectly, to Einstein Truth is hate to those who hate truth. (Prov. 9:7-8) – unknown The Andy Griffith Show on children "choosing" their gender In a Nov. 13, 1961 episode of The Andy Griffith Show titled “Opie’s Hobo Friend,” Sheriff Andy Taylor is concerned with the influence a hobo is having on his son. So he decides to have a talk with the man, David Browne. Browne wonders why the boy, Opie, can’t just figure things out on his own. BROWNE: “Who’s to say that the boy would be happier your way than mine. Why not let him decide?” SHERIFF TAYLOR: "Nah, I'm afraid it don't work that way. You can't let a young’un decide for himself. He'll grab at the first flashy thing with shiny ribbons on it. Then, when he finds out there's a hook in it, it's too late. Wrong ideas come packaged with so much glitter that it's hard to convince ‘em that other things might be better in the long run. All a parent can do is say 'wait' and 'trust me' and try to keep temptation away." I almost titled this, “More sense in the 60s” but realized this wasn’t an example of things being better and people being smarter back in the day. Instead, it was the opposite, showing that they were wrestling with similar problems then too. Maybe that’s one reason why Solomon warns us “Do not say, ‘Why were the old days better than these?’ For it is not wise to ask such questions” (Eccl. 7:10). We won’t appreciate the blessings of today, nor the courage of our parents, if we keep imagining that yesteryear was so much better. Gary North on breaking your TV habit Gary North (1942-2022) was a Christian economist and such a prolific writer he must have followed the advice he offers here and entirely kicked his TV habit. “Put a piggy bank next to the couch where you watch TV. Every time you watch a one-hour show, put $2 into the piggy bank. If someone else watches, and you're a free rider, have that person put in $2. Then break the piggy bank – or at least empty it – in the last week of December. Put the money in your bank account. Then write a check for this amount. Send it to a charity. In short, put a price on your time. Pay the price. Economics teaches: ‘When the price rises, less is demanded.’ You will cut your TV habit by 50%. If not, make it $3.” Source: Gary North’s Tip of the Week, January 3, 2015...

Red heart icon with + sign.
News

Saturday Selections – Apr 1, 2023

Matt Maher: It's Yours (4 min) The first 30 seconds are misdirection but stick around for the transition for this great one. Not so long ago the AMA was puffing the tobacco industry  When we aren't in a position to evaluate something for ourselves – when we don't have the needed expertise – then the next best thing we can do is evaluate the trustworthiness of the experts we're forced to rely on (Matt. 7:20, Prov 12:17). And the AMA's long involvement with the tobacco industry – a product that has harmed millions – gives us reason to doubt either their ethics or their expertise, or both. Then skepticism is also reasonable when we are relying on their take to shape what we think about a novel vaccine. 5 things you should know about about the Trinity Our God is three in one. That's something we may never fully grasp, but because we love God we should be interested in seeking to grasp in part. And this short introduction to the doctrine of the Trinity is a great place to start. Social media means there's no "backstage" for our kids  For kids, school can feel like a performance. They have to think through what they say and do every minute of the day, not only in class, but even in the hallway, because there's always an audience around, always looking to critique. That's brutal, but at least coming home can be an escape... except that social media means even time away can be "performance time" – the critics are still ready. How to be a prolific writer For an aspiring author, these are a half dozen great tips. Creationist on the Babylon Bee Podcast (1 hour) President of the Institute for Creation Research (ICR.org) Dr. Randy Gulizza spent a fascinating hour on the Babylon Bee Podcast talking about how creationists can find deeper and deeper design because they know to look for it, even as evolutionists try to explain complexity via genetic breakages. ...

Red heart icon with + sign.
News

Did the “fountains of the deep” make Joe Rogan lose sleep?

Joe Rogan is one of the world’s most popular podcasters, well known for his curiosity (though also for his vulgarity). It was that curiosity that, on March 29, had him doing some mind-blowing late-night reading. As he posted to Instagram: Me: man, it’s after 2am, I should probably get some sleep. Article: “Did you know there’s an absolutely massive supply of water hidden underneath the Earth’s crust that’s three times bigger than the oceans that sit on the surface?” Me: No, I did not know that. And now that’s all I’m interested in… 3 times all the oceans underneath us? While the article Rogan read was recent, this superocean was discovered more than a decade ago. This water is said to be buried 400 miles down, captured in a type of rock called “ringwoodite.” The amount of water in these rocks has been variously estimated as being as much as all the water in all our oceans, or even three times that amount. Rogan's post went out to his 16 million Instagram followers and caught the attention of Not the Bee’s John Knox and others. Knox connected some dots and suggested that this vast quantity of water might be the “fountains of the great deep” that “burst forth” in Genesis 7:11 when God brought the Flood to punish the world. It was an interesting idea. The biblical Flood account is mocked as being impossible on account of all the water that'd be needed to cover Mount Everest. But what if Mount Everest wasn't so tall, and the oceans weren't so deep? As professor Brad Alles has noted: “if the planet were as smooth as a billiard cue ball, there’s enough water to cover the earth 1.7 miles deep all over.” So maybe the world pre-Flood was a flatter place. And as Genesis 7:11 shares – and this 2014 discovery also highlights – the water we see is far from the only water on Earth. There’s also water under the ground! Creationist differs Now, the Institute for Creation Research’s Brian Thomas does differ with John Knox. He argued back in 2014 that this ringwoodite, because it is 400 miles down, is probably too far underground to have contributed to the Flood. He doesn't think these stones were a part of the "fountains of the great deep." However, he does highlight how “this discovery shows that the mantle materials can store vast amounts of water.” And if the amount of water on and under the Earth's surface is enough to blow Joe Rogan's mind, here's something that should get Christians' jaws to drop. In Luke 19:40, Jesus explains that if his disciples were silenced, then even the stones would cry out. In this incident we can see God using a foul-mouthed agnostic comedian to get the word out that an unbelievably vast quantity of water is trapped deep in the Earth's mantle. How's that for stones – of one type and another – crying out?...

Red heart icon with + sign.
News

Two bills are trying a smack-down on Canada’s spanking law

Over 65 countries around the world have entirely banned all physical discipline of children. In 2022, two separate bills were introduced in the Canadian House of Commons and Senate to add Canada to that list. These bills are the latest of many attempts in the past 25 years to ban spanking in Canada. Both are private member’s bills which, although unlikely to pass, are currently going through the legislative process and are providing fresh opportunities for some politicians to speak out against the authority of parents over their children. Specifically, these bills attempt to repeal section 43 of the Canadian Criminal Code which states: “Every schoolteacher, parent or person standing in the place of a parent is justified in using force by way of correction toward a pupil or child, as the case may be, who is under his care, if the force does not exceed what is reasonable under the circumstances.” Some advocates want to ban spanking to fulfill Recommendation 6 of the Truth and Reconciliation Commission’s 94 Calls to Action which were released in 2015. The Commission calls on the government to repeal section 43 “in order to redress the legacy of residential schools and advance the process of Canadian reconciliation.” These advocates argue that repealing section 43 is a small but necessary step on the path to reconciliation and that violence against children must be stopped. In advocating for one of the two bills, Senator Stan Kutcher referenced the Bible, seeking to prove that Jesus “recognized the responsibility of kind and considerate parenting, and that did not include hitting children.” Whether in Canada or elsewhere, the language used by advocates often includes “hitting,” “violence,” or “assault.” When language like “we should ban child abuse” or “ban violence against children” is used, it’s hard to disagree. But child abuse and violence against children are (and ought to be) already illegal. Instead, corporal discipline must be seen as the use of reasonable, non-injurious physical force with the intention and purpose of correction or control of a child’s behavior. Other advocates for a spanking ban argue that spanking is harmful for children and that it creates increased risk of violence and mental disorders in children. However, controlled, non-abusive spanking actually tends to reduce negative behavior in children compared to other disciplinary tactics. Take Sweden as an example, where the rates of assaults against minors have increased since the country banned physical discipline in 1979. Ultimately, parents ought to be able to raise their children as they see fit (within limits, of course). Parents have the responsibility to discipline their children, not out of anger, but out of a desire to protect and train them to be good citizens. The government can never replace parents in the life of a child and must not try to do so by legislating how children ought to be raised....

Red heart icon with + sign.
News

Saturday Selections – Mar 18, 2023

St. Patrick's bad analogies In honor of St. Patrick's Day just past, and our God who has made Himself known, and yet remains incomprehensible. Case studies – 2 Canadian, 1 Australian – show how ideology is preventing inquiry When it comes to the free exchange of ideas, Christians are often portrayed as suppressors because we have a problem with pornography and blasphemy - we do want to put some restrictions on "speech." But God has told us that iron sharpens iron (Prov 27:17) , and that one person questioning another can help us find the truth (Prov. 18:17). Thus there is a biblical basis for allowing speech we disagree with: to help us better seek the truth. But what basis outside of Christianity is there for freedom of speech? Whatever reasons are offered will either be founded on a Christian foundation (if only you dig deep enough) or aren't strong enough to stand up to groupthink, as is evidenced by the reaction to the three follks here, who are guilty of wrongthink. Britain's 1984 moment The "conservative" government across the ocean has just voted for criminalizing the thoughtcrime of silent prayer outside abortion clinics. The silver lining here is that when the Devil overreaches – when he uses the iron fist, rather than the siren song – his lack of subtlety makes it possible for even the most tongue-tied among us to clearly present the antithesis: that the world must choose between bowing the knee to God, or standing with the baby-killers and the thought-police. That's clarity we can be grateful for. Fight for your pastor Shepherds not only have to contend with wolves but they are called to tend sometimes contentious sheep. So what are we doing to sustain them in their role? Are you fighting for your pastor? 3 rules of rational parenting derived from... economics? A Christian professor taps into economics to explain why you should never give in to your child's tantrums – this is a parenting lesson unlike any other :) This is a coat! (4 min) For parents everywhere.... (h/t Anita) ...

Red heart icon with + sign.
News

MP Ed Fast wants to halt Canada’s runaway euthanasia train

In a courageous move, Conservative Member of Parliament Ed Fast has introduced a private member’s bill to permanently halt the federal government’s effort to expand euthanasia to the mentally ill. “It is deeply concerning that this government appears to be moving from a culture of life to a culture of death," he said to reporters on Parliament Hill. When euthanasia and assisted suicide were legalized by Parliament in 2016, they were limited to those whose suffering was intolerable, with an incurable illness, and where natural death was foreseeable. It didn’t take long and the safeguards were broadened or ignored. Most recently, that included government legislation that would allow euthanasia for those whose sole reason was mental illness. As Reformed Perspective reported in our last issue, in response to strong concerns, the federal government paused this plan for one year, but only to give time for medical professionals to get ready. Canada keeps sliding down that slope Fast introduced Bill C-314, the Mental Health Protection Act, to put the brakes on the expansion of euthanasia. “As many of us had predicted when assisted death was legalized in 2016, we now find ourselves on a steep slippery slope that jeopardizes the lives of society’s most vulnerable” Fast shared in an article that was published by the National Post. “As citizens who believe the government is there to protect and nurture life, we must ask: Who’s next? The poor and homeless who are already approaching our food banks to ask for MAID?” The MP is concerned that Parliament has not properly studied what could result from its reckless course. “The expert panel struck by the government to review expansion of MAID was not permitted to study the underlying merits of extending assisted death to the mentally ill. The panel even failed to deliver on its mandate to propose additional MAID safeguards. In fact, two of the panel members quit, noting that the outcome of the deliberations appeared to have been pre-determined.” Although opposition MPs often have to stand alone when introducing private member’s legislation, especially on contentious social issues, this time was different. The Conservative Party of Canada’s leader Pierre Poilievre stood next to Fast for his announcement and spoke up in his support. "Our job is to turn their hurt back into hope. To treat mental illness problems rather than ending people's lives" the CBC reported. He also committed that a government led by him would repeal euthanasia and assisted suicide for the mentally ill. Important, whether or not it passes A private member’s bill rarely becomes law, and it is highly unlikely that the Liberal government would about-face and support Fast’s bill. Yet, as we have seen from those who overturned Canada’s laws on life, family, and marriage in recent decades, efforts like this are critical for changing a trajectory long term. It shifts the Overton Window, moving an idea along a spectrum of acceptability from radical to sensible and then to policy. In the case of Bill C-314, Ed Fast’s bill gave an opportunity for his leader and his party to put a stake in the ground, promising to take action if they are given the opportunity to govern. When an MP chooses to introduce a bill on a contentious social issue, they are also setting themselves up for a backlash of opposition, both from activists on the other side of the issue as well as from their own colleagues and supporters. Many within the Conservative Party balk when MPs provide any leadership on social issues, as they see this as something that will only take away their support and make it even more difficult to ever form government. Those who courageously speak up are often marginalized and rarely promoted to take on bigger roles in the party or in Parliament. ARPA Canada, which has been meeting with government officials about this issue for years, and helping the Christian community speak up for life, rejoiced when C-314 was introduced. “For many years it has felt like we’ve been on a runaway train when it comes to legalized euthanasia. This bill signals that there is a willingness to stop this runaway train in its tracks!” Mike Schouten, ARPA’s interim Executive Director, shared in a note to supporters. “ARPA Canada praises God for this development. We serve a sovereign God with whom nothing happens by chance (Prov. 19:21) and who directs the hearts of our leaders like streams of water (Prov. 21:1). We truly believe God is hearing and positively answering the prayers of His people on behalf of the country in which we live.”...

Red heart icon with + sign.
News

Saturday Selections – Mar 11, 2023

"Cascading problems" showcase your body's design (2 min) Your cells need oxygen, and that creates a problem because, how are they going to get it? You need a respiratory system to distribute that O2. But oxygen doesn't dissolve all that well in the bloodstream – to carry it you need hemoglobin. To get the right amount of hemoglobin you need your kidney cells to regulate their production. And hemoglobin needs iron, but too much iron is toxic to you, so you'll need a mechanism to regulate the amount of iron your intestines absorb. And you'll need some means of transporting that iron to where it needs to go. And on and on it goes. One problem requires you to solve another and another... and all at the same time. Should we treat Big Tech like Big Tobacco? "A mounting body of evidence suggests that social media contributes to the skyrocketing rates of anxiety and depression among teens." This article suggests the government as the solution, but if parents understand the need, they are already in a position to act. Marie Kondo has kind of given up on cleaning after her third child Did you know that the queen of tidying up wrote her bestseller The Life-Changing Magic of Tidying Up as a single woman of 27? Now, as a mom of three at 38, she has discovered that if the choice is between a perfectly tidy house or feeding the kids, the kids win every time. Tim Challies on Asbury: a cold take The Asbury Revival is over, but for two weeks in February, something was happening on the campus of Asbury University – students and a growing crowd of thousands of others prayed and worshipped non-stop. For those of us at a distance, there was no pressing need to evaluate what was happening, and as Tim Challies suggests here, we could simply offer guarded optimism. Woke ideology now dominates Ontario public schools This is a secular account, but even the irreligious are saying enough is enough. How the Canadian government funds the Left Here's a practical argument for small government: for decades now Canada's federal government has been using taxpayer dollars to fund a leftwing agenda via the Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council. The Amish go green (4 min) When this video came out 10 years ago, it was meant to be humorous, more than satiric. It could only be more on the nose now if the speaker had flown in on a private jet to impress on the Amish how they must do their part. ...

Red heart icon with + sign.
Book Reviews, Graphic novels

Allergic

by Megan Wagner Lloyd illustrated by Michelle Mee Nutter 240 pages / 2021 It's Maggie's 10th birthday and she's finally going to get the puppy she's always wanted! Of course, she's ready the moment she's dressed to head out to the animal shelter, but it takes a bit of prodding to get mom and dad out the door. Mom is pregnant and has to get her exercises in, and both her parents are more than a little distracted prepping for the baby's arrival. Maggie wants a puppy in part because she figures her parents are going to be focused on the baby and not her. Her younger twin brothers have each other, and Maggie figures if she has a puppy then she'll have her own best friend and someone who'll always pay attention to her. Those are big expectations for a little pup! The first plot twist is that, after finding just the puppy she wants, Maggie discovers she's allergic. And not just to this pup but everything with fur or feathers! Maggie is devastated. And feeling extra lonely. But she isn't defeated. Not all pets have fur and feathers, so Maggie makes a list and starts investigating options like turtles, hedgehogs, lizards, and even a tarantula. None of them are a good fit. Just when Maggie is feeling her lowest, a new girl and her dad move in right next door. Claire is just a grade older than Maggie and looking for a best friend – it's a wonderful match! Second plot twist: Claire gets a dog not realizing that means Maggie can't come to her house anymore. It's quite the rollercoaster ride for Maggie, with another big up and down to follow soon after, but thankfully it does end on a high happy note. Cautions There are a few cautions, mostly minor, with maybe the most notable simply that at one point Maggie sneaks a mouse and cage into her room without her parents knowing. Going behind your parents' backs isn't behavior we wanted modelled for our kids, but I'll add that Maggie gets her comeuppance. She thinks she knows better than her parents about what's good for her, but as the itching gets worse and worse, she discovers her parents really do know best. Language concerns amount to five instances of "OMIGOSH." Other considerations: the mom does yoga, but that pops up once, for a of couple pages, and then is over – the spiritual element isn't really hit on – and it's mentioned that the next-door neighbor's parents are divorced, but we're never told why. Another caution concerns the impact Maggie's disappointment might have on sympathetic young pet lovers. I'm sure this will get some sensitive souls crying on Maggie's behalf. Conclusion There are a number of pluses for this book, including the general education it offers on allergies. Maggie meets a boy at school who has his own food allergies, and we follow along as she gets her desensitization shots. As more and more kids these days seem to be getting various allergies, this is a book to show them that they are not alone in their struggles. And it can also clue classmates in on how hard those struggles might be. The reason I might buy this for my own kids (even though it is available at the library) is because a lot of kids' fiction today is about angst – about how no one else in the world understands them. That's something to watch out for because it reinforces an idea that's common enough, but isolating. What kid is going to turn to their mom or dad if they think their parents just don't get it? What I really liked about Allergic is that the parents, even when they are distracted and busy, aren't just written off as irrelevant. Maggie thinks no one is paying attention to her and that she's all on her own, but she learns that she's actually got it wrong. I'd say that's the moral to this story, but I'll also add that this point might evade many a young reader. But this is such an engaging story that I think you can count on your kids eventually getting it, because they're going to read this one again and again....

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