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

Equipping Christians to think, speak, and act

Open envelope icon with @ symbol

Get Articles Delivered!

Equipping Christians to think, speak, and act delivered direct to your Inbox!



RP’s 10-day screen-fast challenge is going nationwide July 21-30

If you want to register for the July 21-30 nationwide challenge click here. If you want to learn more about why you should consider it, including some tips on how to go screen-free for 10 days, read on!

***** 

How many times are you scrolling on your phone or tablet each day? Do you have any idea? What pulls in your children most: books, games, physical activity, or a screen?

Christian homes, including seniors, aren’t immune from the addictive nature of screens. Although screens and digital technology can be a great blessing, we have a very hard time keeping them in their proper place. But we want what should be our priorities – family, friends, and faith – to remain our priorities, don’t we?

So enough talk. It’s time to act!

The challenge

Are you, or is your family, willing to go 10 days without screens and/or social media? Do you have the ability to function without them? It is one thing to say so, and another to do it.

A 10-day social media and screen fast will open your eyes to the power that our devices have on our lives, and on our family’s lives. It will provide a window of time to experience what life is like without them. This break can also provide a fresh opportunity to very deliberately decide how you and your family will utilize these devices moving forward.

It may be fun to invite another person or family to do this with you. If you are willing to give this a try, encourage your friends, care group, or others to do the same.

Nationwide July 21-30

You can start any time you like, and there's no better time than now. But we're also trying to generate some positive peer pressure by having a nation-wide screen-free challenge for July 21-30. We can all do this together at the same time!

Some generous supporters have recognized how important this issue is, so for the July challenge they are offering up a little extra motivation for us all. They have pledged to donate $10 per day for every day you manage to go screen from from July 21-30. The money will be split between two fantastic kingdom causes – Reformed Perspective and Word & Deed –  to a maximum of $20,000 split between both causes. Go all 10 days, and that'll be $100 donated. Go just 8, and it will still be $80. If you manage just 1 or 2 days that will still be $10 or $20 donated... and a hard lesson learned on dependency. How long can you go? If you don't think you can, isn't that the best reason to try?

A few tips

  1. Commit. Don’t allow yourself to make easy exceptions, even if you are having a hard day. For example, just because you are at someone else’s home doesn’t mean you can enjoy screens again.
  2. If your fast includes screens, but you still need screens for basic functions that are essential, ensure that you are only using your tablet and phone for those functions. For example, if you need a phone for directions, don’t take the opportunity to scroll the news. If you need a computer at work, or to write a report for a committee you are on, don’t let yourself go to other websites or play an online game.
  3. Turn your devices off and hide them. Take the TV off the wall. Make them difficult to access.
  4. Log out of your social media accounts so that it isn’t easy to open them.
  5. Move the icons of your apps so that the social media apps (including YouTube) are hidden.
  6. Come up with a plan: whenever you find yourself wanting to reach for a screen or open your social media, what will you do instead? It doesn’t have to be hard. Perhaps say a prayer, take a drink of water, try to memorize a verse (keep some verses on a piece of paper in your pocket), do a set of 10 jumping jacks, or read a couple of pages of a book you’ve been meaning to get to.
  7. Have alternatives waiting and ready for you and your children: books, magazines, art supplies, a soccer ball, a walk to the park, etc.
  8. Invite accountability: let loved ones know what you are doing, and ask them to check in on you regularly to see how it is going. Tell them not to let you off the hook!
  9. Don’t read this and conclude a screen-fast challenge is only important for youth or young adults.
  10. Be sure to check out our article "What can I do anyways? 35 screen-free alternatives."

You can register for the July 21-30 nationwide challenge here.

The results

We would love to hear how this goes for you and what impact it had on you and your family. Please send the editor a note.

Or send us a good ol’ fashioned letter via

Reformed Perspective
Box 3609
Smithers, BC
V0J 2N0

We look forward to hearing from y’all, and sharing the results!



News

Saturday Selections – July 12, 2025

Josiah Queen's "A Garden in Manhattan"

On the crowded streets,
all the people that I see
Want them to know the Jesus that I know
If I'm the closest thing to a Bible that they read
Let the words they read be what You wrote
Father, help me to go

I'll be a garden in Manhattan,
be a river where it's dry
When my friends can't find the road,
I'll be a roadside welcome sign
Sunshine in Seattle,
be a cool breeze in July
Light in the darkness
I'll be a garden, a garden in Manhattan

Florida after dark,
I know it ain't quite Central Park
There's souls in my hometown You wanna reach
Oh, God, use me where You have me...

Climate hypocrisy tells us what the elites really believe

When global warming proponents like Oprah Winfrey, Bill Gates, and Jeff Bezos all jet off to an exotic locale to celebrate a wedding, you can know they aren't really worried about CO2 hurting the planet... or they wouldn't fly a hundred jets to a party. And as this article explains, EV cars are another hypocrisy gauge. They might make sense in some instances, but if they are being pushed whether they help lower CO2 emissions or not, then you know this is about show, not substance. As Bjorn Lomborg writes:

"In some parts of the world, like India, so much of the power comes from coal that electric cars end up emitting more CO₂ than gasoline cars...."

Now, to be fair, Lomborg himself is worried about global warming. But, as he highlights, the actions most governments take are not what would be needed to solve the issue if it did exist.

Parks Canada staff privately doubted Kamloops "graves" claim

“$12M spent by @GcIndigenous to find purported 215 children's graves at Indian Residential School was instead spent on publicists & consultants with no graves found to date...”

The legacy media is betraying Canada (10 min. read)

Soviet Union President Nikita Khrushchev is credited with saying, "The press is our chief ideological weapon." In contrast, US President George H.W. Bush is said to have said, "We need an independent media to hold people like me to account.” The dictator wanted to own the press so the government could use it to direct public opinion, while the US president touted the need for a press independent of government so it could hold those in power to account.

Our Canadian government spends massive amounts of money funding the country's largest media outlets, and these outlets not only don't denounce the proposition, but take the money. That tells you a lot about which direction our media is heading.

While readers likely won't mind this article's anti-Liberal Party bias, some might be put off by just how loud it is. But read it anyways for the money trail.

The Scopes Monkey Trial is 100 years old!

In 1925, a Dayton, Tennessee high school teacher named John Scopes was put on trial for violating a state law that forbade teaching evolution. The case made big news then – across both the US and into Canada – and made big news again in 1960 when a movie version called Inherit the Wind was made, which portrayed the town of Dayton as a bunch of creationist hicks who wanted to storm the jail to get Scopes. That film was then shown in classrooms across the US for generations, convincing many students that only idiots like those onscreen could ever believe Genesis is literal.

But the truth is, the whole town was in on it – they challenged the law to get some attention for their hometown, and recruited Scopes, who agreed to be charged, and in an ironic twist, he probably never even taught evolution in his classroom. In another ironic twist, as this article lays out, much of the scientific evidence marshaled for evolution during the trial has been overturned since (ex. vestigial organs, similar embryonic development). So, even if it had been a bunch of dumb hicks, dumb hicks siding with God are a lot smarter than a gaggle of reporters and scientists siding against Him.

Is Trump doing good or is he doing bad? Yes.

Jeffrey Epstein was a sex trafficker with ties to many of the most powerful people in the world. This, then, was a man who could name names, and topple empires... and then he died mysteriously in his jail cell – a purported suicide but one that happened when his cell's video cameras were broken. The country's reaction was telling. No one was buying the coincidence. This past week, Epstein's client list was supposed to be released and the news now is that there was no client list. As the video below details, this has a lot of conservatives, Christians among them, feeling crushed. They don't believe it, and want to know where the justice is.

Part of the disappointment comes from the tendency we have of making politicians our dividing lines. Joe Biden and Kamala Harris were monsters... so we should love Trump? That doesn't follow. Canadian prime ministers Trudeau and Carney have a litany of sins, most recently trying to push murder as a treatment for mental illness. But does that mean we have to look past the shortcomings of Pierre Poilievre? Christians don't have to. Our dividing line is not a Trudeau or Trump, because our unswerving loyalty lies only with God (Josh. 5:13-14). So, yes, Trump continues to stand strong against gender nonsense, but the missing Epstein list has people wondering if the swamp can ever be drained, and as Mindy Belz (sister-in-law of WORLD magazine founder Joel Belz) highlights, his results-now approach has undercut processes that protect everyone from government overreach.


Today's Devotional

July 15 - A new creation

“And you know that He was manifest to take away our sins, and in Him there is no sin.” - 1 John 3:5 

Scripture reading: 1 John 3:4-9; 2 Corinthians 5:12-20

John uses some pretty strong statements in our passage today.  He says that, "Whoever abides in Him does not sin” (v.6) and “Whoever has been born of God does not sin” (v.9).  John >

Today's Manna Podcast

Manna Podcast banner: Manna Daily Scripture Meditations and open Bible with jar logo

The Great Healer

Serving #904 of Manna, prepared by Rev. Richard Aasman, is called "The Great Healer" and is based on John 9:1-3.











Red heart icon with + sign.
Parenting

Have a child – change the world

In his best-selling book Atomic Habits, James Clear makes the case for committing to tiny changes in your life, for drastic change. “Here’s how the math works out,” he explains. “If you can get 1 percent better each day for one year, you’ll end up thirty-seven times better by the time you’re done.” The reverse is also true. “If you get 1 percent worse each day for one year, you’ll decline nearly down to zero.” With time, little changes cause exponential shifts. That is exactly what is happening beneath the surface when it comes to the world’s fertility. The challenge, simply put, is a lack of children. The world is aging quickly, with too few children to replenish the work force, let alone care for the seniors. We are on the brink of a population collapse. Our opportunity is to welcome the gift of children even while the world isn’t. The contrast between the two directions may hardly be noticeable in one year or even 10. But in 75 years (by the end of this century), it could result in a world filled with people who know the LORD. But that will only be true if Christians embrace new life, and raise these children with love and in the fear of the LORD. Unfortunately, God’s calling for us to do this is increasingly being shushed, including in Reformed churches. The world is aging quickly From the 1800s to the 1960s the average woman gave birth to 5 or 6 children. In the 6 decades since, the fertility rate has plummeted worldwide – in Canada, we’re down to 1.26 children per woman, and in BC it is even worse, at just 1 child per woman. That is even lower than China. To put this in context, for the world’s population to stay stable, the fertility rate must be 2.1. This demographic challenge is widely recognized, but especially in some countries where fertility rates decreased a little sooner. For example, according to Pronatalist.org, “at current birth rates, there will be six great-grandchildren for every hundred Koreans. This is equivalent to a disease that wipes out 94% of the population.” And if we look at Italy, in just 30 years it is projected that 60 percent of Italians will have no brothers, no sisters, no cousins, no aunts, and no uncles. In just the last year or two, the rest of the world has been waking up to the problem as well, as it’s become evident that decreasing fertility rates are far more widespread, and dropping faster, than previously thought. That includes countries like Iran, known for its hardline Muslim population, which has seen its fertility rate drop from 6.5 children per woman in 1982, to 1.68 in 2022. Two-thirds of the world’s population now have a fertility rate below replacement. Like Iran, the countries that have had high fertility are decreasing the fastest (1-3 fewer children per woman in just 20 years). Most people still don’t see this as a big issue today because it feels like there’s no shortage of people. Indeed, the world’s population will likely keep growing for a few more decades as people live longer and we continue to experience the fruit of the higher birth rates that occurred in the 20th century. But the effects of how the world is increasingly saying no to children will become far more acute soon. The first thing most people will notice is an aging population. The number of seniors in the world is expected to double to over 1.4 billion in just 30 years. Let that sink in. The number of seniors is projected to double in just 30 years! Generally speaking, seniors need more care. Their health care costs increase substantially even as their employment income plummets. Normally we look to the next generation to step in, both through providing care for their parents and grandparents, and by becoming the new labor force to keep the economy moving. But in places like Korea, if there’ll be just 6 great-grandchildren to replace every 100 Koreans, how is that going to work out? For those for whom fewer children has been a deliberate choice, efforts to change this attitude have so far been futile. According to the Globe and Mail, “no country has successfully reversed birth-rate decline.” And if that is true of individual countries, it is hard to be optimistic about the population of the world as a whole. “Great civilizations are not murdered. They commit suicide.” These words are credited to the famed historian Arnold Toynbee, who wrote about the rise and fall of 26 civilizations. I believe it is fair to conclude that much of the world is committing civilizational suicide. Technology is allowing us to live according to our desires. What we are witnessing in the world today is, for the most part, not the result of sickness, calamity, or oppression. Much of humanity, and western civilization in particular, is choosing this. The difference between the empires of centuries ago and now is that the challenge isn’t contained to a relatively small geographical area. Most of the world is succumbing, and the rest of the world is rushing even faster to join in. There is no reason the Church has to follow course In a world of birth control, having children is, increasingly, an act of faith that our life is a part of something much larger than ourselves. Perhaps this is why God’s first words to humanity were a command to “be fruitful and multiply, fill the earth and subdue it.” One of our readers recently wrote to Reformed Perspective expressing concern that we’ve been trumpeting this topic, since fertility can be sensitive and personal. But this call to be fruitful and multiply isn’t just my opinion, or Reformed Perspective’s hobby horse. It is God’s commission to the world. The goal isn’t political dominance, or to outbreed other religions. No, God has made it very clear from Genesis through Revelation that He is a God of the covenant. Already in the Bible’s third chapter we are promised that the seed of the woman – one of her offspring – would crush the head of the serpent. Likewise, most of us are very familiar with the encouraging words that “The promise is for you and your children and for all who are far off—for all whom the Lord our God will call.” Fertility is the means through which God grows His kingdom. That kingdom includes both those who become Christians mid-way through life and the children of believers born into the covenant. And this calling isn’t the burden the world believes it is – it is a blessing! Psalm 127 is well known and loved for good reason: Children are a reward. We are blessed if we have many! Imagine the impact on the world if Christians embraced God’s gift of children! Deciding to pursue a spouse, and then get married, and welcoming the children that the LORD gives is exactly what this world needs. It is exactly what the Church needs. Having a child, or another child, and raising them with love and in the fear of the LORD can be one of the most impactful things you do for God’s kingdom. I got a glimpse of this when I spent time in a couple of American towns, such as Lynden, Washington, and Sioux Center, Iowa this past year. It is probably the closest thing I have experienced to seeing the gift of life welcomed. These places are strikingly different from most Canadian towns and cities, even than my own home town. Families are everywhere. Kids are the norm. Playgrounds are busy places. There is something very special there. And it’s no coincidence that these are very “churched” towns. That the world wants to reject children is no reason for the Church to follow! It only means we can be a massive light to the world by bringing new life into the world. Notice how sad faces brighten when a child walks by. That child is a light! Want to be missional? Bring new life into the world! Our decisions are more impactful than we realize Not only does God want us to reproduce, He is looking for multiplication. Here too, in His wisdom, God has designed life in a way where the cultural mandate is very realistic for most people. My parents were married in 1971. Unlike most Canadians, they didn’t contribute to the fertility rate decline. They were blessed with eight children. Now if a couple has 8 children, and this is maintained for just 10 generations, how many descendants will they have in about 200 years? Over 1 billion! That is almost twice as many people as in North America. Now, I didn’t have 8 children, at least not yet. We have 6. If each generation had 6 children, how many descendants would there be in 10 generations? Over 60 million! That is one and half times the population of Canada. What about 3 children? Even with three children per generation, there would still be 59,000 descendants – enough to fill an NHL stadium three times over. How about two children? Unfortunately, it is very well possible that we never get to 10 generations. The family line will likely disappear. The point here is that a decision to have another child, multiplied over successive generations, can have a monumental impact on the world. What is holding us back? So, what do the stats tell us about the fertility rate of Christians compared to the world? Our fertility rate is higher than the “nonreligious,” but only a little bit more – just over 2 children per woman in America, and about 2.7 worldwide. Looking at the Reformed community, it is evident that the fertility rate has dropped significantly in the past few decades. We still have more children than our neighbors, but we have far fewer than we had not long ago. And the difference is more apparent in urban areas than rural. When I was doing presentations on this topic to Reformed communities across Canada over the past two years, it struck me how rural areas responded to the message very warmly. In contrast, in the more urban areas, I was clearly walking on sensitive ground. Yes, fertility is a sensitive topic. There is no way that I can understand the pain and heartache that many women and couples face daily because they aren’t able to have children, or because they have lost children. Likewise, there are many singles who would love to be married and have children, but haven’t been blessed with a spouse. Or their spouse is no longer with them. To add to this, many people grew up in homes where their parents had many children, but then failed to provide the care that those children really needed – the impact of this neglect can carry on for a lifetime. We live in a very broken world, and the curse of the fall is still being felt daily. There are very good reasons why many people can’t have children. Likewise, there are good reasons to not have more children. The challenge with sensitive topics like this is that, out of love for the hurting, we might feel a pressure to just stay quiet. But we so easily forget that encouraging God’s people to marry and have children isn’t just some opinion that we can choose to hold to or not. It is, instead, God’s express command to humanity. We are silent to our own peril. And whatever our situation, all of us can play a role in welcoming the gift of life. 1. Considerations for couples with children If you already have children and wonder if you should have more, I heard one Christian couple recommend that you literally write out each reason you may have for not having another. And then, for each reason, put it in a column. Is this reason an example of faith, trust, love, or fear, or selfishness? Since this is a self-administered test, it’d be easy to skew the results however you might wish. So be careful to use it to evaluate your thinking, not simply justify it. Remember that one day we will all stand before the Judge of the universe and it is His standard that matters. If you are open to having more children, first confirm that your spouse is as well. God wants us to be faithful to the marriage and baptism vows that we have made, which means we have to have the physical and emotional capacity to love and care for our spouses and the children He has given us. The goal is not to have as many children as possible. If, based on your feelings right now, you think there is no way you can have more children, it likely isn’t wise to take measures that would prevent you from changing your mind a few years from now. It is amazing how much our situation can change in just a couple of years. We can only see and feel this moment. God may have something very different for us in the future. I have had people pull me aside to tell me how much they regret taking steps to prevent more children. And I’m sure you are aware of many families who thank God almost daily for every child He has given them. 2. A thought for couples without children If you are a couple who has decided that you want to wait with getting married, or wait with having children until you have reached certain milestones that have to do with studies, career, or finances, how does this align with this passage from James 4:13-17: “Now listen, you who say, ‘Today or tomorrow we will go to this or that city, spend a year there, carry on business and make money.’ Why, you do not even know what will happen tomorrow. What is your life? You are a mist that appears for a little while and then vanishes. Instead, you ought to say, ‘If it is the Lord’s will, we will live and do this or that.’ As it is, you boast in your arrogant schemes. All such boasting is evil. If anyone, then, knows the good they ought to do and doesn’t do it, it is sin for them.” The world promises that women can make plans to have it all – they can plot out their career track and after they are established then they can have their children. But as many women have discovered too late, fertility declines sharply in a woman’s thirties. We never know what tomorrow might bring us. 3. Singles The number one reason for the declining fertility rate is that more women are childless. This is also evident in the Church. I have been struck time and again by the number of quality girls in Reformed churches who are age 20, then 25, then 30, and guys still haven’t snapped them up yet. I see groups of young adults where the guys and girls seem to prefer to hang out as singles rather than to date, get married, and start a family. Single young men, it is your responsibility to find a girl and start a family. This takes courage and effort. But you can do it! What are you doing to make this a reality? If your fears, career, or your hobbies and sports are keeping you immobilized or too preoccupied, make changes starting tonight. Ask God to give you eyes to see a godly woman who could be a great wife. And when He shows you one, ask her out on a date! Young women, are your decisions about career and studies making it harder for solid Christian guys to meet you? Are your standards for guys aligning with God’s will or your own? Both guys and girls, if practical things like the cost of housing is keeping you from getting married, my encouragement would be to prioritize marriage. Trust in the LORD’s provision, and be open to changing some of your expectations if need be. As Christ tells us, “seek first His kingdom and righteousness, and all these will be yours as well.” If the cost of housing means you think you can’t get married or have children, consider moving to a new community where housing is less expensive, or be content with renting for the time being. 4. Everyone else If God hasn’t given you children, or if you won’t be having more children, you can still be a massive help simply by looking beyond yourself and loving your neighbors, young and old alike. This can be through your job (we need teachers, nurses, and truck-drivers), and on the side (catechism teachers, baby-sitters, and coaches), and in hundreds of other ways. Changing the world, while being sanctified A lot of people are trying to change the world through activism, political engagement, and missions. These things matter a great deal – in fact, they flow from our identity as prophets, priests, and kings. But we can get so caught up in good things that we neglect our most basic callings. One lesson that I have learned is that the greatest blessings I have are not the things that I have worked the hardest to make happen. They are the gifts that God freely gives. After high school I studied in university for 7 years and received a diploma, then a degree, then a Master’s degree. I then worked for 15 years and gave that job my blood, sweat, and tears. Around that same time, my wife and I worked very hard to tame a wild piece of land in northern BC to be a place where we could raise our family. What has come of these things? All of them I have given away or would be willing to. My wife and I sold that land a few years ago because it was too difficult for me to stay on top of it with my other responsibilities. And I left that job about a year later. And if my degrees were taken away from me, it would make almost no difference in my life or to anyone else. But it is very clear to me that what matters the most is my marriage to Jaclyn, my six wonderful children, the many blessed relationships I have in church and beyond, and most of all, the promises of God. These things are not a result of my effort. They are a gift from God. But I had to be willing to accept these gifts willingly and to prioritize life accordingly. It takes courage to ask a girl out, to leave a career to prioritize raising a family, to be open to having more children when there are already toddlers around our legs. Like many of you, I was scared about the prospect of having more children and about seven years ago the epicenter of a burnout I experienced was when our sixth child was born. It isn’t easy. But I wouldn’t trade these gifts for anything. There is incredible pressure in our culture for women to be something more than a mom. Yet a mom can have a monumental impact on this world for centuries to come. A career may come with perks like money and recognition, but these things can disappear overnight. Your offspring will change the world and will live into eternity. As we get older, we go to more and more funerals. They are always hard, but I also can’t help but be convicted every time again when I go to a funeral. I get such clear perspective on what matters most in life. At a funeral, does it really matter if someone really nailed that hobby, or built up a successful business? Only if these things were a blessing to others. So many of the things they worked so hard for are not even considered at the funeral. What matters most is whether they loved their family and others, and whether they loved the LORD. I don’t think I’m the only one who doesn’t know what is best for myself. I need to follow God’s Word, even if it clashes with how I feel – my fears, my ambitions, my desires. That is true for all of God’s children. If you made it to the end of this article and still aren’t convinced, consider these two questions: 1) To Whom do you (and me) owe our own existence? 2) Shouldn’t we trust the One who made us to know what’s best for us, and best for the world He’s placed us in?...

Red heart icon with + sign.
Parenting

Obstacles and roadblocks to having children

Some obstacles to having children aren’t entirely in our control. But there are also roadblocks that we can set up in our own way ***** On my 20th birthday, I flopped back on my dorm bed and told my mom on the phone, “I thought that I’d have kids by now.” So why didn’t I? First comes marriage The first and most obvious reason was that I was so busy studying at university I wasn’t even dating. I knew that God intended kids to be raised in a home with a mom and a dad. Since I was single, I wasn’t in a position to have children – even if it was my hidden desire. It was so hidden, in fact, that the girls I lived with voted me as “the most likely to never have children.” So I needed to start bringing what was hidden to the surface, and that began with praying for a husband. I prayed for a God-fearing man who was eager to provide for our family and I trusted God’s will for my life. In addition, I was now up for doing the other things I could to meet eligible men including: Putting myself in places where I was likely to meet eligible men by prioritizing my attendance at church events over other activities and entertainment, and by going to a Christian post-secondary institution, Speaking graciously to many new single men by listening well, being cheerful and kind in the content of my speech, and encouraging them in godly pursuits, Dressing modestly and attractively to avoid two pitfalls: being noticed for the wrong reason and being overlooked because my God-given beauty was hidden, and Being willing to go on dates and try new things, giving guys a fair chance. Over time and by God’s leading, I was married at 25. There’s waiting and then there’s waiting But we didn’t actively try to have children right away. There are some benefits to waiting for a time after marriage to have kids. It is not necessary, but it allows time to adjust to new roles as husband and wife without the added challenge of pregnancy hormones. Just as God typically allows 9 months for a pregnant couple to adjust to the idea of parenthood (and for the baby to develop in preparation for the transition to life outside the womb), my husband and I agreed to allow ourselves some time for the transition from being single to being married. I also saw this as a time that I could complete some life goals before the added responsibility of children. I was eager to complete my schooling for my professional designation. The final test was nine months after my wedding and required intensive studying. My husband and I agreed that it was ok to wait to try for kids until after the final exam. We felt that this was a reasonable amount of time to wait after marriage. However, there are some disadvantages to waiting. There is a risk that life goals snowball. After the exam was finished, I could have said I wanted to hold off trying for kids until I got a promotion, or had a down payment for our own house, or . I knew we would never arrive at the ideal situation prior to having children, but I was happy to have the big exam behind me. Another disadvantage to waiting is having an unhealthy motive. I knew God designed married couples to have children. If I chose to forgo having children to better be able to climb the corporate ladder I knew I would be disobeying God. My life goals would then be an idol, keeping me from loving and serving God whole-heartedly. Being open to God’s blessing of children keeps life goals from becoming idols. In my case, I was content to set aside my goal if I got pregnant before I passed my exam. Open still to the blessing of children Yet in the period of not actively trying for children, it is important to consider what method of preventing pregnancy the married couple is using. Three methods of birth control exist, and some Christians argue that any form of family planning is problematic because God so designed sex as to be procreative. They’d argue sex apart from procreation is a problem. I’m noting the objection, but I don’t share it. But I do think two of the three methods have problems. The first is simply to not have sex. While it is a highly effective form of birth control, it goes against God’s design for marriage. As the Apostle Paul puts in 1 Cor. 7:5 abstinence isn’t a good idea, except maybe by mutual consent for a short period, “so that you may devote yourselves to prayer” but then he encourages couples to “come together again so that Satan may not tempt you…” A couple devoted to prayer is different than a couple trying to avoid precreation; therefore, this is not a biblical form of birth control. A second method involves preventing ovulation – the release of an egg – by taking a birth control pill or using a birth control implant. If there is no egg, then there can be no baby; but it doesn’t always work. If ovulation does happen, then this chemical means of birth control has a secondary effect of making the womb less hospitable to a fertilized egg. A new life begins when an egg is fertilized, even before implantation. Therefore, this secondary effect would end this new life. A conversation with a medical expert using these layman terms would help when trying to clarify how your preferred birth control works. I felt that using this second method of birth control was like firing a machine gun at my sleeping baby’s crib. I wanted to create a safe environment for my children, even in the womb. The third method involves preventing a sperm from fertilizing an egg by using some sort of barrier, like a condom, or not going all the way. The timing of intercourse can also be done when the wife is less likely to be fertile. These forms of family planning prevent life from being created. Some forms of birth control are more effective at preventing pregnancies than others; yet Christians can rest knowing that God’s ways are not our ways and children are one of His gifts. I was comfortable with the “risk” of becoming pregnant before I met my milestone of finishing school. Wrestling with myself After I finished my exam (and before I knew if I had passed), we started trying to conceive, but there was still some wrestling that I had to do with myself before the throne of God. I knew that even though I may not meet this milestone of being professionally designated, there were other goals that I’d have to change or forgo in order to have a child. I started to “count the cost,” doing almost a cost/benefit analysis to see if child-bearing was “worth it.” Part of my wrestling was because I was inexperienced with babies. I was the youngest of two kids so I’d never seen my parents welcome a baby into the home. I also had limited babysitting experience. I had limited experience with the joys of children, but I could imagine all sorts of costs that welcoming a child would bring. Not only would my clothes be stained by gross baby fluids, my hair pulled, and my sleep drastically interrupted, but: my career pursuits would be put on hold, slowed or abandoned; my youthful body would stretch and become a different shape; my attention would be split by keeping track of someone else’s life; my free time to travel and enjoy hobbies would dwindle or include children; my friends and conversations would be different; and, my treasured possessions would be at risk of being damaged by curious children. Reasons for having children With all these worldly fears and reasons not to have kids, why did I do it? First, childbearing is the purpose of marriage. Malachi 2:15 says, “Didn’t the LORD make you one with your wife? In body and spirit you are his. And what does he want? Godly children from your union.” God wanted me to have children filling my home. It was my joyous duty to live in obedience to His command and trust Him to give children as He saw fit. Furthermore, I can trace back in my genealogy many generations of faithful Christians. I felt called to continue this tradition. The psalmist sings to God saying, “One generation will commend your works to another” (Psalm 145:4). I could tell the next generation of “God’s mighty acts” by teaching Sunday school, but I could do it when I sit at home, when I walk on the road, when I lie down and when I get up if I had children in my own home (Deuteronomy 6:7). It would be arrogant to think that all the sacrifice and obedience of my ancestors was for my benefit. No, my responsibility was to continue what they had done. God first blessed and commanded mankind: “‘Be fruitful and multiply’” (Genesis 1:28). I didn’t have to do a cost/benefit analysis. I could obey Him. Second, being a mother is a worthy calling, and better than so many of the pursuits the world focuses on instead, like trying to accumulate wealth and experiences. Being a mother involves creating a life that will continue into eternity. I thought of the author of Ecclesiastes complaining that all pursuits were meaningless and without purpose, like chasing after the wind. In contrast, a newborn has a soul that continues into eternity. All my other life pursuits (wealth, beauty, pleasure, etc.) would fade and be worthless. But people will live forever, either in heaven or hell. God uses women to create and nurture new life. He uses many of His people, by the guidance of His Holy Spirit, to win souls for Christ’s sake. Since children and people in general have eternal value, this makes the sacrifices of moms and all His servants “worth it” and is better use of their time and efforts than focusing on things of this world. Third, I trusted that having a child would bring joy. There are many women of the Bible who expressed joy upon holding their first born: Eve, the first mom, expressed awe at her firstborn son (Gen. 4:1). Sarah said, “God has brought me laughter” (Gen. 21:6). Hannah prayed and spoke of God lifting up her heart: “‘My heart exults in the Lord; my horn is exalted in the Lord’” (1 Sam. 2:1). Naomi and Ruth both rejoiced at the birth of Obed, speaking of how he’d nourish Naomi in her old age and be a restorer of life (Ruth 4:15). Elizabeth’s joy in giving birth to John the Baptist was so great that it bubbled over to her neighbors and relatives (Luke 1:58). Mary “treasured up” Jesus’ birth and pondered it in her heart (Luke 2:19). These biblical women described such meaningful happiness at holding their bundles of joy that I wanted to know that experience for myself. Furthermore, these women were from a span of history that covered 4,000 years, yet all expressed similar joy. Childbearing is a gift God has given women that transcends cultural expectations. Life has eternal value. Childbearing is a joyous gift of God and He commands it of Christian marriages. Therefore, the benefits of having children were far greater than my list of costs. Wrestling through this helped me to pursue conceiving a child with joy and peace, but again I did not get pregnant right away. One last barrier The last barrier I went through to having a child was an ability to conceive as quickly as I’d expected. I was actively trying to get pregnant, but it wasn’t happening. Every month that I wasn’t pregnant I was disappointed. Reading medical articles about fertility helped me to better understand the typical time it takes to get pregnant and I learned that it takes longer the older the age of the mom: “When a woman is younger than 30, she has an 85% chance to conceive within 1 year. At the age of 30, there is a 75% chance to conceive in the first 12 months. This chance declines to 66% at the age of 35 and 44% at the age of 40. This is due to the effect of aging on the ovary and eggs.”1 I learned that a 1-2 year wait to get pregnant was within the range of normal. My experience fell into this category. However, I know there are more complexities to the issue of infertility than time. Many seek medical advice. Christian couples pray and search Scripture for wisdom as they consider the various options available, including fostering and adoption. My struggle to conceive was a monthly challenge, but I am thankful for this trial. It produced peace as I learned to surrender to the Lord’s authority and trust in Him to provide. My first child was born on a Monday morning, just as the sun was coming up. It was a girl! She was dainty and muscular. We gave her a name that means “strong” and the middle name “joy” to remind us and her that “the joy of the LORD is your strength” (Nehemiah 8:10). The Lord led me through the barriers blocking my way to childbearing and blessed me with the joy of motherhood. Endnote 1 “Knowledge about the impact of age on fertility: a brief review” by Ilse Delbaere, Sarah Verbiest, and Tania Tydén, in the Upsala Journal of Medical Sciences, Vol 125 (2), 2020, pages 167-174...

Red heart icon with + sign.
Gender roles

More to consider: women on setting life and post-secondary goals

The timing of a woman’s life can get complicated, especially when she faces decisions about whether to pursue higher education or not. In a society that insists on women getting an education and establishing a career before even thinking about marriage and family, it’s not always fashionable to point this reality out. But women simply have more considerations to take into account when making these decisions. The challenging part is because there is no guarantee of a husband coming along, or children being born, she faces an added layer of uncertainty. Essentially, a woman who wants marriage and a family is trying to plan for two futures, without knowing which future will happen for her. The questions are endless. Should she pursue practical education and a career just in case she doesn’t get married? Should she work in a dead-end “for now” job because she expects to transition into motherhood soon? Should she take out student loans, which could limit her freedom to make choices in the future? And when a woman is intellectually gifted, or “smart,” the questions can be tougher. Is she “wasting” her gifts if she doesn’t pursue an education? Did she waste her time or money if she does pursue an education and never “uses” it after she gets married? The ultimate answer to this bewildering maze of questions is simply that there is no one-size-fits-all path. The many possible ways an individual woman uses her gifts can look quite different from one woman to another. Life, after all, is not mapped out for us ahead of time, but it is a journey where we take each step as best we can, trusting in God. But in this article I want to explore these challenges in a bit more depth so that, first of all, women see that they’re not alone in facing these questions – especially in a culture that shies away from discussing them. And secondly, I want to explore them so that the Christian community understands how complex (and frustrating!) navigating these questions can be. And lastly, I want to offer guidance where any guidance can be given. Making a life plan For me, deciding what to do after high school was a confusing mess. I was open to marriage and children, but I hadn’t met anyone. I was considered “smart” and everyone expected me to go to university, and I did want to study, but I didn't know what to study. The idea of having a “career” didn't appeal to me – I certainly didn't relate to the idea of being a “girlboss.” But I felt stuck between devoting time and energy and money to studying things I enjoyed, or finding a career that could support me while I was single, or keeping my options open if I met someone. I wanted to go beyond what I personally experienced in writing this article so I reached out to other Reformed women I’d connected with through Facebook. And I received a flood of responses about their own experiences in considering post-secondary education. How women timed their education was an important question for me, because I’ve heard a lot of theories about how college is to blame for the low birth rate in North America. My assumption initially was that women who wanted children had always had that on their mind to some extent. But in my conversations it turned out that not everyone did. For some women, the timing of their life just “worked out.” As Jen Crowder explains, “As a young person in my 20s, there were times where it felt ‘hard’ to not be dating, but the Lord richly blessed me – with peace to be patient, and even more so in bringing my spouse and I together in His marvelous timing shortly after I started my first teaching position. As a young person, it’s very hard to see four, five, or six years as a very short period of one’s life, but looking back on it now, God’s timing is always perfect.” And her experience was echoed by other women who met their husband in their last year of their studies, or just after, and didn’t experience a big conflict between education and beginning a family. Life does not nicely “work out” for everyone, but when considering whether to study or not, this is a comforting reminder to young women that everything is in God’s hands. Sometimes you do borrow worry about the future before you need to. For other women, the timing of life events did overlap. “I remember studying for an exam while in labor at the hospital, and writing an exam a week after giving birth!” says Anna Nienhuis. Some had to fit their studies in around taking care of small children, or put their studies on hold and resume them when their children were older. Some women did not start until later: “I did not consider post-secondary possibilities until I was in my early 30s, married for 12 years, and had five children,” says Sarah Vandergugten. And some found themselves required to go back to school in order to support themselves or their families when they hadn’t expected it. All of these circumstances made studying much more challenging, but somehow they continued to see God’s hand guiding them through it all. Sometimes when you’re young you can feel like you have to be able to predict your future and plan for it responsibly. And to some extent, women do have to consider how their education, jobs and financial situation might impact their freedom to have children. But well-meaning advice can make it sound like your life can all be planned out perfectly. It’s easy to say, “women should pursue marriage first, then children, and then a career if she wants,” or, alternatively, “women should get an education and a career first, and then marriage and children.” But in real life, the path individuals take tends to be more much complex than that, in ways that can’t always be planned out. Even when events in our life overlap in chaotic ways, women and families muddle through while trusting in God. The challenges teach them to trust in Him and the strength He provides. Some women did change their plans when they met their future husband. It might have been a switch from a longer program to a shorter program, such as switching from nursing to healthcare aide. Or it was a switch from something less flexible to something more flexible. “The career I was studying for was not compatible in any way with my husband’s and so I chose to change my plans. Since I had just started my education it was easy enough to change it,” says Deanna DeWit. Others switched from something with fewer career opportunities, such as a Ph.D., to a regular teaching degree which offered more employment. And lastly, some women went the opposite direction, switching from something “practical” to pursuing study at a Master’s and Ph.D. level when they discovered their love of learning, with the encouragement and support of their husbands. This simply shows how, as you grow up, you can become more aware of yourself and your gifts, and what makes sense for the life God has called you to. You can start something and change paths later. Sometimes changing your path while you can is the best decision. Then there were more than a few women who regretted pursuing higher education, or at least weren’t sure it had been worthwhile for them. A few felt they had pursued it because of family expectations, or because they’d absorbed the message from culture to pursue a career first. Some even mentioned in hindsight they felt they’d delayed marriage and hadn’t been accepting God’s will for their lives at that time, though they had come to terms with the choices they’d made. It seems that post-secondary wasn’t a perfect fit for every woman. And it’s true that higher education is not for everyone! For many women it makes sense, especially if there is no husband on the horizon and they may have to support themselves one day. In fact, many women felt free to begin because they weren’t expecting marriage in the very near future. But decisions should never be made primarily because of cultural messages, family expectations, or fear of bad consequences. And cultural messages do shift over time – older generations felt unusual when pursuing higher education, whereas younger generations felt more cultural pressures to pursue it. “I had believed the idea – a lie actually – that if I was to be successful I had to go to university,” says Rebecca Van Middelkoop. “No one ever told me that directly but it was an idea that I seemed to have picked up over the years and I think many people believe it as well. As someone who was academically gifted it seemed like I was obligated to do something ‘big’ ... We often think that some careers are superior or more meaningful compared to other careers, especially ones that are more entry level.” She suggests job shadowing, internships and summer jobs in a field you’re interested in to test out what opportunities exist and whether you do need more education. For other women, higher education could be a path God is calling them to. “God doesn’t have a general plan or calling for all women... God has a specific plan for each of His children,” says Rachelle van Leeuwen. “God’s plan for me was to put people in my life who would continue to encourage me to further my education. If He is putting those people in your life, don’t balk at it; instead, explore different paths that are realistic for you in your current stage of life (not on where you hope to be one day).” Which brings us to discernment, or listening to God’s will for your life. Discernment In the end, making this decision is simply a process of discernment, of drawing near to God. What is God’s call on your life specifically? For me, the phrases “pray about it,” and “seek God’s will,” felt formulaic when I was trying to make decisions, and felt frustrating when it felt like He was silent. But so often phrases become a cliché because they’re true. When I'm making decisions in life, when I feel in the dark and confused, that is when these supposedly tired and formulaic statements hold the most truth. That is when God is teaching me to be persistent in seeking after Him, making decisions as best I can at each step, and trusting that I don’t need to be afraid of the future. You may not hear God’s voice from the sky telling you directly what to do, but you can lean on Him as you study your gifts, circumstances and responsibilities and make the best choices about how you can serve Him with what He’s given you. This means that, yes, if your passion is to be a wife and mother, it’s worth discerning what steps to take to pursue this too! Sometimes we feel we have to leave this area of our lives entirely in God’s hands without taking any action that we might take in other areas of our lives (in the way we might in our careers). Of course, we can’t pursue marriage in the same way as a career, but we can do things like staying social with other likeminded Christians (even if we're busy studying at university), being involved in church activities, being open to being introduced to possibilities, and maybe even visiting other areas of the country. While we should do the tasks God gives us, it’s not an either/or choice when it comes to marriage or career. Society might tell you to not think about marriage until after your career is established but if you want it, it’s worthwhile to keep your eyes open even while you're studying. Lastly, some women mentioned feeling judged, both for looking too “desperate” for marriage by not pursuing a career, or for having a career when most women around them didn’t. But if we truly believe our sisters are looking to God to discern how He will work in their individual lives, we can expect it to look a little different from person to person. God created humans in His image to glorify Him, but this also happens in an individual sense – we are not all eyes, or hands, or heads. We do not start off knowing all that we as an arm (for example) can do, but we grow into it by fixing our eyes on Christ. And so we can also turn to one another and encourage each other, and take the time to truly understand how others navigated their experiences and made their own decisions. And so, my last piece of advice would be to talk to other women! Through writing this piece, I was inspired by my fellow sisters in Christ, as I listened to how God had guided their life journeys. Each story is an amazing story, whether their path was straightforward or more bumpy. In fact, I wish I had more room to tell these stories. In my confused high school years, I could've benefited from having some of these conversations about how life paths can be anything but straight and still be clearly guided by the hand of God. Jenn VanLeeuwen sums it up like this, “If you would have asked me at 18 what my life was going to look like at 24, I definitely envisioned being married and having a few kids and a dog. However, God, in His wisdom, had that in store 10 years later. I was able to complete a number of university degrees and certifications, move across the country a few times for different teaching jobs, travel, and grow so very much as an individual!” Conclusion There are many more considerations I haven’t covered, including financing education and whether debt makes sense, whether to choose a practical career or follow your passion, whether secular college is wise, and when seeking knowledge for knowledge’s sake is worth pursuing. Debt, in particular, can have a huge impact on young women’s freedom to make choices, but her passions and goals can also shape the path of her life. In short, while figuring out how education fits into the timeline of your life is one piece of the puzzle, there are many other factors to take into account. However, ultimately the process is not about weighing every possible consideration, but rather about drawing closer to God and to what He is calling you to. May He guide you....





Red heart icon with + sign.
Internet, Media bias

3 simple reasons we believe misinformation

We use the internet as a therapeutic, and do so at the cost of truth ***** Last week I came across a great article in the MIT Technology Review called, “Why Generation Z Falls for Online Misinformation.” The article highlights a handful of reasons why the youngest, most savvy purveyors of internet culture become victims of misinformation themselves. What makes the article such a good read is the sort of paradox it plumbs. The young people who make up Gen Z are supposed to be smarter about this kind of stuff than their Boomer parents or grandparents, right? How are these internet curators and trend-setters getting duped themselves? In many of the same ways that we all can get tricked by news or other information we see online. Here are three simple ways we can all fall prey to misinformation: 1) In our whirlwind world, we inherently trust people like us. This is highlighted in the MIT article I cite above. With faster, more pervasive communication and information transfer today than ever before in history, sifting through all of the data, news, commentary, and all the rest of the content we come into contact with on any given day can feel truly, and terrifyingly, overwhelming. It’s like we constantly exist within a hurricane of information, hot takes, and content somewhere in between. We aren’t meant to drink in all of the content we consume. As Neil Postman wrote in 1985, “How often does it occur that information provided you on morning radio or television…causes you to alter your plans for the day, or to take some action you would not otherwise have taken?” When we become overwhelmed by the content glut to which we are helplessly addicted our discernment is fractured and we begin to rely on less-than-reliable rationales for trusting people on the internet. Postman wrote in Amusing Ourselves to Death, “The credibility of the teller is the ultimate test of truth of a proposition.” He was bemoaning this sad reality, not endorsing it, and it has perhaps never been more true (like so much of what Postman wrote in Amusing). As Jennifer Neda John wrote for MIT Technology Review: As young people participate in more political discussions online, we can expect those who have successfully cultivated this identity-based credibility to become de facto community leaders, attracting like-minded people and steering the conversation. While that has the potential to empower marginalized groups, it also exacerbates the threat of misinformation. People united by identity will find themselves vulnerable to misleading narratives that target precisely what brings them together. When we have bound ourselves to constant content consumption we create a situation in which we are easily overwhelmed with information and opinions—this sense of overwhelm is scary and real and it reduces our standards of discernment and leaves us vulnerable to being led astray by people who look like us, live like us, or believe like us. 2) We consume content too quickly to fact-check sources. This idea is pretty straightforward, but it is perhaps the most common and endemic to social media. As Ms. John writes in that same MIT article: election rumor appeared among dozens of other posts in teenagers’ TikTok feeds, leaving them with little time to think critically about each claim. Any efforts to challenge the rumor were relegated to the comments. The whole idea of most social media platforms, especially quick-hit ones like TikTok or Instagram Stories, is to consume lots of short content for as long as possible. YouTube’s strategy tends to be built around keeping you on the platform to watch longer-form, minutes-long content. TikTok and other platforms deliver you content that is largely less than a minute long as quick bites to be consumed in large quantities. Let’s explore a hypothetical scenario. My wife and I have just finished dinner, cleaned up the kitchen, and are scrolling our phones while watching Netflix like any other self-respecting 30-year-old couple. I come across a TikTok that, in 45 seconds, explains why the moon landing may have been faked. I am intrigued so I tap over to the user’s profile and watch other videos he or she have created around other conspiracy theories—one on how LBJ actually had JFK killed, one on aliens, one on people disappearing near caves around the U.S. I’ve just trained the TikTok algorithm that conspiratorial content is of interest to me, and now I’m likely to get more. I flip back over to my For You Page. I see a funny video of a dog chasing a pet hamster around a living room obstacle course. I favorite a mac-and-cheese casserole recipe to try making next week. Then I see a video suggesting the American education system is designed to undermine rural children’s education to encourage them to stay on the farm and not go to college. Interesting. I swipe up again to see a highlight from last night’s Cubs game. I swipe again and hear a creepy voice explaining the secret family of Adolf Hitler, asking rhetorical questions designed to make one wonder about if Hitler’s family still has some sort of power today. Only three minutes have passed since I began scrolling. The seemingly random smattering of content that I consume in fewer than 200 seconds has left me no real margin to investigate the weird ideas that wiggled their way into my feed unless I decide to do a deep dive into Wikipedia or Google and investigate those claims. “Nah,” I think, “I’m scrolling to be entertained, not educated,” and I’ll always kinda wonder if Hitler’s family is secretly running some multinational dark government. Not really, but this is a general idea of this concept: many of the most popular social media apps in the world are designed for mass consumption of micro content in a short period of time, and this inhibits our ability to discern what is true or real. 3) Our relationship with the internet is meant to be therapeutic at the cost of being realistic. Though it often fails us in this regard, many of us come to the internet, and social media specifically, to feel good. We come to the internet to laugh at humorous content, cry at touching content, or otherwise be entertained and made to feel good. It should be noted that the most popular internet platforms in the world—Facebook, Instagram, Amazon, Google, Tiktok, etc.—know that our primary motivation to engage with the internet is to be made to feel good, even if maybe we don’t recognize it or wouldn’t admit it. Because these platforms know that we log on to the internet to feel good or otherwise have our needs fulfilled, they have designed their experiences to reinforce these feelings and make us feel good. When they make us feel good, we spend more time on their platforms. Because our primary value when using the internet is to feel good, any value that clashes with this value will lose, and the clash will affect how we use the internet moving forward. If we use the internet to feel good, but our daily interactions with people on Facebook make us feel bad, then we will likely stop using Facebook. If we use the internet to feel good, but we can never find a show we want to watch on Hulu, we may unsubscribe from Hulu. It follows, then, that if we use the internet to feel good, and the news we consume about the world makes us feel bad, we will either: a) stop consuming news altogether, or b) consume “news” or other facts that make us feel good whether or not they are real. We use the internet as a therapeutic at the cost of truth. Because of our therapeutic abuse of the internet, that which makes us feel good will always take precedence over that which is true. Christians are as guilty of finding their joy and their comfort in the internet as anyone else. To think we as a community of faith are somehow “above” this particular kind of brokenness is foolish. False until proven true Foundational to preventing ourselves from being tricked into believing and sharing that which is not true is not letting our engagement with the internet have the central role in our lives that it so often does. We should consume (and create) less internet content. We should not see the internet as a means of feeling better about our lives. Let me share what has helped me as I have spent the last six months auditing my relationship with the internet. As I have worked to live a more offline life, the most effective tool for me has been setting time limits for my favorite apps and limiting the times of day I can engage with these apps. When I restrict the duration and times of day I engage with content on the internet, I spend a lot less time looking at my screens and a lot more time looking at the world around me. This has helped me realize that the digital world is secondary to the physical world. Likewise, and this may sound a bit negative, but I just have sort of come to assume anything I read on the internet needs to be confirmed by multiple, diverse outlets before I consider it “true.” I think if we just go into our relationship with the internet with the understanding that much of what we see or hear or read is actually “false until proven true” then we may go a long way toward not being duped into believing untruths. This originally appeared in Chris Martin’s “terms of service” Jul. 12, 2021 blog/newsletter and is reprinted with permission.  “Terms of service” looks at the social internet from a Christian perspective and comes in both a free and paid subscription, either of which you can sign up for at www.termsofservice.social....

Red heart icon with + sign.
News

Saturday Selections - May 23, 2020

Surfin is illegal in the USA: A Beach Boys parody (2 min) There's no better way to kill the funny than to discuss a joke. But with all the vicious memes, and cruel editorial cartoons circulating the Internet, before I pass along this bit of parody it's worth considering what Christians can, and must not, say about our elected officials. Romans 13:6-7 instructs us: "Give to everyone what you owe them: If you owe taxes, pay taxes; if revenue, then revenue; if respect, then respect; if honor, then honor." That rules out the careless insult, and the casual disobedience. We can't call our Prime Minister names, and can't disobey his lawful orders without being able to show how those orders violate God's commands. But in our democratic system, our elected authorities are also our employees, and one of our roles is to evaluate their performance – we could even describe that as an authoritative role God has given to the electorate. So there may well be a time when, in the process of a"performance review" on our authorities, we have to use language they'd rather not hear. But it isn't disrespectful or dishonoring to explain why Joe Biden is a hypocrite for insisting we should believe women except when one accuses him. And it isn't violating Romans 13 to question the intent of Prime Minister Justin Trudeau's recent gun ban. That's legitimate job performance review material, even if the "interviewee" might prefer we don't go there. When it comes to our current COVID-19 crisis, we also aren't violating Romans 13:6-7 when we highlight governmental excesses, even when we do so with a dose of humor. The fellow behind this video below may or may not be a Christian, but his Surfin USA parody illustrates an important point: some of our authorities are not exercising their powers with restraint. These are the questions I asked about the viral "Plandemic" video An investigative journalist tracked down the documentary's producer and asked him some key questions. Michael Cook offers some sage advice as well, in his "How should we tackle conspiracy theories about COVID-19?" UN provides us some unintended comedy This week the United Nations tweeted out a request to have folks ditch the words "husband" and "wife" to "help create a more equal world." As Jonathon Van Maren shares, "the global community united in side-splitting gales of laughter." Why surrogacy is oppression "...surrogacy exploits the vulnerable....Increasingly, surrogacy is about two wealthy men using a woman for her body, while appropriating a role that only she can fulfill." John Stonestreet and Maria Baer followed up their article above with: "Adoption is beautiful; surrogacy isn't." Frog fossils found in the Antarctic Does a warmer earth spell our doom? Frog fossils in the land of ice and snow would seem to say no. Parents: slow down and listen Tedd and Margy Tripp with important advice for parents: "If your children are saying 'You never listen to me,' it is because they feel you never listen to them. Slow down and listen." The spread of the Gospel (2 min) "Every frame is one year in the last 2000 years of the Great Commission....It shows everywhere the Gospel has been preached, where churches and Christian gravestones first show external evidence of that work, and where churches and Bibles are accessible today." ...

Red heart icon with + sign.
Apologetics 101

The JFK assassination and apologetics: the facts don't speak for themselves

Movie director, Oliver Stone, unleashed a Pandora's Box at the box-office in 1991 with the release of his controversial film, JFK. The movie, which was a technological marvel and starred Kevin Costner along with a host of well-known actors, explored the assassination of John F. Kennedy, the Warren Commission Report regarding the tragedy, and a complex conspiracy theory which sought to "get to the real truth" behind an alleged cover-up. The Stone movie provoked a phenomenal response. Some people were outraged at its ugly implications, or at its own distortion of testimony, or at its white-wash of questionable sources, or even at its amazing editing and weaving of soundbites, visual images, changing angles, flashbacks and anticipations, documentary coverage and interpretive re-creations. Other people are equally outraged at finding out how poorly the subsequent investigation into the assassination was handled, and how many disturbing pieces of evidence or testimony were squashed or ignored, and how outlandish the explanations of the single-assassin theory had to become, and how our own government agencies may have been entangled or willing to look the other way. Newsweek magazine was so egged on by the movie that it decided to throw rotten eggs in return, giving it prime attention on its front cover with the heading: "The Twisted Truth of 'JFK' - Why Oliver Stone's New Movie Can't Be Trusted" (Dec.23, 1991). On the other hand, the local bookstores have been doing a rousing business in selling books which are relevant to rebutting the Warren Commission conclusions and exploring theories which, despite their conspiratorial character, pay compelling attention to details. Among the most important are the two books by lawyer Mark Lane: Rush to Judgment (a 1966 cross-examination of the Warren Commission, both thorough and sober) and Plausible Denial (a more recent book purporting to show C.I.A. involvement to some degree in the assassination). The massive analysis of Jim Marris (who teaches a college course on the subject) runs over 600 pages in length, and is entitled Crossfire: The Plot That Killed Kennedy. Also worthy of mention is On the Trail of the Assassins, written by former New Orleans District Attorney, Jim Garrison, whose investigation and eventual trial of Clay Shaw for alleged participation in a scheme to kill the president was the organizing plot of the Oliver Stone movie. On the downside of credibility for the conspiracy theorists is the large number of such theories which have been advanced. Granted, some are more plausible and well-reasoned than others, but the fact that there are so many of them is disturbing, each offering somewhat convincing evidence. Who should be fingered for the crime? The C.I.A.? Military intelligence? The mafia? The F.B.I.? The Vice-President? Anti-Castro Cubans? Pro-Castro communists? Right-wing extremists? Pro-Soviet communists? All of the above? None of the above? For years the thesis that Lee Harvey Oswald was the man who shot President Kennedy, and that he acted alone, has seemed relatively easy to accept. The public was told that an eyewitness saw Oswald in the book depository building window. A rifle was discovered there which not only had Oswald's palm-print, but had been purchased by mail order under an assumed name, identification for which Oswald was carrying on him. His own wife said she believed he was the killer. The FBI found incriminating photos at Oswald's home, later published by Life magazine. The man had previously renounced the United States and lived in the Soviet Union! No, the case against Oswald was not hard to believe. Yet there always had been disturbing elements in the story. Why was Oswald deprived of legal counsel, and why was no record made of police interviews with him? How did a man (Jack Ruby) simply walk in off the street, stride right up to Oswald in the presence of dozens of officers, and shoot him point blank? What do we make of eyewitnesses who said they previously saw Oswald and Ruby together in Ruby's nightclub? Why did the people who were present in Deleay Plaza when Kennedy was shot run forward toward the fence on the grassy knoll, seeking the shooter, instead of running back toward the depository building? Fifty-one witnesses claim to have heard shots from the direction of the grassy knoll! Why did the medical doctors initially report an entry wound to Kennedy's throat, if he had been shot (only) from behind? Why do films show his head recoiling from a frontal (and from the right) shot? The Oswald theory would require that no more than three shots were fired – although ballistics experts were unable to replicate even that feat within the relevant time restraint (5.6 seconds) with a bolt-action rifle like Oswald's. However, acoustics evidence now proves there were at least four shots. On the Oswald hypothesis, one of the assassin's three bullets needed to inflict seven wounds in two bodies (Kennedy's and Governor Connally's) – some at nearly right angles – and emerge in almost pristine condition! Photographic experts have discredited the Life magazine pictures of Oswald as edited composites. Marina Oswald's opinion of her husband's involvement actually changed (following virtual house-arrest for weeks with the FBI) from an initial disputing of it. Paraffin tests performed on Oswald's cheeks the day of the assassination demonstrated that he had not fired a rifle that day. When the FBI turned over the alleged murder weapon, it reported that there were no prints (where the palm print later appeared). Initial autopsy reports on Kennedy were destroyed... The case against Oswald looked strong for a time (and still does for many people), but now that case begins to appear rather weak (if not being fully refuted according to some people).  So what? For our present purposes, it is not really relevant whether the Oswald-as-lone-assassin theory regarding Kennedy's assassination is accurate or not. It is not my intention to take sides on this troubled question here. Rather, it is the controversy itself that is raging over this question which should interest us, for this dispute provides a very fruitful education into the real character of what we sometimes call "factual investigation" and illustrates the nature of historical (and forensic) argumentation. Oddly enough, the controversy over the Kennedy assassination provides an opportunity for Christians to learn something valuable about apologetical method - the defense of their faith. Popular and widely published apologists for the Christian faith often tell us, for example, that the most persuasive way to practice the defense of the faith is simply to provide unbelievers with "the facts" of history (the raw evidence of eye-witness testimony) and challenge them that any "rational" man would have to conclude that this evidence "proves" with practical certainty that Jesus rose from the dead – as the most astounding miracle of history. This approach has always seemed more than a bit naive. And the controversy surrounding the Kennedy assassination makes that naiveté stand out all the more prominently. The facts don't speak for themselves Evangelical apologists who think that a presentation of "the fact" of history is enough to vindicate the truth of Christianity against the skeptical challenges of unbelievers overlook the way in which people reach – and critically maintain – their personal conclusions about fundamental and important issues. Those who think that unbelievers would become believers if only they were made aware of the observational "evidence" (the testimony of alleged eyewitnesses) do not fully grasp the key issues in the philosophical study of the theory of knowledge (epistemology). What they do not realize is that, contrary to a popular aphorism, the "facts" do not "speak for themselves." What people see (or hear) will be unavoidably interpreted according to their other beliefs, their personal expectations and values, and their governing presuppositions. "The facts" do not simply stand "out there" with their meaning inherent in them, waiting to be seen for what they are regardless of what the commitments and beliefs may be of those who find "the facts." What a person will take to be a "fact" and how that fact is interpreted and related to other beliefs is not determined alone by the perceptions or observations (or observation-reports) which a person has. His thinking will be guided by various assumptions or controlling presuppositions. There were plenty of eyewitnesses at the very scene of the crime when President Kennedy was assassinated. In our day we enjoy incredibly advanced techniques and technologies for investigation of evidence, physical and personal. Hundreds of people have been hard at work dealing with the relevant clues and testimony concerning the killing of JFK. Do "the facts speak for themselves"? Do they? The fact that advocates of the Warren Commission's theory debate ferociously with critics of the Commission tells you that much more is involved here than a simple look at "the facts and nothing but the facts" concerning a particular event which transpired in 1963. The fact that critics of the Warren Commission disagree widely with each other in proposing other theories about the assassination of Kennedy tells you that there is much more involved here than a simple amassing of "the facts." This is even more the case with respect to Christ's resurrection. Here we do not have an event which took place merely thirty years ago, but almost two thousand years ago. We do not have any hard physical evidence to investigate and no living witnesses to cross-examine. We do not have a great number of extant testimonies (although some we have do speak of others as well). The event in question was no ordinary natural event (as the mere shooting of a man is, although he was a politically important man), but rather an awesome and extraordinary resurrection from the dead – a miracle. If the dispute over Kennedy's assassination shows us that the facts do not speak for themselves – that the question is not settled simply over alleged evidences – how much more should Christian apologists realize that our debate with unbelievers over the resurrection of Christ (and other matters of Biblical truth) is not simply a matter of "evidences." It must eventually involve a challenge to the heart-commitment and intellectual presuppositions of the non-Christian. Jesus said it long ago: "If they will not hear Moses and the Prophets, neither will they believe if one should rise from the dead" (Luke 16:31). This article was first published in the May 1992 issue of Penpoint (Vol. III:3) and is reprinted with permission of Covenant Media Foundation, which hosts and sells many other Dr. Greg Bahnsen resources on their website www.cmfnow.com....





Red heart icon with + sign.
Documentary, Movie Reviews, Watch for free

Birthgap – Childless World

Documentary 2021 / 51 minutes Rating: 9/10 Birthgap dismantles one of the biggest, deadliest lies of our time: the "myth" of overpopulation. It's a big lie in how many believed it – the whole world! – and big too in how absolutely backward it got everything. The impact was absolutely murderous, justifying abortions by the millions in the name of saving the planet from the burden of having too many mouths to feed. But overpopulation was a danger that never existed. Christians didn't always, but should always, have known better. We need only contrast what God says about children – how they are a blessing (Ps. 127:3-5, Prov. 17:6, Deut. 7:13-14, and of course, Gen. 1:28) – with how the overpopulation proponents were presenting them as a curse. We could also have known from the fruit of this movement – when killing babies is the solution, then there must be a problem with the problem. This is, however, a secular documentary, so the producer is limited to looking at just the data and at history. He begins his story with Dr. Paul Ehrlich, who was and remains the biggest of the overpopulation fearmongers, and whose 1968 book The Population Bomb began with this stark prediction: "The battle to feed all of humanity is over. In the 1970s hundreds of millions of people will starve to death in spite of any crash programs embarked upon now. At this late date nothing can prevent a substantial increase in the world death rate..." That his short-term predictions didn't happen didn't stop the fear from spreading (and hasn't stopped Ehrlich from remaining a popular "expert" even today). In 1979 China implemented their ruthless One-Child Policy, permitting couples to have just one child. For the next two decades a generation was raised that had no siblings. And the generation that followed had not only no siblings, but no aunts, uncles, or cousins. Here in Canada, where most of us have been blessed with at least some extended family, we know better than the Chinese themselves the magnitude of the joy that was stolen from them. And speaking practically, a Chinese couple could find themselves with two sets of aging parents and perhaps four sets of aging grandparents to care for, with no siblings or cousins to help them. Who will step in? The government? In the rest of the world, family size has shrunk too, less dramatically, but relentlessly. Dr. Ehrlich and his disciples have people living in fear of the sort of barren, depleted planet the next generation would inherit. Who would want to bring children into a world of certain starvation, wars, and so much death? The real danger But as Birthgap unpacks, the real danger lies in the other direction. The world has stopped having children and many countries soon won't have enough people in the workforce to be able to support their aging population. This film is named after a statistic that narrator and producer Stephen J. Shaw identified: "If we look at Italy... in 2019, there were around one million people aged 50 who will be retiring in around 20 years time. Then, if we look at the number of newborns, who, in around 20 years time will be entering the workforce to support these retirees, there are less than half! Any large gap between the number of newborns and the number of people they will have to support into retirement is significant, socially and economically. Given that these gaps are being caused by long-term low birthrates, I decided to call any shortfall in workers 'birthgaps.'” This birthgap shortfall – the greater number of 50-year-olds as compared to newborns – exists in almost every country in the world outside of Africa. And the gap is growing. The US has one of the smallest birthgaps of just 14%, with 3.6 million newborns in 2020, compared to 4.1 million who are 50. In contrast, South Korea has among the worst birthgaps, at 71%, with 263,000 babies born in 2021, to replace the 903,000 50-year-olds. Another way to look at this is by birthrates: how many children are born per woman. To replace the previous generation and keep the population stable (neither growing nor shrinking) we would need each woman to have 2 children – one to replace her, and the other to replace her spouse. But, as Shaw explains, we're nowhere near 2. "Japan, Italy, and Germany, with birthrates around 1.4 children per woman..." will in just two generations see their population "fall by over half, and in three generations, by 70%." Doing better than the one-eyed man This is a secular film, which means that Shaw, as insightful as he is and eager to figure out why this is happening, can't answer his own question. He doesn't understand the spiritual battle that is occurring behind the scenes. But God has revealed it to us. He commanded that we be fruitful and multiply and fill the earth... (Gen. 1:28) so, of course, the Devil whispered – and with the help of Dr. Ehrlich, shouted – that children were a curse on the planet, and each baby just one more mouth to feed. But as even this film presents, we are creators too. "Many hands make light work," isn't a biblical proverb, but "Two are better than one, because they have a good return for their labor” is (Eccl. 4:9). We can't create something out of nothing like God, but our brainpower can create resources out of materials that once weren't resources at all (my favorite example is how farmers turned their excessive supply of manure into bedding for their cows). Many brains did that. What a blessing it would be if we had more of them to solve more such problems! So why is the population declining so dramatically? Because God said, "have no other gods" (Ex. 20:3) and the world has turned from Him to worship the gods of comfort, career, recreation, travel, and more. A child can bring so much joy, but a boy or girl will also require your time, your sleep, and your money. And in interview after interview, Shaw finds people who are waiting to have things just so before they get down to having a child. But that path leads to them just not having kids at all. That unintended result might be what the Church most has to watch out for. God's people aren't going to flat-out reject His call on married couples to be fruitful but it is easy to justify delaying. And one small delay after another can add up to the same unintended result the world is seeing, with either far fewer kids than we might have thought we were going to have, or no children at all.  God doesn't give us a prescribed family size, so couples will have to consider for themselves what it will mean to obey that command ...but let's not casually delay our obedience. Meanwhile, the world doesn't feel any push to obey God. And so they follow after their other gods... even though the interviewees seem to already understand that these gods won't ultimately satisfy. Cautions A pair of men are among the couples Shaw questions about having kids. They are on screen for a few seconds. Conclusion Stephen Shaw plans two sequels to this film where he will continue to seek an answer to his why question. But the answer Shaw is after – getting families to multiply once again – doesn't seem likely, outside of revival. So, this is a great film to make you and whoever you might share it with, aware of an enormous problem the world faces. But only God's people know the solution. And with that special knowledge comes a special obligation to share it because to whom much has been given, much will be required (Luke 12:42). We can point the way out of this whole mess. Repent and believe. Trust what God says about children. Obey His command to multiply. Share both the good news of the Gospel, and share the wisdom of our Heavenly Father Who knows what is best for us when it comes to procreation... and everything else. Watch the documentary for free below (it is called Part 1 but is complete in itself). I'd nominate this one as a must-see in our schools and homes. Birthgap really deserves an hour of your time! ...

Red heart icon with + sign.
People we should know

Elon Musk and visions of the future

“These human space flight missions were a beacon of hope to me and to millions over the past two years as our world has been going through one of the most difficult periods in recent human history. We see the rise of division, fear, cynicism, and the loss of common humanity, right when it is needed most. So, first, Elon, let me say thank you for giving the world hope and reason to be excited about the future.” – Lex Fridman speaking about SpaceX to Elon Musk, on his podcast released December 28, 2021 **** Where are the dreams of previous decades, of flying cars and paperless offices and TV phones? Not only have these dreams turned out to be rather bleak (Zoom as a sort of TV phone has not sparked joy in anyone), but no new visions of the future have sprung up to replace them. Young people – those supposedly optimistic young people – fill social media feeds with anxiety-soaked visions of climate catastrophe, plague and economic collapse. Our world dreams of catastrophe, not progress. And yet some young people do turn to one figure as a beacon of hope in the negativity all around them. They turn to a public figure who frequently and publicly describes a future where humanity overcomes its challenges, and continues to seek out the meaning of existence. This is the vision of the future provided by Elon Musk – a controversial figure whose “true fans” love him for his insistence that human ingenuity can create a future that will be better. Christians, of all people, have reason to be excited about the future. We live in hope, even in the midst of darkness and despair. Or so we say. And yet it is not Christianity that many turn to, to escape the bleak future. It is not Christianity that provides these young fans with a new vision of the future, and an optimism to be hopeful again. When we see the success of visionary dreams of the future, when we see Elon Musk inspiring millions, it pushes us as Christians to work out what we mean by hope. It pushes us to define what we expect from the future. And it urges us to consider whether we are “visionary,” and whether we should be. The profound hopefulness of Elon Musk “You want to wake up in the morning and think the future is going to be great—and that’s what being a spacefaring civilization is all about. It’s about believing in the future and thinking that the future will be better than the past. And I can’t think of anything more exciting than going out there and being among the stars.” – Elon Musk, SpaceX website What is Elon Musk’s vision? Musk has many critics, including many who doubt he sincerely means to benefit common humanity with his companies and inventions. Despite this, fans continue to flock to him. Whether or not his vision of the future is sincere or a marketing tactic, the simple fact is that there is something in his vision that fulfills something his fans are looking for. They draw hopefulness from his vision. Why is that? First of all, Musk has the ability to drag unlikely concepts, like reusable rockets, into the realm of reality. For a young generation struggling with anxiety, just getting out of bed in the morning can feel superhuman. A person who can come up with an idea, and then make sure that idea gets done, confronts our feelings of helplessness and comforts us that maybe solving our problems is as simple as just doing it. “When something is important enough, you do it, even if the odds are not in your favor,” as Musk says in his interview with Lex Fridman. On one level, Musk is not that revolutionary. Electric cars, space flights to Mars, satellite internet – all of these are ideas that have been dreamed up before Musk came along. But because Musk has done more than dream, Musk has become a source of inspiration. But Musk doesn’t simply get things done – he frames his activities as the stuff that fires imaginations. “You need to have things that when you wake up in the morning, you're excited about the future,” Musk argues in another interview with the Babylon Bee. “Why live? If it's all about solving problems of being miserable, like, why live? So they've got to be things that...you know, get you in the heart. And I think space is one of those things.” God created a world with much more than the bare necessities. He also created a people with a capacity for enthusiasm – an enthusiasm to explore, an enthusiasm to see what is possible. We can be full of curiosity about creation, just as scientists before us reached out to God through their discoveries of the natural world. Haven’t Christians who have come before have been eager to explore and create? From Johannes Kepler to David Livingstone, the world has opened up to us through the enthusiasm of those who have come before us. The Bible itself illustrates this too. The overall arc of the Bible moves from its beginnings in the garden to its ending in the city. The story of creation is a story that includes the development and unfolding of what God made. This is why we need dreamers and visionaries, to bring out the possibilities inherent in creation. Elon Musk hits on some important things. Building real things in the real world matters, even if it isn’t easy to bring things together and make them work together. In fact, building real things can contribute to a feeling of fulfillment in us, a feeling of doing what we were meant to do. No wonder some find inspiration in this. But Musk himself is used as the example to follow for those looking for a hopeful outlook on the future. As a man who presents himself as someone who dreams and builds his dreams, he is viewed as an inspiration. This means the vision he presents should be examined in more depth. Before we fully jump on board with Elon Musk’s future, we should consider what future, exactly, he presents. The bleakness of Elon’s future Elon Musk claims to want to build the future so humans can continue to seek the meaning of life. “I don't know when I'll die, but I won't live forever. But I would like to know that we are on a path to understanding the nature of the universe and the meaning of life and what questions to ask about the answer that is the universe.” Musk wants to save humanity so humanity can continue to struggle with the meaning of existence. Well and good! Humans are meant to seek out the purpose of their existence, and not give up on their existence as meaningless. But Musk himself holds back from offering an answer to the question of meaning, only vaguely hinting that humanity might figure it out in some far-off someday. And in this way, Musk’s future does not fully alleviate the temptation to nihilism. After all, what does he really think the nature of the universe is? He is building physical technologies that will greatly impact the real world we live in. But he is deeply ambivalent about whether the world we live in is a real world after all. “The odds that we’re in base reality is one in billions,” he explained at Code Conference in 2016. It’s a fun idea that tech entrepreneurs and philosophers like to play with – the idea we might be living in a video game that is a copy of some deeper reality. Except this idea of “what’s really going on” is cold comfort to the apathetic and despairing. And Musk is, famously, all-in on artificial intelligence, as well as linking our brains to computers (see his company Neuralink). This does indicate a belief that reality may really not consist of anything more than ones and zeros after all. If we are living in a simulation, a cosmic simulation where something is jerking us around like puppets – well, some of us might be eager to know the truth of this. But this truth is not the kind of truth that sets us free from apathy. Musk does not know what the meaning of life is. He only wants to buy more time for humanity to figure it out. The answer to the meaning of existence that many people arrive at today, when looking at the failures of humanity, is simply that humanity does not deserve to exist. This is what feeds into our current culture’s apathy. And no journeys among the stars are fantastic enough to change their minds. In some sense, Elon Musk is right. What makes life worth living is working on problems, seeking the meaning of existence, and exploring every cranny of creation. Only Christians can fight with those problems before the face of a God Who has answers. Saving us from the future? Do Musk’s fans really turn to him because of his musings about reality being a simulation, or because of his goal of preserving human consciousness in order to seek out the meaning of life? It is possible they turn to him for a far simpler reason than this. For some of them, it may be less about finding positive inspiration in his message, and excitement for the future – and more of a response to fear of the future. Fear of the future is behind so much of human activity. As Dietrich Bonhoeffer said in a sermon in 1933, “What else is all the razzle-dazzle and drunkenness of New Year’s Eve, other than our great fear of a new era, of the future? Fear is breathing down our necks.” Elon Musk’s vision is a relief because it offers a positive vision of the future, in contrast to the terrible ones on the news every day. It acknowledges terrible consequences that may occur, but it encourages us that humanity can overcome them. By being hopeful, it helps others to hang onto hope. And this relief from fear brings devotion along with it. After all, is it really self-evident that space travel is inspiring, and is that truly what his fans latch onto when they admire Musk? Going to Mars is presented with the enthusiasm that the age of exploration brought, when voyages to unknown lands brought home wonders. Except in our case, Mars is not exactly unknown or unexplored. The magic of going there is to just say we can go there, to say humans have set foot on a place we already know all about – more like a family vacation to Paris than a voyage of discovery to the South Seas. To make it even more prosaic, the reason to go there is “a life insurance policy.” Musk presents his technology as supplying a reason to get up in the morning and feel optimistic about the future, but he simultaneously does not shy away from arguing his work will preserve humanity in case something really bad happens to earth. He says, “We should basically think of this, being a multi-planet species, just like taking out insurance for life itself – like, life insurance for life.” (“This turned into an infomercial real quick,” says his interviewer, Lex Fridman). His focus on using technology to avoid potentially devasting problems, such as climate change, helps explain why he is so often viewed as a savior by the devoted. To explore out of a love of exploration, out of a joy of living, is quite different than to explore and build to avoid a negative outcome. To the extent Elon Musk’s vision is driven by a joy of discovery, it is admirable. To the extent it reveals humanity’s underlying fears and insecurities, it reveals a drive to control and secure our own futures. Looking to technology to solve all our problems and absolve us of our fears quickly becomes placing our faith in technology – in other words, placing our faith in humankind. Ideally, we recognize the capabilities God has given to humanity, while simultaneously recognizing their source in God. Otherwise the failures of humanity can feel overwhelming, as demonstrated by our current culture’s reaction to the optimism of the 1950s. Nihilism and apathy are much more common, despite the technological progress of the twentieth century. Christians and the hope that we have Christianity should also inspire us to live, and not just a grit-your-teeth-and-get-through-life kind of living. There is a superficial similarity with Elon Musk here. But what is Christianity’s vision of the future? One critique of Christianity is that it directs all hope to life after death. It neglects the world we live in for some fairy tale future. It maintains the status quo by promising if Christians are meek and humble they will be rewarded in the life to come. Christian visions of the future that have been presented have at times been bleak as well – that the physical world doesn’t deserve improvement, as it will be enveloped in fire anyway. Or that humanity can never progress, because we’re deeply stained by sin. Or history will just continue to get worse and worse (“wars and rumors of wars”) until Jesus comes again. But let’s turn from what some Christians have thought about the future and look towards what the Bible presents as the future. What is the clearest, most concrete vision of the future that Christianity offers? It is actually quite simple and clear: the return of Christ. “e wait for the blessed hope—the appearing of the glory of our great God and Savior, Jesus Christ” (Titus 2:11-13). The return of Christ is our future. Notably, this future that the Bible describes is a future that Elon Musk does not find comforting at all: “We could have a chapter past Revelation,” he says when asked what book he’d add to the Bible. “Like, is there a happy ending here? Revelation Part 2: The Happy Ending.” He does not elaborate on what he finds so depressing about the new earth and the Bible’s vision of the future, but it could be that he does not see the continuation and culmination of our work in this world into the next. Perhaps “the apocalypse” really sounds like a final end to him. Christians live with their lives pointing towards the kingdom of heaven. Yes, this means living for the world to come. But at the same time, this means recognizing the kingdom of heaven exists already in the world today, like “yeast that a woman took and mixed into about sixty pounds of flour until it worked all through the dough” (Matt. 13:33). It is about doing our work in this world in the light of eternity, not as if our work right now doesn’t matter because there will be another world, but because what we do now does matter for our eternal future. Perhaps it is Herman Bavinck who explains this best, in his article, “The Kingdom of God, The Highest Good”: “We are, finally, the totality of what we have ever willed, thought, felt, and done. The profit that we yield for ourselves in this way is profit for the Kingdom of God. Even a cup of cold water given to a disciple of Jesus receives a reward. God calls us to work in such a way that, amid all that we do, we should envision the eternal work that God desires to bring about through people… even if our work space be ever so small and our occupation ever so nondescript. This is truly and essentially working for the Kingdom of God.” It is mysterious how God promises to bring everything to fulfillment, but the new world will not be “starting over.” Even in Revelation 21, the kings of the earth bring their splendor into the new Jerusalem, indicating that in some fashion the glories of this world, once redeemed, will crown the new heavens and new earth. It will not make God’s work in history now into something meaningless. We’re allowed to be visionary. We’ve been given a vision that equips us to work. And so we’re called to hope. To hope in a way that encourages us to try, to build and invent, to strive for a concrete idea of what could be better, and to fight to understand what we’re here on earth for. For Christians the future is inevitable. Our consciousness will not be snuffed out. Humanity will go on for eternity, to live and love and build, and learn about what we can do, before the face of our God....

Red heart icon with + sign.
People we should know

Elon Musk’s highs and lows

Elon Musk might be best known for a brilliant bit of marketing he did back in 2018 for two of his companies: he launched his own Tesla electric roadster into space on one of his SpaceX rockets. Images of his red sportscar, blue Earth in the background, were carried by papers around the globe. More recently his SpaceX company made news for providing their Starlink satellite internet service to Ukraine when invading Russian forces destroyed much of the country’s online access. Richest Musk has also earned fame by, at times, being the richest man on the planet. Back in February, stock market gains gave him a net worth of $187 billion regaining him the title, at least briefly – he has some competition. He’d probably have had a firmer grip on the title if not for his 2022 Twitter purchase, which cost him $44 billion. Free speech defender Since that purchase Musk has been making headlines for the conservatives and/or Christians that he’s “unbanned” from the social media giant, including Jordan Peterson, Project Veritas, and the Christian satire site Babylon Bee. The Bee ran into trouble with Twitter in 2022 when they awarded US Assistant Health Secretary Rachel Levine their “Man of the Year Award.” Levine is transgender – a guy pretending to be a girl – and the pre-Musk Twitter would cancel your account if you didn’t play along with this sort of delusion. But within a month of Musk finalizing his purchase, the Babylon Bee, Peterson, and others, could tweet again. Unafraid of the social media mob Musk had gained admirers for being willing to tweet common sense takes that too many others are scared to say. An April 14 example: “Any parent or doctor who sterilizes a child before they are a consenting adult should go to prison for life.” Debunking overpopulation Musk’s 100+ million Twitter followers allow him to debunk lies like few others can, and he’s been using his influence to takedown the myth of overpopulation. He’s brought attention to the fact that the world’s population isn’t exploding but is, in fact, facing a coming collapse. At the government trough While Musk has shown entrepreneurial initiative a good chunk of his wealth has come via the public trough. He’s received billions in subsidies from various levels of government around the world to build factories. And he’s made billions through government programs that allow his electric car company Tesla, to make more from selling climate credits than from selling cars. The government awards Tesla these climate credits because their electric cars are said to be more friendly for the planet. Tesla can then sell these credits to other companies that aren’t meeting their climate targets. Is a moral liberal In addition to endorsing homosexuality, and euthanasia, Musk has had a less than exemplary family life, having his 9 children with 3 different women and via surrogacy. And while he is against “transitioning” children, his company Tesla has touted it has helped its adult employees “transition.” Apathetic about God Finally, Musk’s influence is troubling particularly when it comes to God. His obvious smarts make his agnosticism seem almost respectable, which is turn may give others the idea that doubt is not something to wrestle with, but is simply a place to land. Conclusion Much more could be shared; we haven’t even touched on Musk’s “Boring Company” tunnelling projects, or the 20,000 flamethrowers he’s sold, or his connection to PayPal. But even this short overview shows him to be a man of many interests, and consequently, a pretty intriguing fellow. But might his one million interests be a distraction for him from considering his Creator?...