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.

Subscribe Now! Open envelope icon with @ symbol.
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!

Line-art icon representing RP article category
Kids
Line-art icon representing RP article category
Magazine
Line-art icon representing RP article category
Articles
Line-art icon representing RP article category
Book Reviews
Line-art icon representing RP article category
Movie Reviews
Line-art icon representing RP article category
Daily devotional

More of Reformed Perspective!

Articles, Documentary, Watch for free

12 free must-see docs for Christian families

Documentaries aren’t your thing? Then you haven’t seen these. We’ve got brilliant scholars and scientists sharing, in just a line or two, all their study, and the many books they’ve read or written. And we get videos and pictures of birds, planets, or our own insides, that we’d never see like that on our own.

Six categories each have two “winners” to create this  "Top 12" list, but I’ve cheated a bit by sneaking in some honorable mentions. All the films can be watched for free online, and you can click on the documentary titles for longer reviews.

6-DAY CELEBRATED

Some creationist videos limit themselves to beating up evolution, and while that can be fun and valuable – we are called to destroy false arguments (2 Cor. 10:4-5) – the best sort celebrate the truth of God’s Word and the genius of His design.

The Riot and the Dance: the TV series
2022- / 30 minutes
RATING: 9/10

The folks who brought us Riot and the Dance: Earth and Riot and the Dance: Water now have a TV series, and you can watch the pilot episode for free. It’s God’s creation viewed through the eyes of a poet and an adventurer. Narrator Dr. Gordon Wilson shares that while he teaches a marine biology class, he “needed to go back to school for this film – scuba school!” Why? “I don’t want to just sit back and narrate over some pretty picture. I wanted to get as close as I can to as many divinely crafted underwater miracles as possible.” Dr. Wilson can’t help but gush: “I love turtles, their eyes, their beaks, their scales like tiles on a fancy floor. What hilarious cartoon characters they are, and what a fantastic cartoonist God is.” This is just geeky cool!

Is Genesis History?
2017 / 100 minutes
RATING: 8/10

Del Tackett is best known for his excellent Truth Project video series, and this is every bit as good. He interviews PhD-holding scientists with various areas of expertise, all of them happy to share why their field of study backs a literal understanding of the first few chapters of Genesis.

This is among the best creationist documentaries ever made, filled to the brim with heartfelt, concise, deep discussion!

When that leaves you wanting more be sure to explore their YouTube channel and IsGenesisHistory.com for extras they just couldn’t fit in the film.

HONORABLE MENTION: Remember all those cutesy story bible ark depictions that had the giraffes sticking their necks out of the top windows? No wonder many people – Christians included – are skeptical of the Bible’s Flood account. But as Tim Lovett shows in Noah’s Ark: thinking outside the box (2008/35 minutes), the ark’s dimensions have more in common with a modern ocean-going oil tanker. Computer animation, large-scale models, and a generous dose of humor make this a documentary that parents and teens will both enjoy.

INTELLIGENT DESIGN

Intelligent Design (ID) proponents celebrate a Designer but purposely won’t mention who He is. It’s a familiar enough strategy for Christians in the public square: the world demands we leave God out of it, and for some reason we listen to them rather than Him (Ps. 96:3)! But while ID is afraid to go much beyond toppling evolution, that shouldn’t stop us from taking their findings and going further, giving credit to the Brilliant Triune Engineer.

The Master Designer: the song
2014 / 76 minutes
RATING: 8/10

I appreciated this documentary’s patience, keeping to just a half dozen animals, to allow the time to explore each one in some depth. It begins with the bee and its amazing ability to make honey. Did you know “It takes 556 bees flying a total of 55,000 miles to gather nectar from an astounding 2 million flowers to make a single pound of honey”? Though a bee has a brain the size of a seed, it’s a brilliant architect, with a hive’s hexagonal honeycomb structure maximizing storage capacity. Weirder and more wonderful, the bee communicates through the language of dance – yes, really! – wiggling this way and that to tell the other bees where the nectar is to be found. And we shouldn’t forget that honey itself is amazing in that it never spoils! And that’s just the first of the six critters we get to meet.

Revolutionary: Michael Behe and the mystery of the molecular machines
2016 / 60 minutes
RATING: 7/10

Revolutionary is about what a quiet professor did to get Darwinian evolutionists very, very upset with him. Michael Behe seems to believe in an old earth and that some sort of evolution may well have occurred. So why would Darwinians be so very disturbed by him? Because Behe doesn’t believe the world came about by chance. While studying the human cell he realized the microscopic machines within it are so intricate and complex it’s inconceivable they could have come about via only random mutation and natural selection. This is in part, a history of the ID movement, which Behe had a big hand in beginning. But the real “star” of the show is one of those “micro-machines” that so fascinated him: the bacterial flagellum motor that can manage 100,000 revolutions per minute. Behe is too quiet to keep kid’s attention, but he’s also an ID giant, and someone worth knowing.

HONORABLE MENTION: Michael Behe’s Science Uprising: a revolutionary case for Intelligent Design (2019-) series might be just the thing for teens. With 10 different short videos, just 6-10 minutes each, this comes in bite-sized chunks. And there’s still plenty to chew on here, with topics like “The myth of the Multiverse,” “Mutations break’ they don’t create,” and “No, you are not a robot made out of meat.”

ECONOMICS

Economics is a bigger spiritual battlefield than maybe most Christians realize. Just consider how, while God commands us not to covet our neighbor’s goods, those on the Left make envy out to be downright virtuous, peaking over the fence at what the millionaires and billionaires have. So, this often-neglected sphere is worth further study.

The Pursuit
2019 / 77 minutes
RATING: 7/10

The Pursuit is the story of one man’s search for the best way to lift the world’s poorest out of their poverty. And what the former French-horn player and current globe-trotting economics professor Arthur Brooks discovered is that it’s the free market that did this, that lifted literally billions out of extreme poverty.

So why would a Buddhist/Catholic former French horn player make a good guide for Christians interested in learning about economics, and the benefits of the free market? It’s because, as much as he might differ from us in big ways and small, his case for free trade is built on principles that line right up with Scripture. He doesn’t quote it, but his foundation is the Second Greatest Commandment (Matt. 22:36-40) – Brooks is clearly motivated by a love for his neighbor.

Love Gov: Breaking up with government is hard to do
2015 / 25 minutes
RATING: 8/10

An economic argument for small government presented as a comedic romance? Hmmmm… Alexis is thinking of quitting college to start her own business, but then she meets the strangely charming Scott Govinsky (known as “Gov” to his friends). Gov is so very caring and supportive. And eager to help. And he never seems to runs out of advice. Perfect material for a boyfriend? Alexis thinks so…at first. The problem is, Gov’s advice isn’t nearly as helpful as it seems.

Alexis’ new boyfriend Gov is a stand-in for our government, which wants to mind our business because it cares for us so deeply. But as much as the politicians and bureaucrats might mean well, that doesn’t mean they are doing well…which is what Love Gov tries to show. That’s a point worth sharing with our kids, and this series 5 short 5-minutes videos makes for quick viewing. But these are libertarians, not Christians, teaching the lesson here, so parental guidance is a must. Watch the whole 5 episode series here.

THEOLOGY

Theology is the study of God, and as the earth is the Lord’s and everything in it (Ps. 24:1) so, in a very real sense, all the other documentaries are theological too. But here it we get to learn more about God without anything distracting from our focus.

The God Who Speaks
2018 / 92 minutes
RATING: 9/10

The God Who Speaks makes the case that God still speaks to us today like He did with His prophets, doing so through Scripture. Alistair Begg, R.C. Sproul, Albert Mohler, Frank Turek, Kevin DeYoung, and Norman Geisler are some of the names here, all speaking to how the Bible attests to its own Divine origin. Really worth checking out!

The Marks of a Cult: a biblical analysis
2005 / 115 minutes
RATING: 8/10

How would you define a cult? What this documentary focuses on are religious groups that have some connections to biblical Christianity, but which have departed so far from it, that they are worshipping another God. The film offers Christians an easily understandable way of spotting those departures by using the four common math operations. As the host explains it, “A group can be classified as a cult when they:

1. Add to the 66 books of the bible…
2. Subtract from the triunity of God by either denying the personhood or the deity of one or more members of the Godhead
3. Multiply works necessary for salvation
4. Divide the loyalties of their followers from God…”

These math symbols are then used as the documentary’s four “chapters” and serve as logical breaks for any who might prefer to digest this 2-hour documentary in chunks.

PRO-LIFE

Is there a bigger tragedy in our age? Are there any victims more vulnerable, and more in need of someone to speak up for them? Here’s some help to get you ready.

Babies are murdered here
2014 / 54 minutes
RATING: 8/10

This is a must-see for anyone sitting on the sidelines. Where the film gets controversial is in the producers’ argument that we must name the sin that is going on behind clinic doors, using stark, clear terms, like “murder.” Do they want us shrieking it as women enter abortion clinics? Not at all. The men and women we see here witnessing are carrying large signs that read “Babies are Murdered Here” but there isn’t a hint of self-righteousness about them. They are clear, and generally pretty winsome too; truth is being coupled with grace. Their approach is comparable to pro-lifers who make use of large graphic pictures and pair that with soft-spoken words.

180: from pro-choice to pro-life in minutes
2011 / 33 minutes
Rating: 7/10

What kind of question would prompt a pro-choicer to become pro-life almost instantly? What street preacher Ray Comfort does here is confront people with the incoherence of their own views. When he asks them to explain what circumstances make it permissible to kill a baby, each of his interviewees is brought short. They don’t want to say we can kill a human being simply because they might grow up poor. Or because they are unwanted. Or because they are inconvenient. Their conscience convicts them with the knowledge that these are not good reasons to murder someone. By asking his pointed question Comfort makes them realize that they have never really thought through the issue of abortion before. Comfort’s approach will not work with any who have hardened their conscience. But for the ignorant or confused, what Comfort presents is incredibly clarifying.

HONORABLE MENTIONS: While Fearfully and Wonderfully Made (49 minutes) is little more than a PowerPoint lecture, it’s an amazing lecture, which is why it was for years, among Answers In Genesis’s top-selling DVDs. A Christian looking at their newborn might call the child a “little miracle” but Dr. Menton reveals the insufficiency of this description. There isn’t just one miracle involved in the conception and birth of a child – numerous miracles are involved at every stage, even before conception occurs. Any adult who gives it 15 minutes will want to stay for the rest of it, and will be sharing this link with all their friends!

Back 2019, to mark 50 years since Pierre Trudeau’s government first legalized abortion, pro-life organizations came together to make The Missing Project (75 minutes). It’s an important film, for the history lesson it provides, and for how it explains the division that exists among pro-lifers, between “abolitionists” and “incrementalists.” Who are these two camps? Abolitionists argue we can never settle for half measures – we need to push for a total ban on abortion. Incrementalists want this same end, but believe the best way forward is one step at a time. What’s missing from this film is any sort of explicitly Christian defense of the unborn. Our value, and everyone’s equality, can only be properly grounded in what we all share – being made in the Image of God (Gen. 9:6) – so that is a notable omission.

APOLOGETICS

We’re called to have a ready response to any who want to know about the hope we have (1 Peter 3:15) because of Jesus. How can we do that? What would it look like? Here’s a couple of masterclasses.

Collision
2009/ 88 minutes
RATING: 9/10

In May 2007, leading atheist Christopher Hitchens and pastor Douglas Wilson were asked by Christianity Today to dialogue on the question “Is Christianity good for the world?” They wrote six exchanges which were printed in the magazine and then, in 2008, compiled into a book. When the two men headed out to do an east-coast book tour, filmmaker Darren Doane tagged along. He captured their exchanges and interactions, both onstage in formal debate settings, and as they conversed over a pint of beer in the local pub. The end result is the most entertaining and enthralling debate you will ever see on film. This is a must see for its able demonstration of presuppositional apologetics. (Don’t know what that is? See the next documentary.) The attacks that Hitchens levels against God and Christianity are mimicked on secular campuses, so Wilson’s able defense of the faith will be instructive and will be an encouragement to our young people when they face these same attacks from their professors and fellow students. You can watch it on Facebook here.

How to Answer the Fool
2013 / 85 minutes
RATING: 8/10

While Wilson, in Collision, gives the better demonstration of presuppositional apologetics, Sye Ten Bruggencate gives the better explanation of it here. Some Christians will try to provide atheists with reasons for why they should believe in the Bible, and for why they should believe in God. In How to Answer the Fool, Ten Bruggencate teaches us to start with the Bible instead, and to present to the unbeliever the fact that it is only by acknowledging God, and the Bible as his Word, that the world makes any sense. Or to borrow from a C.S. Lewis analogy in Weight of Glory, this is believing in the Bible for the same sort of reason we believe in the sun. It’s not because we see it but because by it, we can see everything else.

HONORABLE MENTION: The Fool (2019 / 65 minutes) is the true story of how evangelist Ray Comfort was ridiculed by atheists the world over for a silly joke he made that fell flat. But God was using Ray’s humiliation: these same atheists started inviting Ray onto their shows, podcasts, and stages and they let him say anything he wanted. So Comfort used these forums to share the Gospel with thousands of atheists at a time. Atheists even took Ray’s books and read through them on their YouTube channels, all in an attempt to mock him. But the end result was they read out a Gospel presentation to their listeners. As Ray asks, “Who but God could take atheists and not only have them listen to the Gospel, but have them proclaim it?”

Find more than 100 other documentary recommendations, many of them also free to see, at ReformedPerspective.ca/100.

Red heart icon with + sign.
Theology

Genesis: theology and history!

A common objection to understanding Genesis 1 as history is that we should instead take it as theology. We’re told that God wants us to learn about ...
Red heart icon with + sign.
Assorted

Charlie Kirk in context

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

Saturday Selections – Oct. 11, 2025

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

Why Charlie Kirk’s death hit so hard

For a time, in September, my Facebook feed – I’m sure yours too – was full of tributes to Charlie Kirk. At this point, I don’t need to tell yo...
Red heart icon with + sign.
News

ARPA condemned in BC legislature

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

Red heart icon with + sign.
People we should know

Cornelius Van Til: his life and impact

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

Red heart icon with + sign.
News

90,000 legal homicides in Canada since 2016

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

Red heart icon with + sign.
News

Saturday Selections – Oct. 4, 2025

Bahnsen vs. Hitchens, the Rap Battle Here's AI put to its weirdest and most wonderful –the late Reformed apologist Greg Bahnsen taking on the late atheist apologist Christopher Hitchens. Were dragon stories really dinosaur encounters? Short answer: it sure would seem so! Where do human rights come from, senator? A US senator thought that it was akin to being a fundamentalist Muslim to think that human rights come from God. They come from the state, he insisted. But if they come from the state, how could the state ever violate them? How could we ever complain about any state abusing human rights? Health-care costs for typical Canadian family will reach over $19,000 this year That we don't pay for healthcare directly doesn't mean we don't pay for healthcare. It means, at the very least, that tax dollars that go for that care aren't used for anything else. And the hidden costs of our socialized healthcare system also mean it is really hard for us to tell if we're getting value for our money. Canadian government pushing hate speech law again "Hatred is a real sin. But government and law enforcement cannot discern the degree of hatred in one’s heart, though they can judge and punish the things they do. "That’s why existing prohibitions in the Criminal Code focus on prohibiting particular actions, not emotions or motivations. While Christians should condemn hateful thoughts, words, and gestures, the government cannot regulate the heart." The dangerous logic of Moral Subjectivism "If right and wrong are things outside of ourselves which we can't change, we need to align our behavior with what's right. But if it's the other way around, and morality is just a thing I get to make up, well, I can act however I want." "Huh... that's basically the same as not having a moral system..." **** This video is worth watching for what it gets right, like the above. But where it falls short is in what it settles for – that agreeing there is some sort of objective moral standard outside ourselves is all that's really important. The problem is, ideologies and religions can hold to an objective truth that includes the notion that "conversion by the sword" is a legitimate means of persuasion. So, for example, it isn't enough that an ISIS jihadist thinks a moral standard exists outside himself, he isn't about debate and dialogue. This sort of short-sightedness is what happens when we appeal to the fruits of Christianity without actually holding to the Root of it, Christ Himself. Civil discourse is a fruit of the only real objective standard that exists, God's morality, which teaches us: God has no interest in merely outward observance (Is. 1:13), discouraging any attempts at compelled belief. to treat others as we would like to be treated (Matt. 7:12), prompting civil discourse. to love our enemies (Matthew 5:43-4), prompting civil discourse. it is good to hear both sides (Prov. 18:17), which encourages hearing out things you might disagree with. we are all made in the Image of God (Gen. 9:6), and that hate is the equivalent of murder (Matt. 5:21-22), which both, again, encourage civil discourse. So not just any objective moral standard will do. Civil discourse is a fruit of Christianity, and as we are seeing, a nation that turns from Him will slowly but surely start losing the fruit of the Christian faith, including civility. ...

Red heart icon with + sign.
Assorted

Dominee’s friend

There is style and there is class. Dominee may not have had much style, as the world considers style, but he had class. Dominee had accepted a call...
Red heart icon with + sign.
Science - Creation/Evolution

FALSE DILEMMA: Is Genesis 1 Historical or Poetic?
Red heart icon with + sign.
News

Saturday Selections – Sept 27, 2025

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

Veya’s story

The fight for her life in a broken and biased healthcare system – one that sees doctors perpetrating euthanasia and abortion and calling them both m...
Red heart icon with + sign.
News

Charlie Kirk’s funeral spreads the Gospel

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

Red heart icon with + sign.
Theology

What does fleeing sin look like?

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

Red heart icon with + sign.
News

Saturday Selections – Sept 20, 2025

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

Red heart icon with + sign.
Culture Clashes

What will Canada look like in 2040?

Where some see gloom, God’s people can proceed in hope, knowing that God remains in control ***** “Canada to Become a Dystopian Nightmare, Households Will Flee: Gov Report.” A Christian friend shared this article with me, from Better Dwelling, a news outlet specifically focussed on Canada’s housing market. This friend wanted to make sure I was aware of a government report, “Future Lives: Social mobility in question,” that was published in January but which hasn’t been noticed and circulated until more recently. According to Better Dwelling’s Stephen Punwasi, the report from the federal government’s own think tank, Policy Horizons: “paint a grim picture resembling a dystopian mashup of a Charles Dickens’ novel meets Terminator. A Canada where wealth & the ability to own a home are determined at birth, hungry households hunt & fish for sustenance in cities, and moving down social classes is the norm. Welcome to Canada in 2040.” The message will undoubtedly resonate with many Canadians who have noticed that things have been changing quickly in the past five or ten years. Not so long ago, children could anticipate earning more, and spending more than their parents ever did. Now we may make more money, but it doesn’t go nearly as far. We can go to university, but a degree doesn’t mean much when it comes to getting a good job today. Young adults are finding it hard to imagine being able to buy even a modest home. Those that can find jobs are working more, and not having as many children. So, instead, to keep our population growing, we are bringing in millions of immigrants. But they need a place to stay too, which makes it even harder and more expensive for everyone to find a place to live. Then there is AI: that mesmerizing but creepy technology that is replacing many jobs and seems to be a lot smarter than most people using it today. Indeed, anticipating 2040 can be rather scary. But that is only true if we aren’t looking to the future with faith in our sovereign and loving God. PROVIDENTIAL GLASSES In Lord’s Day 10 of the Heidelberg Catechism, we confess that God upholds heaven and earth and all creatures so that “all things come to us not by chance but by His fatherly hand.” As a result, “with a view to the future we can have a firm confidence in our faithful God and Father that no creature shall separate us from his love.” I don’t know what is going to transpire in the next 15 years, but based on this confession of God’s providence, I believe a good case can be made that the changes we are experiencing aren’t something to fear but can be means through which God is gathering His Church and kingdom. What follows are some possibilities of the future, when looking through providential (in contrast to rose-colored) glasses. ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE AI will have us seeking something authentic From my limited experience, the hype around AI is well-warranted. It is far “smarter” and more capable than I would have imagined. Even the over-used word “revolutionary” may not suffice. The advance of AI means we’re soon going to have a hard time telling whether what we read, see and hear is real or original: Did Emma really make that valedictorian speech that had us laughing and crying? Or was it the product of Chat GPT with a few tweaks to make it look authentic? Was that YouTube clip about the New York Yankees having a moment of silence after Charlie Kirk’s death real, or just AI-generated? How can we even know? Did the pastor actually write that sermon on Lord’s Day 10, or did he ask AI to make a sermon for him, pointing it to www.TheSeed.info to ensure that the result would line up with solid Reformed orthodoxy? Can I trust that the person calling me to ask for money is actually my son/grandson in trouble? He sounds just like him, but something just doesn’t seem right. This is just a small taste of AI’s impact and is legitimately concerning. God’s Word remains trustworthy But when we look through the glasses of God’s providence, something else becomes clear: in a world where it is very difficult to know what is true, solid, trustworthy, and real, the things that are will become all the more noticeable and meaningful. And what is more true, solid, trustworthy, and real than God and His Word? “The Lord is my rock, my fortress and my deliverer; my God is my rock, in whom I take refuge, my shield and the horn of my salvation, my stronghold” (Psalm 18:2). Just as many young men today are pushing against the woke culture they were catechized in, I won’t be surprised if many people begin recognizing the beauty of God’s Word for what it is: unchanging, reliable, proven, not open to opinion, and anything but artificial. In that dizzying sea of AI will stand the rock of God’s Word and the sure hope of the Gospel. That may explain in part why popular secular influencers like Joe Rogan, Piers Morgan, and Andrew Schultz are all asking Canadian Christian Wes Huff to come on their platforms to explain how Scripture is reliable. Who would ever have seen that coming this year? The Colson Center also shared news about a “quiet revival” across England and Wales: “the number of 16- to 24-year-olds in the U.K. attending church at least once a month jumped from 4% in 2018 to 16% in 2024.” To add to this, the most recent data from book sales revealed a 22 percent increase in Bible sales in the USA (compared with 1 percent for total book sales). And the “religious books” category saw the largest increase in publishing in 2024. For the past 75+ years, many in Western Civilization saw God’s Word as a relic from the past, that isn’t all that relevant. That seems to be changing. IMMIGRATION So many people With a plummeting fertility rate, Canada, along with most Western nations, relies on immigrants to keep our population and economies stable, let alone grow. In just two years, from 2022 to 2024, Canada’s population grew by 2,358,697 with about 98 percent of that increase due to incoming temporary and permanent residents. Such a large influx of new people over a short time can result in challenges. One has only to follow the news in places like the UK and Germany to see how difficult it is to provide leadership in a secular country in which many immigrants have little interest in upholding the social conventions and laws of that land. So many who can now hear But when we look through providential glasses, here too we see some amazing possibilities for the Church. My friend and his family were missionaries in a remote region of Africa, carrying God’s Word on foot to people immersed in paganism. But they came back to our small community in northern BC not long ago and realized that a lot has changed since they left for Africa. God has literally brought people from around the world to our own doorstep. This friend has decided to continue his mission work at home, reaching out to immigrants in our own community. At the same time, many “Canadians” who grew up in this nation have become as pagan, or more, than many of places where these immigrants are coming from. Millions of people in our own provinces aren’t familiar with the Gospel. The fields are ripe for the harvest, and they are next door! Ironically (providentially), God is sometimes using immigrants to challenge the trajectory that our society, and even some churches, have been on. For example, recent election results show that immigrants and minorities are swinging to the political right, favoring conservative parties federally and provincially. Closer to home, delegations representing different ethnic communities within the Christian Reformed Church urged their synod to adopt a biblical perspective of sexuality and were one of the forces leading to a shift in direction within that denomination. God isn’t looking to us to save Western civilization. Civilizations have risen and fallen many times. It is His kingdom that endures. And in His grace, God is bringing many to our land who are willing to “seek first His kingdom.” SOCIAL WELFARE SYSTEM The partial collapse of government The “Future Lives” government report mentioned at the beginning of this article made waves in part because it warned that in the dire near future “people may start to hunt, fish, and forage on public lands and waterways without reference to regulations. Small-scale agriculture could increase.” To add to this “governments may come to seem irrelevant if they cannot enforce basic regulations or if people increasingly rely on grass-roots solutions to meeting basic needs.” In other words, if Canadians are struggling under our socialized government welfare system, they may just start to take matters into their own hands and provide for themselves and their families. We saw a taste of this during Covid, as rural land became much more popular to own, and the public trust in government regulations was broken (in spite of daily assurances from public health officers). More freedom to be productive? I don’t think I need to work hard to convince most readers that there is a lot to this “warning” that may be a providential blessing. In a land where government regulation has stifled productivity and development for decades, many Canadians and Christians would welcome increased freedom and responsibility so that they can fulfil the cultural mandate that God gave humanity to “be fruitful and multiply, fill the earth and subdue it” (Genesis 1:28). That said, I think it is also the case that many Christians have become reliant on government income (i.e., monthly child care benefits, independent school funding, and even funding for their magazines) and may have a hard time adjusting if this were to decrease or terminate. Society will be greatly blessed when more responsibility is put on individuals, families, churches, and community organizations, rather than the state. But that is only the case if these people use their responsibility for the furtherance of God’s kingdom, and not their own. UNIVERSITIES Ivory towers may topple The government report also warned that “post-secondary education could be a stranded asset.” A stranded asset loses its value prematurely, as a result of a shifting market – think of someone who had a horse buggy factory as motor cars were taking over. University degrees might become like that? “People may look for alternative forms of training in new niches that appear to offer upward mobility. Non-traditional providers, including private firms, may outcompete traditional PSE players in attracting consumers.” What could rise from the rubble? As with the decline of the social welfare system, not many Christians will lament the breakdown of post-secondary education as it is represented in much of Canada today. Universities have been bastions of evil in our land, training generations of Canadians to undermine the Christian heritage that our civilization and country was founded on, and replace it with hedonism and, more recently, critical theory. There is little surprise that the “centers of higher learning” don’t help with “upward mobility” and might be outcompeted by private firms that seek to build, rather than tear down. The question is, what will be the worldviews of the private firms that are built? Will they, like Harvard and Princeton University were when they were founded, operate on a biblical and Reformed foundation? If so, unlike Harvard and Princeton, will they stay true to their mission? CANADA IN 2040 I understand why people aren’t optimistic about the future of Canada. Even in my own community, far removed from any urban centers and which, until recently, was known for being an idyllic place to raise a family, there are places that feel eerily similar to Vancouver’s Downtown Eastside. I see more homelessness, open drug use on the streets, and the need for 24/7 policing. My family isn’t even comfortable walking down parts of Main Street anymore. The same is true in communities across Canada today. This is the natural fruit of a secular worldview (ironically labelled “progressive”), and we can expect the trajectory to only continue as long as our country refuses to humble itself before the LORD. But God’s kingdom is above all of this and is advancing perfectly according to His plan. He put us in this time and place intentionally. He has a calling for us, right here and right now. We can leave the future in God’s hand, confident that He has the authority and power to guide all things. “If God is for us, who can be against us?” (Romans 8:31). There may be reformation or revival, like in the time of Josiah (2 Kings 22-23). Or God may have good plans for another civilization to take our place, as He has done to the Babylonian and Roman empires, along with so many others. Or He may usher us into glory today yet. God doesn’t burden us with the future. Our task is to focus on the present. We can use each day He has given us to build on the foundation of Jesus Christ, confident that “if the work that anyone has built on the foundation survives, he will receive a reward” (1 Cor. 3:14). As such, it doesn’t matter so much if Canada still exists in 2040. We know with certainty that God’s kingdom will endure....

Red heart icon with + sign.
News

A renewed hunger for the Bible

Data from the Association of American Publishers reveals that the biggest sales increase among all categories of books being published last year in th...
Red heart icon with + sign.
News

Saturday Selections – Sept 13, 2025

On the death of Charlie Kirk American Christian and conservative leader Charlie Kirk was shot and killed on Wednesday. Kirk (1993-2025) wasn't as rem...
Red heart icon with + sign.
News

The assassination of Charlie Kirk

A new era has been marked; Christians must tell the truth. Unsurprisingly, on September 11, 2001, I wept. I also wept, unexpectedly, on September 11,...
Red heart icon with + sign.
News

Quebec to ban public prayer and advance secularism
Red heart icon with + sign.
Apologetics 101

What Truth sounds like: sometimes calm isn’t appropriate

Some years back, Justin Trudeau made it a requirement that all Liberal MPs had to support abortion. MP Lawrence MacAulay had, to that point, been known as pro-life, but he indicated, via a series of tweets, that he would follow his party leader Justin Trudeau's new requirement for his MPs. MacAulay wrote: "I'd like to clarify my comments to The Guardian the other day. I am personally pro-life, and have long held these beliefs; however I accept and understand the party position regarding a woman's right to choose. Despite my personal beliefs, I understand that I will have to vote the party position should this issue ever come up in the House of Commons." Broadly speaking, there are two sides of the abortion debate: those who know it is a baby and recognize that this is a life and death situation those who don't understand (or at least claim not to understand) that abortion ends the life of a precious human being But there is a third group. This group is made up of those who know it is a child, know it is a life and death situation, and knowingly advocate for death. This is the group Lawrence MacAulay joined. He called himself "personally pro-life," so he understands a life is involved. And yet, knowing what he knows, MacAulay pledged support for the murder of 100,000 Canadian children each year. This is the most indefensible of all positions – the most outrageous stand of all. So how should we respond when someone in public office takes such an outrageous position? We can write about them to the local paper, and we can write to them via an email or letter, and when we do, we should then be civil…but we should not be calm! Calm isn't appropriate We communicate things in how we say them, just as much as by what we say. That's why when we sing to God, it should be with gusto – mouthing the words, even if they are wonderful words, sends a mixed message, or simply doesn't praise Him at all. In the same way, a calm, quiet response to Lawrence MacAulay's betrayal wouldn't match up with what he'd done. The confusion he created certainly cost children their lives. Any woman who was considering abortion at the time who then heard this professedly pro-life MP agree to support abortion would have had to understand this as an acknowledgment that abortion isn’t really a life or death matter – it can’t be if he’s not even willing to take a stand. That's the implicit message he spread. And in how we respond, there’ll be an implicit message sent in how we say what we say. So if someone is promoting the slaughter of the unborn, we can't talk to him like we would if he was proposing an increase in the GST by a per cent or two. (Sadly, if MacAulay had done that, he'd probably have gotten more heated responses than he ever got for his tweets.) This isn't about money, but about lives, so if our response doesn't have some heat in it, we're not doing it right. Does that mean we should just go off on him? SHOULD WE TYPE OUR LETTER IN ALL CAPS? Should we call him every name in the book? Of course not. But we should use powerful words. We should use clear words even though we know they will offend. There is no getting around offending someone in this situation - people will get offended when you confront them about the blood on their hands. But we should not offend him with spurious insults, or with demeaning talk. Here is the letter I wrote this MP at the time: Dear MP Lawrence MacAulay, As a pro-life citizen, I don’t appreciate your party leader's stance. But your recent tweets left me more disappointed in you than him. Justin Trudeau, at least, can pretend he doesn’t know better. But why are you personally pro-life? Of course the answer to that is simple – you know it is a baby. So let’s look back at what you tweeted and insert in your own pro-life perspective. Here then, is what you really said: "I'd like to clarify my comments to the Guardian the other day. I am personally against the killing of unborn babies and have long held these beliefs; however I accept and understand the party position regarding a women's right to choose to kill her unborn baby. Despite my personal belief against killing babies, I understand that I will have to vote to kill unborn babies – my party's position – should this issue ever come up in the House of Commons." Being personally pro-life and yet politically pro-choice is the most damnable of all positions in the abortion debate. It means you know what is going on, but don’t have the courage to act. Please reconsider. Jon Dykstra If I were to have a second go at it, I would have started differently. "Don't appreciate" and "disappointed" aren't the sort of terms you use to tell someone to stop promoting mass murder – far too relaxed. However, I'm not sharing this as an example of some perfect letter. There is no such thing, so that shouldn't be our standard. But it is worth reflecting on what we could improve on for next time. While my beginning could have been better, I got the right tone in the second half. No euphemisms, nothing to minimize what he is doing. My tone matches my message – the words I use bring with them a brutal clarity: this is killing children – this is damnable. Conclusion Christians are too often too calm. We live in a crazy culture in which there is a right to murder unborn babies; murder is also being touted as a “treatment” for the elderly, sick, disabled, and maybe soon even the mentally ill; and adults and even children are being told they are the wrong gender and that the fix is to have healthy body parts mutilated. That is crazy! But too often our tone and the word choices we use simply don't match the overall claim that we are making. Can we talk of being "disappointed" or not "appreciating" the actions of a man like Lawrence MacAulay and really expect to convince our fellow Canadians that 300 children a day are being slaughtered in our country? That's not the right vocabulary. Back in 2014, at this same time that MacAulay was issuing his tweets, three Mounties were murdered in Moncton, N.B., and the newspapers were filled with words like "heartbreaking," "horror" and "grief-stricken." Those are the kinds of words we use in the face of a travesty. How we sound does matter. If we're going to convincingly communicate the truth of what's being done to the unborn, the elderly, and the gender-confused, we need to talk like we mean it. Instead of being "disappointed," we need to be "devastated." Instead of being "regretful," we should be "shocked." A deeper problem might lie not in our vocabulary and how we talk, but in our hearts and how we feel. It is hard to speak about being outraged when we aren't actually outraged. Apathy is understandable in the face of an evil like abortion that is decades old, or even an evil like transgender mutilation, which is mostly happening to people we don’t even know. But apathy in the face of evil is also sinful. If we speak of being disappointed because that's all the passion we can muster, then we need more than a change of vocabulary – we need a change of heart. Please forgive us our apathy, Lord. Please turn around those who love the shedding of blood. And please, Lord, save the children and adults who are being killed and mutilated! A version of this article first appeared in the July/August 2014 issue....

Red heart icon with + sign.
Book Reviews, Children’s picture books

James Herriot’s Treasury for Children

by James Herriot 260 pages / 1992 & 2104 James Herriot is best known for a series of semi-autobiographical books he wrote about his veterinary practice in the Northern England country of Yorkshire during the 1930s through the 1950s. Sadly, the books included frequent abuses of God's name. Fortunately, his eight children's stories, collected in this treasury, don’t share that problem. All are beautifully illustrated with full-page pictures. While there are some quirky human characters, the animals are the stars, as is evidenced by the story titles: • Moses the Kitten • Only One Woof • The Christmas Day Kitten • Bonny's Big Day • Blossom comes Home • The Market Square Dog • Oscar, Cat-About-Town • Smudge, the Little Lost Lamb A couple of cautions: at one point in Moses the Kitten Herriot says, "What the devil...?", and in The Christmas Day Kitten, the momma cat dies soon after giving birth, which might be a bit traumatic for the very young. Oh, and if you are a tough macho dad who has never shed a tear in front of your kids, well, they'll see another side of you when you come to very beautiful ending of Bonny's Big Day. I'd recommend these for three (so long as they can sit still!) all the way up – I can’t image anyone not enjoying them....

Red heart icon with + sign.
Book Reviews, Children’s picture books

Bruno the Bear

by W.G. Van de Hulst 47 pages / 1978 & 2014 Little Rosie is sick so Mother takes her off to bed. But wait, what about her teddy bear Bruno? The little goof has slipped right out of her tired little hand onto the floor. There he lies, sitting up against the doorpost with his glass eye twinkling, almost winking, as if he had a secret joke. It’s no joke though, when Jimmy and Joe come home from school, and turn their sister’s favorite toy into a puppet on a string. They make Bruno dance and fly, and then - oh no! – they swing him about over the canal outside their window. When Bruno gets hooked on a pole sticking out of the water the string breaks, and then the two naughty boys don’t know what to do. Their sister is crying – she’s sick and wants her teddy. But they don’t dare tell Mother what they did! Bruno the Bear was originally published in Dutch, and the translators have done a wonderful job – it is a fun book to read out loud. It is also a beautiful book, with more than 25 pictures that are quite helpful in setting the scene. My three-year-old and five-year-old were both able to follow all the way through this pretty long story – I think it might have taken a half hour to finish. One thing I particularly appreciated was the author’s Christian take on the boys naughtiness. The two boys don’t want to tell Mother or Father, and they don’t. But that night, as they go to bed, we learn that Joe tried to pray, but didn’t dare. And Jimmy “had said it as fast as he could. And that was not really praying. No, Jimmy did not really dare to pray either.” When I asked my girls why the two boys didn’t dare pray, they understood exactly why, and we had a good conversation about what the boys needed to do – fess up! (Which they do indeed do a few pages later.) Bruno is one of 21 Van de Hulst children’s books the publisher sent me, and so far this is our favorite. In some of the other books I’ve had to “mute” some of the action – for example, in The Rockity Rowboat I skipped over a description of just how fierce a big black dog looked – but what might be need a bit of abridgment for a three year old will be great reading for a child in Grade 1 and 2. So, to sum up, Bruno is well translated, beautifully illustrated, thoroughly Christian, and engaging enough to keep a three-year-old’s attention for half an hour. You can order it, and the other Van de Hulst books, at Inheritance Publications....

Red heart icon with + sign.
Pro-life - Abortion

Judges vs. justice: a history of abortion in Canadian courts

In 1988 Canada’s Supreme Court’s gave their Morgentaler decision which struck down all restrictions on abortion in the country. Shortly afterwards the Supreme Court again dealt with abortion in the Borowski and Daigle cases. Together, these three cases have been called the “abortion trilogy” and a close look at these cases shows how Canada’s top judges can take a large amount of the credit for us being one of just three countries in the world with no protection for the unborn. 1. The Morgentaler decision In 1983 abortionist Henry Morgentaler was charged with operating an illegal abortion clinic in Toronto. At that time, the law only allowed abortions to be performed in accredited hospitals with special abortion committees that had to approve each abortion. Morgentaler and his supporters considered this to be too restrictive. His case went all the way to the top and on January 28, 1988, the Supreme Court ruled that Canada’s abortion law violated section 7 of the Charter. The majority of judges argued that the abortion law violated the procedural fairness required by the Charter of Rights. While this was a major victory for Morgentaler, there was a sense in which that decision was not a complete defeat for the pro-life cause because it gave Parliament the option to pass better abortion legislation. (though Parliament hasn’t touched the issue since). In his 1992 book Morgentaler vs. Borowski, University of Calgary political scientist Ted Morton relates some little known information that shines some light on the Supreme Court’s thinking. Morton notes that when Gwen Landolt, a lawyer and leader of the pro-family group REAL Women of Canada, read the Supreme Court’s decision she noticed something startling. Four of the judges who struck down the law referred to a document known as the Powell Report in their decision. Dr. Marion Powell had been commissioned by the Ontario government to survey the availability of abortion services in Ontario. Dr. Powell was a “pro-choice” activist, and her report was released on January 27, 1987, three months after Morgentaler’s case had been heard by the Supreme Court. Landolt reviewed the Morgentaler docket in the Supreme Court archives and confirmed that the Powell Report had not been mentioned in court when the case was argued – obviously because the report did not yet exist at that time. In other words, the Supreme Court, in striking down Canada’s abortion law, had relied heavily on a document that had not been submitted as evidence, and which had been produced by an abortion rights activist. Landolt shared this information with Laura McArthur, the president of the Toronto Right to Life Association. McArthur then lodged an official complaint with the Canadian Judicial Council, arguing that the Court had deprived Morgentaler’s opponents of the right to challenge the Powell Report when the case was argued. Considering that Dr. Powell was a pro-abortion activist, the impartiality of her report was certainly questionable. The Council replied that the issue raised by McArthur was outside of its mandate to consider, and also that the Supreme Court occasionally relies on materials which have not been introduced as evidence. This is known as “judicial notice.” However, as Prof. Morton notes, “To justify the Court’s use of the Powell Report as an exercise of judicial notice was to stretch the concept beyond its normal scope.” 2. The Borowski decision While Henry Morgentaler had been fighting in the courts to strike down restrictions on abortion, a prominent Manitoba pro-life activist (and former provincial cabinet minister) Joe Borowski had been fighting in the courts to have abortion prohibited in Canada. That is, he was challenging the same law Morgentaler was challenging, except from the opposite point of view: Borowski said Canada’s abortion law violated the Charter because it allowed abortions to be performed. He argued that unborn children were protected by the Charter’s declaration that “everyone has the right to life.” After considerable effort and expense, Borowski’s case reached the Supreme Court in October 1988. A few months later the Court ruled that it would not address Borowski’s arguments because his case had become moot. The law he was challenging had been struck down in the Morgentaler decision, so the Court did not need to address issues related to legislation that was no longer operative. All of Borowski’s efforts were thwarted by this declaration that his case had become moot. Years of work and expense came to nothing. Now the pro-life movement had lost two cases at the Supreme Court, but there was one more yet to come. 3. The Daigle decision On July 7, 1989, Jean-Guy Tremblay obtained a court injunction in Quebec to prevent his former girlfriend, Chantal Daigle, from aborting the child they had conceived together. The Quebec Superior Court upheld the injunction 10 days later. Then on July 26 the Quebec Court of Appeal also upheld the injunction. In a decision that shocked the country, that court ruled that an unborn child was a “distinct human entity” that “has a right to life and protection by those who conceive it.” The Quebec Court of Appeal decision was immediately appealed to the Supreme Court of Canada. The Supreme Court judges were called back from their summer vacations to hold an emergency session on August 8. As Ted Morton and fellow University of Calgary political scientist Rainer Knopff write in their 1992 book Charter Politics, “Never before in the Court’s history had a case moved from trial to the highest court in the land with such speed!” Canada was in the midst of a full-fledged crisis. How dare a court in this country declare that unborn children had a right to life! During the Supreme Court proceedings, Daigle’s lawyer announced that she had gone to the US and had an abortion there, making the case moot. The injunction preventing her from getting an abortion no longer had any practical effect. The Chief Justice then asked the opposing lawyers if they wished to continue the proceedings. Tremblay’s lawyer said no, but Daigle’s lawyer said yes. The Court therefore decided to continue, and within two hours they had struck down the (moot) injunction against Daigle, once again handing the pro-abortion side a complete victory. That wasn’t all, however. The Court decided to do more than decide Daigle’s case, which concerned Quebec’s civil law. The Court went well beyond the questions of that case by also addressing the rights of the fetus under common law, which applies in the other nine provinces. This was to prevent a similar case from later arising in one of the common law jurisdictions. The Supreme Court had previously taken the position that it wanted to avoid unnecessary judicial pronouncements. Morton and Knopff point out that in this case the Court violated its own maxim twice: When the justices learned that Chantal Daigle had had her abortion, why did they persist in ruling on the issues involved rather than declaring the case moot – which it clearly was? Similarly, why did the Court expand the scope of its ruling to include the common law when this was not necessary for a Quebec appeal? They note that, “for many this aspect of the Daigle decision encourages the suspicion that the Supreme Court is less than neutral on the abortion issue.” Morton and Knopff indicate that there are other questions as well. When Borowski’s case became moot, the Supreme Court refused to proceed with it. When Daigle’s case became moot, the Court proceeded anyway. “Why under these circumstances, sceptics wonder, did the Court persist in deciding the issue of fetal rights? Why did it treat Borowski and Daigle so differently?” As mentioned, Daigle’s case was rushed to the Supreme Court level unlike any previous case. Perhaps this can be justified because of the medical issues involved. It could be seen to be an emergency situation. As a result of the lack of time, there was much less legal preparation and input than usual for a major court case. When Daigle had her abortion, however, the emergency was over. There was no need to rush into a decision without proper study and thoughtful consideration. This was serious stuff, after all, because it concerned the supreme law of the land. Morton and Knopff quote another constitutional expert as saying that it was a bad idea to rush ahead with the Daigle case and produce a major court ruling “in a hothouse, emergency atmosphere. This opinion will be with us for centuries.” And yet this important decision had been reached with considerably less preparation and argumentation than would normally occur. The Canadian people (most notably those in the womb) were not well served. Operation Rescue Besides the Daigle controversy, there was other activity on the abortion front in Canada during 1989. After the Morgentaler decision, many Canadian pro-lifers became increasingly frustrated about the lack of restrictions on abortion. Some joined Operation Rescue and engaged in civil disobedience directed primarily against Everywoman’s Health Clinic in Vancouver and two abortion clinics in Toronto. Operation Rescue was a group founded in the US to promote nonviolent resistance as a pro-life tactic. Operation Rescue activists would use their bodies to block access to the entrance of abortuaries. Pregnant women were thereby prevented from entering and getting abortions. The police were always called in to break up the blockades. Court injunctions were imposed against these protests, but activists would often ignore the injunctions. Many were thus thrown in jail and fined. The courts in BC were particularly harsh in dealing with protestors who participated in Operation Rescue. But while the mainstream media strongly approved of Daigle’s actions and her Supreme Court decision, it disapproved of the Operation Rescue missions. Writing at the time, Ted Byfield of Alberta Report pointed out the hypocrisy of the situation: It’s true that, in aborting the child, she defied a court injunction. In Vancouver, that is a dreadful thing to do, as the judges so gravely aver every time they slam the abortuary rescuers into jail for doing it. receives no such admonition. She has been through enough, the judges decide. So we see how law is administered in Canada. If you defy an injunction in opposing abortion, you are a wretched criminal and must go to jail. If you defy an injunction in having an abortion, you are a national hero, and warmly commended. Conclusion Ted Byfield’s comment puts the matter clearly. Canada’s courts had become politicized. When they were presented with an abortion-related case, the outcome always favored the pro-abortion side. The courts reasoned one way in one case, and the opposite way in another case, in order to arrive at their desired decision. Their legal reasoning was steered in particular directions to achieve their political goals. The courts will not change until Canadian society has been changed. This is why the efforts of pro-life groups are so important. Neither the politicians nor the courts will respond favorably to pro-life arguments until there’s a broader reception of the pro-life message. It isn’t going to start at the top – grassroots activity is essential to accomplishing this goal. We all need to talk to our neighbors. This article first appeared in the April 2015 issue....

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