Transparent heart icon with white outline and + sign.

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

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

White magnifying glass.

Search thousands of RP articles

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

Open envelope icon with @ symbol

Get Articles Delivered!

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



Education

Helping students overcome a fear of failure

The goal of genuine learning isn’t to pass tests

*****

Among the most common mental attitudes hindering the pursuit of a genuine education by young people is fear of failure. When the focus of the student’s attention turns away from the subject matter of a course and how well it is understood and applied, concern will be directed rather to formal considerations like:

• “How much has to be done in order to pass this test?”
• “How many pages must be written for this report?”
• “What will the final grade be on my report card?”

Whether or not one can use algebraic formulas successfully, can write a clear and grammatical sentence, can appreciate the literary merits of Shakespeare, or see the fallacy in materialistic philosophy – all these and similar, educational concerns are lost in the scramble to make sure that one has enough points to pass the course. The worst thing that could happen, in the mentality of many students, is that they would receive an F for a course, rather than that they would have failed to understand a course.

It stands to reason, then, that parents and teachers who want students to receive a genuine, intellectually maturing, personally enriching education – and not simply formal marks on a report card filed away – will aim to overcome the student’s obstructive fear of failure.

Why do students have such fears? Generally because they have not developed successful habits of study (inside and outside the classroom) and are aware of their lacking. They are just not sure how to tackle the challenge of new work, new concepts, and stiff assignments.

How can parents and teachers help students to overcome fear of failure? There are things that can be done. There is no need to throw our hands up in despair, imagining that it is somehow a fortuitous matter of “chance” (fate, luck) that some students do well and others do poorly in schoolwork. Every student of normal ability (i.e., every student who is free of physical or mental handicaps) can do well in schoolwork. As blunt or even as harsh as it may seem at first, we will eventually have to face up to the grim truth that there is no such thing as a (normal) student who cannot do passing work. There are simply some students who will not (choose not) to do passing work. Now they may very well desire to have at the outcome of the course a passing mark. They want that end – BUT without being willing to pursue the means to that end.

The age in which people commonly believed in magic has not passed. It has simply taken on a more sophisticated front. Parents and teachers who believe that (or operate as though) the difference between successful and unsuccessful students is a mystery beyond our control assign good schoolwork, in effect, to magic or chance – beyond any cause-effect explanation. Students who want a passing grade at the end of the course, but who ignore or refuse the means to that end, are hoping for a magical deliverance. We live in a universe where events (effects) have their corresponding causes. There are appropriate causes of good performance in school. This is bad news and good news. The bad news is that students who fail cannot “cop-out” and blame their failure on something beyond their control. The good news is that something can indeed be done to improve a student’s work in school. There is hope because there exist proven methods of achieving success as a student.

What help can we offer them? What are some principles of educational success?

1. Don’t leave things at the Ramada Inn

The first piece of advice which we can give students who fear failure is not to leave things at the Ramada Inn. Let me explain that remark. This last summer my family took a vacation, traveling up the coast to Monterey and San Francisco, then across to Sacramento and Reno. In Monterey we stayed at the Ramada Inn. Imagine that when we left the Ramada Inn we inadvertently left behind the overnight case, only to realize that fact an hour and a half on the way to San Francisco. What a painful discovery that would be! We certainly needed the items in the overnight case, and yet to get the case we would be forced to backtrack an hour and a half on the road.

If this had actually happened to us, what do you suppose we should have done? Well, one thing we could have done is to continue traveling up the road, bemoaning the fact that we were going to be inconvenienced. We could have complained that the Ramada Inn was an hour and a half (now an hour and three quarters) drive back to Monterey. We could have driven on and on, hoping against reasonable hope, that the overnight case which was an hour and half (now two hours) behind us might miraculously catch up with us before we stopped that night. But when all the murmuring and imagination had been indulged, the fact would have been that we knew we had to go back to the Ramada Inn. The trip could not successfully continue until we went back and picked up what had been left behind. The sooner we realized that hard fact, the better for the continuation of the vacation.

The same principle applies to schoolwork. As a course progresses through a semester, more and more new material and new concepts (or skills) are set forth to the student. Later material presupposes the foundation laid by earlier material. Growth in understanding is cumulative. Consequently, when a student does not understand something which has been taught, does not do the necessary homework which has been assigned, does not complete the reading which goes with a unit of teaching and yet continues on in the course, that student is set up to fail the later portions of the course. Understanding the later material depends on a previous understanding or exposure to the earlier material. When something has been left behind, the trip cannot successfully continue.

Students are sometimes funny – unrealistic, really. They figure that they can tune out part of a lecture, omit a reading assignment, or not bother to ask for help when they do not understand something in a course, and then tune in and begin understanding at some later point. But as with vacation travel, so also with schooling. The sooner we realize that we must go back to the Ramada Inn (or to the material, which has not been read or understood), the better it will be for us. Students simply must keep abreast of what is being taught in the course, not hoping to go back later and fill in the gaps in their understanding. And if they do fall behind, then it is important to go back and pick up what as omitted, and so the sooner we do so, the better.

2. Learn how to read

A second rule to be observed for achieving success in school is that students must learn how to read. A shocking suggestion, perhaps, because the assumption commonly held is that high school students already know how to read. But that is held because we erroneously think that reading is merely a matter of knowing how to sound out words, recognize punctuation, and understand basic vocabulary. That is, we are often satisfied simply with the mechanics of reading – getting the encoded message on the page through the eyeballs, into the (reasonably alert) brain. I do not doubt that most (if not all) of our high school students can do this. Reading mechanics – the basics – have been mastered.

But reading has not.

Once the basics have been learned, students need to learn how to tackle a reading assignment in such a way that they understand its meaning, point, and structure. They need to master skills of comprehension and retention. In a word, they need to learn how to analyze and interpret – not simply translate – the message encoded on the page(s) of their assignment.
Let me suggest a proven method of reading. Never plan to read an assignment only once; good readers will read at least twice and usually three times.

1. Read
The first time through should be a quick and casual reading to familiarize yourself with the material and find out the main point(s) the author intended to communicate.

2. Write
The second time through you should take notes for yourself, attempting to outline (roughly) the material presented so that the way in which the author gets to his conclusion is made clear; also write out important lists which may appear in the reading, along with key sentences which express important insights or necessary declarations (as far as the author is concerned).

3. Highlight
Only after these two steps have been accomplished should you go through the assignment again the third time and underline (or highlight) the words, phrases, or sentences which will help you to review and recall the material later. Keep these underlinings to a minimum, for too many such markings will simply force you later to reread most of the assignment again – which defeats the purpose of underlining. By the time these three steps have been completed, the reading assignment will be clearly recorded in the mind.

The reading notes, along with underlinings, will facilitate quick and effective review of the material, which should be accomplished once a week until the end of the term. This method of reading may appear to consume more time initially than the less rigorous style practiced by most students, but in the long run it saves not only time (for instance, rereading the entire assignment every time a quiz is possible) but also emotional energy which is lost over the fear of failure at exam time.

This article was first in two parts in the September and December 1981 issues of The Conqueror under the titles “On Not Leaving Things at the Ramada Inn” and “Learning How to Read in High School.” They are reprinted with permission of Covenant Media Foundation, which hosts and sells many other Dr. Bahnsen resources on their website.



News

Saturday Selections – Mar. 1, 2025

Why we can't focus (12 min)

This fellow is worried that moving from a text-based culture to a video-based one is leaving us all stupider – "we are amusing ourselves to death." He's not trying to make a Christian point, but as "people of the Word," we know there is a pressing need for us to not only be able to read, but be able to concentrate on a passage long enough to understand it.

Tariffs – an entrepreneur’s perspective

What should you do when your neighbor gives you lemons? Christian businessman (and CHPer) Dave Bylsma encourages us to start thinking lemonade – explore the opportunities, rather than fixate on a problem that we really can't do anything about. The biblical basis for such an opportunity-mindset is the assurance "that in all things God works for the good of those who love him, who have been called according to his purpose" (Romans 8:28). We didn't seek this hardship, but God is acting on us, and could be acting through us if we rise to this challenge.

"The harm is staggering..."

Jonathan Haidt on how smartphones and social media are fuelling the youth mental health crisis. He shares their four harms.

Could this be the year’s most ridiculous idea about how life originated?

Life may have started in space? They found some amino acids on the Bennu asteroid (at a cost of nearly $1 billion) so, the speculation has begun. Count the could haves and other fudge words in the paragraph below and ask yourself, if the prospect is so unlikely, why is this even getting covered? Well, because this level of rampant speculation is among the best prospects they have...

"If a vast swarm of briny little worlds produced biological precursors, it could have mixed them together as they crashed into one another. The heat of the impacts could have fueled more chemistry, giving rise to even more complex molecules in their interiors, and perhaps even living cells. 'Could life have started there?' Dr. Rennó asked. 'I’m open to it. I like crazy ideas.'”

Resisting gender ideology indoctrination in Canada’s public schools

"Imagine that a religious cult had mysteriously swayed Canada’s schools to teach children that they are spirit-beings trapped in their physical bodies as some kind of curse. Imagine further that special staff were dedicated to ensuring schools were 'safe spaces' for kids to discover their true spirit-selves. Imagine special 'student clubs' to guide students in this self-discovery, with help from zealous adult believers from outside the school. Imagine students adopting new cultic names for themselves at school, which everyone else was required to use. And imagine at last schools keeping their kids’ new cultic identities secret from parents because 'children don’t need parents’ permission to be who they are,' to paraphrase Justin Trudeau.

"I think Canadians would be appalled at this. And many would intuit that there was something legally suspect about it. But swap in 'gender identity' and this is what’s happening in Canada. A quasi-religious gender ideology is permeating our public schools, and most Canadian families have no opt-out..."

Voddie Baucham's thoughts on voting as a Christian

He's speaking in the context of the US, but there is crossover...


Today's Devotional

March 6 - Steadfastness in faith

“… you know that the testing of your faith produces steadfastness.” - James 1:3 

Scripture reading: I Peter 1:3-9

God the Father promises in our baptism that He will provide us with all good and avert all evil, or turn it to our profit. God doesn’t promise to avert all evil, period. He promises to avert all evil, or turn it to our profit. >

Today's Manna Podcast

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

God is at work: Ruth

Serving #773 of Manna, prepared by Dr. Jeff Temple, is called "God is at work" (Ruth).











Red heart icon with + sign.
Assorted

Aged saints can tell you what your peers don’t know or won’t say

In late 1785, the 26-year-old British Member of Parliament William Wilberforce secretly met with 61-year-old John Newton. Wilberforce had very recently encountered the grace of Christ. Deeply convicted about his squandered youth and self-serving ambition, the young MP seriously considered resigning from Parliament to enter the ministry. Uneasy of mind, he visited Newton – the slave-trader-turned-clergyman – under cover of darkness. Newton encouraged Wilberforce to remain in Parliament and continue his parliamentary career as a Christian. Newton would later tell Wilberforce, “It is hoped and believed that the Lord has raised you up for the good of His Church and for the good of the nation.” Following the meeting, Wilberforce stated that “when I came away I found my mind in a calm, tranquil state, more humbled, and looking more devoutly up to God.” Two years later, Wilberforce would boldly declare that: “God Almighty has set before me two great objects, the suppression of the slave trade and the reformation of manners.” Newton’s prescient advice to his younger brother in the faith shows us what it looks like to live out the biblical mandate for older Christians to mentor younger Christians. The much older Newton had turned to Christ three decades earlier and had much more experience in the Christian life than his newly saved counterpart. In consistency with the example of Scripture, he used his hard-earned wisdom to guide a young believer in need of direction. We need Newton, not Tate Sadly, our age has undermined the mentorship role of the elderly. Popular culture idolizes youthful attractiveness and athletic achievement over the wisdom gained in old age. Worse, the world portrays the outward decay of the elderly as an imposition on those who are still enjoying the fleeting pleasures of youth. As a result, care for the elderly is kept away from the family and offshored to a professional class. This is poignantly exhibited in the rise of euthanasia, now Canada’s 4th leading cause of death. If true life consists in beauty, youth, and health, then life itself must be ended once these qualities have disappeared. However, as with all other attempts to reorder God’s creative design, the removal of the elderly from societal influence has produced dire consequences – an emerging generation whose primary influences are their own peers rather than seasoned mentors. Popular online influencers, such as Andrew Tate, have filled the mentorship gap among young men with a false and sinful masculinity. Speaking to Tate’s growing influence, John Stonestreet writes, “young men, when left to be taught by assertive online influencers eager to avoid the feminist ditch, can be driven straight into the pimp ditch. They must instead be taught through real relationships with fathers, pastors, friends, and mentors who are willing to live out all that is distinctive about God’s design for men.” This problem is not unique to young men – social media is dominated by celebrations of a false femininity that devalues the dignity of godly womanhood and instead encourages young women to pursue licentiousness. Called to speak For the Christian, however, gray hair is not the gutting sign of approaching death, but the hard-won crown of a life spent in service to God (Prov. 16:31). With Heaven as the horizon, there is deep value in a life well-lived – the lessons from which may be shared with those who are young. In this way, the Apostle Paul instructs his own younger disciple in the faith, Titus, about the relationship between older Christians and younger Christians (Titus 2:2-5): “Older men are to be sober-minded, dignified, self-controlled, sound in faith, in love, and in steadfastness. Older women likewise are to be reverent in behavior, not slanderers or slaves to much wine. They are to teach what is good, and so train the young women to love their husbands and children, to be self-controlled, pure, working at home, kind, and submissive to their own husbands, that the word of God may not be reviled.” The priority of mentorship between old Christians and young Christians is clear. Just as the eye cannot say to the foot “I have no need of you,” so also the young Christian cannot say to the old Christian “I have no need of you.” Rehoboam foolishly listened to the council of his childhood friends rather than the mature instructions of his father’s advisors. We too are susceptible to surrounding ourselves with similarly aged peers who affirm our decisions and never rebuke our errors. But godly young people require godly, aged mentors who are committed to speaking directly and truthfully. Wisdom earned in old age provides the mature Christian with the hard-earned right to speak difficult truths that may not as readily flow from the lips of a young Christian’s peers. The willing reception of this gift, however, is only one part of the equation. The gift must also be offered, which requires diligent instruction on the part of the aged and a refusal to listen to a culture which tells those in their final stage of life to hide away until death comes. Wise, aging Christians have been called to deliver godly exhortations to young believers. With such exhortations, mature believers are paving the way for a new generation of the Christian church and the never-ending proclamation of Christ’s glory. Gray hair truly is a far more noble crown than the fleeting bravado of youth. Keeping the fire flickering After nine years of laboring against the slave trade with very little success, a wearied, 36-year-old William Wilberforce wrote his old friend John Newton and questioned whether he could continue the fight. The now 71-year-old Newton replied: “It is true, that you live in the midst of difficulties and snares, and you need a double guard of watchfulness and prayer. But since you know both your need of help and where to look for it, I may say to you, as Darius to Daniel, Thy God whom Thou servest continually is able to preserve and deliver you.” Wilberforce did not quit and, on March 25, 1807 – some dozen years after Wilberforce’s disheartened letter to Newton – Parliament voted to abolish the slave trade throughout the British Empire. A society that scorns the exhortations of aging and faithful men is a society where young men such as William Wilberforce flicker out in discouragement. But, thankfully, God delights in using aging Christians to encourage young Christians in the faith. Godly old men and women must not relinquish that duty, and young men and women must not despise these lessons. In this way, aging Christian believers can fulfill their integral role in the victorious history of Christ’s Church....

Red heart icon with + sign.
Assorted

The peculiar blessings of Covid

God used even this evil for good ***** In the early spring of 2020, Christian pastors from across Alberta sat on a telephone townhall with Alberta Premier Jason Kenney and Chief Medical Officer Deena Hinshaw. On the call – which had been scheduled to offer Alberta’s religious leaders an opportunity to ask questions about Covid-related regulations – pastors shared opinions, asked for medical advice, and requested clarification on the government’s early pandemic guidelines. Uncertainty about the future of the pandemic and its effect on in-person worship dominated the conversation. In the months following the townhall, as pandemic restrictions became more hotly contested and closely enforced, pastors and other church members reckoned with deep theological questions about the nature of human embodiment, the importance of in-person worship, and the efficacy of the Lord’s Supper. In addition to such practical theological questions, Canadian Christians – like their non-Christian neighbors – faced a litany of disappointments and devastation over the course of the pandemic era. These included cancelled weddings, cancelled funerals, the death of loved ones from Covid, the death of loved ones from suicide, frayed family relationships, and crushing financial hardships. As a result, many Christians – and most non-Christians – now view the pandemic as a long international nightmare which must never be repeated, and which would best be forgotten. This response to the human devastation of the Covid pandemic is natural. And in many ways it might even be healthy: a desire to constantly relitigate past events at the expense of tackling present problems serves no good purpose. However, underneath the severe difficulties of the Covid-era are surprising proofs of God’s covenant-keeping faithfulness – proofs that should make Christians rejoice in God’s sovereign activity during the Covid pandemic, and should produce hope about God’s activities amid today’s often-grievous cultural developments. Nothing to do but be renewed For some, the hated pandemic restrictions became the means through which God saved their soul. Allison, a young government employee from Alberta, spent much of the pandemic in the United Kingdom, unable to return home. As a result, she stayed at the house of a kind friend who invited her to watch livestreamed worship services. Convicted of her sin and curious about the God proclaimed in the sermons, Allison’s atheistic thinking began to fall apart. Renewed by the Spirit, she embraced the gospel. Today, she is a member of a local church in Calgary, having rejected the godless ideology of atheism and instead now embracing the whole counsel of the God who purchased her with His blood. Jared, a young data scientist from Hong Kong, was unable to find work at the height of the pandemic. Forced to change plans, he moved to Canada to pursue his education and career in a new country, eventually taking a job in Calgary. With no immediate social connections in his new city, Jared started consuming hours of YouTube content and the site’s algorithm eventually led him to Christian apologetics. Intrigued by arguments defending Christianity, he was learning as much about the Christian faith as he could, and soon turned to Christ for salvation. He now faithfully serves his local church where he is beginning to teach theology classes to fellow church members. As Covid spread throughout the world in March of 2020, God carefully laid the foundation for Allison and Jared’s conversion. Long before patient zero, God had chosen vessels of mercy to be converted during the pandemic and ordered the decade’s darkest circumstances to bring His chosen sons and daughters into the marvelous light of His grace. Public education exposed A second proof of God’s covenant-keeping faithfulness during the pandemic is the dramatic expansion of Christian school and homeschool participation in Canada. As school buildings closed, and mom and dad began to pay closer attention to the public school content that was now being streamed into their homes, parents didn’t always like what they were hearing. Some then responded by homeschooling their children, or by placing them in faithful Christian schools. As a result, both homeschooling and Christian school registration rates skyrocketed in the immediate aftermath of the pandemic. Jeff Park, the Executive Director of the Alberta Parents Union, commented that, during the Covid pandemic, parents, “…saw hostility to their values, and less competence than they had always assumed. Public trust in public schools took a big hit, especially for people of faith.” According to Park, “God meant for good – to wake up the sleeping giant of Christian parents and save their children from godless indoctrination.” God is using the previous difficulties of school closures to help Christian parents think more deeply about their children’s education. And He is causing many to ask deep questions about the kind of education that will most benefit the souls of their children. Conclusion The Lord grieves the death, division, and persecution of His people. However, He is never surprised by such occurrences. As Christians braced for the unknowns of a viral pandemic in early 2020, God had already prepared for the salvation of men and women who previously cursed His name. As congregations bitterly disputed about distancing requirements, God applied His pruning to strengthen the unity of His church. As governments made school closure decisions, God established the steps of Christian families. In 2020 – despite the fears of many of His people – the God of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob did not falter in His promises to the church He’d bought with His own blood. He used a virus to build and strengthen His chosen assembly, against whom the gates of Hell have not prevailed. And if God’s faithfulness did not falter through some of the most dramatic world events of the modern era, should we not also have joyful confidence that He will use every other sin and disaster that besets Canadian society for the good of those who love Him? None of this lightens the tragedy of death, the pain of unhealed division, or the grievousness of sin. It does, however, offer a small glimpse into the eternal perspective. As we approach today’s news – war in Ukraine, war in Israel, a society in rapid moral decline, skyrocketing inflation – we must not do so as those without hope. Instead, we do so with the expectation of eternal joy and with a lasting confidence in the wisdom of an Almighty King who will one day split the sky and prove forever that what man meant for evil, God meant for good....



Red heart icon with + sign.
Pornography

Is Porn more like heroin, or driving a car?

Explaining why it's evil to our non-Christians friends ***** In recent weeks, I’ve come across what seems like a multitude of articles on the subject of pornography, especially articles focused on the fact that more and more teenagers and children are now viewing pornography on a regular basis. The latest piece to catch my eye came from Rod Dreher on The American Conservative website. At one point, Mr. Dreher writes a paragraph in which you can almost hear him weep in sorrow as you read it: “This society has a death wish. I wish I had some idea how it could be saved. What concerns me most of all right now is the horrifying complicity of conservative, even conservative Christian, parents in the spiritual, moral, and emotional ruin of their children and of their moral ecology because they, the parents, are too damn afraid to say no, my kids will not have a smartphone, I don’t care what they and society think of me.” I hope that readers will share his sorrow, and that it might induce parents who have perhaps been blasé to take a long, hard look at their situation and take whatever action they can to protect their children’s innocence. The issue of pornography is a difficult one to even talk about, but we must. I want to consider the societal phenomenon, addressing what I believe is one major way we are being deceived, and how we can communicate the nature of that deception to our non-Christian friends and neighbors. It’s not just a problem for children I would assume that all Christians reading this know instinctively that pornography is wrong. At the same time, I am also aware that we can often fall into the world’s way of thinking on issues, and that this can mean that we accept its solutions to problems and fail to see the real issue. One of the ways we are doing this around pornography is increasingly seeing the major problem as being its spread to children, rather than pornography itself. Of course the spread to children is a massive problem, but it is not the problem. Here’s an example: an article by Conor Friedersdorf in The Atlantic quotes one of the world’s biggest “porn stars” expressing concern that we’re not doing enough to stop pornography getting in front of children. Yet the same article states that “accessing hard core porn is (properly) legal.” This now seems to be the default position: pornography is fine for adults, but we just need to keep it from children. Now it is of course true that pornography filtering down to children is a very great evil. Young minds are more susceptible to habit-forming from new stimuli in ways which adult minds are perhaps not. Nevertheless, if we concentrate all our efforts on simply stopping pornography getting into the hands of children, we miss the point completely. For the problem is not primarily that pornography is falling into the hands of children, but rather that as a society we have opened the floodgates to allow porn in and normalized it. It is absurd to think that it is possible to normalize something like this, and for it not to filter down to children. Children, by their very nature, want to grow up to be adults, and they often want to do adult things before their time. So if we have largely normalized pornography amongst adults – and we have – then no amount of paywalls and banning of smartphones or anything else is going to make much difference. We have become a pornographic society, and children, who aspire to do what adults do, will generally find ways of getting their hands on it by hook or by crook (though of course responsible parents will take as much action as they can to prevent their children coming into contact with it). Drugs? Or driving? Look at it like this. There are two types of activity that adults seek to protect children from. First, there are perfectly good activities that we want them to grow up into, but for which they need to come of age before we allow it. For instance, driving a car. Then there are activities which are bad in and of themselves, and which we try to protect them from not just because they aren’t old enough to do them, but because we don’t ever want them to do them. Taking heroin would fall into this category. So which category does porn fit into? Is it like driving? Or is it like heroin? Is it something a child should one day be able to do, only not just now? Or is it like heroin; something that no sane parent would ever want their children to get into, no matter how old? If our culture puts it in the same category as driving a car, something to be avoided as a child, but something that is perfectly normal once you turn a certain age, then it can be safely said that we have lost all moral compass and are quite sick. If, on the other hand, we see it in the same category as heroin, then at least we would be acknowledging it as a problem to be dealt with. But why don’t we want kids seeing it? Sadly, I would say that we have moved in the last ten years from treating it in the heroin category to the driving category. “We don’t want you to touch it now, but of course there will come a time when it becomes your right to consume as much of it as you like,” is essentially the message. And yet the schizophrenic nature of this is obvious when you think about why it is we don’t want children seeing it. Isn’t it because we know it pollutes their minds? Isn’t it because we instinctively know that it demeans and degrades them? Isn’t it because we are well aware that it will give them a terribly unhealthy and warped view of the opposite sex? Of course it is, but are we really naïve enough to think that it doesn’t have the same sorts of effects on adults? But they’re adults, and we can’t stop their rights, can we? And, of course, if we did enact a law that bans it all, such a law at the point we currently find ourselves at would be as effective as King Canute commanding the sea to go back. What I am suggesting is that our culture urgently needs to stop looking at the main problem as being one of trying to prevent pornography falling into the hands of children. That is only byproduct of the much larger problem society needs to acknowledge: the normalization of pornography among adults. Rob Slane is the author of “A Christian and Unbeliever Discuss: Life, the Universe and Everything.” A version of this article first appeared on SamaritanMinistries.org and is reprinted here with the author’s permission....

Red heart icon with + sign.
Transgenderism

A is A…except when it wants to be S?

The transsexual debate and the death of logic “Hi A. It is A, isn’t it? I hardly recognized you there. It’s B. Remember me? How are you doing?” “I’m fine. Well I’m … well it’s just … I’m …” “What is it A? Is something the matter? You don’t look quite yourself.” “Look, B. There’s something I need you to know. I’m no longer known as A.” “What do you mean you’re no longer known as A, A?” “I mean I no longer identify as A. In fact, from now on I’d like you to call me S.” “S?” “Yes. S.” “I’m afraid you’ve lost me.” “Look, it’s quite simple. You’ve always known me as A, and all my life everyone told me I was A. But recently I started to question whether that’s really who I am. And the more I questioned it, the more I realized I was just the victim of social conditioning and prejudice. To put it bluntly, I’ve been brainwashed into thinking that I’m A.” “Social conditioning? Brainwashing? But A, you are A. How could you be anything else? Remember the first rule of logic: A = A and so A can’t = non-A.” “Well I simply don’t agree. In fact I believe that’s nothing but an outdated social construct.” “Social construct? But it’s an obvious truth. And it’s true for all times and all places.” “There’s nothing obvious about it whatsoever, and frankly I’m amazed that anyone living in our post-modern culture could still think it is.” “Ah, I thought as much. You’ve been listening to the post-modernists haven’t you? Well frankly I don’t much care what they say about it. It’s self-evidently true that A = A and there’s an end to it.” Do feelings make the man? “You know, B, I had always thought of you as a fairly open-minded letter. But I’m beginning to detect a quite shocking level of intolerance in you. Listen. Maybe this will persuade you. All my life I’ve had this nagging suspicion that I might be different. I’ve never much liked the way I look. That silly pointy bit at the top and that even sillier horizontal bar in the middle. And that’s just the capital “me.” Don’t get me started on the little “me”! But I’ve always admired S. Beautiful curvy letter is S. Well thankfully we’ve moved on from outmoded stereotypes that would have meant that I stayed an S trapped inside an A’s body, and I can now be any letter I want.” If gender, why not species? “But you can’t be an S. Surely you can see that?” “You know, I don’t think I’ve ever come across such a shocking level of bigotry. Why can’t I be another letter entirely, if I want to? Who are you to say what I can and can’t be?” “Why stop at a letter then? Maybe you could identify as a number. I could call you 1. Or 19 if you like. Or maybe even a duck.” “Adding sarcasm to hate speech doesn’t make it any less hateful.” “Hate speech? I said nothing hateful. But A, do you not see what will happen all if you insist on calling yourself S?” “Such as?” You already have a role to fill “Well, I don’t know how we’d get along without an A. I mean, imagine if we tried driving to Alberta without you.” “What do you mean?” “Ever tried driving to Slberts? And what about that fellow who got caught up in the tree after trying to topple his father from the throne. Now what was his name?” “Absalom?” “No. Sbsslom I think it was. Not to mention what we’ll do with the poor old SSrdvsrk. Can’t you see how ridiculous it all is?” “Well I’m not going to stand here all day being lectured by someone who is clearly a Hater and a Transletterphobe.” “You mean ‘someone who is clesrly s Hster snd s Trsnsletterphobe’? You see, all you’ve succeeded in doing by refusing to abide by the simple truth that you are A and that you cannot therefore = non-A is to sow chaos and confusion. Imagine what will happen if T wants to become C, or Y wants to become X.” “As it happens, Y is already well on her way to becoming X thank you very much. She’s a chromosome, you see. She used to be male but now identifies as X. And as for X, he’s sometimes identifying as Y. You have a problem with that?” “Well yes, actually. It’s just a clear denial of objective reality.” “Objective reality? Hah! What you need to realize is that every letter has the right to identify as whichever letter they want, and every other letter ought to respect their feelings.” Why should your feelings win? “Hmm! Fair enough. You win. I will no longer identify you as A.” “Good. Thank you.” “Instead, I shall now identify you as H.” “H? But I just told you I identify you as S, didn’t I.” “Yes you did, but your basis for doing so was based firstly on a denial of objective reality, and then on making subjective opinions and feelings your standard. And, I might add, you said we all have to respect that. Well okay, in my subjective opinion, I no longer identify you as A, or indeed as S, but as H. Are you prepared to respect that?” “But I’m S and you have no right to call me H.” “No right? So let me get this straight. You decree that there is no such thing as objective reality (A = A) and that your feelings are king. Then you insist that I accept your definition as truth and call me a hater, a bigot and a phobe if I don’t. So what you have done is to use your subjective feelings to create your own new ‘objective reality’ and insist that I accept it. Well sorry, I refuse. Two can play at that game and I say you’re an H! Now you’re not going to be a Transletterphobe, a bigot, and a hater and deny me my rights are you? Or is subjectivism taken to its logical conclusion as hard for you to bear as it is for me?” Postscript After this exchange the letter B was hauled off for tolerance training where he is learning that the right to define objective truth is the sole preserve of the Cultural Marxists who denied it in the first place. Rob Slane is the author of "A Christian & an Unbeliever Discuss: Life, the Universe & Everything" which is available at Amazon.ca here and Amazon.com here....





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

Ordinary Men: Reserve Police Battalion 101 and the Final Solution in Poland

by Christopher R. Browning 1992 / 384 pages This is a really horrifying book. Ordinary Men tells the World War II story of German Reserve Police Battalion 101. Police battalions were units sent into occupied territory to quell civil unrest and to take care of any remaining partisan forces. They generally consisted of men too old for the regular military draft, or sometimes volunteers attempting to avoid conscription into an active military unit. They were formed of men with families and careers, the sort of men you might meet at the grocery store, or perhaps go bowling with. The men in police units were not normally those you'd consider likely to become mass murderers. On July 13, 1942, that all changed. The nearly 500 men of the battalion were sent to Jósefów in Poland. Upon arrival, Major Wilhem Trapp, the battalion commander gave the men their instructions. In tears he told them that they were to round up the 1500 or more Jews in the town and execute them. In an unusual move, Trapp invited anyone to step forward who did not want to carry out the task at hand and be assigned to other duties. Only 12 of the nearly 500 took Trapp up on his offer. Those who didn’t stepped forward were set to work, and an initially small group of them was brought to the nearby woods where they were instructed on how to execute the Jews in as swift and tidy a way as possible. With their victim lying face down on the ground, the policemen were instructed to place the bayonets of their rifles at the base of their victims' necks, and then fire. This method ensured a swift death for the victim, and was as clean and tidy as a mass execution could be. Later groups that carried out the executions that day were not given the same precise instructions, and often shot wildly. This meant that the victims' skulls were frequently blown apart, splattering the formerly tidy uniforms of the police with blood and brains of the victims. As might be expected, many of the shooters were unable to continue and were allowed to assume other less distasteful duties. Unit discipline was surprisingly loose that day, and many of those doing the shooting simply abandoned their posts without permission and slipped off into the woods. They were able to do this without any punishment from their superiors. Despite it being so easy to avoid being one of the executioners, 80 per cent or more of the battalion continued rounding up and executing the Jews until the job was completed. Upon returning to their barracks, most of the men of the unit quickly got drunk. As with most difficult tasks, executing the Jews became easier, and even a source of merriment at times. Battalion 101 did few actual executions on their own, generally providing police cordons to prevent doomed Jews from escaping their fate. While Lithuanian "Hiwi" units did much of the actual shooting, the men of Battalion 101 were involved in the execution either directly or by providing a security cordon to at least 38,000 Jews from July 1942 until November 1943. Additionally, they forced at least 45,200 other Jews onto trains bound for death camps like Treblinka. Story of Those That Killed This is a horrifying book, but not so much because of the number of men, women and children who were innocently executed. This book is not the story of those who died, but of those who killed them. After the initial incident at Jósefów, battalion discipline was tightened. Despite this, men who didn't want to be involved in the executions had little trouble avoiding the duty. When officers set up details, they generally picked volunteers. On those occasions when they simply chose people at random, it was still easy to avoid the duty by moving to the back of the crowd. It quickly became apparent that men in close proximity to the officer got picked, so avoiding this unpleasant job was a relatively simple affair. The horrifying part is that despite it being easy to avoid execution duties, it was never a problem finding volunteers, eager to go out and join the latest squad. There were always other more seemingly honorable tasks available for those who chose not to join the execution squads, such as joining a patrol to eliminate partisan resistance fighters. None the less, there was a conspicuous number of men in the unit who appeared to prefer the task of killing unarmed civilians. In reading a book like this, one has to ask how an average man could become a mass murderer. The author is quick to emphasize that these were not men trained to kill. As police officers, their military training was no better than the average. They had received no special indoctrination that prepared them for their task. Being, for the most part, middle aged men set in their ways, they were, if anything, less susceptible to the worst of the Nazi propaganda than most of the younger soldiers conscripted into military units. Only about 25 per cent of the policemen were members of the Nazi party and most of those were late joiners, coming into the party after National Socialism had become well established in Germany. In other words, most of these men weren't even committed Nazis. The author emphasizes that in almost every conceivable way, the men of Battalion 101 were average. They were, quite literally, ordinary men. They could well have been your neighbor next door, or the guy from down the street. So how do you explain something like this, when ordinary men become willingly involved in extraordinary evil? The author notes that psychological experiments suggest humans will readily inflict severe pain on other human beings when ordered to do so by an authority figure. It seems that the average man's conscience can be put at ease if someone else has told him to cause pain, for perhaps then he might be able to convince himself he is not morally responsible. In the case of Battalion 101, however, the normal stern authority figure who ordered the killings was a kindly older man, so distraught about the orders he brought that he was literally in tears. His instructions to clear out the ghetto in Jósefów came less as an order from an authority figure than as a request from a man deeply uncomfortable with his task. The standard explanation of many accused of heinous crimes - "I was merely following orders" - simply doesn't apply here for it was almost always possible to avoid the order with no adverse consequences. The authority figures of the battalion never took a stern line and never forced the men to kill. Rationalizing Evil Some of the men of the battalion rationalized their actions in strange ways. One explained that he always paired himself with another policeman who would shoot the parent of a child. Since the child was now an orphan, it seemed only merciful to this individual to also shoot the child, for this would "deliver" him from the lonely, miserable life that orphans have often experienced. It may not have been intentional, but the policeman justifying his actions used a perverse pun. The same German word he used to suggest he delivered the child, also means "to redeem." It seemed shooting these Jews almost took on a religious significance for him. The author also contrasts the policemen with the bureaucrats in Berlin who issued the orders that Battalion 101 followed when they executed civilians, or forced them onto death trains. These bureaucrats, he notes, were able to issue their directives with relative ease because they never actually had to face the people whose deaths they were responsible for. The men of this police battalion never had that excuse. They couldn't claim that they were emotionally distant from their victims as they escorted them, one by one, to the areas in the forest where the killing was taking place. The policemen saw their victims close up, and were able to look them in the eye. The men of the battalion indicated they even struck up conversations with the men, women, and children they were about to kill though one is left to wonder what kind of a conversation could possibly have occurred. The policemen could not claim a moral distance from their victims like the bureaucrats in Berlin could. They looked many of their victims in the eye and treated them like human beings until the very last possible moment. True Cowardice So what could be the cause? There is, perhaps, only one explanation that makes sense and even partially accounts for what occurred. Twenty years after the fact, when facing criminal prosecution for their actions, men of the battalion were asked why they didn't step forward and avoid becoming a mass murderer when offered the opportunity by Trapp. Most explained they didn't want to appear cowardly. It was one thing to start with the executions and then be unable to finish. It was quite another to not do the executions at all. That was cowardly. Only one individual seemed to understand his own motivations clearly. When asked why he didn't step forward when given the chance, he didn't say that he was trying to avoid being a coward, but that he didn't step forward precisely because he was a coward. He was less afraid of killing innocent children than he was of the peer pressure exerted by his comrades. The true story of Battalion 101 is a horrifying tale. There was, no doubt, enormous pressure from the rest of the battalion to conform and to join the executions. Yet peer pressure is not an excuse. We don't excuse kids at school caught smoking who gave in under pressure from their peers, and, though the crime is larger, people caught in the situation of the battalion cannot be excused either. Peer pressure helps to explain their actions, but it doesn't take away the guilt. Perhaps the most obvious element lacking from all the excuses provided by the policemen is any sense of morality. Twenty years after the fact when criminal investigators interviewed these former policemen, there was no longer an immediate sense of peer pressure. The rest of their unit no longer had the same sway over them, and even that long after the events the policemen overwhelmingly indicated they had done what they did because they didn't want to appear weak in front of their comrades. They hadn't been motivated by a belief in Nazi values. Twenty years after the fact they expressed little remorse for what were clearly morally repugnant actions. Even those who had not been involved in the killing did not claim to be "too good" to kill, but they were "too weak." It is almost unbelievable that crimes of this magnitude could be discussed without any reference to morality. In All of Us Though this is a work of history and not theology, and though the author reveals no obvious religious bias, his conclusion sounds like something straight out of the Bible. He warns against the smugness many feel when discussing the evil actions of others. As he notes in his final sentence, if under these circumstances the very ordinary men of Battalion 101 could become mass killers, "what group of men cannot?" It is in this last comment that it might be possible to finally understand the actions of these men. The Heidelberg Catechism explains that we are "incapable of any good and prone to all evil" and the Larger Catechism of the Westminster Confessions states that mankind is "wholly inclined to all evil." This is why the tale of Battalion 101 is so utterly horrifying. Their actions are not horrifying because they're so unusual, and so implausible, but because they're something we're all capable of. The level of evil to which they descended - the same evil we've seen repeated in places like Rwanda, or by individuals like Ted Bundy, Jeffrey Dahlmer, or Clifford Olson - is something that lies in the hearts of all of us. Reading a book like this is not for the faint of heart, or those prone to nightmares. As one of my grad school colleagues commented, it is almost senseless to talk about preventing these kinds of actions, for without the regenerating work of God the cause of the evil remains unsolved. Despite its disturbing story, the book is one well worth reading for it illustrates in a brutally clear fashion why reaching out to our neighbors is so urgent. If you ever needed a slight push to talk to co-workers, or the people just across the back hedge, to explain to them "the reason for the hope that you have," this book will do that for you. This review originally appeared in the March 2000 issue under the title: "Ordinary Men, Ordinary Monsters." Listen to Jordan Peterson talking about Police Battalion 101 below. ...