October 4, 2026

Another key passage often used by pro-choicers is Genesis 2:7, they claim that this passage indicates that until there is breath there is no life. There are two problems with this first they are using a situation that has never and will never be repeated after Adam. They fail to recognize that a fetus does need oxygen and takes it in through the mother from the moment of conception. This argument would mean that anyone who is unable to breath by their own power is not human. This would include those on life support, clearly this argument in nonsensical.
In addition to the passages already considered the Bible in many places talks about the unborn fetus not as something less than human, but as a human being created by God. In Luke 1:41-44 the unborn are referred to as children. In Matthew 1:20-21 Jesus is said to be human while still in the womb. Jeremiah 1:5 and Isaiah 49:1 indicate that God knows the unborn and even calls them. In Judges 13:2-7 Samson’s Nazarite vow is in effect from the point of conception. There can be no doubt that the Bible knows nothing of the unborn as being anything but human beings created by God.
If one simply considers what the Bible says about the unborn that would be sufficient to show that abortion is murder in the eyes of God and therefore sinful. However as with all truth the Bible and science are in agreement. From a scientific standpoint abortion is also ending a human life. The most obvious way this can be demonstrated is by considering that the genetic makeup of the fetus is no different from what it will be at birth or at 75 years of age. From the point of conception the fetus has 46 Chromosomes that will determine all of its physical characteristics. The only difference between a 10 minute old fetus and a 10 year old child is time and nutrition. Given the necessary nutrients the fetus will develop everything else. This means that nutrition has become the determining factor of humanness which again, can be logically extended to say that anyone lacking the means to develop is less than human.
The early development of the fetus is another strong indication of humanness. It has already been noticed that at the point of conception the infant has all of the genetic material that it will ever have. By the first month the fetus has a heart beat as well as head arms legs. By forty two days brain waves can be detected. During the second month the baby will have it’s own blood type finger prints and is sensitive to touch. In the third month the baby will swallow, swim, suck its thumb, and be able to feel pain (remember abortion is commonly performed any time prior to the fifth month). By month four the infant will have reached half its birth weight and be eight to ten inches long. Finally by month five the baby has hair, nails, can cry, and live outside the womb. When all of these physical characteristics are considered it is hard to even imagine destroying this little life.
There is also the understanding accepted by all biologists that when two animals of a species conceive the result is another of the same species. No one says when a dog is pregnant that it is carrying anything but more dogs. With regards to human beings though there is confusion as to whether or not the human mother is carrying a human. 

~ Kevin Cleary

September 27, 2026

The population of Canada is about 35million people. It would be considered at tragedy if some disease or industrial accident were to wipe out the whole population. If a foreign invader did it would be considered genocide and that nation would be guilty of war crimes. However in North America every year over 30million babies are killed mercilessly and no one bats an eye. They are killed by their own mothers who because of embarrassment or inconvenience see fit to end the life of their unborn child by abortion.

The reality is that there are many views about the rightness or wrongness of abortion. From these many views three main categories can be identified;
1) Abortion is always acceptable
2) Abortion is sometimes acceptable
3) Abortion is never acceptable

The view one holds is determined by how that one sees the unborn fetus. If the fetus is human than laws against murder that apply to humans are applicable to abortion however if the fetus in not human then they do not. This is true both for Christians and non-Christians since Christians would consider God’s admonitions against killing to apply only to human beings. This means that the real question under consideration is when does a fetus become a human being.

The three views of abortion stated above correlate with how one understands the humanness of a fetus. Those who say that abortions is acceptable all the time would say that until the point of birth the fetus in something less than human. Those who say that abortion is acceptable some of the time would say that the fetus is potentially human and becomes human sometime during gestation. And those who would say that abortion never acceptable would say that the fetus is human at conception. By identifying the right view we can determine whether abortion is right or wrong and when.

To determine which of the above views is the correct one we can look to scripture and ask when God calls a fetus human. We can also consider what medical science has discovered that would be pertinent to our discussion. By considering these things we can know if when a child is aborted murder is being committed and therefore, if the abortion is right or wrong.

There are a few passages of scripture that must be considered if we are to have a grasp of what the bible teaches about the state of the fetus:

The First of these and possibly most important is Exodus 21:22-23 the reason this text is especially significant is that it is often used by pro-choice groups to say that the Bible differentiates between born and unborn and that the unborn are not given equal rights. In fact this passage teaches the opposite. The passage reads as follows: 22 “If men struggle with each other and strike a woman with child so that she gives birth prematurely, yet there is no injury, he shall surely be fined as the woman’s husband may demand of him, and he shall pay as the judges decide. 23 “But if there is any further injury, then you shall appoint as a penalty life for life,”. It has been said that this passage teaches that if the baby is miscarried then only a fine is imparted showing that it is not considered a human life (this argument is based on a misunderstanding of mischief in the KJV and totally falls apart when the passage is read in a modern translation) . What this passage really teaches is that the life of the unborn infant is equal to that of the man who killed it. 

 

~ Kevin Cleary

September 20, 2026

     A supervisor publicly corrects Jimmy during a company meeting, leaving him visibly shaken. Most of his coworkers think, “Come on, Jimmy. Shrug it off. Everyone gets criticized at work.”

A modern proverb says, “It may be a pebble on the beach to you, but it’s the whole ocean to someone else.” Simple yet profound, it stresses two important truths. 

     First, we rarely have a full perspective on what people are carrying. We see only the surface of their lives, unaware of their past trauma, disappointments, failures and present stresses.

Second, since we don’t know a person’s backstory, we should not be quick to dismiss their feelings as “not a big deal” simply because it would not have affected us the same way. True empathy recognizes those feelings as real and worthy of our attention, even if the situation seems small from our perspective.

     That was certainly true in Jimmy’s case. What his coworkers didn’t know was that he grew up in a home with hypercritical parents who rarely expressed approval. Neither did they know two weeks earlier he was told his position might be eliminated. What looked like an ordinary correction from a supervisor reopened old wounds and fanned a present fear. To his coworkers, it was a pebble. To Jimmy, it was an ocean.

     The Bible condemns quick judgments that produce dismissive and harsh responses. Solomon writes, “He who answers a matter before he hears it, It is folly and shame to him” (Prov. 18:13). Making quick judgments and dismissive responses like “shrug it off” before knowing the situation is unloving. Such careless and dismissive words “pierce like swords” (Prov. 12:18).

The Bible calls us to empathy that seeks understanding so we can respond with compassion. In 1 Peter 3:8, Christians are called to be compassionate, loving and tender-hearted. The Greek word translated “compassion” literally means “to suffer with” or “to share in another’s experience.” It beautifully describes the biblical call to understand another person’s pain. That is empathy at its core.

     When it comes to loving people as Christ did, we, unlike Christ, rarely know the whole story. Therefore, we must humbly recognize the limits of our own perspective and seek understanding before we respond. Only by recognizing that what may be a pebble to us may be an ocean to someone else can we respond with Christlike compassion.

Craig Ressler 

(~Kevin Cleary)

September 13, 2026

In response to the discoveries pointing to the beginning of the universe, physicists proposed alternatives. Hoyle defended the steady state by hypothesizing mater spontaneously appearing in the spaced between galaxies. Oscillating universe was another alternative in which the universe expands and contracts repeatedly into the infinite past. These theories are not consistent with the second law of thermodynamics. 

Other important discoveries have further bolstered evidence for the big bang. Two important ones relate to cosmic background radiation. Sometimes called the radiation afterglow this refers to low levels of radiation that should be present throughout the universe if there was a big bang at some time in the past. The energy expelled at the big bang should leave a small amount of background radiation throughout the universe. Two physicists Arno Penzias and Robert Wilson accidentally discovered this very thing using large antennae. They were getting constant interference coming in from all directions and couldn’t figure out what it was. They eventually realized that it was in the form of microwave wavelengths and could be found everywhere. In other words, they found the predicted residual energy from the big bang. They contacted Robert Dicke at Princeton who had also been searching for evidence of cosmic background radiation who examined their findings and concluded that they had found what he was looking for. 

There is another important discovery related to background radiation. It take a little explanation. If the universe started from the expansion of a singularity and matter radiated uniformly as it expanded then we would expect to see gravitational pull cause material to pull together in a uniform way. We would therefor expect to find a uniform distribution of Galaxies in the universe. However, this is not what we see instead we see clumps of bodies separated by large voids. This would require slight fluctuations in density in the early expansion which would leave evidence in the form of slight fluctuations in the cosmic background radiation. The problem was no such fluctuation could be found remember Penzias and Wilson found the same interference coming from all directions. This problem persisted until NASA launched a satellite (Cosmic Background Explorer, COBE) which could look out into the universe without the obfuscation (interference) of the atmosphere. When they did guess what they found? Exactly the fluctuations expected, indicating small anomalies in density during the early universe. Some cosmologists have termed these fluctuations in radiation galaxy seeds. 

These discoveries have convinced nearly all cosmologists that indeed the universe is not eternal but instead had a beginning in the finite past. Despite their best efforts the evidence to simply too much to ignore. Much to the dismay of those who were wise enough to grasp the immediate implications. 

~ Kevin Cleary

September 6, 2026

As mentioned Einsteins theory described gravity as mass interacting with spaces, curving it like you might get if you placed a bowling ball on a trampoline. His description however although more accurate than Newton needed some repulsive force to keep matter from congealing together into one massive ball. Einstein added a constant to his equations which he called the cosmological constant. This allowed for time-space to not compress and allowed for the empty spaces between bodies in the universe. Other physicists questioned Einsteins cosmological constant suggesting that in fact the density and radius of the universe changed or varied with time. Einstein rejected this theory and wrote rebuttals of the scientists who suggested it favouring a steady state universe. 

In 1927 Belgian physicist Georges Lemaitre offered solutions to Einsteins field equations based on observations of distant galaxies. Lemaitre used Vesto Slipher’s research on the doppler effect and distant galaxies. The data indicated that galaxies that were further away were moving faster than those closer Galaxies. His solution suggested a universe which was expanding in all directions expanding in a spherical shape. This further implied that in the past the universe was also smaller. As mentioned above Einstein was highly critical of this theory. 

In 1931 Einstein famously visited Mt Wilson to look through Hubble’s telescope this event is often presented as the definitive moment that changed Einsteins mind. Upon considering Hubble’s data which showed red shift of galaxies was proportional to their distance Einstein was forced to admit that the universe was expanding. He called his insistence on his cosmological constant the greatest blunder of his life. Red shift is caused by the lengthening of light waves into the infrared spectrum caused when an object is moving away from the observer. Thus, more redshift indicates greater speed of movement away. 

The implications of this expanding universe were immediately evident to scientists. British Astrophysicist Arthur Eddington said “Philosophically, the notion of a beginning of the present order is repugnant to me.” Einstein himself expressed a similar sentiment regarding Lemaitre’s hypothesis saying his primeval atom hypothesis was inspired by the Chrisitan dogma of creation, and totally unjustified from the physical point of view.” Robert Dicke explained “An infinitely old universe would relieve us of the necessity of understanding the origin of matter at any finite time in the past. A finite universe, by contrast, would force scientists to confront uncomfortable questions about the ultimate beginning of the material universe itself. It also raised the possibility that the universe had begun in something like a creation event produced by a cause that existed independently of matter, space, time and energy.” 

~ Kevin Cleary