From the faculty room of Reformed Theological Seminary in Orlando, Pastor Brito interviews Associate Editor of Ligonier Ministries, Robert Rothwell. The famous TableTalk magazine, read by over 250 thousand people around the globe is one of the most treasured devotional in our day. Robert writes those devotionals as well as contributes to theological articles.
In this interview we discuss the history of the magazine, as well as delve into some questions concerning the Trinity. Robert is considering a dissertation on the topic. Take a listen.
In this interview, Pastor Uri Brito speaks to Andrew Sandlin, the president of the Center for Cultural Leadership. We discuss the legacy of Professor Greg Bahnsen and the lessons he left us as we celebrate the 23rd anniversary of his death.
Andrew was a friend of Dr. Bahnsen and one who continues the Bahnsenian legacy of faithfulness to the Scriptures and commitment to the absolute Lordship of Jesus Christ over all areas of life.
Have you noticed a shift in strategy by supporters of abortion? Have you detected the establishment of a new philosophical foundation for killing our own children? I think I have.
In the beginning, it was a matter of privacy. Abortion was a simple surgery, on par with a vasectomy, and no one should be listening in on conversations with a woman and her doctor. Abortion was a simple medical procedure that removed a clump of unfeeling, undifferentiated cells from a woman’s body. Of course, this argument became increasingly difficult to maintain, as ultrasounds of babies in utero became more widespread.
In the not too recent past, abortion was called a difficult decision that should be left to a woman and her doctor. That word “difficult” put some moral weight into the conversation. I mean, it is never a “difficult decision” to have a skin tag, or a pre-cancerous mole removed. It is just tissue, and healthy tissue will replace it. Undoubtedly the difficulty of abortion requires that you acknowledge at least the potentiality of this baby having a life of its own.
The argument moved a bit further down the philosophical track by declaring that abortion should be “safe, legal and rare.” Why rare? The evidence is piling up that a very young fetus can feel pain, that they are unique human beings and are entirely distinct from their mothers even while they are dependent upon them. Abortion should only occur in extreme situations goes the argument. But what qualifies as extreme should again be left to the mother and her doctor.
Well, people became increasingly uncomfortable with abortion for just any reason and at any point in the development of a child, so restrictions began to increase in state legislatures. Can the baby survive outside the womb? You may not kill the child. Can the baby feel pain in the womb? You may not kill her then either. Are you killing the child for a genetic defect, say being conceived a girl? We won’t allow you to kill her for that reason.
Positive care was required. You have to provide medical care to a baby born alive during an abortion. You have to keep medical records on the woman coming in for an abortion. You have to have admitting privileges at a local hospital so that if you rip a hole in the mother’s uterus as you are cutting up her child, you can transfer the mother with her medical records describing what transpired. These restrictions did not sit well with abortion advocates.
In 2015 we learned that Planned Parenthood had negotiated prices for fetal eye tissue (and brain matter, and spinal cords, and feet, toes and tiny fingers) and the outrage became so great there was an actual movement to take away federal tax dollars from them (damn radicals!).
This was a bridge too far, and proponents of abortion set their argument for abortion on a new moral foundation. Abortion is good, and it is good in and of itself. The killing of your child is a thing to be celebrated. You should SHOUT YOUR ABORTION. Let the world know what a good thing it is to kill your baby. Better for him, better for the mother, better for society. Abortion is no longer a necessary evil – it has become a moral imperative.
Today we write hymns about our abortions. We set up virtual shrines with ultrasound images of our babies so we can speak to them about how grateful we are to have the right to kill them. We demand that fetus joins us in our worship of self.
Ladies and gentlemen, I give you the fetal lullaby:
Alan Stout is the Associate Pastor of Providence Church in Pensacola, FL and active pro-life advocate in the Pensacola community. He serves on the board of Emerald Coast Coalition for Life.
Every Christmas there is the inevitable talk about a “war on Christmas.” Not all opposition comes from secularists, atheists, and Muslims. Some Christians believe the Bible does not set aside the birth of Jesus as a special calendar day to honor His birth. Such a celebration violates the “regulative principle of worship.” Others believe Christmas has a pagan origin and that the Roman Catholic Church turned a pagan celebration into a Christian holy day (holiday). Because of this religious metamorphosis, Christians should not celebrate Christmas. A subset of this opposition is the Christmas tree. It, too, is said to be of pagan origin, thus, Christians should not bring them into their homes.
Should we stop using wood because some people seek out for themselves “a skillful craftsman to prepare an idol that will not totter” (Isa. 40:20)? Are all trees pagan because pagans have used trees to create idols? Of course not. The Bible tells us, even in a post-fall world, that “everything created by God is good, and nothing is to be rejected if it is received with gratitude; for it is sanctified by means of the word of God and prayer” (1 Tim. 4:4-5; cf. Gen 1:31). For millennia idol worshippers have bowed down before heavenly bodies — sun, moon, and stars — calling them their gods. There were people in Isaiah’s day who looked to “astrologers, those who prophesy by the stars, those who predict by the new moons” seeking guidance (Isa. 47:13).
The people of Israel were warned by God not to lift their “eyes to heaven and see the sun and the moon and the stars, all the host of heaven, and be drawn away and worship them and serve them, those which the LORD your God has allotted to all the peoples under the whole heaven” (Deut. 4:19). God created the heavenly bodies to “be for signs, and for seasons, and for days and years,” and to “be for lights in the expanse of the heavens to give light on the earth” (Gen. 1:14).
These heavenly bodies were not to be worshipped or given divine status. They are created things that point back to God as their Creator: “For since the creation of the world His invisible attributes, His eternal power and divine nature, have been clearly seen, being understood through what has been made, so that they are without excuse” (Rom. 1:20; see Ps. 19:1-6). Even with the misuse of the heavenly bodies, it did not stop God from choosing the sun, moon, and stars to symbolize His chosen nation Israel (Gen. 37:9–11; Rev. 12:1–2). And neither did it stop Him from using a star to announce the birth of Jesus (Matt. 2:2).
Pagans believe there is power in inanimate objects like the sun, moons, and stars, but we know better. Notice how the Bible ridicules those who turn God’s good creation into divine objects they claim should be worshipped (Isa. 44:12–20). God’s people know better. We are not fooled or intimidated; it’s just a piece of wood created by God to be used for our benefit and enjoyment. We can burn it for heat or fashion it into a tool. Should we cut down the trees in our yards because Jesus was crucified on a tree?
Some will turn to Jeremiah 10:1–10 to make a case against “Christmas trees,” actually, evergreen or more technically conifers, because idol worshipers used them in their religious rituals. Jeremiah is describing idol worship, and he ridicules it: “Like a scarecrow in a cucumber field are they, and they cannot speak; they must be carried because they cannot walk! Do not fear them, for they can do no harm, nor can they do any good” (10:5). Who among us believes that a “Christmas tree” is worshipped today? When people put packages under the tree, they are not bowing down to worship the tree. The gifts are not for the tree gods. (more…)
Michael Ungar, Ph. D, therapist, researcher, and author writes in Psychology Today, “Kids are using their cell phones way too much and putting their mental health at terrible risk. National surveys are showing that kids today are more anxious than ever before, with spiking rates of depression and suicide.” Ungar also cites an uptick in Emergency Room visits for mood disorders and self-reported anxiety as part of the mental health crisis among teenagers.
How could cell phone use be causing such mental health trouble among our teens? I’m sure the possibilities are numerous and that the experts will elaborate on them all over time. The three I want to address here are bullying, something I will call cyber codependency, and isolation.
First, our teenagers are exposed to bullying as they never have been before. When I was a kid, the bully was the guy who threatened to beat you up if you didn’t give him your milk money, and he would follow through. Today the bully may still beat you up, but he also has social media tools to ratchet up the pressure; many of our teens are feeling the squeeze. Ungar writes again in Psychology Today, “A recent article in the Canadian Medical Association Journal by a group of researchers based mostly in Quebec, Canada, found that among a large sample of teens 59% reported moderate exposure to bullying, and 14% reported chronically high exposure to bullying, both in person and online.” Sometimes inexperienced, immature victims cannot see a way out of or through such intense pressure. As we have seen too often in recent years, the result can be tragic.
Next is the phenomenon I am calling cyber codependency. I am far from being a psychiatrist, but I am smart enough to see that many of our teens, and most especially girls, are getting their identities, their value, their self-worth from what others are saying about them online. In an article hosted on The Week and titled, “The Quiet Destruction of the American Teenager,” opinion writer Matthew Walther put it this way,
“Hell is not, strictly speaking, other people. But for a teenage girl, nine hours a day of other people evaluating your appearance and utterances as you attempt to negotiate their preferences and attitudes and jockey for some intangible sense of status is probably something very much like hell.”
As Christian parents, we are hopefully mature enough to know that our worth is found in Christ, not in what others think or say; however, a fourteen-year-old often does not have that same assurance, yet she has the whole world critiquing her selfies on Instagram. It is nearly impossible for her to be prepared for some of the responses she may receive to her naïve posts. How will she react? Many such girls, one in four to be exact, are responding by cutting or burning or otherwise harming themselves.
Finally, our teenagers are isolating themselves even as they think they are more connected to others than ever before. Social media, via the smartphone especially, has given us this sad paradox. The average American kid gets a smartphone long before he becomes a teenager, actually, and then spends an average of six to nine hours a day with his face glued to it, ignoring real flesh and blood family and friends in favor of those he interacts with electronically. If the isolation from community wasn’t bad enough on its own—and it is (Prov. 18:1)—there are other side effects that come with being connected to those you don’t know in a real flesh and blood sense. (more…)
Smartphones were turned loose on the world in 2007. How many of us have stopped to think that the average fifth grader has never known a world without smartphones? Today’s seventh graders were only two years old in 2007, so it is doubtful they can access much memory before smartphones. These children have always had the power of the internet and everything it brings with it right at their fingertips on their parents’ phones. Now they have it right in their back pockets because the average American child receives his first smartphone at the ripe old age of 10 (Psychology Today). As you might expect, that little number comes with some baggage.
Technology is moving so fast that parents often do not have time to get their minds around one gadget or game or social media craze before the next one has kidnapped their child’s attention. Don’t think it is any easier for school teachers and administrators either. Even though student cell phones must be in the backpack, in the locker, and turned off at Trinitas, the residual effect smartphones are having on school culture isn’t so residual. The age group from 10 to 15 years old is the hardest hit because they are not mentally, emotionally, or socially prepared to navigate the enormous responsibilities that come with having a smartphone and the data plan to go with it.
Some estimates are that teens spend six to nine hours a day on their phones (Psychology Today). This kind of usage could be considered addiction (or idolatry). Many parents are harrumphing right now because they cannot imagine how their child could spend that much time on his or her phone. I’ll tell you how: they aren’t sleeping! (The Conversation) Just recently a group of pre-teen boys told me that they regularly wake up at 2am to play Fortnite. One of the boys was sheepish about not being allowed to play until 8am; the others teased him.
The boys aren’t the only ones affected, though. Girls are also sleeping less while spending more time on their phones than on any other activity. For girls, it isn’t gaming that interests them; instead, it is searching for acceptance on social media. Jean Twenge, Ph. D., writes in Psychology Today:
… we found that social media use was significantly correlated with depression for girls … Developmentally, girls are more concerned with physical appearance and social popularity than boys are. Social media is a showcase of those issues, even quantifying them in numbers of likes and followers. Girls also spend more time on social media.
As it turns out, girls’ reactions to how they are perceived on social media can be dangerous. In fact, self-harm among girls between the ages of 10 and 14 has tripled since 2009. And by self-harm, I mean cutting or poisoning or something else serious enough for an ER visit. In short, our teenage daughters are looking for love in all the wrong places and are hurting themselves when they don’t find it (Psychology Today).
As a parent talking to other parents, I want to ask you a few questions. Does your child really need a cell phone, especially a smartphone, before he or she is driving? Does your teenage son or daughter have unrestricted access to the internet? Does he or she keep the phone in the bedroom? Do you have a way to check what the phone is being used for?
I firmly believe we are giving our children far too much freedom on the internet before they are mature enough to handle it. The effects on our culture are widespread, of epidemic proportions really. It is a disaster we are bringing on our own children. And why? For what reason? If our best answer is that everyone else is doing it and we can’t bear to tell our children no, then we need to carefully count the costs because they are high. I have only scratched the surface in this little blog. I encourage parents to do their own research. It will be well worth your time.
In this episode, Pastor Uri Brito speaks with the president of New College Franklin in Tennessee. New College is a classical college where students enter into the great conversation through the great works of western history and the significant philosophical questions of our day. Pastor Brito inquires about the uniqueness of New College in the modern educational environment as well as the kind of human beings this educational model produces in the workplace and in the church.
In this interview, Dustin Messer interviews NSA President Dr. Ben Merkle. Merkle discusses the vision of New Saint Andrews as well as what differentiates NSA from other traditional colleges. There is also an interesting discussion on how technology has shaped the college experience.
Dr. Goheen has authored, co-authored, or edited ten books, including A Light to the Nations: The Missional Church and the Biblical Story(IVP, 2014), Introducing Christian Mission Today: Scripture, History, and Issues (Baker, 2011), and The Church and Its Vocation: Lesslie Newbigin’s Missional Ecclesiology (Baker, forthcoming, 2018). He spends time each year in Brazil and Hungary training pastoral leaders.
For our 40th show, Pastor Brito interviews KC contributor Pastor Dustin Messer concerning his recent piece published at the Theopolis Institute entitled Sacred Work in a Secular World. The discussion begins with a false distinction between “full-time Christian ministry” and “secular work” so mistakenly proclaimed in the evangelical church. Dustin traces the history of vocation in the work of the Reformer Martin Luther and articulates a fuller vision of vocation based on the creation account of Genesis. Messer concludes by discussing how he would encourage a young person who is uncertain about what vocation to pursue.
“Most folks start in Genesis 3 to think about vocation…but if you start with the Fall explaining what’s wrong with work you can lead people to believe that work is just a necessary temporal good… We should go to Genesis 1 and ground your view of vocation in the creation of the world.”
“God is ruling over all creation through mortal humans and he has chosen a church for his mission so that what you do has real meaning and value.”
There is not a square inch in the whole domain of our human existence over which Christ, who is Sovereign over all, does not cry, ‘Mine!’Abraham Kuyper
