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!



Magazine, Past Issue

Mar/April 2025 issue

WHAT'S INSIDE: Christians don't retire / Free video series to protect families from porn / Tariffs are terrible economics: why Canada shouldn't hit back / Aged saints can tell you what your peers don't know or won't say / Planning for retirement / More time to pray: Martin & Christina Veenstra on retirement in your nineties / Necessary Endings: finding the courage to let go in business, church, and family / "Can You Build it?" contest winners / Life in bloom: the gift of flowers / A century of cinema for your family: 20+ films to take you and your kids through the 100 years of feature films / Euthanasia changed the abortion battle / Why write? / How to write... for Reformed Perspective / Fiction for tween and teen boys / Chang Shen: grace to persevere / Are there little green men? / Come + Explore God's majestic microverse / and more!

Click the cover to view in your browser
or click here to download the PDF (13 mb)



News

Saturday Selections – Mar. 22, 2025

One question to confound the evolutionist

Which came first, the chicken or the egg? It's a famous enough conundrum but quite the dilemma for the evolutionist. You need an egg-producing chicken to get eggs, and a chicken-producing egg to get chickens, so how does this circle ever start via evolution's small incremental changes? This can be likened to the many "irreducibly complex" systems needed for life to survive – it all has to work together or it doesn't work, so there's no stepwise way to get here.

Christian college wins Canadian women's championship over team with men

The Columbia Bible College's women's basketball team lost in the regional finals to a team with two or more men on it. They also lost their coach, Taylor Claggett, to suspension for the season when she had questions about the safety of men playing women's sports, but was then accused of directing her players to hurt the male star on the other team. In other words, the team with guys on it was claiming their players were in danger.

Fortunately, the top two teams from the PacWest went to nationals, and the CBC Bearcats made use of this second opportunity to win it all. And, blessedly, they didn't have to play the team with the men on it again, as it never made the finals.

Canadian Reformed player Elissa Vreugdenhil was the playoff MVP. CBC spokesperson Derek Rogusky noted just how tough the season had been:

"This team is an amazing group of young women....They have endured false accusations, online abuse and vitriol that no young woman should have to experience. They had their coach taken away from them for the entire playoff run and were stripped of the chance to host PacWest conference playoffs. However, they did not fold. Instead, they focused on playing for each other, they turned the other cheek, and in the end, they persevered to win a hard-fought national title. They are deserving to be called true champions and have earned a spot in Bearcats history."

This battle has been about what Coach Taylor did or didn't do or say, but it's not really about her at all. It's not even about the safety of the players she leads, and it's not about fairness either. The heat here is all about the Who behind it all, and whether God defines reality or we do. It is about whether what He says in Gen. 1:27 is true and trustworthy. We can certainly talk about all the other issues, but we need to lead with what the world most needs to hear, and with what would most glorify God: that the choice here is between Christ or chaos.

These ladies have triumphed on the basketball court, and we can pray they'll now be given the opportunity to glorify God in a different court as this matter moves on to the legal arena (Matt. 5:11).

The man who saved two million

Australia's James Harrison had special blood. It contained a rare antibody "which is used to make the life-saving medication given to mothers whose blood is at risk of attacking their unborn babies..." Harison donated blood over a thousand times and didn't receive a dime for it. But he was happy to have a role in saving as many as two million babies.

The People’s Party of Canada wants to talk about the unborn

To be clear, the PPC isn't taking a pro-life turn – all they want to do is talk. But even a willingness to talk about abortion has them standing in sharp contrast with the other federal parties who are either unwilling or afraid to talk about the plight of the unborn.

Random thoughts on being a dad

Tim Challies with a collection of quick thoughts every dad will benefit from.

Small toys taking on big government?

There was a time, about a dozen years back, when your little brother could have had toys that took on Big Brother. This line of "Kronies" action figures highlights how the government has fearsome powers that can be used to compel compliance ("Mandated!"), restrict consumer choices ("Tarrified!") and ensure "taxpayer loses; crony gains!"

You don't have to be Christian to see how government can abuse its powers. But as a Christian we can understand the pressing need for government to shrink rather than grow. God has given authority to more than simply those in the political sphere – the Church, parents and even self-government are other authorities – and the government can only grow by taking from others the power God has given to them.

These toys might not be available but thanks to YouTube, their legacy lives on.


Today's Devotional

March 26 - Tempted in our suffering

“But each person is tempted when he is lured and enticed by his own desire.” - James 1:14 

Scripture reading: Hebrews 4:14-5:10

Usually, when we think about temptation, we think of the temptation to do immoral things, to commit sexual sin, to steal something we want, or to cheat on a test or on our taxes. But we also face temptations when we suffer, >

Today's Manna Podcast

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

I AM the Light of the World

Serving #793 of Manna, prepared by Steven Swets, is called "I AM the Light of the World".















Red heart icon with + sign.
Being the Church

Wise and Innocent

“Behold, I am sending you out as sheep in the midst of wolves, so be wise as serpents and innocent as doves.” – Matt. 10:16 ***** My children have often called me gullible and naïve. As a matter of fact, the word “Mom” often had an exclamation mark behind it. Perhaps they are right, and here’s an example to prove that. **** In the 1990s I became friends with a young man who worked at the Owen Sound Public Library. He was an avid landscaper and had been designated to take care of the flower beds around the library building. He also maintained the flora inside the renovated Carnegie structure. Some of these plants stood in the rectangular windows sills of the rooms housing the books, while other plants lined the foyer. The gardener and I became acquainted after my husband, Anco, and I donated a large Norfolk pine to the library. The tree was fingering the ceiling of our living room and we were anxious to find a good home for it. Our conifer species was received with enthusiasm and placed in the spacious foyer. I have forgotten the gardener’s name at this point, but remember that when I frequented the library, very often he would corner me to let me know how the pine was doing. One day, when he was weeding outside, he called me over. “Christine,” he began, “I want to ask you a favor.” “Sure,” I answered, smiling congenially. “Well,” he went on, “I have some special flowers that need only a minimal amount of water. And I wonder …” He paused and I encouraged him by nodding. “Well, I wonder,” he continued slowly, “because I know that your husband is a veterinarian, if you would be able to get me some syringes. You see I could put water in them and squirt just a tiny amount of fluid into these plants. It would be a great help!” “Oh, sure,” I replied, immediately sympathetic to the presumed problem in his foliage kingdom, “I’ll ask my husband and get back to you.” “That would be great.” He beamed at me and I beamed back. Upon coming home, I relayed the question to one of my sons. “Mom!!” he exclaimed, “Don’t you get it! That guy’s a druggie. He’s an addict. He’s trying to get his hands on some free syringes so he can inject himself with who knows what! You are so gullible!” Later, upon hearing the request, my husband agreed with my son and, upon reflection, I came to the conclusion that they were probably right. When I met the man again, I gently let him know that I was unable to obtain the desired syringes for his plants. He shrugged and that was the end of it. **** Last week I was shopping at Zehr’s. It was late afternoon on Friday, on Valentine’s Day. Generally speaking, Friday afternoon is not the time I usually shop but there had been warnings of an impending storm and I thought it would be wise to get some groceries before the weekend. There were a lot of people in the store. I presumed that everyone wanted to get their shopping done before the storm hit and felt a common bond between myself and the other purchasers. There was a rather long wait in the line-up to pay as one of the customers had bought an item without a price tag on it. There were two gentlemen standing behind me, each with only one item in their hands. I noted them and briefly wondered why they were not going to the faster check-out, but it was only a passing thought. After finally paying my bill, I pushed the shopping cart through the mall foyer towards the entrance. My car was parked in the first row across from the store and easy to access. As I had forgotten my cloth bags in the car, I had to transfer my groceries from the cart into the bags. Opening the front door, I deposited my purse onto the console between the front seats. Then the process of transferral began as I put the groceries from the cart into the cloth bags and into the back seat. Having done that, I brought the cart back to the sidewalk by Zehr’s and moseyed on back to the car. Opening the door and easing myself into it, I shoved my purse over to the passenger seat and was about to start the motor when there was a knock at my window. Startled, I turned my head. There was a man, a rather short and squat man, beckoning with the fingers of his right hand that I should come out. He then pointed to the back wheel of the car, the wheel on the driver’s side. Immediately I assumed there was something wrong with the back wheel – something which he had noticed while passing. I straightaway opened the door and hopped out. He walked over to the back wheel, and said something which I did not understand. You see, he was wearing a cream-colored scarf which hid his mouth. He was also wearing a big black hat. Consequently, I was only able to see the top of his upper lip and his chunky nose and rather small eyes. “That man is cold,” I thought, and it surely was cold. “Pardon me,” I voiced politely, “but I didn’t hear what you said.” He repeated himself, but honestly it was Greek to me and the scarf over his mouth didn’t help his pronunciation. He squatted down, and touched the back tire with the index finger of his right hand. “Is it going flat?” I asked, squatting down next to him, “Is that what you’re trying to tell me?” “Leak,” he answered, as he lifted his finger off the tire before he reiterated, “Leak.” “Leak?” I repeated. He then put the worried index finger back down on the tire, which to my non-mechanical eyes, looked very healthy. But then what did I know? He then lifted the finger off the tire, waved it about a bit before putting it back down on the tire. “Is air coming out?” I asked. “Is it a slow leak? Will it be dangerous for me to drive, do you think?” In a far-off time, before there were cars, Augustine once said that we should be “innocent as doves that we may not harm anyone”; and “cautious as snakes that we may be careful of letting anyone harm us.” That is to say, we are not to be credulous, but we should be discerning enough to know that not all whom we encounter are who they say they are. The man continued to put his finger on the tire a few more times and then stood up. He looked at me above his scarf face. “Is OK,” he said, “Is OK.” “Are you sure? Because I have a drive of about fifteen minutes to get home.” “Yes, is OK.” I thanked him for his care in stopping because he thought something might be wrong. I told him that I thought this was very kind. Then I said goodbye, got back into the car and drove home. But all the while I was worried that perhaps the tire might have a slow flat coming in, all the while I worried about how to turn the wheel if the car would begin to swerve. Upon coming home, I told my daughter what had happened. She told me not to worry, that my son-in-law would look at it when he came in. However, as I was putting the groceries away, I noticed that my wallet (always in my purse) was missing. My daughter helped me look and look we did. After exhaustively searching everywhere, we eventually phoned Zehr’s. Zehr’s surveyed their area, spoke to the teller who had checked me out, and then informed us that they were unable to locate the wallet. “Mom,” my daughter told me, “I think you’ve been robbed.” We then proceeded to phone both my bank and the Mastercard company. The bank put a marker on my account and the Mastercard company told us there had been four attempts on my card in the last half hour and a fifth had been successful in withdrawing four hundred dollars. It is a blessing that Mastercard is the only credit card I use. However, my wallet was also home to my Social Insurance Number, my library cards, my health card, and my driver’s license. There was also more than one hundred dollars cash, postal stamps and photographs. That last item, though perhaps not much in the way of money, was important to me. Presently, I’m in the process of getting a new driver’s license, and have bought a protection called Equifax which protects a person from identity fraud. It’s all a far cry from Eden. I think about the fellow wearing the cream-colored scarf. Was he poor? Had he just lost his job, as so many have lost theirs in the last year? Did he know the Lord? What partner helped him steal my wallet out of my purse when I was hunkered down thankful that a stranger cared enough to stop and warn me about a possible leak in my tire? Were these two thieves the men who had stood behind me in the checkout line? Had they been watching me as I punched in the pin number of my Mastercard? **** Believers do not have a life free from conflict. That is a fact. Jonathan Edwards said: “Men that have their spirits heated and enraged and rising in bitter resentment when they are injured act as if they thought some strange thing had happened to them. Whereas they are very foolish in so thinking for it is no strange thing at all but only what was to be expected in a world like this. They, therefore, do not act wisely that allow their spirits to be ruffled by the injuries they suffer.” If Christians expect to be taken advantage of, they will not be depressed when it happens. We are called to bear our injuries with dignity and hope in the providence of God – even as Christ did. Jonathan Edwards went on to say: “As love to God prevails, it tends to set persons above human injuries, in this sense, that the more they love God the more they will place all their happiness in him.... The more they love God, the less they set their hearts on their worldly interests, which are all that their enemies can touch.” There is no doubt that widows, widowers and all older and retired persons, should beware. There is also no doubt that it hurts to be taken advantage of. But Jonathan Edwards’ words are encouraging and put things into perspective. The two robbers could only harm my worldly pleasures. They cannot, and never will be able to, take the inheritance that is laid up for me in heaven. With the help of the Holy Spirit, I will look to God and love and trust Him alone. And He is faithful and will help me....





Red heart icon with + sign.
Politics

Separating Christianity from politics

The agenda of “Christian” secularists ***** This first appeared in the June 2013 issue. It wasn't the only reason, but it was biggest – when abortion was legalized in Canada in 1969, and in the US in 1973, North American Christians got heavily involved in politics. And as they did, they were criticized for "violating the separation of church and state." The other side – the secular humanists – used this jargon to try to delegitimize the Christian opposition to their agenda. The accusation that Christian activism violates the separation of church and state is simply false. The church and the state are separate institutions, and they remain entirely separate even when Christians engage society from an explicitly Christian perspective. Christians are citizens and have just as much right to participate in society and politics as anyone else. While it’s not hard to understand why secularists don't want Christians bringing their faith with them into the political realm, it is a mystery as to why some Christians will also accuse explicitly Christian politicians and political activists of violating the separation of church and state. One such example is the book A Secular Faith: Why Christianity Favors the Separation of Church and State by Darryl G. Hart. This book is noteworthy because Hart is a well-known elder in the OPC. He speaks for a constituency within the OPC and other conservative Reformed and Presbyterian churches in North America. Religion out of politics = impossible The basic thrust of this book is perhaps best stated by one of the endorsements on its dust jacket. Respected Christian historian Mark Noll writes, “Darryl Hart is a serious Christian who wants to get religion out of politics.” It’s important to notice the difference between two different concepts specified here. Hart’s book title talks about the separation of church and state. Noll’s description of the book mentions getting “religion out of politics.” These are not the same thing. The separation of church and state refers to organizational and functional separation between two entirely different institutions. The separation of church and state is a good thing and it is Biblical because the Bible establishes both the church and the state as separate entities with different purposes and functions. Separating religion from politics is a completely different matter. Religion is (generally speaking) a belief system whereas politics consists of activities associated with the government. Separation of religion and politics is impossible, because all political activity is based on ethical concepts that are rooted in religious ideas. When someone is discussing these kinds of issues, and switches back and forth between “separation of church and state” and “separation of religion and politics” as if the two concepts meant the same thing (like Hart does in this book), confusion is the result – confusion in the reader’s mind to be sure and one wonders if it also reflects confusion or fuzzy thinking in the writer’s mind. Back to when faith “knew its place” Towards the beginning of the book Hart states his purpose this way: "My argument is that the basic teachings of Christianity are virtually useless for resolving America’s political disputes, thus significantly reducing, if not eliminating, the dilemma of how to relate Christianity and American politics." Christianity, in his view, is a private, personal religion. You practice your Christianity in your family and your church, but certainly not in the political sphere. Hart claims that those who advocate a distinctly Christian approach to politics are being unbiblical. His purpose is to straighten them out: "I want those advocates of Christianity’s public role and political responsibility to take seriously Jesus Christ’s own words when he said, "My kingdom is not of this world." At one time in American history, sixty or so years ago, evangelical Protestants knew that those words involved an ambivalence about the rulers and principalities of this world. Now otherworldliness seems a fossil of an older time when faith knew its place." Christ Himself said that His kingdom “is not of this world.” Therefore, in Hart’s view, Christ’s kingdom has nothing to do with government and politics. Christianity is ambivalent about politics. As Hart sees it, Christianity needs to become otherworldly again and get back in “its place,” that is, in the closet rather than in the public arena. In arguing thusly, Hart recognizes that he is advocating a view at odds with John Calvin. As he puts it, "To say that using Christianity for political purposes is a distortion of the faith is, of course, to dissent not only from Jerry Falwell or Jim Wallis but also from much more significant church luminaries, from parts of John Calvin to the encyclicals of John Paul II." His position, then, consciously differs from the evangelical position, the historic Reformed position, as well as the Roman Catholic position. American history and the errors of Christendom Much of his book recounts aspects of American history. In considering his own country’s history, Hart is puzzled that American Protestants “came to regard the Ten Commandments” as “the assumed source of virtue and morality for decent Americans.” Apparently he sees the Ten Commandments as only applicable to the church. He just can’t understand why any Christians would think otherwise: "That American Protestants thought their exclusive faith could provide the moral standard for a republic conceived in religious neutrality is one of the more surprising twists in the history of biblical religion." Actually, it’s not surprising at all. The vast majority of citizens in the new republic were Protestants, and it would have been unthinkable that public moral standards would be anything other than Christian standards. Historically, most Protestants did not believe that Christianity should be divorced from political affairs, as Hart advocates. Hart believes that Protestant theology in the United States went wrong right from the start. The Puritan founders of America and their theological descendants “repeated the errors of Christendom” by thinking that Christian ethical norms applied to government and society, rather than just the church. These “errors” were then perpetuated down through the country’s history. American Protestant theology was fundamentally flawed because it saw an active role for Christians as Christians in the social and political affairs of the nation. In contrast to that “flawed” view, Hart warmly describes the perspective of a nineteenth century Presbyterian minister named Stuart Robinson. For Robinson, "The kingdom was narrowly religious, located ordinarily within the affairs and ministry of the church, the place where it was appropriate for citizens of the divine kingdom to confess that, "Jesus Christ is Lord." The civil realm, as such, was not a site of Christian activity and should not be." In this respect, Robinson offered a corrective to the dominant view that Christianity was relevant to all of life, including public affairs. The “reduced character of Christ’s sovereignty” Hart points out that many Christians believe that Christ is Lord of all, and therefore He is also the Lord of government and politics. He brushes that argument aside: “The all-or-nothing logic inherent in appeals to the Lordship of Christ,” Hart writes, “fails to do justice to the reduced character of Christ’s sovereignty in the Christian era.” In the Old Testament, Israel had a political as well as a spiritual component. In the New Testament, the church had an exclusively spiritual focus. Christ no longer carried any political authority. "The Lordship of Christ, then, was in the Christian era to be seen and employed within the institutional church. The state’s affairs were to be rendered to the state." Or, in other words, Christ rules the church but not the state; He is not the Lord of the state. This may seem to diminish our view of Christianity, but Hart says just the opposite is true. The really important things are the specifically spiritual things such as the forgiveness of sins and the promise of eternal life. This is what Christianity is really all about, and as a result, political activism detracts from the key message of Christianity. As he puts it, “the argument of this book is that using the Christian faith as the basis for culture or politics, by seemingly making it so important, actually trivializes Christianity.” So in his view he is actually defending Biblical Christianity against a warped version of the faith, namely, a version of Christianity that sees it as applying to all areas of life, rather than just the specifically spiritual matters that are most important: "The question pursued in this book has been whether Christian-inspired policy, arguments, or candidates are appropriate on Christian grounds. My conclusion is that such involvement is inappropriate, because using Christianity for political ends fundamentally misconstrues the Christian religion." Failure of the secular position Hart is right about the priority of spiritual matters, of course. It is true that our individual relationship with God is much more important than political affairs. But his main point that Christianity is basically irrelevant to government and politics is simply wrong. Consider just one Scripture passage, Romans 13:1-7. In this passage the civil ruler is said to be “God's servant for your good.” He is also “an avenger who carries out God's wrath on the wrongdoer.” Hart would, of course, agree with this, i.e., that the civil government is established by God. But here’s the rub: the civil ruler must distinguish between good and evil in order to carry out his duties. How will he know what is good and what is evil? As “God’s servant,” he will need to look to the Word of God. Where else does God indicate what is good and what is evil? Therefore, if the civil ruler must look to the Bible to fulfill his God-assigned task, Christianity is immediately relevant (essential, in fact) to government and politics. Hart’s effort to divorce Christianity from government and politics comes crashing down. Another problem is Hart’s support for “religious neutrality” in the public arena. Religious neutrality suggests that Christianity must play no role in politics and government. What does this mean for pressing issues like same-sex marriage and abortion? What is the “neutral” position on same-sex marriage? There’s no such thing. Is allowing babies to be killed “neutral”? Or is forbidding them from being killed “neutral”? The idea of a position on abortion being neutral is absurd. Obviously, neutrality is impossible. Conclusion In a book of over 250 pages on the role of Christianity in politics, Hart does not even discuss the issues of homosexual rights and abortion. My fear is that he avoids those issues because the so-called “neutral” view looks a lot like the secular humanist view. In fact, Hart’s whole argument that Christianity is a private affair that should be kept out of the public arena dovetails extremely well with the secular humanist position. But if the Christian worldview is kept out of politics and government the result will not be neutrality, it will be a non-Christian (or even anti-Christian) worldview carrying the day....