Let’s take a break from bad news around the planet by considering a way to escape the planet altogether.

A California-based startup plans to open a hotel on the moon by 2032. Galactic Resource Utilizations Space launched their booking website last month. Construction is expected to begin in 2029, pending regulatory approval. You can book your spot by putting down a deposit of a mere $1,000,000.

Why 2016 is making a comeback

If you’re looking for a less expensive way to manage the stress of our times, however, you can look to history rather than to the heavens. For example, the Wall Street Journal reports that “a severe bout of nostalgia is spreading in America” as “young adults are yearning for the simple days of 2016.”

In the first two weeks of January, the number of user-generated 2016 playlists on Spotify surged nearly 800 percent. A New York Times columnist points to the surge of people posting online content from ten years ago as well.

Some might blame the 2016 election of Donald Trump, but a history professor responded: “Part of it is that we have lost some hope of the future—that’s true of the right and the left. There’s some consolation in looking back.” According to the Journal article, “Some think the nostalgia stems from a shift in the past decade to a darker period of online life, and that celebrating 2016 brings people back to a less dystopian era of the internet.”

For a different way to escape the news, you can join the 213.1 million US adults who plan to watch the Super Bowl this Sunday. This year, 121.1 million intend to throw or attend a party, while another 18.2 million plan to watch the game at a bar or restaurant.

Of course, the “Sunday scaries” will be waiting for you when the game is over and you have to contemplate the week to come. You might even be experiencing lunaediesophobia: an intense fear or extreme anxiety regarding Mondays.

There’s a better way to redeem the stress of our days. In one sense it will cost you nothing, while in another it will cost you everything, but in the end it will bring you a peace and purpose you will find nowhere else.

“We are trying to fill an existential chasm”

Let’s begin with two book reviews.

First, the humanities professor Samuel Goldman reviews for the Wall Street Journal a book titled The Rise and Fall of Rational Control: The History of Modern Political Philosophy. Based on Harvard professor Harvey C. Mansfield’s signature course, it shows how ancient thinkers viewed reason as an end in itself. However, beginning with Machiavelli (1469–1527), modernity made understanding the world a means to changing it.

In Western context, this quest produced representational government, capitalistic commerce, and a secularized society, all intended to improve our lives by improving our world. But as the current epidemics of depression, loneliness, and “deaths of despair” illustrate, our efforts have been less than successful.

This leads us to our second review, this one in the Telegraph, where the author Stuart Jeffries appraises the latest book by psychoanalyst Adam Phillips. In The Life You Want, Phillips explains why our quest for happiness and fulfillment is so often unfulfilled: we are goaded by our materialistic society and the advertising that engulfs us to make our lives better with things. As Jeffries notes, “We are trying to fill an existential chasm inside ourselves with expensive nonsense.”

This is because, according to Phillips, we do not know what we truly want and thus cannot be truly satisfied. As a result, when we obtain something we think we want, it soon loses its luster. In fact, we often feel worse than before we obtained it.

“As labor pains upon a pregnant woman”

So, if the path to peace and purpose is not to be found within our society or ourselves, where are we to look? I’m sure you know what I’ll suggest, but I’d like to take us there through a route I had not considered before.

In my morning Bible study this week, I came upon 1 Thessalonians 5. Here Paul says of the return of Christ, “While people are saying, ‘There is peace and security,’ then sudden destruction will come upon them as labor pains upon a pregnant woman, and they will not escape” (v. 3). Let’s modify his metaphor for our conversation:

1. We are all “pregnant” with regard to ideas, attitudes, character, and our interior lives: “As a man thinketh in his heart, so is he” (Proverbs 23:7 KJV).
2. Like a child in their mother’s womb, that which is within us must inevitably come to “birth” in the world: “Nothing is covered that will not be revealed, or hidden that will not be known” (Matthew 10:26).
3. When it does, what we have been “growing” in the unseen dimensions of our lives will be obvious to ourselves and to others: “Out of the abundance of the heart the mouth speaks” (Matthew 12:34).
4. We must therefore form our interior lives in ways that produce the exterior peace and purpose we were created to seek: “If there is anything worthy of praise, think about these things. . . . and the God of peace will be with you” (Philippians 4:8–9).

Such formation in God’s plan costs us everything: We must be “crucified with Christ” (Galatians 2:20) as we give our entire selves to the Lord in a “living” and perpetual sacrifice (Romans 12:1) and take up our cross “daily” (Luke 9:23). In another sense, however, this costs us nothing: our holy Father can accept our surrender not because we are worthy but because his Son paid our debt and purchased our salvation (2 Corinthians 5:21).

We can even ask God to help us submit our lives to God, praying with the despairing father of a demon-possessed boy, “I believe; help my unbelief!” (Mark 9:24). We can pray for the faith to have faith, the strength to have the strength to yield our lives unconditionally to our Lord.

“The one thing that bears fruit in the life”

When we seek to “abide” in Christ in this holistic way, he assures us: “Whoever abides in me and I in him, he it is that bears much fruit” (John 15:5a). However, he also warns us, “Apart from me you can do nothing” (v. 5b).

Our lives can produce “much fruit” with Jesus, or we can produce “nothing” by ourselves. This is a binary choice with a binary result.

In yesterday’s My Utmost for His Highest reading, Oswald Chambers states:

“This abandon to the love of Christ is the one thing that bears fruit in the life, and it will always leave the impression of the holiness and of the power of God.”

Will you choose this “one thing” today?

Quote for the day:

“When I speak of a man ‘growing in grace’ I mean simply this—that his sense of sin is becoming deeper, his faith stronger, his hope brighter, his love more extensive, his spiritual mindedness more marked.” —J. C. Ryle

Our latest website resources:

• Bad Bunny, the Grammys, Super Bowl outrage, Don Lemon arrest & Epstein update
• What does faith have to say about today’s sports culture?
• What does the future look like for Israel, Hamas, and Gaza?
• Should I have watched the Grammys? A reflection on cultural engagement and spiritual purity
• Alex Pretti’s death, immigration tensions & how Christians can respond with Dr. Ryan Denison

Denison Forum

Savannah Guthrie has withdrawn from hosting the 2026 Winter Olympics opening ceremony to focus on her family. As you know, her mother, Nancy Guthrie, has disappeared in Tucson; police believe she was taken against her will in a “possible kidnapping or abduction.”

Now CBS News is reporting that its Tucson affiliate received a ransom note which “contained specific details about the home and what Nancy Guthrie was wearing that night.” The local sheriff has expressed concern that the eighty-four-year-old needs medication she must take daily, saying, “The clock is literally ticking.”

Ms. Guthrie’s disappearance is tragically not unusual in the US. In addition to abductions, elder fraud and abuse are epidemics, as hundreds of thousands of adults over the age of sixty are abused, neglected, or financially exploited each year.

It’s been said that the way we treat people is the true measure of our character. As we’ll see today, this is both bad news and good news. The choice is ours.

Why “America is awash in vice”

Cultural commentator Aaron Renn’s latest Wall Street Journal article is titled “America Is Awash in Vice.” The subtitle explains his thesis: “Gambling, drugs, and pornography were once held at bay by the country’s Judeo-Christian moral consensus. Not any more.”

Renn notes that we “hear a lot less about the mafia” than we used to, in part because federal law enforcement has worked hard to break up their criminal networks. But he explains the larger reason: “Society has legalized much of what the mafia used to do—gambling, drugs, and pornography.” As a result, “America is now a post-vice society.”

First, he cites gambling, now legal in all but a handful of states. About half of eighteen- to forty-nine-year-old men have online betting accounts, even though sports betting reduces savings and increases bankruptcy and domestic abuse.

Second, he notes the legalization of marijuana, which causes a variety of serious medical problems, and the decriminalization of psychedelic drugs like psilocybin. He also reminds us of the opioid crisis, in which “completely legal drugs sold by legitimate businesses caused hundreds of thousands of American deaths.”

Third, he points to pornography, “now delivered at industrial scale in high-definition video for free online.” This despite the fact that sex trafficking and child sexual abuse are common in the online pornography world.

Renn reports that for much of our history, America had a “softly institutionalized generic Protestantism” that “created an emphasis on moral reform and vice suppression.” As examples, the Comstock Act of 1871 banned the sending of obscene material in the mail, while the Mann Act of 1910 banned interstate prostitution. However, religious adherence and church attendance have declined in recent decades, while “academics and cultural figures called into question the old religious moral framework.”

He concludes:

A new and different public moral order has replaced the old one. This one has no problem with vice.

The mainstreaming of destructive vices is but one unforeseen negative outcome of the decline of Christianity in America. It’s unlikely to be the only one.

Nearly-nude celebrities at the Grammys

Legislation can constrain immorality to the degree that laws can be enforced, but it cannot produce morality. Because fallen humans are motivated by the “will to power,” our drive to be our own god (Genesis 3:5), we will almost always do what is in our own perceived best interest.

Even altruism typically serves our ends: we want to impress others with our compassion, obligate those we serve to serve us in return, and motivate God to reward us for our service.

And temptation will always appeal to our basest instincts.

Nearly-nude celebrities at last Sunday’s Grammys appeared as they did because they wanted to generate the publicity they knew their outfits would produce. Their strategy obviously worked: the internet is still talking about them this morning. They came up to the line of public nudity, which is as far as the law can go, while violating all principles of decorum and good taste in the service of advancing their careers.

Pornographers do the same, coming to the line of what is illegal while producing content that is clearly immoral and damaging both to those who make the content and those who view it. Those in the tobacco industry similarly victimize their customers for the sake of their profits.

Elective abortion is the most obvious and tragic example of all. As Mother Teresa observed, “It is a poverty to decide that a child must die so that you may live as you wish.” Since abortion was legalized in America, more than sixty-five million children in America have died as a consequence of this moral “poverty.”

“Thanks be to God through Jesus Christ our Lord!”

I am no exception to the principle that laws cannot produce morality. I have spent my entire adult life teaching, preaching, and writing biblical responses to the issues of our day. By virtue of my vocation, I get to spend more time in Scripture each day than nearly anyone I know.

But what I know I should do and what I want to do are not aligned often enough. Paul’s testimony resonates with me: “I delight in the law of God, in my inner being, but I see in my members another law waging war against the law of my mind and making me captive to the law of sin that dwells in my members” (Romans 7:22–23).

Now comes the good news. After Paul asks, “Who will deliver me from this body of death?” (v. 24), he answers immediately: “Thanks be to God through Jesus Christ our Lord!” (v. 25). The living Lord Jesus will transform my heart and shape my motives as he remakes me like himself (Romans 8:29). He will give me the desire to obey his word and the power to fulfill this desire. He wants to reproduce himself in me and in multitudes of other believers until the “body of Christ” encircles the world and advances his kingdom to the ends of the earth.

The key is to settle for nothing less than such holistic holiness. Being better than our broken culture is not good enough. We must want to be so much like Jesus that our private thoughts and public words and actions please and glorify him every moment of every day.

Do you want such holiness today? If you do, ask Jesus for the empowering of his sanctifying Spirit and then do what he leads you to do.

If you don’t, ask for the faith to have faith, the grace to seek grace.

If you’re a Christian, you have all of God there is.

Does he have all of you there is?

Quote for the day:

“The whole work of sanctification, from its first step to its last period, is all of grace, all must be ascribed to God’s free goodness.” —Thomas Manton (1620–77)

Our latest website resources:

• What does faith have to say about today’s sports culture?
• What does the future look like for Israel, Hamas, and Gaza?
• Should I have watched the Grammys? A reflection on cultural engagement and spiritual purity
• Alex Pretti’s death, immigration tensions & how Christians can respond with Dr. Ryan Denison
• Finding hope after life’s detours

Denison Forum

As the ceasefire between Israel and Hamas enters phase two, many are equally surprised it has held this long and dubious that it will continue. At the heart of those doubts are questions about the Board of Peace, which is meant to oversee much of this transition.

Why it matters

Rebuilding Gaza will take an enormous commitment from the nations that have pledged to help. Anything that leaves room for Hamas to regroup and eventually retake power—or for a group equally committed to Israel’s destruction, even if it comes at the expense of the people in Gaza—could result in even worse warfare than before. This peace needs to last, and it remains to be seen if it can.

The backstory: How we got to phase two and what to look for going forward

Last October, both Israel and Hamas agreed to a 20-point plan that would start with a cease-fire with the hopes that lasting peace could be achieved by the end of it. The first phase of that plan called for Hamas to return all living and dead Israeli hostages, while Israel would release 2,000 Palestinian prisoners. As of last week, the body of the final hostage was returned to Israel.

While both sides have continued to kill one another at various times over the last three months, overall, the violence has lessened to a tremendous degree. Moreover, the UN reports of starvation that proliferated last year have subsided, with 100 percent of Gazans now having their basic food needs met. And the Rafah Crossing from Gaza to Egypt is now open once again, paving the way for an estimated 18,500 people—including 4,000 children—in need of medical care to receive it.

However, phase one was always going to be the more straightforward part of the deal. Now comes the really tricky part.

You see, phase two is where most expect that the cease-fire will fall apart. Israel now has the reward they valued the most—the return of all hostages. Meanwhile, Hamas will now be expected to fully step back from governance and disarm—the requirement they have never fully agreed to live up to.

In place of Hamas, a National Committee for the Administration of Gaza (NCAG) will pick up the mantle of governance. Ali Shaath has been tapped to lead this group of fifteen Palestinian technocrats as they attempt to guide the rebuilding of the region. A “Gaza Executive Board,” comprised of leaders from Turkey, Qatar, Egypt, the United Arab Emirates, Israel, and the UN, will help to supplement their efforts.

And above them all stands the Board of Peace that President Trump announced at the World Economic Forum last month. Yet, the Board has quickly become the most controversial element of the situation in Gaza, despite the presence of an armed terrorist organization in Hamas and Israel’s continued bombings.

So what is it about the Board that is so controversial? And will it ultimately prove to be more of a help or a hindrance on the path to peace in Gaza?

Has the Board of Peace already lost its vision?

The controversy surrounding the Board of Peace centers primarily on two points: the scope of their mission and who was invited. Let’s start with the mission.

When the Board was first proposed, the idea was that it would serve as an international body of countries committed to supporting Gaza’s reconstruction and development. Most would agree that the scope and scale of that project is far more than any one country could handle. For example, clearing the rubble is projected to take at least three years, so simply making the bulk of Gaza safe for the people of Gaza is a big ask to start with.

That’s why many of the Board’s skeptics were quick to point toward mission creep after President Trump presented his plans for the endeavor at the World Economic Forum. There, he announced that the group would instead seek “to promote stability, restore dependable and lawful governance, and secure enduring peace in areas affected or threatened by conflict” (emphasis added). “Areas affected or threatened by conflict” pertains to a lot more than just Gaza.

While Secretary of State Marco Rubio later clarified that Gaza will “serve as an example of what’s possible in other parts of the world,” that only works if the group can stay committed long enough to actually finish their work in Gaza.

Perhaps it shouldn’t come as a surprise, then, that the first term on the Board will start with a three-year interval unless countries choose to pay $1 billion for permanent membership. Essentially, if you want to still be around when the time comes to profit from much of what is being rebuilt, you need to pay up and prove your commitment from the start.

And, given some of the nations that have signed up to do just that, many are dubious of what those efforts will look like in the long run.

Can the Board of Peace be trusted?

The second point of contention many bring up with the Board of Peace and its plans for the future of Gaza is related to the group’s composition. Many of America’s more traditional allies in Europe—France, Germany, and the United Kingdom, to name a few—have declined their invitation to join.

Instead, the Board will be composed largely of the Middle Eastern nations with whom Trump has negotiated heavily since returning to office. Egypt, Saudi Arabia, Turkey, Qatar, the UAE, and Israel have all agreed to play a role. Meanwhile, Russia and China have been invited but, as of this writing, have yet to say whether they will take part.

Given Russia’s ongoing war in Ukraine and China’s ever-present threat of attempting to take Taiwan, inviting them to a group focused on “enduring peace” has understandably raised some eyebrows. That Trump is set to preside over the body even after his term as president ends in 2028 is another point of suspicion for many who doubt that the Board was put together with the good of Gaza in mind.

And the reality of the situation is that the good of Gaza is, most likely, not the Board’s first priority. As Dan Perry points out, though, that may not be a bad thing:

Trump is also driven by a sense of ownership. He remains focused when a project feels like his, and the Middle East is such a project. If the Board of Peace appears to be key to sustaining his sense of ownership — and if it keeps pressure on regional actors, maintaining momentum toward dismantling Hamas’ grip on Gaza — then it may be useful, even if its structure is indefensible.

And Trump is hardly alone in paying more attention to causes from which he can benefit personally. The peace plan in Gaza hinges on everyone involved standing to benefit in some way.

World leaders have rarely—if ever—acted solely out of the goodness of their own hearts. Some opportunity for selfish gain has to be baked into the equation for nations and leaders to sacrifice as much as they’ll need to for Gaza to know true peace and restoration.

Would it be better if these leaders’ primary concern were the people of Gaza? Absolutely. But it also wouldn’t work.

As such, the situation in Gaza and with the Board of Peace speaks to a much larger truth about humanity, as well as the opportunity that truth presents for us to share the gospel.

Spiritual application: Redeeming human selfishness 

Milton Friedman once remarked:

I do not believe that the solution to our problem is simply to elect the right people. The important thing is to establish a political climate of opinion which will make it politically profitable for the wrong people to do the right thing. Unless it is politically profitable for the wrong people to do the right thing, the right people will not do the right thing either, or if they try, they will shortly be out of office.

To put it another way, the temptation toward selfishness is endemic to our fallen nature, and the key is learning to redeem it. In truth, though, it’s been that way from the beginning.

The very first person ever born with inherited sin murdered his brother because he was jealous that God honored Abel’s sacrifice rather than his own. And things didn’t exactly improve from there. Before Adam died, he would see his offspring spread across the land and begin to devolve into such wickedness that God would purge the earth of everyone but Noah and his family.

And even after humanity restarted with Noah, it didn’t take long for things to go downhill once again. However, living in accordance with Christ’s commands stands out all that much more because the world has taught us to expect selfishness and evil from our fellow humans.

And you don’t have to be a politician or world leader for that to be the case. There are selfish people in every walk of life, which means that your example can stand out regardless of where God has called you to work, the community in which he’s called you to live, or even the church in which he’s called you to serve.

Each time we see examples of selfishness or evil in the world, it’s an opportunity to either grow jaded and distraught or to be reminded of just how easy it can be for the gospel to stand out when we follow Jesus well.

Which response will you choose today?

Denison Forum

A reflection on cultural engagement and spiritual purity

The 68^th Grammy Awards were on television last night, an event intended to recognize outstanding achievements in music. My wife and I watched for a few minutes, but the parade of celebrities wearing very little clothing and taking turns disparaging the government soon became wearisome. (Though I must add that Jelly Roll’s acceptance speech, in which he glorified God and emphatically called on the audience to trust in Christ, was a very notable exception.)

In addition, I have heard almost none of the music being recognized and know very little about the performers apart from the headlines they occasionally generate. It was the same with the Emmys last fall, and I assume it will be the same with the Oscars in a few weeks. Thus far, I have seen exactly one of the movies nominated for best picture and am not sure I’ll see any of the others.

This is an odd confession for someone whose calling is to be a cultural apologist. How can I respond to the culture if I’m not more engaged in it?

It’s a question that concerns not just people like me but also people like you. And it has implications far beyond annual awards shows.

Living in a cave atop a tower

With regard to cultural engagement, a spectrum of options presents itself.

On one extreme, we can emulate the desert monastics who retreated from society into lives of complete isolation. They did so in part to prevent being “contaminated” by their fallen society, but also to intercede for that society.

On a study tour of Greece and Turkey some years ago, our group drove through a region noted for its “fairy chimneys.” These are rock formations characterized by tall pillars rising from the valley below. Many are pockmarked with caves. And some of these caves are inhabited by monks who live there for years, some for decades.

These monks are fed and otherwise supported by nearby monastic communities. Some of them will go many years with no contact with the larger world.

I asked our tour guide how Christian ministers could feel they were serving God in such isolation from the world we are called to influence for Christ. We are the “salt of the earth” (Matthew 5:13), I noted, but salt has no effect if it remains in the salt shaker.

He explained that these monks dedicate their lives not to escaping the world but to praying for it. They feel that their intercession is a greater service to the global population and its challenges than anything else they could do.

If we believe in the merits of intercessory prayer (cf. Mark 11:24), we should consider the merits of their position.

What percentage of Christians possess a biblical worldview?

On the other extreme, we can engage so fully in our fallen culture that there is little distinction between us and those who do not claim to follow Jesus.

Only 30 percent of self-identified Christians attend church services each week. According to Barna studies, only 9 percent of us possess a biblical worldview. On a variety of issues, many Christians and even many evangelicals are indistinguishable from the larger culture in their beliefs and practices.

You and I likely fall somewhere in the middle. We don’t live in caves, we attend church with some regularity, and we don’t participate in obviously sinful activities such as the near-nudity on the Grammys stage or the profanity of many of the lyrics performed and speeches delivered.

But if you’re not locked into an extreme on a cultural spectrum, you must decide where you should be on each issue as it arises. And you can expect some who differ with you to take exception to your decisions.

Quoting David Brooks

For example, I regularly reference writers with whom I disagree on significant issues. My extended quote from the now-former New York Times columnist David Brooks in today’s Daily Article is an example. I agreed with some of what he wrote in his article so fully that I wanted to reproduce and respond to it. I disagreed strongly with some other parts of the same article, however, just as I sometimes disagree strongly with other positions Mr. Brooks takes on political and cultural issues.

I regularly cite media platforms such as the Times, even though I regularly disagree with their typical editorial slant. On occasion, readers will take exception to such references, fearing that I am endorsing these platforms by citing them.

If, however, I am only to cite platforms with which I completely and consistently agree, I will have no platforms to cite. I don’t even agree with some of my own sermons and writings from years ago. And I acknowledge the fact that I am no more inerrant today than I was then.

It’s virtually impossible to participate in any collective activity or organization without risking an apparent endorsement that might offend someone. For example, we have dozens of staff members at Denison Ministries. Each of them could be seen as endorsing what I am writing right now by virtue of their decision to work with us. Because my wife and I attended church yesterday, someone could accuse us of endorsing anything our pastor says or does today.

All of which makes a cave atop a tower understandably appealing.

“Speaking the truth in love”

As always, Jesus is our model.

He engaged with his fallen culture so fully that critics called him “a glutton and a drunkard, a friend of tax collectors and sinners!” (Matthew 11:19). He did so in the knowledge that we must take the gospel to the lost just as salt must contact that which it is to influence.

Yet our Lord refused to participate personally in the sins of his society (Hebrews 4:15). He was in the world but not of it. As the author and professor John A. Shedd noted, “A ship in harbor is safe, but that is not what ships are built for.”

When a ship is in the water, all is well. When water is in the ship, all can be lost.

Now Jesus is ready by his Spirit to lead us to those parts of the culture we are to engage by “speaking the truth in love” (Ephesians 4:15). Your call may not be mine, just as mine may not be yours. But we are both called to use our influence for the advancement of God’s kingdom in our world (Matthew 6:33).

As the Spirit leads us, he will equip and empower us. He will give us the discernment to engage with sinners without committing their sins (cf. Hebrews 5:14). He will speak to us and through us (cf. Matthew 10:20).

And he will enable us to love others as he loves us.

“Bad ideas have victims”

My wife often reminds those she teaches that lost people act like lost people. As Paul noted, “The natural person does not accept the things of the Spirit of God, for they are folly to him, and he is not able to understand them because they are spiritually discerned” (1 Corinthians 2:14).

This is because “the god of this world has blinded the minds of the unbelievers, to keep them from seeing the light of the gospel of the glory of Christ, who is the image of God” (2 Corinthians 4:4). As my friend John Stonestreet says, “Ideas have consequences. Bad ideas have victims.”

This means that you and I are not cultural warriors doing battle with those who disagree with us, but cultural missionaries called to share the love we have experienced in Christ.

Our enemy is Satan, not those he has deceived. Our power is the Spirit who always defeats our enemy. And our hope is as secure as the promises of God.

You are alive when and where you are because you can make a kingdom difference when and where you are. Charles Spurgeon was right:

“It is the whole business of the whole church to preach the whole gospel to the whole world.”

What part of this “business” is yours today?

Denison Forum

American governance and the path to our best future

Anti-ICE protests were staged in cities across the US over the weekend. Bikers also participated in memorial rides for Alex Pretti, who was killed by federal agents in Minneapolis last month. Over two hundred such rides took place across forty-three states.

In other news, the US government partially shut down over the weekend as dozens of federal agencies saw their funding lapse at 12 a.m. Saturday. And President Trump named Kevin Warsh to become Federal Reserve chair, but the process for confirmation by the Senate may be in doubt.

Here’s what these stories have in common: they illustrate features in America’s governance, not bugs. This is a fact that matters far beyond its political implications.

Equality vs. checks and balances

Public demonstrations have long been part of the American story, as the civil rights movement of the 1960s and the recent “March for Life” in Washington, DC, illustrate.  Such events stand in marked contrast to the recent massacre of protesters in Iran and the 1989 murder of demonstrators in Tiananmen Square by the Chinese Communist Party.

Our partial government shutdown occurred because the Senate approved a funding package late Friday, but the House is not expected to vote on it until tomorrow at the earliest. Mr. Warsh’s confirmation by the Senate may be blocked by Sen. Thom Tillis, not because he is opposed to the president’s nominee, but because he wants an investigation into the current Fed Chair, Jerome Powell, to be “fully and transparently resolved” first.

In each case, we are seeing the juxtaposition of America’s founding declaration that “all men are created equal” with the constitutional provision of checks and balances against unaccountable power.

Citizens can seek to persuade our leaders and otherwise catalyze change through lawful protests and public gatherings. The various branches of government can also leverage their influence toward the common good. And even individuals serving in leadership can have an outsized role in our governance.

This system has helped an amazingly disparate and diverse nation achieve a level of solidarity and progress that few Europeans foresaw at its birth. But no nation’s future is guaranteed, including ours.

Our “most grievous cultural wound”

I have long appreciated the work of New York Times columnist David Brooks. I do not agree with all he writes, but I appreciate the reasoned way he seeks to advance his vision of American flourishing.

I was therefore surprised on Friday to read that he is leaving the Times after twenty-two years. In his final column, he diagnoses our cultural condition once more:

Four decades of hyperindividualism expanded individual choice but weakened the bonds between people. . . . As a result of technological progress and humanistic decay, life has become objectively better but subjectively worse. We have widened personal freedom but utterly failed to help people answer the question of what that freedom is for.

The most grievous cultural wound has been the loss of a shared moral order. . . . Without shared standards of right and wrong, it’s impossible to settle disputes; it’s impossible to maintain social cohesion and trust. Every healthy society rests on some shared conception of the sacred—sacred heroes, sacred texts, sacred ideals—and when that goes away, anxiety, atomization, and a slow descent toward barbarism are the natural results.

In other words, we want the benefits of consensual governance without the necessity of a consensual morality. But human laws cannot change human nature. At best, they can restrain some of us from harming others some of the time. They cannot produce the “shared moral order” that leads to the flourishing our Founders envisioned for us.

What can?

“Honest but reluctant taxpayers”

At this point, you probably expect me to recommend biblical morality as our essential cultural foundation. But here’s the problem: such morality requires our unconditional commitment. The Bible calls us to “love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your mind and with all your strength” (Mark 12:30, my emphases).

When did you last spend a day loving God with “all” your heart?

I am no different. I am just as tempted by partial obedience as you are. It is appealing to have my cake and eat it as well, to do what God requires to obtain his blessing but no more.

1. S. Lewis observed in his last sermon:

Our temptation is to look eagerly for the minimum that will be accepted. We are in fact very like honest but reluctant taxpayers. We approve of an income tax in principle. We make our returns truthfully. But we dread a rise in the tax. We are very careful to pay no more than is necessary. And we hope—we very ardently hope—that after we have paid it there will still be enough left to live on.

But partial obedience can lead only to partial benefits. The more unconditionally we are committed to our marriage, our children, our work, or our friends, the more we experience the best such relationships can offer.

It is the same with God. Our Father cannot bless what harms his children, and anything outside his will is sin (James 4:17) that enslaves us (John 8:34) and “brings forth death” (James 1:15). As Lewis noted in his sermon, “When we try to keep within us an area that is our own, we try to keep an area of death. Therefore, in love, [God] claims all.”

How, then, can we give him “all”?

“I have now concentrated all my prayers into one”

Jesus promised, “If you love me, you will keep my commandments” (John 14:15). “Love” translates agape, the unconditional commitment to place the other before ourselves. When we love Jesus like this, he said, “you will keep my commandments.” Not might, but will.

Here’s the good news: agape is a “fruit” of the Spirit, not of human effort (Galatians 5:22). When we submit ourselves to him daily (Ephesians 5:18), he produces this fruit in our lives daily. The Spirit thus enables us to love our Lord so fully that we naturally and inevitably keep his commandments.

As the pastor and author Erwin Lutzer noted, “When you surrender your will to God, you discover the resources to do what God requires.” And doing “what God requires” positions us to experience his best in and through our lives, advancing the “shared moral order” that Brooks identifies as foundational to our cultural future.

Charles Spurgeon testified,

“I have now concentrated all my prayers into one, and that one prayer is that I may die to self and live wholly to him.”

Let us make his “one prayer” ours today, to the glory of God.

Quote for the day:

“Few souls understand what God would accomplish in them if they were to abandon themselves unreservedly to him and if they were to allow his grace to mold them accordingly.” —St. Ignatius of Loyola (1491–1556)

Our latest website resources:

• Alex Pretti’s death, immigration tensions & how Christians can respond with Dr. Ryan Denison
• The Focus: Reason for hope after the shooting of Alex Pretti
• A review of “The Body Teaches the Soul” by Justin Earley
• Finding hope after life’s detours
• The Challenger disaster and the providence of God

Denison Forum

“A massive Armada is heading to Iran. . . . Like with Venezuela, it is ready, willing, and able to rapidly fulfill its mission, with speed and violence, if necessary. . . . As I told Iran once before, MAKE A DEAL! They didn’t and there was ‘Operation Midnight Hammer,’ a major destruction of Iran. The next attack will be far worse! Don’t make that happen again.”

That was President Trump’s message to the leaders of Iran earlier this week, though it appears to have fallen on deaf ears. To this point, Iran and the US have passed messages through intermediaries like Qatar, Saudi Arabia, and Turkey, but it does not appear that they have talked directly to one another.

Turkey has taken a leading role in those mediations, and Iran’s foreign minister, Abbas Araghchi, arrived earlier this morning for that purpose. So far, at least, neither side appears overly eager to budge, with Araghchi using part of his time in Turkey to decry the European Union’s decision to name Iran’s Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) a terrorist organization for their role in suppressing protests earlier this month. However, those looking for a diplomatic solution may have time, as President Trump does not seem to be in too much of a hurry to act, despite the threats he’s issued.

As of this writing, he has yet to decide on an approach, and that indecision stems largely from the reality that they don’t really have a clear picture of what they hope to accomplish. Secretary of State Marco Rubio has cautioned that regime change in Iran would be “far more complex” than what they carried out in Venezuela, and even there, they appear to be making things up as they go to some extent.

But if they’re hesitant to force a change in leadership, what are their goals? After all, the fleet they’ve positioned within striking distance of Iran was not exactly cheap or easy to relocate.

Four demands, in particular, stand out.

The terms for peace

President Trump’s first demand—and the one he highlighted in his Truth Social post referenced above—is that Iran not only put an end to its nuclear program, but also give up all of its stockpiles of enriched uranium. That may prove difficult, however, since the majority of that uranium is buried underneath the facilities that collapsed following the strikes last summer.

Second, Iran must “stop killing protestors.” He later added that “they are killing them by the thousands.”

While the Human Rights Activists News Agency, a US-based group monitoring Iran, has confirmed 6,126 deaths from the protests, that number does not include the more than 17,000 that are still under investigation or the bodies that were buried by loved ones secretly to avoid government desecration. And, given that the government continues to arrest its citizens for connections to the protest, both numbers could increase over the coming days. Ultimately, we’ll never know an exact number, but something in the tens of thousands appears most likely.

The third demand is perhaps even less likely to be achieved than the first. President Trump called for Iran to limit the range and number of its ballistic missiles to such an extent that Israel would be safe from further attack. Given that those missiles are largely considered to be the primary reason that Israel hasn’t already attempted a regime change in Iran, removing the threat is likely off the table for the Supreme Leader and his government.

Iran’s unwillingness to consider this condition for peace is one of the reasons why these ballistic missile sites are thought to be high on the list of potential targets should the US engage with Iran directly. Israel would, reportedly, be willing to assist in such an attack and has encouraged President Trump to consider going this route if he chooses to engage.

Lastly, the fourth demand is perhaps the easiest for Iran to accomplish: sever all ties with proxy groups like Hamas, Hezbollah, and the Houthis. While the regime would be loath to officially cut off all connections with these terrorist organizations, the truth is that sanctions have crippled their economy to the degree that most believe they don’t have much to offer right now anyway.

Yet, as with the others, agreeing to this demand would effectively mark the end of the regime’s influence and respect around the region, even if some of the same people technically remained in power. As such, while a deal between the United States and Iran remains possible, it’s difficult to see where they can find common ground.

So, where does that leave us?

They don’t have the cards

Hopefully cooler heads can prevail, further violence can be avoided, and—most importantly—the lives of the Iranian citizens who have already suffered so much can finally start to get a little better. However, that does not appear to be the direction in which events are heading.

While Araghchi may not have begun speaking directly with his American counterparts, he has been quite vocal about what Iran needs to see before negotiations could begin. Namely, he stated:

Our position is precisely that pursuing diplomacy through military threats cannot be effective. If they want negotiations to take place, they must set aside threats, excessive demands, and the raising of illogical issues. Negotiations have their own principles and must be conducted on equal footing and based on mutual respect (emphasis mine).

That last part about equal footing and mutual respect is essential to understanding why this situation still has a high possibility of escalating into further violence.

You see, the US and Iran are not equals, and Iran has never treated America as an equal. To ask for such treatment now, when their army is already overwhelmed, most of their people have lost all respect and fear of them, and a military force far greater than they can defend against is parked just off its southern coast, is simply foolish.

It makes sense that Iran’s leaders would be hesitant to show weakness, but pretending they are in a position of strength when they’re not is only going to make matters worse for them. Even if their legions of drones and ballistic missiles pose a greater threat than what American forces encountered in Venezuela, those factors likely represent a reason for caution rather than genuine concern.

To use one of President Trump’s favorite analogies, in the end, they just don’t have the cards, and the world knows they’re bluffing. Unfortunately, that’s not a mistake limited to Iran.

Made in whose image?

Throughout Scripture, we find examples of people who lacked the self-awareness to see their situation objectively. King Belshazzar, whose celebration was interrupted by a divine hand scrawling a message of doom as the Persian army was taking his city, seems like a fitting example (Daniel 5). However, he’s not alone.

Generations of Israelites thinking God wouldn’t care if they worshiped other gods, the religious leaders in the Gospels who were so focused on keeping the Law that they rejected its author, and Peter taking Jesus aside to scold him for talking about dying are all good examples of this mistake in action.

The truth is that when we forget who God is, it becomes far easier to forget who we are as well.

From the very beginning, we were meant to find the essence of our identity in the fact that we are made in God’s image (Genesis 1:27). When our lives are submitted to his will and we see ourselves through his eyes, we don’t have to be afraid of the areas where we’re weak or flawed, because those weaknesses do not define us.

However, when we live as if we are made in our own image instead, strength—or at least the appearance of strength—can easily become foundational to every other aspect of our lives. And when that strength is threatened, everything else becomes threatened as well. Owning our mistakes and understanding when we’re wrong are simply not outcomes we can tolerate very well.

That’s an exhausting way to live, yet it’s the path many people choose to follow.

So, as we finish for today, take a moment to ask the Lord to help you identify any areas where you lack this kind of self-awareness. Is there a part of your life that’s built on a foundation other than your identity in Christ?

If so, today is a great day to repent of that sin and find real, lasting peace in your relationship with the Lord.

Let’s start now.

Quote of the day:

“Self-awareness is indispensable to seeing the lines between what you want to be true and what is actually true.” — Jonah Goldberg

Our latest website resources:

• Alex Pretti’s death, immigration tensions & how Christians can respond with Dr. Ryan Denison | Ep. 54
• A review of “The Body Teaches the Soul” by Justin Earley
• The Challenger disaster and the providence of God
• The Focus: Reason for hope after the shooting of Alex Pretti
• Finding hope after life’s detours

Denison Forum

Does the Lord cause all that happens?

Elizabeth Angle and Gracie Brito were high school sophomores and best friends in Frisco, a suburb north of Dallas. Last Sunday, they were riding on a sled as it was pulled by a Jeep Wrangler. The sled crashed and Elizabeth was killed; Gracie was critically injured and died yesterday.

In a Facebook post, Elizabeth’s mother wrote: “She was a bright light, a fun spirit, a brave soul. We loved her so much. She just got a car and a license and had her whole life ahead of her. It was all taken away so abruptly.” Gracie’s mother called her daughter “a kind and generous soul, full of love, affection, and warmth.” Her family said the days since the tragedy have been “unimaginably difficult.”

I cannot imagine these families’ grief and am so sorry for their loss. I am praying for them, asking God to be their help and peace in these terrible days.

I’m also praying for a mother whose three young sons fell through an icy pond Monday and died. And for the loved ones of those who died in the Challenger tragedy forty years ago yesterday. (For my heartfelt reflections, please see my new website article, “The Challenger disaster and the providence of God.”)

If God is truly sovereign, did he cause their pain?

If not, how can he be truly sovereign?

Either way, how can I trust him to be the Father I hope he is?

“So this is what God’s really like”

There is no biblical doubt that God is indeed sovereign over the universe he created. Jesus taught that not even a sparrow can “fall to the ground apart from your Father” (Matthew 10:29).

It only makes sense that an omnipotent being has the power by definition to do whatever he chooses to do. It is therefore unsurprising that the psalmist would declare, “Our God is in the heavens; he does all that he pleases” (Psalm 115:3).

However, I don’t want to believe that my Father causes all tragedy and pain. But just because I don’t want to believe something doesn’t mean it’s not true. And part of me worries that because God is sovereign, he must cause all that happens, including all death and suffering.

In this sense, C. S. Lewis spoke for me when he wrote after the death of his wife,

Not that I am (I think) in much danger of ceasing to believe in God. The real danger is of coming to believe such dreadful things about him. The conclusion I dread is not “So there’s no God after all,” but “So this is what God’s really like. Deceive yourself no longer.”

God’s sovereign choice to limit his sovereignty

However:

• Did God not choose to make humans in his image (Genesis 1:27)?
• Does being made in his image not include the same freedom to choose that he possesses (cf. Joshua 24:15)?
• Does God not then need to limit his sovereignty if he is to honor the freedom he gives us (cf. Deuteronomy 30:19)?
• Is it not an expression rather than a denial of his sovereignty if he sovereignly chooses to honor our freedom in this way (cf. 1 Kings 18:21)?

Consider an example.

Paul wrote that God “desires all people to be saved and to come to the knowledge of the truth” (1 Timothy 2:4). Peter added that God is “not wishing that any should perish, but that all should reach repentance” (2 Peter 3:9). And yet not all people are saved (cf. John 3:18). To the contrary, “If anyone’s name was not found written in the book of life, he was thrown into the lake of fire” (Revelation 20:15).

This paradox only makes sense if God sovereignly chooses to limit his sovereignty to permit our free will. As a result, though he passionately wants all people to be saved, not all are.

“His mercies never come to an end”

This discussion encourages me to believe that not everything that happens is the intentional will of God. However, let me hasten to add that he has both a perfect will and a permissive will.

Because he is sovereign, he must at least permit all that happens in his creation. From the sparrow that falls to the ground, to the Challenger disaster forty years ago, to the boys who drowned in an icy pond, to the teenagers who perished in a sledding accident, nothing can take place without his permission.

This fact leads me to close with mystery more than certitude, faith more than proof.

I don’t know why the God who permits disaster doesn’t always prevent it. He permits our free will, to be sure, but as with his miraculous delivery of Peter from Herod’s prison (Acts 12:6–11), he sometimes prevents its consequences.

However, as I noted in my website article on the Challenger tragedy, as a fallen and finite creature, I should not expect to understand the perfect and infinite mind of God any better than I do (cf. Isaiah 55:8–9). And the more I need his providence, the less I am likely to understand it, since challenges that call for his help are likely to be so difficult as to call into question his love.

Conversely, if I reject my Father’s love and grace because I do not understand them, I impoverish myself and forfeit his best in my life.

So I will pray honestly, “Remember my affliction and my wanderings, the wormwood and the gall!” (Lamentations 3:19). But then I will say:

This I call to mind, and therefore I have hope: The steadfast love of the Lᴏʀᴅ never ceases; his mercies never come to an end; they are new every morning; great is your faithfulness. “The Lᴏʀᴅ is my portion,” says my soul, “therefore I will hope in him” (vv. 21–24).

In what—or whom—is your hope today?

Quote for the day:

“Sooner shall a tender mother sit inattentive to her crying infant than Jesus be an unconcerned spectator of his suffering children.” —John Newton

Our latest website resources:

• Alex Pretti’s death, immigration tensions & how Christians can respond with Dr. Ryan Denison
• Reason for hope after the shooting of Alex Pretti
• A review of “The Body Teaches the Soul” by Justin Earley
• Finding hope after life’s detours
• What is the purpose of the Board of Peace? Trusting God when we cannot see him

Denison Forum

Let’s step away from the news today to discuss the way we consume the news. The Guardian asks, “Are we living in a golden age of stupidity?” Here are some reasons for the question:

• American high school seniors’ scores on math and reading tests have fallen to their lowest levels on record.
• Dependence on AI tools erodes critical thinking skills, harms learning and creativity, and increases isolation and loneliness.
• Research shows that overuse of social media, video games, and other digital platforms impairs executive functioning skills, including memory, planning, and decision-making.
• Short-form videos have been conclusively linked to poorer mental health and cognition.
• “Brain rot” has become such an ubiquitous term that Oxford University Press selected it as its 2024 word of the year.

Andrew Budson, a Boston University neurologist who specializes in memory disorders, explains our problem: we are using technology for the wrong purposes.

“Their brains actually shrink”

Dr. Budson reports that “our brains evolved for social interactions.” As a result, “People who become socially isolated, their brains actually shrink, even if they don’t have a disorder, and people who are socially isolated are at increased risk of developing dementia.”

I would amend his observation to say that our brains “were created for social interactions” by our triune God, who is relational by nature and made us in his image (Genesis 1:27). Nonetheless, Dr. Budson’s point stands: When we use technology in ways that isolate us from others, we misuse our brains. And this is by far the primary way we use technology.

Right now, I am sitting alone in my study as I type these words. You are likely reading or hearing what I write by yourself as well. Even if you watch television or a movie today in the company of others, you are unlikely to be discussing or experiencing it relationally. Earbuds and headphones intentionally block out everything else. Screens we can hold in our hands keep our hands from doing anything else.

And research emphatically shows that such isolation causes our brains to shrink, lose neuroplasticity, and otherwise decline in health and function.

So the answer is to engage more fully with the world around us, or so it would seem.

Not so fast.

“A dangerous network of domination”

Henri Nouwen warned in The Way of the Heart: “Our society is not a community radiant with the love of Christ, but a dangerous network of domination and manipulation in which we can easily get entangled and lose our souls.”

Nouwen then explained how we become so entangled:

“Compulsive” is indeed the best adjective for the false self. It points to the need for ongoing and increasing affirmation. Who am I? I am the one who is liked, praised, admired, disliked, hated, or despised. Whether I am a pianist, a businessman, or a minister, what matters is how I am perceived by my world.

If being busy is a good thing, then I must be busy. If having money is a sign of real freedom, then I must claim my money. If knowing many people proves my importance, I will have to make the necessary contacts. The compulsion manifests itself in the lurking fear of failing and the steady urge to prevent this by gathering more of the same—more work, more money, more friends.

If being isolated from the world harms our brains, but engaging with the world entangles us in its lostness, what is the way forward?

“Loving a holy God is beyond our moral power”

In The Holiness of God, theologian R. C. Sproul observed:

Loving a holy God is beyond our moral power. The only kind of God we can love by our sinful nature is an unholy god, an idol made by our own hands. Unless we are born of the Spirit of God, unless God sheds his holy love in our hearts, unless he stoops in his grace to change our hearts, we will not love him. . . . To love a holy God requires grace, grace strong enough to pierce our hardened hearts and awaken our moribund souls.

1. S. Lewis would have agreed. Commenting on Jesus’ sixth beatitude (Matthew 5:8), he noted: “It is safe to tell the pure in heart that they shall see God, for only the pure in heart want to.”

So, the way forward seems clear:

1. Recognize our need for the grace by which God changes our hearts and transfigures us with his love (2 Corinthians 5:17).
2. Pray for such transformation daily as we submit to the Spirit who alone can sanctify us (Ephesians 5:18; Romans 12:1).
3. Partner with God by refusing conformity to the world and seeking the “renewal of your mind” in Scripture, prayer, and worship (Romans 12:2).
4. Engage in technology and other isolating activities while in conversation with the Spirit as he guides our minds and hearts (John 14:26).
5. Engage in community while in conversation with the Spirit as he speaks through us to draw us closer to our Lord and thus to each other (cf. Matthew 10:20).

In short, “practice the presence of God,” as Brother Lawrence famously advised. What happens when we do?

“Noah found favor in the eyes of the Lᴏʀᴅ”

The Bible reports that “Enoch walked with God, and he was not, for God took him” (Genesis 5:24). The Hebrew for “walked with God” could be translated, “continually conversed and traveled together with the Lord.”

The phrase is used of only one other person: “Noah was a righteous man, blameless in his generation. Noah walked with God” (Genesis 6:9). I think the latter explains the former: because he “walked” with God, he acquired God’s character and thus was “righteous” and “blameless.”

But an earlier reference explains them both: “Noah found favor in the eyes of the Lᴏʀᴅ” (v. 8). “Found favor” could be translated, “received grace.”

So we are back to our pathway to God’s best: receiving the grace of God leads to walking in the presence of God, which leads to being transformed into the character of God, which leads to (in Enoch’s case and ours one day) being taken into heaven with God.

Will you pray for such transforming grace now?

Quote for the day:

“A Christian is never in a state of completion but always in the process of becoming.” —Martin Luther

Our latest website resources:

• Reason for hope after the shooting of Alex Pretti
• Finding hope after life’s detours
• What is the purpose of the Board of Peace? Trusting God when we cannot see him
• “Owning” Greenland and other legal fictions: Why do we seek to possess what can never be truly ours?
• Greenland explained, Indiana’s championship run, Iran updates, Minnesota tensions & Epstein files

Denison Forum

President Trump announced Monday that he was dispatching his border czar, Tom Homan, to Minnesota amid outrage over the fatal shooting of Alex Pretti by federal agents. He also suggested in a phone call with Minnesota Gov. Tim Walz that he is open to reducing the number of federal immigration agents in the state, the governor said after the call.

As you know, Mr. Pretti, a US Department of Veterans Affairs ICU nurse in Minneapolis, was killed by ICE agents on Saturday. He was carrying a 9mm handgun for which he had a legal permit. The Department of Homeland Security stated, “The officers attempted to disarm the suspect but the armed suspect violently resisted. . . . Fearing for his life and the lives and safety of fellow officers, an agent fired defensive shots.”

However, according to CBS News, video from the scene and witness accounts are “at odds with official statements.” NBC News reports that “some policing experts said the shooting appeared unjustified and one said it amounted to murder.” President Trump told the Wall Street Journal that the administration is “reviewing everything and will come out with a determination.”

Whom do you blame for this tragedy?

• Mr. Pretti, whom Stephen Miller, Mr. Trump’s homeland security adviser, called a “domestic terrorist”?
• ICE agents, whom critics call “inexperienced” and “minimally trained”?
• Mr. Trump, whom Minnesota Gov. Tim Walz called upon to “end this operation”?
• Gov. Walz, whom White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt accused of encouraging “left-wing agitators to stalk and record federal officers in the middle of lawful operations”?
• Democrats who, according to Sen. Ron Johnson (R-Wisconsin), “supported Biden’s open border, which created the mess that now must be cleaned up”?

All of the above? None of the above?

How do you know moon rocks are from the moon?

Unless you have information unavailable to the rest of us, my guess is that you are filtering what you read, hear, and see by what you think you already know. Your prior beliefs regarding Mr. Trump, ICE activities, and Democrats are likely governing your view of the present tragedy.

I’m not accusing you of partisan bias: this is how nearly everyone knows nearly everything they know.

I know that Minneapolis exists because I have been there personally. But I had not met Mr. Pretti, have never met an ICE agent, and have no personal relationship with anyone else in this story. How, then, am I to interpret it apart from what I do know and believe?

My two great-aunts were convinced astronauts never went to the moon, that the TV coverage of Neil Armstrong and the rest of it was staged to steal money from American taxpayers. When I asked them about moon rocks I saw in a museum, they asked, “How do you know they’re from the moon?” I hadn’t thought of that.

We learn new words by associating them with our existing vocabulary. If I told you my “mumblephump” was in the shop for repairs, you wouldn’t know if I was talking about my vehicle, my son’s guitar, or my grandfather’s antique watch, among other options. But if I told you that it needed a new transmission and a brake job, you’d know that I was probably using a strange word for a car. This is because you already know what “transmission” and “brake job” mean.

If you’re an average American, you know about six hundred people. The existence, character, and activities of the other 343 million of us are known to you only through sources who know them better than you do.

Why a greenhouse becomes bright

This matters because our “post-truth” culture has abandoned objectivity for subjectivity, so we have no objective means by which to test our biases. In a media world where subscriptions have replaced advertising revenue, causing outlets to focus on producing content their customers want to purchase, our biases become even more entrenched.

As a result, when divisive tragedies such as Mr. Pretti’s death occur, whatever their actual reasons, we have no way to achieve an unbiased understanding of what happened, much less what to do about it. And so our political and cultural divisiveness continues and deepens.

But there is a way Christians can be part of the solution rather than the problem.

Secularism leaves us with no transcendent hope since we have no source of help but ourselves. Religions across human history offer the opposite: a God or gods who do what they do independent of our agency.

By contrast, the heart of Christianity is the claim that Christ can live in our hearts. As Oswald Chambers noted, “The Holy Spirit will make all that Jesus did effectual in me.” C. S. Lewis agreed, writing in Mere Christianity:

The Christian thinks any good he does comes from the Christ-life inside him. He does not think God will love us because we are good, but that God will make us good because he loves us; just as the roof of a greenhouse does not attract the sun because it is bright, but becomes bright because the sun shines on it.

As God makes us “good,” he manifests himself in our minds, hearts, and lives (Galatians 2:20). We can have his wisdom by which to interpret the events of our world if we seek and submit to his Spirit’s guidance (John 14:26). We can have his compassion by which to love those who do not love us (John 13:34). We can have his character by which to demonstrate the radical difference he makes in our lives (Romans 8:29).

Asking your father for money to buy him a present

The key is to recognize how passionately our Father loves us and then to ask his Spirit to manifest his love for our Father in our hearts in response (Galatians 5:22). It’s like a child who asks her father for money to buy him a Christmas present.

When we love our Father with his love, we love others and ourselves in the same way. We then become the change we wish to see in our broken culture. And neither we nor those we influence can ever be the same.

Diadochos of Photiki (c. 400–c. 486) noted:

Anyone who loves God in the depths of his heart has already been loved by God. In fact, the measure of a man’s love for God depends upon how deeply aware he is of God’s love for him.

How “deeply aware” of God’s love are you today?

NOTE: Dr. Ryan Denison will offer an in-depth analysis of the recent ICE shootings in his weekly newsletter, The Focus, when it is published later today. I strongly encourage you to subscribe, which you can do here.

Quote for the day:

“The greatest honor we can give Almighty God is to live gladly because of the knowledge of his love.” —Julian of Norwich (c. 1343–1416)

Our latest website resources:

• What is the purpose of the Board of Peace? Trusting God when we cannot see him
• “Owning” Greenland and other legal fictions: Why do we seek to possess what can never be truly ours?
• Greenland explained, Indiana’s championship run, Iran updates, Minnesota tensions & Epstein files
• Faith and politics, yoga and Christian practice, salvation, and hope in a divided culture
• Is Greenland worth what it will cost the United States?

Denison Forum

A “generational” winter storm and the solidarity of our souls

If you happen to live in the geographical half of the country that was not victimized by a “devastating dose of winter weather” over the weekend, please permit me to reflect on the experience on behalf of the half of the country that was.

• Trees exploded in Minnesota.
• In the coldest areas, people were warned that they could incur frostbite in five minutes.
• President Trump approved twelve federal emergency declarations yesterday.
• Nearly 820,000 are without power this morning.
• More than twelve thousand flights were canceled yesterday.
• Railroad operations were disrupted.
• Twenty-three states and Washington, DC, declared a state of emergency.
• A meteorologist warned that much of the country would be “entombed” in ice.
• A writer in Austin wrote, “If I were to run, where would I run to? The cold is everywhere, all the way up to New York City.”

His complaint points to the point I’d like us to consider today.

Why YouTube is the most popular TV platform

A “generational storm” like this is one of the few things that unites us with other people. I got a phone call Friday afternoon from a friend in Pennsylvania who was expecting thirteen inches of snow over the weekend. Like us in Texas, she assumed her kids would not be going to school on Monday.

Apart from a storm system that spanned forty states stretching from Arizona to Maine, what else unites us these days?

Media has shifted hard to the left and right as paywalls replaced advertising revenues, causing outlets to cater to “passionate subscribers who want their worldview reinforced, not marginal readers.” The United Nations no longer unites the nations. The World Health Organization no longer encompasses the world.

Our political polarization has reached an all-time high. From abortion to same-sex marriage and LGBTQ ideology to euthanasia, a record-high 80 percent of us agree that we are “greatly divided when it comes to the most important values.”

In an insightful Wall Street Journal article, Ben Fritz notes that “for most of the twentieth century, pop culture was the glue that held the US together.” He reports that an estimated 200 million tickets were sold for Gone With the Wind when the US population was 130 million. In 1983, more than 100 million people watched the finale of M*A*S*H.

From the 1940s through the 1990s, three TV networks and seven movie studios decided everything we watched, while five or six record labels determined what we heard. Nearly everyone saw Jaws and Star Wars, Jurassic Park and the Harry Potter and Marvel series, or so it seemed.

Then came the internet, enabling everyone to make and stream video content, and handheld screens on which to watch it. YouTube is now the most popular television platform. As Fritz notes, this is “not because it has the hottest handful of shows, but because there’s something on it for everyone, no matter how mainstream or obscure.”

A photo of my father and his father

Disasters and crises can still unite us. If you’re old enough to remember 9/11, you also remember what it felt like to crowd into churches along with people who were there for the first time, to watch the president of the United States throw out the first pitch at a New York Yankees game, and to grieve with hundreds of millions of fellow Americans in the face of such horrific tragedy.

Think back to the COVID-19 pandemic and, again, the solidarity we all felt. When my wife and I ordered groceries online, drove our car to the store, and opened the back hatch so the masked store employee could put our food inside, we thanked them with a level of heartfelt gratitude I had not felt for a grocery store employee before.

My parents had similar stories about surviving Pearl Harbor and World War II, and my grandfather about serving in Europe during World War I. My brother recently sent me a photograph of our father in his war uniform, standing next to his father, both of them with prideful smiles I seldom remember seeing from either.

But the exceptions prove the rule. For people made in God’s image and thus for relationship, the atomizing fragmentation of our secularized society is devastating. The US Surgeon General reported that our “epidemic of loneliness and isolation” directly impacts cardiovascular disease, hypertension, diabetes, infectious diseases, depression and anxiety, suicidality, and self-harm.

If it takes a storm that endangers thirty-five states to unite us, what is our future as a “United” States of America?

The power of “a love genuinely lived”

Behind all that divides us, there is a commonality waiting to answer my question. St. Augustine spoke for us all when he prayed, “You have made us for yourself, and our hearts are restless till they find their rest in thee” (Confessions 1.1.1).

Thirteen very disparate colonies in the New World became a united nation only after the First Great Awakening drew them closer to God and therefore to each other, then an existential war for independence forged their national cohesion. The reason subsequent national crises, such as world wars, terrorist attacks, and pandemics, have not sustained the unity they sparked is that they were not preceded by such a transforming spiritual movement.

Our first president was therefore right to identify “religion and morality” as “indispensable supports” to “political prosperity.” Gen. Washington’s assertion makes sense: If we are created and intended to love our Lord and our neighbor as our highest purpose and aspiration (Mark 12:30–31), we will find unity and cohesion in doing both.

I cannot imagine that the weather crisis gripping much of our country will produce a national solidarity that endures once the ice and snow have melted. But I can respond to the personal finitude and mortality this storm revealed by seeking greater intimacy with the Lord who still calms stormy seas. And I can renew my commitment to loving my neighbor by praying earnestly for spiritual awakening to transform my nation and then by sharing my Father’s love with those I meet today.

In Meditations on the Cross, Dietrich Bonhoeffer observed:

The world is overcome not through destruction, but through reconciliation. Not ideals, nor programs, nor conscience, nor duty, nor responsibility, nor virtue, but only God’s perfect love can encounter reality and overcome it. Nor is it some universal ideal of love, but rather the love of God in Jesus Christ, a love genuinely lived, that does this.

How “genuinely” will you live such love today?

Quote for the day:

“The real love of God does not consist in tear shedding, nor in that sweetness and tenderness for which we often long just because they console us, but in serving God by serving those around us in justice, fortitude of soul, and humility.” —Teresa of Avila (1515–82)

Our latest website resources:

• What is the purpose of the Board of Peace? Trusting God when we cannot see him
• “Owning” Greenland and other legal fictions: Why do we seek to possess what can never be truly ours?
• Greenland explained, Indiana’s championship run, Iran updates, Minnesota tensions & Epstein files
• Faith and politics, yoga and Christian practice, salvation, and hope in a divided culture
• Is Greenland worth what it will cost the United States?

Denison Forum

Where I live, we are less than twenty-four hours from a major ice storm that is predicted to shut down our area for days. Roads will become impassible; power lines may come down. Everyone is stocking up on food and preparing for the worst. Since most of us remember the “Great Texas Freeze” of 2021, we’re reliving the pain of those terrible days in advance.

Our situation is by no means unique: this system could end up affecting more than two hundred million people in the US.

It’s an odd thing, really, our collective impotence in the face of nature. You and I live in the most technologically advanced age in human history. The slab of glass in my pocket can access the world’s store of information gathered across human history; these words I am typing on my laptop will soon be transmitted to hundreds of thousands of people in every nation on earth. My home is more climate-controlled and electronically equipped than any home I have ever owned.

And yet a winter storm I can neither forestall nor shorten will dominate my life for the next few days.

Is my religion a placebo effect?

Think how people felt in earlier eras, when there were no sophisticated meteorological instruments to predict the weather and no electricity to light and heat their homes. No wonder every civilization known to history has worshiped some type of deity or deities.

When you’re facing forces you cannot defeat, it only makes sense to call for help from forces greater than yourself. If worshiping a god of rain and storms can protect you and your family from the weather, this becomes a “why not?” proposition. If such worship seems to correlate over time with better outcomes, you’ll likely codify your religious beliefs into religious practices.

I have personally seen some of the altars built by Greeks and Romans across their empires to their pantheons of gods. I’ve met tribal people in Southeast Asia who worship the elemental spirits they believe inhabit and control their natural environment.

And I prayed this morning to my God, asking him not only to guide what I am writing today but to protect my family as the ice storm approaches our area.

Recent literature has documented the positive outcomes from religious practices for mental health, social stability, and overall wellness. But these outcomes are natural, not supernatural. They can be seen as a kind of placebo effect; the consequences of wish fulfillment and practices that produce benefits by virtue of the activities themselves rather than the supposed deities being worshiped.

And there’s the matter of negative outcomes. It would be one thing if religious practices always led to positive results. If people were healed every time we prayed for healing or storms were diminished every time we asked God for such protection, a skeptic would be more likely to believe that an actual God was at work. But I have prayed for healing that did not come and protection that never arrived. So have you.

The fact that I believe in Jesus doesn’t prove Christianity to be true any more than a Muslim’s or a Hindu’s beliefs persuade me to adopt Islam or Hinduism.

So I’ll continue to pray for divine protection as the ice storm approaches, but with the knowledge that my prayers may not be answered as I wish and that many in our post-Christian culture see my religious beliefs as outdated superstition akin to someone praying to Zeus.

Proving you should have children

At this point, my career-long study of Christian apologetics can be helpful. I can cite remarkable evidence from history, archaeology, science, and logic for the existence of God, the veracity of Scripture, the historical existence and resurrection of Jesus, and the continuing activity of the Creator in his creation.

But a post-truth culture will likely listen to all of that and retort, “That’s just your truth.” If all truth is personal and subjective, even objective evidence for Christianity becomes subjective as well. And even a professional apologist such as myself must admit that no faith commitment can be compelled through reason.

All relationships require a commitment that transcends the evidence and becomes self-validating. You could not prove scientifically or rationally that you should go to a school until you attend its classes, or that you should get married until you get married, or that you should have children until you have children. You could not prove that reading this article is worth your time until you read it. You examine the evidence, to be sure, but then you must make a decision that proves itself by experience.

Herein lies my point today.

Making God a “spare tire” in my car

Unlike every other religion and worldview known to human history, Christianity offers the proposition that the God we worship can and will inhabit our bodies and lives.

Jesus is not just at the “right hand” of the Father (Ephesians 1:20) akin to Zeus atop Mt. Olympus—he is also living by his Spirit in every person who trusts him as Lord (1 Corinthians 3:16). He is not just “with” us “to the end of the age” (Matthew 28:20)—he is also “Christ in you, the hope of glory” (Colossians 1:27). As Paul testified, Christ “lives in me” (Galatians 2:20) and we are “filled with all the fullness of God” (Ephesians 3:19).

Here’s the problem: When I relate to Jesus as transactionally as the Greeks prayed to their gods, giving him what I think he wants so he will give me what I want, I miss the essence of the uniqueness of the Christian faith. When I make him primarily a “weather god” in the face of an ice storm, or a “healing god” in the face of a health crisis, or a “wisdom god” in the face of a perplexing decision, I make him a means to my ends—a genie in my bottle, a parachute in my plane, or a spare tire in my car.

This is not the heart of Christianity. The beauty of our faith is that we can experience the God of the universe personally and intimately. We can know the joy and peace of his presence. We can walk with our Father through the “valley of the shadow of death” into whatever lies on its other side (Psalm 23:4). We can know that he is “with” us as we “pass through the waters” (Isaiah 43:2) because we are in his hand and he is in our heart (John 10:29).

We can pray for his help, to be sure. In fact, he encourages us to do so (Matthew 7:7; James 4:2). But at a level far higher and deeper than any transaction, we can experience life and life eternal in a conscious, abiding experience of his presence in the depths of our being, no matter what circumstances life brings us today (cf. John 15:1–11).

“The greatest human achievement”

I cannot know what “ice storm” you are facing today. But I do know that your Father wants to redeem it by using it to draw you closer to himself. Not just for what he can do for you, but for who he can be in you.

St. Augustine, the greatest theologian after Paul, observed:

“To fall in love with God is the greatest romance; to seek him the greatest adventure; to find him the greatest human achievement.”

What will you do to experience this “romance” today?

Quote for the day:

“Nothing in or of this world measures up to the simple pleasure of experiencing the presence of God.” —A. W. Tozer

Our latest website resources:

• Greenland explained, Indiana’s championship run, Iran updates, Minnesota tensions & Epstein files
• Faith and politics, yoga and Christian practice, salvation, and hope in a divided culture
• Is Greenland worth what it will cost the United States?
• Why the Buffalo Bills were right to fire Sean McDermott
• Are you SAD? How to fight against the winter blues

Denison Forum

President Trump announced yesterday that he was canceling his planned tariffs on US allies in Europe over US control of Greenland. The announcement came after he and NATO Secretary General Mark Rutte agreed to the “framework of a future deal” on Arctic security. Earlier in the day, Mr. Trump also stated that he was ruling out military force to acquire the island.

As Dr. Ryan Denison explained in Tuesday’s edition of The Focus, missile defense systems that form a primary deterrent against attacks on the US rely heavily on Greenland’s location. Melting ice caps have opened shipping lanes that were previously closed; Russia and China have increased their presence in the region. There are also significant rare earth minerals, oil, and hydrocarbon reserves on the island.

All of this argues for Greenland’s escalating geopolitical and military significance for the US in these fraught days. Nonetheless, Mr. Trump’s statement that he would not use military force or tariffs to acquire the island was met with approval. In fact, only 17 percent of Americans support the US taking Greenland; only 8 percent support using military force to do so.

Such reticence is understandable. A basic principle undergirding the world order is that nations are sovereign and that no country has the right to impose its values on another.

Let’s apply this thesis to the most urgent moral issue of our day.

What is the leading cause of death worldwide?

January 22 is the saddest anniversary of the year. More than sixty-five million babies have lost their lives in the US since the Supreme Court discovered a “right” to abortion in the US Constitution on this day in 1973.

More than a million babies in the US were aborted in 2024. This makes abortion the leading cause of death in America, far outstripping heart disease, the second-leading cause of death, with 680,981 fatalities. Abortion is also the leading cause of death worldwide: globally, more than seventy-three million babies were aborted just last year.

According to World Health Organization estimates, abortion accounted for nearly 52 percent of total deaths worldwide. Think about that for a moment: More than one in two deaths around the world were by abortion. If a disease was causing such horrific fatalities, it would lead the news every day. As it is, I would presume that you’re only now learning this.

At the same time, the world is facing an escalating demographic crisis. The global fertility rate for 2025 was 2.2 children per woman, the lowest level in recorded history. For the fourth year in a row, China reported more deaths than births last year as its birthrate plunged to a record low.

This matters because people are living longer than ever, meaning that fewer young people will be working and contributing to the support of more retirees. Over time, there will also be fewer people to buy goods and services, so economies will shrink, further exacerbating financial pressures.

Imagine the difference millions of aborted lives would make to this burgeoning crisis. You don’t have to wonder: according to the Joint Economic Committee of the US Congress, $6.9 trillion is lost each year from work that aborted individuals would have contributed to the American economy.

And there is a worldview factor here as well. A dear friend and I were discussing this issue the other day, and he noted that when people have no children or grandchildren, they are less invested in the future and more focused on what seems best for them in the present. As a result, they mortgage the future for themselves and everyone else as well.

When my room was bugged in Russia

Despite these global consequences, it is commonplace for Americans and even many evangelical Christians to respond to the abortion epidemic with the claim, “I don’t believe in abortion, but I have no right to force my beliefs on others.” I have heard this personally in conversations, radio interviews, and responses to speaking engagements over the years.

I understand the sentiment. When I was in St. Petersburg, Russia, some years ago, we were warned that our hotel was likely bugged by the government and that my roommate and I should not discuss our religious beliefs even in the “privacy” of our room. When I was in Beijing, China, I was permitted to teach the Bible only inside an international church closed to Chinese citizens. In Cuba, I had to be very careful to say nothing negative about the Communist government—even in private conversations—on the assumption that government infiltrators were listening.

To have the government or anyone else force their beliefs on us feels like an invasion of our basic freedoms. The same sentiment is behind the pro-abortion protester’s sign, “My Body, My Choice.” And it is behind those who advocate for same-sex marriage and transgender rights. And those who champion the “right” to death by euthanasia.

What makes abortion different?

Gandhi on “the true measure of any society”

In a recent survey, 96 percent of the 5,577 biologists who responded affirmed the view that human life begins at conception. This was not a survey of evangelicals: 89 percent of the respondents also identified as liberal and 63 percent as non-religious.

Nonetheless, their scientific position aligns with the clear declaration of Scripture. David said to God, for example: “You formed my inward parts; you knitted me together in my mother’s womb” (Psalm 139:13).

This means that an unborn baby is scientifically and biologically just as human prior to its birth as after its birth. Consequently, it has the same scientific and biological right to “life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness” as anyone else. But he or she obviously has no way to defend themselves in their mother’s womb.

This is what separates abortion logically from all other “rights.”

Abortion advocates claim that pro-life proponents are “forcing” their beliefs on them. But is a woman who chooses abortion not “forcing” her beliefs on her unborn child?

Which of the two is more vulnerable?

At their core, criminal laws “impose” societal values on would-be perpetrators to protect those who would otherwise become their victims. We do this to defend those who might not be able to defend themselves.

Can a baby in a womb defend himself or herself from abortion?

Mahatma Gandhi reportedly observed,

“The true measure of any society can be found in how it treats its most vulnerable members.”

How would the “most vulnerable members” of our society “measure” you today?

Quote for the day:

“He who accepts evil without protesting against it is really cooperating with it.” —Dr. Martin Luther King Jr.

Our latest website resources:

• Faith and politics, yoga and Christian practice, salvation, and hope in a divided culture
• Is Greenland worth what it will cost the United States?
• Why the Buffalo Bills were right to fire Sean McDermott
• Are you SAD? How to fight against the winter blues
• Texas A&M University removes Plato from a philosophy course

Denison Forum

When President Trump takes the stage in Davos, Switzerland, later today for his speech at this year’s World Economic Forum, it will mark the first time he’s visited the conference in person in six years. He appeared via video conference at last year’s event to call for a quick end to the war in Ukraine and to foreshadow the tariffs and other economic policies he would unleash in the months to come.

Overall, the speech set the tone for his first year in office, even if it came in contrast to the theme of “Collaboration for the Intelligent Age.” And most expect today’s speech to fall along similar lines.

The theme of this year’s conference is “A Spirit of Dialogue,” and expectations are mixed on how much genuine dialogue will occur. A White House official said the president is expected to focus on affordability while calling on Europe to fall in line on both Greenland and the policies he will argue “propelled the United States to lead the world in economic growth.”

But while the world waits to see what he will say, it’s the meetings behind the scenes that could end up being the most significant aspect of the event.

The meetings that matter

President Trump is taking some of his cabinet’s most important (and busiest) people with him. Secretary of State Marco Rubio, Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent, and special envoy Steve Witkoff are all expected to attend the conference alongside the president. Their presence has many speculating that Trump intends to accomplish far more than simply address the world during his time in Switzerland.

Among those expected endeavors, the most important are thought to be:

• A meeting with Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky, where some believe they will sign new security guarantees that could pave the road for a ceasefire with Russia.
• The first meeting for the newly formed “Board of Peace,” which has grown more controversial in recent days after a draft of its charter revealed its members intend to “secure enduring peace in areas affected or threatened by conflict.” That work would require a far greater scope and scale than simply facilitating the rebuilding of Gaza, and has many concerned that Trump is attempting to start a new NATO, but under his leadership.
• An advancement of conversations concerning Greenland, with the President speculating that “things are going to work out pretty well, actually. So, I think something’s going to happen that’s going to be very good for everybody.” Most doubt such a quick resolution is possible, but as I discussed in yesterday’s edition of The Focus, the ice-covered island is shaping up to be an inflection point after which America’s relationship with its European allies is likely to change in lasting and substantial ways, regardless of which path they take.
• Other international conflicts, like the evolving situation in Iran and China’s continued efforts to convince the world that it should be allowed to take Taiwan. It’s quite possible that the manner in which the Greenland situation plays itself out could have a direct effect on China’s willingness to advance on the much-coveted island near its own borders.

Against the backdrop of these geopolitical developments, the question of just what kind of world will be waiting for global leaders this time next year remains as difficult to answer as at any point in recent history. As a result, the conference itself has seen a similarly substantial shift in its focus.

The world has more pressing issues

Across recent years, the World Economic Forum has seemed primarily concerned with “high-minded panel discussions about climate change, caring for refugees, and the future of health care.” It was essentially a venue for the world’s elites to decide on the most direct path to living on the right side of history—at least as they saw it.

This year, however, that’s all changed quite a bit.

While climate change, poverty, and other social ills still have their place in the proceedings, the largest crowds and most significant interest are centered on artificial intelligence and technological advancement. Attendees aren’t really even trying to pretend that the social and cultural aspects matter to the same degree as before.

In short, the world has more pressing issues than climate change, and the conference’s content reflects that reality.

Perhaps that shouldn’t come as much of a surprise, though. After all, civilizations have prioritized their most immediate concerns for most of human history, and the people who didn’t were rarely given the opportunity to repeat that decision.

When used well, that necessary reordering of priorities can clarify what’s truly important in ways that a general sense of peace or security cannot. In fact, many of the most important theological principles at the core of how we understand God and the nature of salvation were codified for that very same reason, and we would each do well to apply that lesson to our own lives today.

God’s redemption of our desperation

Starting in the 300s, the church embarked upon a series of councils to clarify some of the most divisive and challenging aspects of understanding our infinite God. However, the vast majority of these councils occurred in the Eastern part of the Roman Empire, especially once you get to the 400s.

While the Emperor’s proximity in Constantinople explains part of that reasoning, the barbarian tribes that routinely invaded the Western half of the Empire played a much more significant role.

As the church began to discover, it’s far easier to find the time to debate theological minutiae when there’s not a horde of traveling armies attempting to burn your villages and kill your people. Consequently, the East had the margin to debate these issues while the West was forced to rely on the teachings that they’d always considered true, and then try not to die before they could put them into practice. And heresy was often less of a problem there as a result.

In the same way, the clarity we receive while in the midst of difficult times is often part of God’s redemption of those inevitable trials. Some lessons can only be taught when our focus is forced on him out of a desperate recognition of our need for his power, presence, and peace in our lives.

Our smaller problems don’t go away, but they can be easier to put in their proper place.

So, are there any issues in your life that have risen to a far greater place of importance than they actually warrant? Is God trying to get your attention and recalibrate your priorities?

Now is the best time to ask him.

Quote of the day:

“Our greatest fear should not be of failure but of succeeding at things in life that don’t really matter.” —Francis Chan

Our latest website resources:

• Faith and politics, yoga and Christian practice, salvation, and hope in a divided culture
• Is Greenland worth what it will cost the United States?
• Why the Buffalo Bills were right to fire Sean McDermott
• Texas A&M University removes Plato from a philosophy course
• ICE shooting, Iran on edge, Golden Globes & postseason football | Ep. 52

Denison Forum

Surprising virtually no one, the University of Indiana completed one of the most dominant seasons in NCAA football history with its victory last night over the University of Miami, winning the College Football Playoff National Championship game. But what you may not know is that faith was at the center of the game for many who competed on the field and on the sidelines.

• Miami’s head coach, Mario Cristobal, and his family are members of their local St. Augustine Parish.
• So is the family of Fernando Mendoza, the Heisman Trophy-winning quarterback whose epic twelve-yard run won the game for Indiana.
• His outstanding receiver, Omar Cooper Jr., calls himself a “Follower of Christ” on his Instagram bio; many of his posts include Scripture.
• Miami’s star quarterback, Carson Beck, said recently, “I feel like God has a plan in everything he does.”
• One of his top receivers, Xavier Restrepo, is public about his faith as well.

I could go on, but you get the point. Amid news that more Protestant churches in the US closed than opened in 2024, as supernaturalism declines and secularism advances, it is gratifying to see prominent people who make their faith in Christ prominent.

However, if you’re looking for encouragement to trust Jesus with your life, you don’t need to look to sports celebrities, well-known pastors, or even apologists like me.

The evidence is everywhere—literally.

 “Both religion and science are founded on faith”

In his Discourse Against the Pagans, St. Athanasius (died AD 373) reasoned:

It is right that creation should exist as [God] has made it and as we see it happening, because this is his will, which no one would deny. For if the movement of the universe were irrational, and the world rolled on in random fashion, one would be justified in disbelieving what we say. But if the world is founded on reason, wisdom, and science, and is filled with orderly beauty, then it must owe its origin and order to none other than the Word of God.

His argument raised a point I had not considered before. I was familiar with the teleological argument that moves from the design of the world to the existence of a Great Designer. If you found a watch on the ground, you would assume that a watchmaker exists. How much more complex is the world than a watch?

I was also familiar with the anthropic principle that notes how perfectly ordered the universe is to sustain human life as we know it. But I had not thought about the existence of the “reason, wisdom, and science” by which the universe itself is “founded.”

The law of gravity, for example, predated any presumed evolutionary movements by which an atheist might seek to explain the existence of life. This force even explains and predates the formation of planets and their spinning and rotational motions.

Electrons are similarly considered “elementary particles,” meaning that they are not made of smaller parts. Science has no explanation for why they exist, but without them, the universe would not exist.

As the eminent theoretical physicist Paul Davies wrote in the New York Times, “Both religion and science are founded on faith—namely, on belief in the existence of something outside the universe, like an unexplained God or an unexplained set of physical laws.”

“Harmonious, joyful, flourishing life”

The order that made possible the universe encompasses your life today as well. It is logically contradictory for a God of reason and love to create an ordered universe but then fill it with disordered, undesigned life.

To the contrary, as Tim Keller wrote in The Reason for God:

Unique among the creation accounts, the Bible depicts a world that is brimming with dynamic, abundant forms of life that are perfectly interwoven, interdependent, and mutually enhancing and enriching. The Creator’s response to this is delight. He keeps repeating that it is good. When he creates human beings, he instructs them to continue to cultivate and draw out the vast resources of creation like a gardener does in a garden (his emphasis).

Keller then noted:

The Hebrew word for this perfect, harmonious interdependence among all parts of creation is called shalom. We translate it as “peace,” but the English word is basically negative, referring to the absence of trouble or hostility. The Hebrew word means much more than that. It means absolute wholeness—full, harmonious, joyful, flourishing life (his italics).

As just one example, take a moment to consider the design of your hand, composed of twenty-nine bones, twenty-nine joints, well more than one hundred ligaments, thirty-five muscles, and a vast array of arteries and nerves. Your fingers have no muscles—they are moved by tendons threaded through them and attached to muscles in your forearm. Approximately a quarter of the part of your brain that controls body movement is devoted to your hand.

The vein patterns and skin creases in your hand are as unique to you as your fingerprints. Your thumb is so remarkably designed that Isaac Newton could say, “In the absence of any other proof, the thumb alone would convince me of God’s existence.”

If your Father can design your hand, think how he can design your life.

“I am happy that I didn’t sneeze”

In his last speech, Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. told of the time he was autographing books in New York City when a woman stabbed him in his chest. X-rays revealed that the tip of the blade was on the edge of his aorta, the main artery. The New York Times reported the next morning that if he had sneezed, he would have died.

In his address on April 3, 1968, he told his supporters, “I am happy that I didn’t sneeze.” If he had, he would not have delivered his “I Have A Dream” speech, received the Nobel Peace Prize, or seen the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and the Voting Rights Act of 1965 passed.

Then Dr. King closed his message the day before he was assassinated with these words:

Like anybody, I would like to live a long life. Longevity has its place. But I’m not concerned about that now. I just want to do God’s will. And he’s allowed me to go up to the mountain. And I’ve looked over. And I’ve seen the promised land. I may not get there with you. But I want you to know tonight, that we, as a people, will get to the promised land. And I’m happy, tonight. I’m not worried about anything. I’m not fearing any man. Mine eyes have seen the glory of the coming of the Lord.

Have yours?

NOTE: For more on faith, providence, and life purpose, please see my latest website article, “Why the Buffalo Bills were right to fire Sean McDermott.”

Quote for the day:

“Grace makes the promise and providence the payment.” —John Flavel (1620–91)

Our latest website resources:

• Are you SAD? How to fight against the winter blues
• Texas A&M University removes Plato from a philosophy course
• Will Iran’s government fall as protests continue?
• ICE shooting, Iran on edge, Golden Globes & postseason football
• How do I study the Bible when it feels boring?

Denison Forum

The Human Rights Activists News Agency said Sunday it has verified at least 3,919 deaths during a massive wave of protests that swept Iran in recent weeks, and fears the number could be significantly higher. Other human rights groups and insiders estimate that between twelve and fifteen thousand people were killed.

Demonstrations that began in late December have reportedly subsided as “an extraordinarily violent crackdown by Iranian security forces appears to have succeeded for now in driving protesters from the streets.” Foreign Policy calls the regime’s response “the greatest massacre in modern Iranian history.”

Why would a government kill so many of its own people?

How can it do so and survive?

Fighting the “Great Satan” and the “Little Satan”

The recent protests were sparked by an economic crisis that can be fixed only if Iran gets relief from international sanctions. This would require the regime to compromise on its nuclear and missile programs. Such compromise would obviously be in the best interest of the Iranian people.

However, these programs are essential to the government’s Islamist purpose: opposing the US (the “Great Satan”) and Israel (the “Little Satan”) to establish a “true” Islamic state that will hasten the coming of the Mahdi, their messiah.

In this ideological frame, Western pressure makes Iran’s case that they are fighting for the existential survival of Islam. Protests against the government are viewed as opposition to Islam. The regime is therefore willing to kill as many of its own people as necessary to survive. Like autocrats in Cuba, China, Russia, and North Korea, they claim that such sacrifices are outweighed by the ultimate benefit of their ideology for the collective good.

By contrast, our Declaration of Independence claims that governments “are instituted among men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed.” This is why we are ultimately governed by laws, not people, and why we elect people to represent us in making and enforcing these laws.

However, while our system provides checks and balances on unaccountable individual power, its intended secularism cannot articulate those transcendent purposes and morality that lead to ultimate flourishing. The same governmental system that abolished slavery in 1865 also produced Roe v. Wade in 1973, leading to the deaths of more than sixty-five million babies in the US.

“Sanctity of Life Sunday” was observed in churches across the nation yesterday to remind us that the battle for life continues. And to call us each to do our part.

“Life’s most persistent and urgent question”

Service is the intended theme of today’s holiday. According to the Smithsonian, Martin Luther King Jr. Day is “the only federal holiday designated as a national day of service to encourage all Americans to volunteer and improve their communities.” As Americans pause to remember the great civil rights leader, we do well to remember the ideology that inspired him.

Dr. King stated, “Life’s most persistent and urgent question is, ‘What are you doing for others?’” He added,

Everybody can be great . . . because anybody can serve. You don’t have to have a college degree to serve. You don’t have to make your subject and verb agree to serve. You only need a heart full of grace. A soul generated by love.

Where, however, does our fallen culture find such a “heart full of grace”?

In How Christianity Changed Civilization . . . And Must Do So Again, historians Mark Aquilina and James L. Papandrea outline seven “revolutions” birthed by the Christian movement that changed the world:

1. “A revolution of the individual affirmed that all people are created equal, in the image of God, and no one is expendable.”
2. “A revolution of the home affirmed it as a place of safety and love, where women and children are not to be exploited.”
3. “A revolution of the workplace affirmed that people are not property, that they must be free to choose their work, and that they must be given free time for worship, for artistic expression, and for the enjoyment of their loved ones.”
4. “A revolution of religion taught the world that God is love.”
5. “A revolution of the community taught people to love their neighbor.”
6. “A revolution of the way people thought about life and death rejected the culture of death and affirmed a culture of life and of hope, encouraging people to stand up for human rights.”
7. “A revolution of government set up the ideal that rulers should serve those whom they rule (not the other way around), and that all people should enjoy freedom of religion.”

In other words, when Jesus began saving souls and changing lives, he produced a movement of hearts “full of grace.” And this grace changes hearts and nations still today.

When an individual has “started living”

Albert Einstein noted, “We cannot solve our problems with the same thinking we used when we created them.” But when we submit our lives daily to Jesus in the “white funeral” that dies to ourselves and ask him to remake us like himself (2 Corinthians 3:18), we experience the “amazing grace” that changed John Newton and changes all who embrace it today.

I visited Newton’s graveside in England several years ago, where I found the epitaph he wrote for himself:

John Newton, Clerk, Once an infidel and libertine, a servant of slaves in Africa, was by the rich mercy of our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ preserved, restored, pardoned, and appointed to preach the faith he had long labored to destroy.

If Jesus is your Lord, you have been “preserved, restored, [and] pardoned” as well. If you have submitted your life to him as your Lord today, you will “preach the faith” as an inevitable and empowering consequence of his Spirit’s work in your life.

According to Dr. King,

“An individual has not started living until he can rise above the narrow confines of his individualistic concerns to the broader concerns of all humanity.”

Have you “started living” yet?

Quote for the day:

“No one really knows why they are alive until they know what they’d die for.” —Dr. Martin Luther King Jr.

Our latest website resources:

• Are you SAD? How to fight against the winter blues
• Texas A&M University removes Plato from a philosophy course
• Will Iran’s government fall as protests continue?
• ICE shooting, Iran on edge, Golden Globes & postseason football
• How do I study the Bible when it feels boring?

Denison Forum

Why their rise could be bad news for believers in Iran

Open Doors recently released its updated list of the most dangerous places in the world to be a Christian. The top ten remained largely unchanged, with North Korea, Somalia, and Yemen continuing to hold the top three spots. However, Syria broke onto the list, rising from number eighteen last year to sixth in the latest iteration.

While there are a number of factors that go into Open Doors’ rankings, the primary areas they consider are the extent to which the nation negatively affects a believer’s private life, public life, family, community, and church. Syria ranked high—meaning persecution was rampant—in all five, with the threat of imminent violence tacked on for good measure.

In short, it’s become one of the most dangerous places to live as a Christian, and there are few signs of improvement. However, that is not the case for Syrians in every part of the country. And the reason why could soon prove crucial for their fellow believers in Iran.

Why persecution is rising in Syria

Open Doors notes in their entry on Syria that the pressure Christians face varies by region, with the Northeast generally safer and the greatest pressure coming near the Northwest and in the nation’s two largest cities: Aleppo and Damascus. When the new government took over following the fall of the Assad regime in December of 2024, they met with Christian leaders and pledged to become more moderate than their predecessors. However, that has not been the case.

The government, under the leadership of Ahmad al-Sharaa, instead established Islamic law as the foundation of the transitional constitution. While that should not come as too much of a surprise, and the nation’s leaders appear to still be wrestling with all that should entail, it has opened the door for extremist groups to expand their activities in several parts of the country.

As Jayson Casper describes, Islamist actors in Damascus and Aleppo “have called for conversion to Islam through trucks laden with loudspeakers in Christian neighborhoods” and “placed posters on churches demanding payment of the sharia-mandated jizyah tax (historically levied on non-Muslims) for those who refuse.” The situation is little better in the South, where Christians face the threat of theft and violence as some Muslim groups in the region “believe they have the right to loot non-Muslim properties.”

And while one local pastor remarked that Evangelicals enjoy “ten times” more freedom than they did under Assad, he also noted that the government is not doing enough to combat the extremist elements within the country.

Syrian believers are hardly the only ones to suffer as a result of a negligent government, though. Open Doors notes that “fragile governments” are one of the leading causes of persecution around the world, and that is particularly important to note given what may be on the horizon for their neighbors in Iran.

Is Iran next?

In this week’s edition of The Focus, I discussed the ongoing protests in Iran and why they could very well result in a change of government. While, as of this writing, it’s looking less likely that America will intervene militarily to support the marches, there’s also a chance they won’t need to.

The threat of American missiles has, for the moment, put an end to the government’s attempts to suppress the protests through murder—though mass arrests have continued—and the economic situation that sparked the protests is not going to get better until the sanctions on Iran are removed and the country can once again engage with the rest of the world market.

The UN sanctions—reimposed last September—could go away if Iran allowed inspectors to monitor their nuclear facilities. That would provide some help, but far more pressure has come from the United States. President Trump has been clear for months that Iran will see no relief until it completely dismantles its nuclear and ballistic missile programs, as well as ends their financing of proxies like Hamas and Hezbollah.

Without those programs and proxies, however, the government of Iran would abdicate the vast majority of what power they have left in the region, which is why they have repeatedly stated that they will not comply. As a result, their days as a regional—much less global—power appear to be at an end, whether that end comes through the government being toppled or through agreeing to essentially topple itself to remain in power.

Either way, the country is in for a great deal of change and, as we’ve seen in Syria, that change can create an even more dangerous climate for the country’s Christians. So, how can they prepare? And what lessons can we take from their situation that might apply to our own lives as well?

Finding peace in the Father

Christ’s promise in John 16:33 is one of the most commonly cited verses in Scripture, particularly in contexts where persecution or hard times feel unavoidable. In that passage, he tells his disciples, “I have said these things to you, that in me you may have peace. In the world, you will have tribulation. But take heart; I have overcome the world.”

The “these things” Jesus mentions are in reference to the warning that an hour was coming when his followers would be scattered and abandon him. That’s not exactly something I would find peace in hearing, were I in the disciples’ place. However, the warning was accompanied by the promise that, even when the disciples deserted him, the Father would not (John 16:32).

I’m sure Jesus would have loved to be able to count on his disciples in those final moments before his arrest and crucifixion. He even asked as much of them in the Garden when he requested that they keep watch while he prayed because his soul was “very sorrowful, even to death” (Mark 14:34).

He didn’t need his disciples in those final moments, though, because he had the Father. And the same is true for each of us.

Ideally, when tough times come, you’ll be able to face them with the love and support of friends and family. That’s God’s will for the Body of Christ, but it would be naïve to think that it will always happen that way.

A time will come when people will fail you, just as there are times when you will inevitably fail other people. That’s just part of being human.

When that happens, will you focus on the shortcomings of others or on the presence and faithfulness of your heavenly Father? Jesus was clear that only the latter can grant us peace.

So, whether you find yourself facing persecution on account of your faith or simply going through a rough patch in life, remember that there’s nothing wrong with looking to others for help. It could be that God will bring people into your life or equip those already present with precisely what you need. However, no person can ever take the place of the Lord, and he is the only one who can provide the peace required to remain faithful during those times.

Where do you need that peace today?

Quote of the day:

“Character cannot be developed in ease and quiet. Only through the experience of trial and suffering can the soul be strengthened, vision cleared, ambition inspired, and success achieved.” —Helen Keller

Our latest website resources:

• ICE shooting, Iran on edge, Golden Globes & postseason football | Ep. 52
• Will Iran’s government fall as protests continue?
• How do I study the Bible when it feels boring?
• “Wake Up Dead Man”: A movie review
• Transgender to transformed: an increasingly common story

Denison Forum

A Free Press article published this week by geopolitical analysts Matt Pottinger and Roy Eakin begins:

If its first days are anything to go by, 2026 may end up the most pivotal year in geopolitics since 1989, a hinge point that began in a moment of geopolitical calm but ended with the collapse of the Iron Curtain.

Within a few years, the Soviet Union had fallen, the European Union had been born, and an era of hyper-globalized trade took off on the wings of NAFTA and the WTO (World Trade Organization). This year could be equally pivotal—only this time with a vaster range of possible outcomes for world order.

According to the article, a positive reading of such “outcomes” would include the fall of the Iranian regime, which “would deal a major setback to Xi Jinping and Vladimir Putin’s geostrategic ambitions.” Since Iran is “the de facto proxy for Beijing and Moscow in the Middle East,” they have provided significant support to it as well as several of Iran’s proxies following the start of the war on Israel. Iran, in turn, has supplied drones that Russia uses against Ukraine and oil imports to China. The article suggests that the fall of Tehran could even trigger the destabilization of Beijing itself.

However, the writers state that a negative reading would include the destabilization of NATO over the Trump administration’s designs for Greenland, which could invite Moscow to take military action beyond Ukraine. And the article points to China’s escalating pressure against Taiwan, warning that “if Taiwan does fall, the economic and geopolitical shock to world order would be immense.”

The island nation is tied to American power in the region supporting Japan, South Korea, Australia, and much of Southeast Asia. And since “nearly all the world’s most advanced chips are made in Taiwan,” if China seized control of this supply chain, it would “effectively hold a ‘kill switch’ on American ambitions to lead the AI revolution as well as its ability to compete economically and militarily.”

“I prefer to be true to myself”

How are we to manage our emotional and relational health in a world that seems to whipsaw daily between cataclysmic crises?

According to journalist Sasha Chapin, “congruence” is essential here. Citing the famed psychologist Carl Rogers, he describes it “roughly” as “a state of unity between your experience, your self-concept, and your outward behavior.” In such a state, you “agree with what you’re doing with your time,” refuse falsehoods you attempt to project to others and yourself, and live at peace with who and what you are.

Frederick Douglass offered an example, stating: “I prefer to be true to myself, even at the hazard of incurring the ridicule of others.” Living in this way elevates us above the maelstrom of media alarmism and political fervor. According to Chapin, we center on our “inner authority” with integrity and integration.

But aspiring to such holistic health is one thing; achieving it is another.

“We must obey God rather than men”

Simon Peter of the Gospels might be the least congruent person in the New Testament.

On his good days, he is walking on the stormy sea to Jesus (Matthew 14:28–29), proclaiming him “the Christ, the Son of the living God” (Matthew 16:16), and promising that he will “never fall away” from following his Lord (Matthew 26:33). On his bad days, he is speaking when he should be silent (Matthew 17:4–5), sleeping when he should be praying (Matthew 26:40), and denying Jesus to a “servant girl” (Matthew 26:69–72).

Then came Pentecost and the gift by which Peter was “filled with the Holy Spirit” (Acts 2:4). The next thing we know, the fearful fisherman is preaching the gospel and leading thousands to Christ (vv. 14–41). He is being used to heal the lame (Acts 3:1–10) and giving the glory to Jesus (vv. 11–26). He is proclaiming the necessity of faith in Christ to the very rulers who crucified his Lord (Acts 4:12) and boldly testifying, “We must obey God rather than men” (Acts 5:29).

He ends up pastoring the church in Rome (cf. 1 Peter 5:13) and writing two letters of the New Testament. The largest cathedral of the largest church in the world stands over his traditional gravesite. His faith and life were so congruent that he chose execution over denying Jesus but asked that he be crucified upside down since he was not worthy to die in the same manner as his Lord (cf. 1 Clement and Eusebius’s Ecclesiastical History).

Now the same Spirit who transformed Peter stands ready to do the same in us.

“The instrument through which you see God”

A dear friend recently suggested that I read Living Fearless: Exchanging the Lies of the World for the Liberating Truth of God. The author, Jamie Winship, is a former police officer who spent nearly thirty years serving Christ in the Muslim world. His practical guide invites us to experience God’s best for our lives by asking our Lord to:

• Show us where we are not living in truth.
• Expose the false identity that enslaves us.
• Reveal to us our true identity in his eyes and grace.
• Ask him what he wants us to do today in relation to this identity, then pay attention as he speaks through his Spirit, his word, our circumstances, and the people around us.

His inspiring book is filled with examples of God’s miraculous responses to these prayers. As Winship shows, our Father wants to speak to his children. He wants us to walk with him as Enoch “walked” with him before God “took him” home (Genesis 5:24).

When we say to God, “With my whole heart I seek you” (Psalm 119:10), we can pray, “Open my eyes, that I may behold wondrous things out of your law” (v. 18).

Oswald Chambers noted, “Whether or not I hear God’s call depends upon the state of my ears; and what I hear depends upon my disposition.” C. S. Lewis similarly explained that God “shows himself” to us as we are able to receive his revelation:

In other sciences, the instruments you use are things external to yourself (things like microscopes and telescopes), [but] the instrument through which you see God is your whole self. And if a man’s self is not kept clean and bright, his glimpse of God will be blurred—like the Moon seen through a dirty telescope.

How “clean and bright” is your soul today?

Quote for the day: 

“God speaks in the silence of the heart. Listening is the beginning of prayer.” —Mother Teresa

Our latest website resources:

• Will Iran’s government fall as protests continue?
• ICE shooting, Iran on edge, Golden Globes & postseason football
• How do I study the Bible when it feels boring?
• Venezuela, 2026 culture predictions, Tim Walz & football playoffs
• How do Christians stay human in an age of AI, anxiety, and division?

Denison Forum

There is anger on both sides of the aisle this morning.

The right is angry with former President Bill Clinton and former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton after they refused to comply yesterday with a congressional subpoena to testify in an investigation into Jeffrey Epstein. They published a letter to House Oversight Committee Chairman James Comer calling his committee’s attempts “legally invalid.” In response, Mr. Comer said he’ll begin contempt of Congress proceedings against them next week.

The left is angry with the Trump administration after the Justice Department opened a criminal investigation into Federal Reserve Chairman Jerome H. Powell. Prosecutors are looking into the central bank’s renovation of its Washington headquarters and whether Mr. Powell lied to Congress about the scope of the project. However, critics believe the action is intended by the administration to pressure the central bank to aggressively cut interest rates.

Whatever our partisan beliefs, both stories illustrate the significance of checks and balances in a democracy.

Congress must be able to investigate current and former presidents so as to hold them accountable to the law. The Federal Reserve was similarly created by Congress in 1913 as an independent agency so it could set interest rates without political interference from Congress or the White House. According to the Brookings Institution, “Central banks in nearly all major capitalist democracies are similarly insulated.” The article explains that politicians could otherwise lower interest rates now at the expense of greater inflation in the future, harming the overall economy.

“The wicked boasts of the desires of his soul”

Forging systems of accountability is not only politically wise but biblically realistic. The psalmist lamented:

The wicked boasts of the desires of his soul, and the one greedy for gain curses and renounces the Lᴏʀᴅ. In the pride of his face the wicked does not seek him; all his thoughts are, ‘There is no God.” . . . He says in his heart, “I shall not be moved; throughout all generations I shall not meet adversity” (Psalm 10:3–4, 6).

As a result,

He sits in ambush in the villages; in hiding places he murders the innocent. His eyes stealthily watch for the helpless; he lurks in ambush like a lion in his thicket; he lurks that he may seize the poor; he seizes the poor when he draws him into his net (vv. 8–9).

All the while, “He says in his heart, ‘God has forgotten, he has hidden his face, he will never see it’” (v. 11).

The psalmist therefore prayed, “Arise, O Lᴏʀᴅ; O God, lift up your hand; forget not the afflicted. . . . Break the arm of the wicked and evildoer; call his wickedness to account till you find none” (vv. 12, 15). He can ask this because “the Lᴏʀᴅ is king forever and ever” (v. 16) and will “do justice to the fatherless and the oppressed, so that man who is of the earth may strike terror no more” (v. 18).

In other words, God provides accountability for the actions of those who are otherwise unaccountable for their crimes. He often does so in this world, such as his judgments against wicked kings in the Old Testament and rulers in the New (cf. Acts 12:20–23). But he always does so in the next world, assuring us that “vengeance is mine, I will repay, says the Lord” (Romans 12:19, quoting Deuteronomy 32:35).

“We have no reason to be angry”

Is God justified in holding us accountable for our actions in this way? After all, his word states that “all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God” (Romans 3:23).

However, as St. Basil the Great (AD 330–79) observed,

We have already received from God the ability to fulfill all his commands. We have then no reason to resent them, as if something beyond our capacity were being asked of us. We have no reason either to be angry, as if we had to pay back more than we had received. When we use this ability in a right and fitting way, we lead a life of virtue and holiness. But if we misuse it, we fall into sin.

This makes sense: God cannot be just and judge us for sins we had no ability not to commit. My voice professor in college was frustrated that I did not sing Italian arias as he wanted, but his (unjust) reprobation could not change the capacities (or lack thereof) of my voice.

At the same time, does trying harder really produce holiness?

“Far more abundantly than all that we ask or think”

John warned us, “If we say we have no sin, we deceive ourselves, and the truth is not in us” (1 John 1:8). From David, a man after God’s “heart” (Acts 13:22), to Paul, the greatest theologian in history, all have struggled with temptation and the sin nature of fallen humanity (cf. Romans 7:21–24).

The answer is found in the logic of grace:

• God holds us accountable to his highest intentions for us because this honors his holiness and leads to our best (1 Peter 1:15–16).
• At the same time, he knows that we are unable to achieve this standard in our fallen capacities (cf. James 3:2).
• So his Son died to pay the debt for our sins so his Spirit can now indwell us and empower us to be like Christ (Romans 8:29).

As Paul testified, God is “able to do far more abundantly than all that we ask or think, according to the power at work within us” (Ephesians 3:20). The apostle testified that he served Jesus by “struggling with all his energy that he powerfully works within me” (Colossians 1:29). Struggling translates a Greek word meaning to “do one’s best to compete and win a battle.” But Paul did this with all his energy—“according to all God’s action and power”—which God powerfully works within me this very moment.

Thus, we should say with the Anglican Book of Common Prayer, “Save thy servant, that hath none / Help nor hope but thee alone.” But we should also “work heartily in all we do, as for the Lord and not for men” (Colossians 3:23).

As we work, God works. As we give our best, God gives his best.

Consequently, as I noted on Monday, you and I are as much like Jesus as we want to be today.

Imagine a world like this

Imagine a world filled with Christians living in the holiness of Jesus by the power of Jesus. Imagine the impact on evangelism and missions, war and crime, poverty, racism, and injustice.

Such a world and nothing less is what God wants for and through each of us.

Is this what you want today?

Quote for the day:

“One does not surrender a life in an instant. That which is lifelong can only be surrendered in a lifetime.” —Elisabeth Elliot

Our latest website resources:

• Who is Nick Fuentes, and why do you need to know?
• Venezuela, 2026 culture predictions, Tim Walz & football playoffs
• How do Christians stay human in an age of AI, anxiety, and division?
• Transgender to transformed: an increasingly common story
• A review of Lee Strobel’s “The Case for Miracles”

Denison Forum

Greenland is the world’s largest island. However, until recent months, I don’t remember seeing even a single headline about it in the news.

Now it’s hard to miss them.

President Trump recently told reporters at the White House, “We are going to do something on Greenland, whether they like it or not, because if we don’t do it, Russia or China will take over Greenland, and we’re not going to have Russia or China as a neighbor.”

Secretary of State Marco Rubio said the administration’s goal is to buy the island from Denmark. The US could also boost its military presence in Greenland. Or it could take the island by force, but since the semiautonomous region is part of NATO ally Denmark, such an invasion could imperil NATO itself.

Why such interest in a sparsely inhabited island three thousand miles from the US?

“Greenland matters because the Arctic matters”

According to the Trump administration, Greenland is now critical to Western security. Vice President JD Vance said last week, “The entire missile-defense infrastructure is partially dependent on Greenland.” Opinion columnist John Mac Ghlionn agreed, writing in the Hill:

Greenland matters because the Arctic matters. Melting ice has turned what was once a frozen buffer into a contested corridor. Shipping lanes are emerging. Subsea cables snake across the ocean floor. Missile paths shorten. Surveillance gaps narrow. Russia knows this. China knows this. Both are investing heavily in Arctic presence, infrastructure, and influence. The US can either treat Greenland as a distant curiosity or as what it actually is: a forward position in a region that will define future power balances.

Whatever our view of this issue, it highlights the fact that any nation’s first concern is and will always be with national security. But nothing we do can secure us perfectly. Government strategists thought our massive naval installation at Pearl Harbor would protect us from war, not cause us to enter it. We thought our oceans and superpower military might would protect us from homeland invasion until 9/11 proved us wrong.

There is ultimately only one answer to our perennial quest for security. I’ll warn you in advance that you may find my proposal simplistic and naïve. But as I’ll try to explain, that’s precisely the problem.

“You give help to those in peril”

Many readers of the New Testament know that Matthew wrote his Gospel to persuade the Jews that Jesus was their Messiah. What we might miss, however, is the fact that he needed to show Jesus to be their only Messiah.

False messiahs were common in the day. The New Testament refers to three of them: Theudas (Acts 5:36), Judah the Galilean (v. 37), and an unnamed Egyptian (Acts 21:38). However, in Matthew 9 alone, the writer documents five acts Jesus performed that only the true and divine Messiah could accomplish:

• He forgave a paralytic’s sins and healed his body as proof (vv. 1–8).
• He healed a woman who had been sick for twelve years and whose disease had been incurable (vv. 20–22; Mark 5:26).
• He raised a dead girl to life (Matthew 9:25).
• He healed two blind men (vv. 27–31).
• He exorcised a demon, thus healing a man who had been mute (vv. 32–33).

In other words, Jesus did what only Jesus could do. Now he wants to do the same for us and through us.

Around AD 95, Clement of Rome wrote an epistle to the Corinthians in which he included this prayer:

You are the God of all flesh. You behold what is hidden in the depths, you see all that men do. You give help to those in peril and rescue to those without hope. . . .

By your acts you made visible the everlasting structure of the universe and set the earth on its foundations. For all generations you have been faithful and just in your judgments and wonderful in your power and majesty. Wisely you have created, and wisely you have kept things in being. All that we see shows your goodness; to all who trust in you, you are faithful, kind, and merciful.

Clement therefore asked:

Come, Lord, let your face shine upon us so that we may peacefully enjoy all good things. May your powerful hand be a roof over our heads and may your strength preserve us from all wrongdoing. Free us, Lord, from those who hate us without cause. Give peace and harmony to us and to all the inhabitants of the earth, as you gave them to our fathers who called on you with trust and faith.

You alone can give us these gifts and confer these favors on us.

Why should we make Clement’s prayer ours today?

“Neither shall they learn war anymore”

Our God has the power to defeat the mightiest of armies (cf. 2 Chronicles 20:1–30) and rulers (cf. Acts 12:1–24). We can ask him for security only he can provide (Psalm 4:8), then trust him to walk with us through our gravest dangers (Isaiah 43:1–3) and redeem them for his glory and our good (cf. Romans 8:28; Philippians 1:6).

But we can also ask him to change the hearts of those who endanger our world.

What God did in Nineveh, he has the power to do in any nation (Jonah 3). If he could turn Constantine the Great to himself and the Roman Empire with him, he can turn any ruler and any empire from war to peace.

However, as John Wesley once observed, “God does nothing but in answer to prayer.” He may have had James’ admonition in mind: “You do not have, because you do not ask” (James 4:2).

Would God do more to prevent war and advance peace in our fractured world if only his people would ask him to?

Right now you may be thinking that this is too simplistic, that asking God to bring the warmongers of our time to repentance and peace to our planet is naïve. But is it? One day, God “shall decide disputes for many peoples,” and “nation shall not lift up sword against nation, neither shall they learn war anymore” (Isaiah 2:4).

Could our intercession bring that day one day closer to this day?

And could our prayers for peace draw our hearts closer to the Prince of Peace who still calms the storms of our souls?

The way we answer our questions will determine their answers today.

Quote for the day:

“All the peace and favor of the world cannot calm a troubled heart; but where this peace is which Christ gives, all the trouble and disquiet of the world cannot disturb it.” —Robert Leighton (1613–84)

Our latest website resources:

• Who is Nick Fuentes, and why do you need to know?
• Venezuela, 2026 culture predictions, Tim Walz & football playoffs
• How do Christians stay human in an age of AI, anxiety, and division?
• Transgender to transformed: an increasingly common story
• A review of Lee Strobel’s “The Case for Miracles”

Denison Forum

It was a busy weekend for some subsets of American society.

If you’re a college football fan, you likely watched Miami and Indiana win their playoff games (Indiana “looks like it will never lose again,” according to one of my favorite sports commentators). If you’re a pro football fan (as many seem to be these days), you had five games to watch, including the Bears’ comeback for the ages Saturday night, with one more contest tonight. If you’re a movie and TV fan, you likely watched the Golden Globes last night, where One Battle After Another and Hamnet won their categories.

If you’re none of the above, you’re wondering if you should keep reading this morning.

I understand the question. While I watched every football game I mentioned, I have not seen even one of the movies or TV shows for which Golden Globes were awarded. As a result, I am avoiding reviews of last night’s ceremony this morning. Time is too short to spend it on what is irrelevant to me today.

This fact is more relevant to our souls than many people seem to know.

The “container” and its “contents”

The Franciscan priest Richard Rohr begins Falling Upward, his meditation on the spiritual life, this way:

There is much evidence on several levels that there are at least two major tasks to human life. The first task is to build a strong “container” or identity; the second is to find the contents that the container was meant to hold.

In this first “task,” we ask the essential questions, “What makes me significant?”, “How can I support myself?”, and “Who will go with me?” However, the “container” these questions help to define “is not an end in itself, but exists for the sake of our deeper and fuller life, which we largely do not know about ourselves.”

When we focus on the “container” but not the “contents,” over time, we inevitably resign ourselves to lives without meaning, or we fixate on means as ends and commit ourselves to aims unworthy of our divine purpose. But when we learn to focus on the purpose for which our lives are intended in what Rohr calls the “second half of life,” several positive consequences occur:

We have less and less need or interest in eliminating the negative or fearful, making again these old rash judgments, holding onto old hurts, or feeling any need to punish other people. Our superiority complexes have gradually departed in all directions. We do not fight these things anymore; they have just shown themselves too many times to be useless, ego-based, counterproductive, and often entirely wrong.

So, what is the purpose for which our lives and our time are best spent?

“When we know whose we are”

I learned recently that I am a direct descendant of two of the passengers on the Mayflower voyage to the New World in 1620. In fact, my great-grandfather (times ten) was apparently the last of these passengers to die.

In the moment I learned this about myself, I viscerally felt myself to be a person of greater historical significance. It was as though I became the child of a celebrity and thus a celebrity myself. Absolutely nothing tangible changed about my life: I didn’t suddenly become richer or wiser. But knowing whose I am, in this context, enhanced my sense of who I am.

Br. Geoffrey Tristam of the Society of St. John the Evangelist in Boston claims that my impulse is more foundational and empowering than I thought: “When we know whose we are, we know who we are.” He points to Jesus’ baptism, commemorated yesterday by many Christian traditions, at which the Father proclaimed, “This is my beloved Son, with whom I am well pleased” (Matthew 3:17).

Then he notes that Jesus’ subsequent temptations were “precisely about doubting and denying his true identity.” The first two began, “If you are the Son of God . . .” (Matthew 4:3, 5). The third similarly tempted Jesus to abandon his identity as God’s Son and worship Satan instead (v. 9).

According to Tristam, “It is only after he has gone through this inner struggle that he could emerge and begin his public ministry.” Through the rest of that ministry, Jesus never wavered from his identity as his Father’s Son. He sought his Father’s glory, prayed for his blessing, chose his will over his own, committed his spirit to him in death, returned to him in Paradise, and intercedes at his right hand today.

Now he wants to help us embrace his identity as our own.

From “son of thunder” to “apostle of love”

As you know, when we trust in Christ as our Lord, we become “children of God” (John 1:12). Now our Father wants his children to become like his Son.

As Paul explained, “The Lord—who is the Spirit—makes us more and more like [Christ] as we are changed into his glorious image” (2 Corinthians 3:18 NLT). God’s purpose is to “sanctify you completely” so that “your whole spirit and soul and body [will] be kept blameless at the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ” (1 Thessalonians 5:23).

However, we separate clergy from laity and thus believe (though we might not say it in words) that true godliness is for the professionals. This makes sense in other realms: professional golfers and musicians perform in ways we cannot, and so on.

But Jesus wants his entire church to be “holy and without blemish” (Ephesians 5:27). Our Father’s goal is that every one of us be “guiltless in the day of our Lord Jesus Christ” (1 Corinthians 1:8).

Why?

God’s purpose in making us like Christ is not just that we experience the “abundant” life he intends for us (John 10:10). It is also that we become catalysts for restoring humanity to him, salt and light in a decaying and dark world, witnesses whose words and works are so compelling that multitudes are drawn to him.

The Spirit transformed a fearful fisherman into a fearless evangelist (Acts 2). He made the church’s greatest persecutor into its greatest evangelist, missionary, and theologian (cf. 1 Timothy 1:15–16). He turned a “son of thunder” (Mark 3:17) into the “apostle of love” (cf. 1 John 4:7–12).

And people changed by Jesus into the character of Jesus changed the world. They still do.

For what purpose will you spend your time and life? With what “contents” will you fill your “container”? How will you express your identity as God’s child?

God’s Spirit will make us as much like God’s Son as we choose to be.

How much like Jesus do you want to be today?

Quote for the day:

“Sanctification means being made one with Jesus so that the disposition that ruled him will rule us. It will cost everything that is not of God in us.” —Oswald Chambers

Our latest website resources:

• “Wake Up Dead Man”: A movie review
• Who is Nick Fuentes, and why do you need to know?
• Venezuela, 2026 culture predictions, Tim Walz & football playoffs
• How do Christians stay human in an age of AI, anxiety, and division?
• Transgender to transformed: an increasingly common story

Denison Forum