Search Results

BY REP. GLENN GRUENHAGEN AND CHRISTOPHER M. FOLEY, MD, ABIM Originally Published at MPPub Part One: a legislator’s perspective Prior to my election to the Minnesota House of Representatives in 2010, I served on my local school board for 16 years. During that time, I developed an interest in the increasing practice of labeling and medicating children who showed signs of Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder (ADHD). I learned that the procedure used to diagnose these children was primarily based on a series of questions from educators, which then resulted in a subjective judgment call and a recommendation to a physician to prescribe psychotropic medications. In almost all cases where students are diagnosed and subsequently labeled with a disorder, there is no objective medical evidence to determine this diagnosis. Special education programs—which include children labeled as having ADHD—is financed at about 80% of actual costs through state and federal funds, which creates major funding problems for local school districts that must fund the remaining 20%. In addition, schools are under increasing pressure to improve their metrics on grades and standardized test scores. These two factors can lead schools to turn to what appears to be a quick fix: medicate in hopes of managing behavior—and, potentially, improving test scores—all the while contributing to a dramatic increase in drug sales involving kids. The pharmaceutical industry promotes the value of this approach, visiting school boards and educators to stress the benefits of psychotropic medications to manage behavioral health concerns and increase test scores. Pharmaceutical representatives can no longer promote their products to physicians, but they can visit educators—and increase their profits, with estimates ranging as high as $7 billion annually for psychotropic drugs. Educators and counselors pass these messages on to parents, resulting in visits to physicians who may trust the recommendations of non-physician educators and write prescriptions without conducting a thorough assessment of the child’s needs. The result is a steep and rapid increase in psychotropic prescriptions. Spotting trends and concerns In 2006 I obtained a book coauthored by Nicholas A. Cummings, PhD, ScD, a former president of the American Psychological Association, entitled, “Destructive Trends in Mental Health: The Well Intentioned Path to Harm.” Two chapters piqued my interest: “Warning, Psychiatry can be Hazardous to your Health” and “The Diseasing of America’s Children.” ​Ten percent of all school-aged children are now labeled with ADHD. Credit: AmenClinics A March 2012 Psychology Today article, “Why French Kids don’t have ADHD,” stated that only one-half of one percent of French kids are labeled and medically treated for ADHD, compared to over 9% of American children. In France, diagnosis of ADHD takes into consideration the underlying causes in the child’s social context, addressing these through psychotherapy or family counseling, whereas the American Psychiatric Association’s Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders does not specifically include these underlying causes. The result is a much larger number of medicated American children. A recent article on the front page of the Minneapolis Star Tribune reported that 10% of all school-aged children are now labeled with ADHD. Then in November 2018, FEE (Foundation for Economic Education) published an article titled “Harvard Study Shows the Dangers of Early School Enrollment,” which warned about the dangers of labeling and medicating pre-school children. The article stated that the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention estimated approximately 11% of children are diagnosed with ADHD in the U.S. It also included numerous other concerns of early school enrollment. Lifetime impacts Another disturbing fact is that the use of psychotropic drugs on the developing brains of children seriously impairs their ability to serve in the military. I have visited with several military recruiters over the last several years who confirmed that the use of psychotropic drugs can result in denial into our military branches. The reason they are denied is that one of the negative side effects of long-term use of psychotropic drugs is violent out-bursts of uncontrollable rage. It should be evident why the military has serious concerns regarding the use of these drugs on developing children. In addition, there is a crisis of young people committing suicide. It would be interesting to study how many were on psychotropic drugs at the time of death. Finally, probably the most serious concern is the growing evidence of the connection between young mass shooters, both in and out of our schools, who also have a history of long-term use of psychotropic drugs. Action steps I am aware that this is an extremely controversial issue with psychiatrists and pharmaceutical companies who deny that there is any possible connection—however it is one of the primary reasons I authored a bill (HF713) in the Minnesota House of Representatives, which would create a study group of experts to research some of the previously mentioned concerns. My concerns are also partially based on the 2013 report of the OLA (Office of the Legislative Auditor), which identified that Minnesota has more than 170 additional laws and regulations over and above the federal requirements on special education. These additional laws have never been evaluated for costs or effectiveness! During the 2019 legislative session, I also offered an amendment (A173) on the House floor with additional language specifically addressing the excessive labeling and medicating of children. The amendment passed on a strong bipartisan vote; however, this language did not make it into the final educational omnibus bill signed by the governor. I intend to try again in 2020. A personal note Whether you agree or disagree with the above information, I think we should all agree that an in-depth study should be done on the costs and effectiveness of Minnesota’s special education requirements. Let me stress that I do not want to hurt any special education students. I have relatives who were in special education programs, but I am committed to finding factual answers to the above concerns. Part Two: a physician’s concerns As a general internist with a special interest in pharmacology, nutritional and botanical medicine, and complex illness, I have grown especially concerned with the misapplication of drugs—often many in the same patient. The rapid evolution of the physician (and other provider) workplaces with computerized medical records and the compulsion to practice medicine by “drop down menu” has added to the propensity to overprescribe. Nowhere is this more apparent than in the inappropriate overprescribing of psychotropic drugs for children—often by physicians who have not adequately examined the child. Questions about effectiveness Many drugs used to manage mood and behavior in children either have very little scientific basis (never tested thoroughly in youth under 18) or have a very undesirable risk-to-benefit ratio. This latter item is rarely, if ever, fully disclosed to the patients or their legal guardians in the spirit of informed consent. Examples include medications like Risperidone, a drug now in relatively common use for schizophrenia and other related thought disorders that has profound implications when given long term. It can actually cause permanent brain damage, resulting in irremediable tardive dyskinesia (an involuntary movement disorder that is both humiliating and disabling). ​Many drugs used to manage mood and behavior in children ... have a very undesirable risk-to-benefit ratio. The so-called “serotonin reuptake inhibitors,” long in use for the management of depression and anxiety (Prozac, Zoloft, etc.) in fact have very little scientific basis for their action. They are routinely given for anxiety and depression, particularly in children who suffer various types of posttraumatic stress disorder from abusive homes, injuries, medical conditions, and other factors. There is very little validated evidence that they are safe or effective in children. In fact, there is a boxed warning regarding both homicidal and suicidal ideations on several of these drugs that are commonly used. A recent expose disclosed that a majority of mass shootings have been perpetrated by individuals taking these drugs. The breathtaking element here is the utter lack of scientific scrutiny for safety and efficacy, particularly when given on a long-term basis (longer than six months). Trends in diagnoses Another overriding concern is the growing number of individuals using these medications. Much of this goes back to the publication of the fourth edition of the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM-IV) in 1994. When this now-revised fourth version came out, reported rates of ADHD, autism, and childhood bipolar disorder increased dramatically, largely because of the then-new DSM definitions. Some have called this “diagnostic inflation,” a phenomenon that is strongly promoted by pharmaceutical companies in concert with the psychiatry profession and those who write the DSM revisions. As soon as an illness is codified this way, spending for pharmaceutical solutions skyrockets. The current DSM-V was published in 2013, and, predictably, started a new epidemic of childhood mental disorders by introducing a new diagnosis: Disruptive Mood Dysregulation Disorder (DMDD). A recent editorial in the Journal of the American Academy of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry goes to great lengths to distinguish between ADHD, childhood manic-depressive disorder, and DMDD in order to help distinguish specific treatments that should be studied and applied in each individual illness. What I find astonishing is that doctors are taking the advice of school employees with no medical training and writing prescriptions without demanding more evaluation by trained professionals. Arguably, it is a bit more work for the medical team to look at nutrition, specific biomarkers such as vitamin D, toxins in the environment, subtle infections including Lyme disease, and even exposure to specific frequencies of light (especially near-infrared and red light). There is scientific evidence that many of these factors are related to the prevalence of adolescents with severe mental illness. ​When physicians prescribe psychotropic medications that could do harm based on a recommendation from educators, without conducting their own assessment of the child’s needs and home life or seeking a second opinion from a behavioral health specialist, the result is the current explosion of labeling and medicating—creating a situation not unlike the opioid epidemic. Parents may not have the resources to seek second opinions, or may live in areas with shortages of psychiatrists, but this follow-up would serve schoolchildren best. Recommendations for evaluation and treatment It was not that long ago when many practitioners failed to test children with behavioral disorders for a condition called PANDAS (Pediatric Autoimmune Neuropsychiatric Disorders Associated with Streptococcal Infections). This condition is of a neuro-immune nature, much like rheumatic fever, but the brain is the target, instead of the heart and joints. It can result in profound mood changes, night terrors, enuresis, and severe obsessive-compulsive tendencies. I have seen many children with this illness who are treated quite quickly and incorrectly with Zoloft or some similar drug with no appropriate investigation. Rarely is such detective work performed when a child is referred by a teacher to a psychiatrist for evaluation and treatment. That consultation almost always results in a prescription based solely on the educator’s assessment. The issue is that thoroughly evaluating a child for underlying causes of aberrant behavior is simply more labor-intensive than writing a prescription. However, that should not deter physicians from finding a better way to evaluate and treat rather than contribute to yet another explosion of psychotropic drugs that are poorly studied in children—many of which can have lifelong side effects and implications. A growing number of physicians, including myself, are doing such detective work, often coming up with solutions that obviate the need to use psychotropic drugs. This needs to be encouraged, studied much more extensively, and, as a policy, prioritized as a healthier way to approach childhood neuropsychiatric problems rather than just reaching for a prescription pad. Glenn Gruenhagen (R) represents District 18B in the Minnesota House of Representatives and served on the Glencoe-Silver Lake school board for 16 years. He owns an independent insurance agency and is a Chartered Financial Consultant and CLU. A USMC veteran, he also participated in prison ministry for 13 years. Christopher M. Foley, MD, ABIM, has practiced internal medicine since 1979 and pioneered one of the first integrative medical clinics in the Midwest in 1995. He is a former instructor in the University of Minnesota Medical School and lecturer in the College of Pharmacy at the University of Minnesota.

By American Revival Press Oct 29th 2024 We had Minnesota State Senator Glenn Gruenhagen back on "All Politics is Local" to follow up from his first interview exposing just how radical Walz truly is, by his track record in Minnesota. In this second interview Gruenhagen discusses specifically what makes Minnesota the most radical Pro-Abortion state in the nation! Why are these Progressive's so hell-bent on lowering the population, encouraging women to kill their babies and worse!? It's hard to understand how an entire political party can boldly campaign on such a murderous and vile policy - and then hardly be called out for it!? Listen in as Senator Gruenhagen tells the story of what Minnesota has endured under Gov Walz. ( Watch on Rumble )

Originally Published at AlphaNews Tearing down monuments along with looting and rioting does nothing to address and fix the root causes of racism in our society. Also, demonizing all police will in the long run only make communities less safe especially for minorities. (Pic: 1960's Infamous Race Riots in Detroit) Our American culture has struggled with racism for decades. In order to end racism in America it is important to understand the roots of modern-day racism and the primary institution which fosters racism in our nation. Modern-day racism received its so-called scientific rationale from primarily two writings by Charles Darwin. The first was titled “The Origin of Species by Means of Natural Selection or the Preservation of Favored Races in the Struggle for Life.” Darwin’s second writing was titled “The Descent of Man, and Selection in Relation to Sex”. Charles Darwin was a white supremacist, a racist and a eugenicist as explained in his writings. Here is a direct quote from this book, “At some period not very distant as measured by centuries, the civilized (European) race of men will almost certainly exterminate and replace throughout the world the savage races”. Darwin goes on to name “…the Negro or Australian (pygmy) and the gorilla”. Note: Darwin’s second book, the “Descent of Man”, is not taught in schools primarily because of its racist overtones, however the primary theory of origins taught in our schools is the Darwinian theory of macro evolution which supports the idea of separate evolved races. Thankfully, science and biology have advanced and in the ‘90s the genetic code was cracked. Much to the dismay of the disciples of evolution, there was no natural selection gene that can turn one kind of animal into another kind of animal even with the eons of time. Science and biology now confirm that there are not many different races but that there is only one human race, therefore we are all related. There are different ethnic groups but only one human race, destroying the Darwinian theory of evolution. Unfortunately, social Darwinism has permeated many of our government-controlled institutions, especially education. The following examples will demonstrate how social Darwinism has negatively impacted our society and fanned the flames of racism. For decades Minnesota has had one of the worst achievement gaps between minority and Caucasian students in the nation. Several years ago, the Minnesota Department of Education reported that only 15% of 10th grade black students could read to their grade level in Minneapolis and St. Paul inner-city public schools. This destroys the future for these black and minority children, leaving them hopeless and trapped in failed public schools. I contend that the wealth gap between minorities and Caucasians in our society mirrors the achievement gap in our public schools. This is a form of racism. One of the greatest civil rights issues of our time is school choice, where parents have control and the funding follows the student, increasing competition between public, private and religious schools. Equal competition between all schools will accomplish what billions of tax dollars spent on a failed inner-city school system cannot. When I was discharged from the Marine Corps I qualified for the GI Bill for higher education. I could attend a public college, or a private college, or a religious college and use the GI Bill’s federal tax dollars for tuition. Using tax dollars to follow the student with school choice should be the same. The U.S. Supreme Court recently ruled it was constitutional. Incidentally, almost all Democrats oppose school choice. Before I entered the political arena, I participated in jail ministry for 13 years. A common denominator I found among prisoners is that they cannot read fluently. Most schools have failed to teach proven strategies for reading such as intensive systematic phonics, traditional spelling, and grammar. Instead forms of whole language, inventive spelling and creative writing are primarily practiced which cause reading and writing problems. This results in a high level of misdiagnosing disorders which is a contributing factor to the excessive labeling and drugging of children. If you can’t read fluently it’s difficult to participate in education or the economy. (Pic: California State Prison) Also, the teaching of multiculturalism and diversity tends to emphasize our differences rather than our commonality. We are not German-Americans, or Hispanic-Americans or African-Americans but we are Americans with a German heritage or an American with a Hispanic heritage or an American with an African heritage, etc. Our schools must again teach U.S. history and patriotism. Another area of government racism is demonstrated in the Great Society programs and the “War on Poverty” of the ‘60s promoted by President Lyndon Johnson. These welfare programs pay government subsidies to women for having children out of wedlock, raising the out of wedlock birth rate of inner-city blacks from less than 20% in the early ‘60s to over 74% today. This has trapped many single parent moms in permanent poverty and government dependency. This is a major reason for the destruction of the traditional black family with devastating consequences for their children. To illustrate, please see the attached YouTube video aired by TV personality Iyanla Vanzant interviewing six black men who between them have fathered 87 children with 50 different women. She confirms that suicide rates, illegal drug abuse, and criminal behavior are all exponentially higher for children raised in fatherless homes. Our welfare programs also incentivize criminal behavior. Welfare recipients realize that generating income from the sale of illegal drugs is not tax reportable while the income generated from a legitimate job is tax reportable and jeopardizes their welfare benefits. Government welfare programs must be reformed and the anti-marriage penalties should be removed from welfare. U.S. taxpayers have spent over $22 trillion on anti-poverty programs from 1964-2014 and the poverty rate is the same or worse than when these programs were started (source: Heritage Foundation). We also see racism in government immigration policies. Minnesota Democrats support sanctuary cities and they support turning Minnesota into a sanctuary state. We need legal immigration. We are all descendants of legal immigrants; however illegal immigration is dehumanizing and racist. Allow me to explain. When illegal immigrants cross our southern border, many have to pay thousands of dollars to “coyotes” who exploit them criminally, sexually, and brutally. Many illegal immigrants after crossing the border arrive in arid or desert areas and die of dehydration. This includes men women and children. Some are brutally murdered by drug dealers. If they survive the gauntlet of crossing the border and entering U.S. soil they are then exploited by some employers for financial gain or experience other criminal behavior. Many fear reporting these acts because they are here illegally. If you have any amount of human compassion you will oppose illegal immigration. Again, we need legal immigration which gives these new immigrants the best chance of achieving the American dream and becoming a productive middle-class citizen instead of being trapped in poverty and on government dependency. Illegal immigration also drives down wages, especially for our unskilled American minority workers. We must promote legal immigration and stop illegal immigration. Next, consider abortion rates. Blacks are about 15% of the U.S. population but comprise approximately 40% of all U.S. abortions. Planned Parenthood was founded by Margaret Sanger a racist, a white supremacist, and a eugenicist. Also consider that Planned Parenthood receives over $500 million of federal subsidies plus state subsidies each year. We need to elect pro-life legislators and judges so we finally end this form of government subsidized racism. Several things to keep in mind historically: slavery was a critical issue of disagreement from the very founding of our country. Originally, our Constitution counted black individuals as only 3/5 personhood. It’s not because our founding fathers were racists, it was because abolitionists of the North wanted to limit the population count of the southern slave states, thereby limiting the number of slave-state representatives in Congress. They hoped this would later give abolitionists a better opportunity to one day end slavery. (For more info please visit www.Wallbuilders.com which has the largest collection of our country’s original founding and written documents) We fought the Civil War with over 620,000 casualties, not to mention those who were severely wounded or maimed, almost all of them young Caucasian boys who endured many hardships and horrible medical procedures. This is the largest number of war casualties in U.S. history, in fact more than all other wars combined. President Lincoln, founder of the Republican Party, was nicknamed the “widow maker” by his opponents. He also signed the Emancipation Proclamation and freed the slaves. We also destroyed the economy of the South and seriously damaged the northern economy. Many Americans are not aware that the first seven black congressman after the Civil War were Republicans. In summary, our educational system and federal and state programs have become heavily influenced by the racist theory of social Darwinism especially since the ‘60s. These institutions must be reformed. There is a current movement for slave reparations of approximately $3 trillion. I believe school choice, where parents control the education and tax dollars of their children, will do much more to end racism in America than the repayment of any slave reparations. Unless we reform the racism that is inherent in our federal and state government institutions and programs, we will not address the root causes of racism and as a result we will continue to see a very divisive and violent society and our children’s future and the future of all Americans will suffer. Tearing down monuments along with looting and rioting does nothing to address and fix the root causes of racism in our society. Also, demonizing all police will in the long run only make communities less safe especially for minorities. Remember our national motto is “E Pluribus Unum”, which means “Out of Many, One”. By this we understand that the principle our nation was founded on was one of “God-given rights”, a Republic where all people are created equal with the right to pursue life, liberty and happiness, with equal justice under the law, as the ideal we strive for. This will create a more perfect and united union with a growing and prosperous Middle class, building a better future for all our children! By God’s Grace and with His help we can solve the critical problems facing our state and nation. Let us commit that we listen to each other respectfully. Acknowledgements: I would like to thank Dr. Thomas Sowell, Starr Parker, Walter Williams, Bob Woodson, Larry Elders, Leo Terrell, Dinesh D’Sousa, Candace Owens and the late Dr. Francis Schaefer and the late Dr. Henry Morris along with many others whose influence, writings and ideas are expressed in this Manifesto.

The allure of gold has captivated people for centuries, but few realize the miraculous story behind its formation. While secular science often credits slow, evolutionary processes with the development of gold deposits, recent research tells a different story—one that aligns perfectly with the account of worldwide flood. This divine event, described in the Bible, didn’t just reshape the world; it formed some of the richest gold deposits ever discovered. Gold in the Bible: A Testament to God’s Creation Gold is first mentioned in Scripture in the Garden of Eden, in the “land of Havilah,” where it is described as “good” (Genesis 2:11-12). But just over 1,600 years later, the world was radically altered by the Flood, which buried much of that original creation, including its gold. This brings us to an important realization: the gold found in today’s richest veins is likely a result of the catastrophic geological processes set in motion by the Flood. God’s Word not only predicts the upheaval of the earth but also hints at the very forces that would lead to the formation of these valuable deposits. Psalm 104:8 describes how the waters “went up over the mountains” and then “flowed down into the valleys,” depicting the immense tectonic activity that took place during the Flood. This event, combined with volcanic eruptions and the mixing of seawater and underground fluids, created the perfect conditions for gold to form rapidly. Scientific Evidence Points to the Flood Secular scientists have long proposed that gold formed over millions of years as hydrothermal fluids slowly deposited dissolved particles. But new research published in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences  (2021) shatters this assumption. A study on gold deposits at the Brucejack mine in British Columbia revealed that the concentration of gold in the so-called “bonanza veins” is too high to have accumulated slowly. These veins, containing up to 50% pure gold, defy the slow-and-gradual model. Instead, the researchers found that gold was carried in a colloidal suspension—similar to how fat is suspended in milk—and that tiny particles clumped together and were deposited rapidly. This process, called “flocculation,” occurred as seawater mixed with hydrothermal fluids deep underground. The key takeaway? Gold can form in a matter of days or even hours, under the right conditions—conditions that perfectly align with the biblical account of the Flood. A Goldmine of Geological Truth When we look at the evidence with biblical lenses, the connection becomes clear. The violent tectonic activity, seismic pumping, and volcanic heat described in the scientific research all fit within the context of the global Flood. It wasn’t just a deluge of water; it was God’s hand reshaping the earth, forming mountains and valleys, and depositing precious minerals like gold in the process. Proverbs 25:2 reminds us, “It is the glory of God to conceal a matter; to search out a matter is the glory of kings.” In studying the earth and its treasures, we see the handiwork of the Creator. Yet, much of the scientific community remains trapped in the evolutionary mindset, limiting their understanding of how the world’s resources truly came to be. Biblical Thinking Leads to Real-World Discoveries Believing in the Flood doesn’t just bring us closer to biblical truth; it can lead to practical results in the world of gold prospecting. Pastor and gold prospector Jack Lange testified in Creation  magazine how his belief in the Genesis Flood guided his success in finding gold nuggets in Australia. His understanding of the forces unleashed by the Flood allowed him to look in places that secular geologists might have overlooked. Lange’s experience is a reminder that God’s truth is not only spiritual but also practical. When we embrace the Bible’s teachings, it opens our eyes to realities the world often misses. This includes understanding how treasures like gold were formed, and ultimately, how they point us back to the Creator. True Riches: Gold and Eternal Treasure As fascinating as the story of gold is, it pales in comparison to the eternal riches promised by Christ. Jesus tells us in Matthew 6:19-20, “Do not store up for yourselves treasures on earth, where moths and vermin destroy, and where thieves break in and steal. But store up for yourselves treasures in heaven.” The gold formed during the Flood is a glimpse of God’s power, but it is the treasure of salvation and eternal life that holds true value. The message is clear: understanding the truth of Noah’s Flood isn’t just about geology or gold. It’s about recognizing that God’s hand has been at work throughout history, guiding events for His purposes. As we uncover the physical treasures of this world, let us not forget the spiritual treasures that await us in eternity. References: 1. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences , 2021. Study on Brucejack gold deposits. 2. Psalm 104:8 - Tectonic activity during the Flood. 3. Genesis 2:11-12 - Gold in the land of Havilah. 4. Matthew 6:19-20 - Treasures in heaven. 5. Lange, Jack. “Golden Evidence of the Genesis Flood.” Creation  Magazine, Vol. 29, No. 4, 2007.

The story of the Tower of Babel is one of the most fascinating accounts in the Bible, shedding light on the origins of language diversity and the limits of human ambition. This ancient narrative, found in Genesis 11:1-9, reveals deep truths about humanity’s pride, God’s judgment, and His ultimate plan for salvation. The Tower of Babel: Man’s Attempt to Challenge God After the flood, humanity once again multiplied and filled the earth. At that time, all people shared a common language, making communication seamless. In their unity, however, humanity made a fateful decision: to build a city and a tower that reached the heavens. Their intention wasn’t merely architectural; they sought to make a name for themselves and resist God’s command to spread across the earth (Genesis 11:4). This act of defiance was not just about constructing a tall building. It was a symbol of collective human pride, a desire to rival God’s authority. Just as Satan once desired to ascend to the heavens and exalt himself above God (Isaiah 14:13-14), so too did humanity in Babel seek to establish their own greatness independently of God. God’s Response: Confusing the Languages God’s response to this act of rebellion was swift and decisive. In Genesis 11:7-8, He said, “Come, let us go down and confuse their language so they will not understand each other.” The confusion of languages abruptly halted the construction of the tower, forcing the people to scatter across the earth as God had originally intended. This scattering was not merely a punishment but a merciful act. By dividing humanity through language, God restrained their collective power, preventing them from falling deeper into sin. As Proverbs 16:18 warns, “Pride goes before destruction, and a haughty spirit before a fall.” God’s intervention in Babel was both a judgment on human arrogance and a redirection of their path. The Significance of Language Diversity The diversity of languages that emerged from Babel serves as a reminder of the consequences of human pride. Today, we see thousands of languages spoken across the world, a testimony to God’s sovereign intervention. Secular linguistics has long grappled with the origins of these language families, yet the Tower of Babel offers a biblical explanation that resonates with both historical and scientific observations. Modern linguists are still puzzled by the existence of unrelated language families. Despite advances in historical and comparative linguistics, there is no consensus on how so many distinct languages could have evolved from a single source, especially considering the complexity of language structures. This has led some scholars to support the idea that languages might have originated independently in different regions—a theory that lacks substantial evidence. As one study noted, “Only Genesis provides a credible explanation” for the sudden emergence of distinct languages and their subsequent development . God’s Ultimate Plan: Unity through Christ While the story of Babel highlights the division caused by sin, it also points to God’s ultimate plan for unity. In the New Testament, we see the reversal of Babel’s confusion through the outpouring of the Holy Spirit at Pentecost. In Acts 2:4-6, the apostles began speaking in different languages, and people from various nations understood the message of Christ in their own tongues. This event signified that through Jesus, God was uniting all people under His grace, regardless of language or nationality. The apostle Paul echoes this sentiment in Ephesians 2:14, where he writes, “For He Himself is our peace, who has made the two groups one and has destroyed the barrier, the dividing wall of hostility.” While Babel scattered humanity, Christ brings us together, offering salvation to all who believe, regardless of their background. The story of the Tower of Babel is not just an ancient tale but a profound lesson about human nature and God’s sovereignty. It warns us of the dangers of pride and self-reliance while pointing us to the unity and redemption found in Christ. As we navigate a world with diverse languages and cultures, let us remember that true unity comes not from human effort but from submission to God’s will and the transformative power of His love. References: 1. Genesis 11:1-9 (NIV) 2. Isaiah 14:13-14 (NIV) 3. Proverbs 16:18 (NIV) 4. Acts 2:4-6 (NIV) 5. Ephesians 2:14 (NIV) 6. Duursma, K.J. “The Tower of Babel Account Affirmed by Linguistics,” TJ 16(3) 2002

In today’s world, many Christians grapple with understanding the relationship between faith and science. One of the most debated topics is the Big Bang Theory, which some see as a way to reconcile modern science with the biblical account of creation. However, is it truly possible to merge the Big Bang Theory with the Bible’s teaching? This article explores this question by comparing the Big Bang Theory with the biblical account of creation and examining the theological implications of attempting to harmonize these two views. The Big Bang Theory: A Scientific Overview According to the Big Bang Theory, the universe began approximately 13.8 billion years ago from a singularity, a point of infinite density and temperature. This singularity expanded and eventually led to the formation of subatomic particles, stars, galaxies, and eventually planets, including Earth. Over billions of years, this cosmic evolution unfolded, resulting in the world as we know it today. Many Christians have sought to integrate this theory with the Bible’s account of creation, seeing it as compatible with the notion of God as the Creator. However, there are significant differences between the Big Bang Theory and the biblical creation narrative. According to Genesis 1, God created the heavens and the earth in six literal days, with Earth being formed before the sun, stars, and other celestial bodies. The Bible presents a direct act of creation, whereas the Big Bang Theory suggests a gradual process over billions of years. This fundamental difference raises theological questions about the compatibility of the two views. Contradictions Between the Bible and the Big Bang One of the key issues in attempting to reconcile the Big Bang Theory with the Bible is the sequence of events. In Genesis 1, God created the earth on Day One, while the sun, moon, and stars were created on Day Four. The Big Bang Theory, on the other hand, proposes that the sun existed long before the earth. This stark contrast challenges the idea that the Big Bang can be harmonized with the Bible without altering the biblical narrative. Furthermore, the Bible teaches that God’s creation was perfect and free from death and suffering before the Fall of Adam and Eve. In contrast, the Big Bang Theory, and the associated evolutionary timeline, suggests that death, suffering, and decay have been present in the universe for billions of years. This view is difficult to reconcile with passages like Romans 5:12, which states, “Therefore, just as sin entered the world through one man, and death through sin, and in this way death came to all people, because all sinned.” The introduction of death and suffering as a result of Adam’s sin is a foundational Christian doctrine that conflicts with the evolutionary history proposed by the Big Bang Theory. Theological Implications of Accepting the Big Bang For Christians who accept the Big Bang Theory, several theological challenges arise. First, the idea that God used a long, gradual process involving death and suffering to create the universe contradicts the biblical depiction of a God who declares His creation “very good” (Genesis 1:31). Accepting a long history of death and decay before humanity’s fall risks undermining the Bible’s teachings on sin and redemption. Moreover, accepting the Big Bang Theory can lead to a slippery slope of doubting other parts of the Bible. If the Genesis account is not taken as literal history, then what other parts of the Bible can be reinterpreted or dismissed? As the Apostle Paul wrote in 1 Corinthians 15:22, “For as in Adam all die, so in Christ all will be made alive.” The historical reality of Adam’s sin and the curse it brought upon creation is directly linked to the need for Christ’s atonement. What the Bible Teaches About Creation The Bible presents a clear and consistent message about the origin of the universe. Psalm 33:9 declares, “For he spoke, and it came to be; he commanded, and it stood firm.” God created the world by His word, and this creation occurred over six literal days, as outlined in Genesis 1. The idea of a creation that unfolded over billions of years contradicts the plain reading of the text and introduces unnecessary complications into the Christian faith. Jesus Himself affirmed the authority of the Old Testament, including Genesis, when He said, “If you believed Moses, you would believe me; for he wrote about me” (John 5:46). The New Testament writers also upheld the historicity of Genesis. As Christians, we are called to trust in the authority of Scripture, even when it challenges contemporary scientific theories. The attempt to harmonize the Big Bang Theory with the Bible raises significant theological and doctrinal concerns. While science can provide valuable insights into the workings of God’s creation, Christians must be cautious not to allow scientific theories to undermine the authority of Scripture. The Bible teaches that God created the world by His word in six days, and this creation was good, free from death and suffering until the Fall. Ultimately, faith in the Bible as the true and infallible Word of God must guide our understanding of the universe. As Hebrews 11:3 reminds us, “By faith we understand that the universe was formed at God’s command, so that what is seen was not made out of what was visible.” Christians should be confident in the truth of God’s Word and resist the pressure to conform to popular scientific theories that contradict Scripture. References: 1. Grigg, Russell. “Can Christians Add the Big Bang to the Bible?” Creation Magazine , January 2021, pp. 24–27. 2. The Bible, New International Version (NIV).

In a world increasingly shaped by scientific discovery and skeptical worldviews, many people assume that belief in God is outdated or irrational. Yet, a careful examination of our minds—our ability to reason, think abstractly, and experience consciousness—points strongly toward the existence of a Creator. This idea, often referred to as the Argument from Reason , provides a compelling case for God’s existence, making belief in Him not only reasonable but also deeply rational. 1. Rational Minds from Non-Rational Processes? One of the fundamental questions posed by Christian thinkers like C.S. Lewis is this: If the universe is solely the product of blind, non-rational forces, how did rational beings like us come to exist? According to atheistic evolution, life—including human consciousness—emerged from random processes without any intentional guidance. But this leaves us with a puzzling question: Why would these non-rational forces produce beings capable of logical thought? C.S. Lewis likened it to the random splash of milk falling off a table. Would we expect that splash to contain useful information about how the carton fell? Similarly, if the evolutionary process has no goal or intention, it seems unlikely it would generate beings capable of abstract thinking and reasoning. The Christian worldview, however, offers a more fitting explanation: We were created in the image of a rational God, and therefore our ability to think rationally reflects His nature. 2. Evolution and Rational Thinking Atheists argue that evolution, through natural selection, could have favored creatures with better cognitive abilities, increasing their survival chances. But this view encounters several challenges. Natural selection ensures survival, not truth or rational thought. A being doesn’t necessarily need accurate beliefs to survive—it just needs behaviors that promote survival. For example, a mouse might irrationally believe that a snake is friendly but still survive by instinctively fleeing. Rational thinking is not essential for survival, making it hard to explain how evolution alone could give rise to human reason. Moreover, many living organisms—like bacteria and plants—function perfectly well without rational minds. If survival is possible without rational thought, why would evolution produce it at all? 3. The Nature of Consciousness The existence of consciousness presents yet another challenge for atheistic explanations. Consciousness is the personal awareness of our thoughts, emotions, and surroundings. While materialists try to argue that consciousness arises from brain activity, it remains fundamentally different from anything purely physical. Conscious experiences, often called qualia , are deeply personal. No one can experience your pain or see the world exactly as you do. This subjective nature of consciousness is hard to reconcile with the idea that we are merely made of atoms and molecules. Even atheistic philosophers like Thomas Nagel have admitted the difficulty of explaining consciousness. In his essay, What Is It Like to Be a Bat? , Nagel argues that no amount of physical knowledge about a bat’s brain can fully explain what it is like to be a bat. Consciousness remains a mystery that material explanations alone cannot solve. 4. A Biblical Answer to Rationality and Consciousness The Christian faith provides a coherent and satisfying explanation for our rationality and consciousness. Genesis teaches that human beings were created in God’s image (Genesis 1:27). This means that we reflect God’s nature, including His rationality. God, who is all-knowing and logical, designed us with the ability to think, reason, and seek truth. This perspective makes sense of why we can understand the world and make sense of abstract concepts like justice, love, and beauty. It also explains why our identity remains constant over time, even though our bodies change. According to Christianity, we are not just physical beings; we are body and soul. Our soul, an immaterial part of us, grounds our personal identity and allows us to think rationally and experience consciousness. 5. The Limits of Atheism Atheists often struggle to explain the origins of rationality and consciousness. Philosopher Daniel Dennett has gone so far as to claim that consciousness is an illusion—an argument that has been widely criticized. After all, if consciousness were an illusion, we would need to be conscious to experience that illusion, making his claim self-contradictory. Many atheists also assume, without sufficient evidence, that consciousness will eventually be explained as an emergent property of complex physical systems, like how water feels wet. However, rational thought and consciousness possess qualities that cannot be reduced to physical matter. The Christian view provides a more satisfying answer: Rationality has existed from the beginning because God, a rational being, created the world and designed human beings to reflect His nature. Faith and Reason in Harmony Belief in God is not a leap into irrationality. On the contrary, it is a reasonable response to the realities of our minds and consciousness. Rationality and consciousness fit naturally within a theistic framework, where a personal God designed the world with purpose and intentionality. The Christian worldview explains not only why we can think and reason but also why our thoughts align with reality. Atheism, with its insistence on a purely material universe, struggles to account for the very faculties that make us human. The more we explore the nature of our minds, the more we find that belief in God is not just compatible with reason—it is the most rational conclusion. 1. Lewis, C.S. Miracles: A Preliminary Study.  HarperOne, 2001. 2. Nagel, Thomas. What Is It Like to Be a Bat?   The Philosophical Review , vol. 83, no. 4, 1974, pp. 435–450. 3. Nagel, Thomas. Mind and Cosmos: Why the Materialist Neo-Darwinian Conception of Nature Is Almost Certainly False.  Oxford University Press, 2012. 4. Dennett, Daniel. Consciousness Explained.  Back Bay Books, 1992. 5. Reppert, Victor. C.S. Lewis’s Dangerous Idea: In Defense of the Argument from Reason.  InterVarsity Press, 2003.

The 16th BRICS Summit is now underway in Kazan, Russia, drawing leaders from 36 countries. Among those in attendance are Chinese President Xi, Indian Prime Minister Modi, and the presidents of South Africa and Egypt. However, a few key figures opted out—Brazil’s President Lula canceled due to health issues, and Serbia’s Vučić had other plans with Poland. In the days leading up to the summit, locals were warned not to drive old cars to “maintain appearances,” and during the event, phone networks have been jammed, with telecoms citing security concerns. It’s a big event with lots of political heavyweights—though, as always, some have gone out of their way to avoid it. This summit marks a significant milestone—BRICS has expanded from just five nations to 36. Officially, the Kremlin describes this growth as a testament to a “multipolar world” and an anti-colonial movement, showcasing Russia’s alliances with countries that represent more than half of the global population. But what is BRICS really about? And how did it come to hold such symbolic weight? BRICS began in 2001 when Russia and China had small economies, barely contributing to global GDP. Back then, they were still scraping by, with untapped potential. It was Jim O’Neill from Goldman Sachs who first coined the term “BRICs” in a paper, grouping Brazil, Russia, India, and China based on their economic potential. His timing was strategic—just after 9/11, when many analysts thought Western dominance was on the decline, making way for new powers. The theory was that these four nations, with their vast populations and cheap labor, were poised for rapid growth. O’Neill’s paper suggested they were “bricks” of a new economic order, solid investments in a changing world. His catchy acronym took off, and by the 2000s, the economies of these countries surged—particularly China, which is now the second-largest economy. Investors profited handsomely, with Goldman Sachs cashing in on the hype. But BRICS soon evolved beyond economics and entered the political arena. In 2006, the four countries began formal meetings and committed to closer collaboration. By 2009, Yekaterinburg hosted the first official BRIC summit. A year later, South Africa joined the group, turning BRIC into BRICS. In 2024, more members came on board—Egypt, Iran, the UAE, and Ethiopia. Others, like Argentina and Turkey, expressed interest but haven’t taken the plunge. However, despite its expansion, BRICS remains more of a conversation club than a real alliance. The group makes bold statements but lacks the structures or institutions of a bloc like the EU or NATO. Member countries don’t sacrifice sovereignty for integration. Their decisions need to be unanimous, and apart from the New Development Bank (NDB), which funds infrastructure projects, there’s little in the way of joint action. Even the NDB cut ties with Russia when sanctions hit. The idea of using national currencies for trade has been floated, but nothing concrete has come of it. And although a shared currency was once considered, the economic differences between these nations make it unlikely. BRICS nations are more connected to Western economies than to each other, relying on them for investment, exports, and technology. China may be the glue holding the group together, but it’s also the largest player by far, with a GDP that dwarfs the rest combined. In reality, the interests of these countries often clash. China and India are regional rivals, each vying for influence and market access. Brazil and Russia, meanwhile, have their own trade commitments—Brazil with MERCOSUR, and Russia with the Eurasian Economic Union—making deeper BRICS cooperation complicated. The idea of an economic coalition simply doesn’t align with the messy realities of international trade and diplomacy. By the 2010s, the initial optimism surrounding BRICS had started to fade. While China’s economy continued to grow, doubts arose about the reliability of its numbers. Meanwhile, Russia and Brazil failed to live up to expectations, struggling with stagnant productivity and missed opportunities. Instead of becoming engines of global growth, they stumbled under the weight of poor governance and economic mismanagement. Today, it’s clear that BRICS doesn’t have a unified vision. New members are mostly interested in forging closer ties with China and India rather than building a coherent alliance. Most of the declarations made at these summits are vague statements about world order and climate change, with little follow-through. The main focus now seems to be on expanding membership, though setting specific goals would likely cause friction among members with divergent interests. At its core, BRICS was never meant to be an anti-Western alliance. When Jim O’Neill introduced the term, it was a way to spotlight emerging economies, not a call for geopolitical realignment. In truth, these countries have more differences than common ground. China benefits from low oil prices, which would devastate Russia’s economy. Meanwhile, India sees economic opportunities in China’s trade conflicts with the U.S., rather than plotting with China to challenge the West. In contrast to functional organizations like the EU or NATO, BRICS feels more like an occasional reunion. Its members meet, make broad commitments, and then go their separate ways. There’s little evidence of meaningful cooperation between countries like India, South Africa, and Brazil. The real beneficiary of these summits seems to be Russian President Vladimir Putin, who uses them to maintain an image of relevance on the world stage. Hosting these gatherings allows him to stand shoulder-to-shoulder with other leaders—a spectacle that serves his personal narrative in an era of increasing isolation. Ultimately, BRICS may be little more than a vanity project, propped up by meetings that create the illusion of progress. But in a political system built on appearances, that may be all that matters.

The decision by Russian President Vladimir Putin to seek North Korean troops for deployment in Ukraine has cast a harsh spotlight on Europe’s military unpreparedness. This development has prompted European nations to confront uncomfortable truths about their defense capabilities and exposed the continent’s reliance on outdated assumptions about peace, diplomacy, and U.S. protection. Europe’s Military at a Crossroads Since the Cold War ended, Europe operated under the belief that armed conflict was an unlikely prospect. European integration projects, such as the European Union, focused on strengthening economic ties, ensuring political cooperation, and leaving military conflict in the past. Defense budgets were trimmed, and militaries, once central to national identities, faded into near irrelevance. This neglect became glaringly obvious following Russia’s annexation of Crimea in 2014, but few European nations treated it as a sign of looming danger. Much of Europe continued to divert resources from military infrastructure toward economic development and welfare programs, further weakening defense capabilities. Even NATO, the transatlantic defense alliance, shifted its focus to non-combat issues like climate change, leaving many of its military commitments underfunded and symbolic. Now, as the war in Ukraine grinds on with staggering losses and growing regional instability, Europe must come to terms with its defense shortcomings. Putin’s recruitment of North Korean troops reflects Russia’s willingness to escalate and involve new players, underscoring the stakes for European leaders. Despite immense financial resources, Europe finds itself struggling to maintain combat-ready forces. The Decline of European Militaries For years, Europe’s military power has eroded to the point that Bloomberg recently described many of its armed forces as “Potemkin armies” – military structures that appear functional but lack real operational strength. For example, France, with an army of 250,000 soldiers, would struggle to field a fully equipped combat force. Across the continent, defense equipment lies idle, with tanks, aircraft, and other resources suffering from years of neglect. This military weakness is a direct consequence of Europe’s long-held assumption that the U.S. would always guarantee its security. With the U.S. seen as the ultimate backstop, European nations prioritized economic growth, social programs, and infrastructure over maintaining robust militaries. Even the arrival of new NATO members, such as Finland, was celebrated as a rare boost to Europe’s defense capabilities—despite the fact that Finland, with a relatively small population, still manages to field a better-trained military than many larger European countries. Shifting U.S. Priorities and Europe’s Wake-Up Call Another troubling development for Europe is the shifting political landscape in the U.S. In recent years, calls to reduce America’s global military commitments and scale back NATO’s influence have gained traction. The combination of a protracted war in Ukraine and wavering U.S. support leaves Europe vulnerable. The war has already shown that modern conflict is not a relic of the past, as European leaders once believed. The battlefield realities unfolding in Ukraine—marked by trench warfare, high casualties, and escalating tensions—are uncomfortably close to European borders. A New Era of Militarization? Putin’s decision to engage North Korea signals that Russia is prepared to push the conflict further, forcing Europe to rethink its pacifist stance. European leaders are now increasing defense budgets and scrambling to rebuild military capabilities that were long neglected. The days of assuming diplomacy could prevent all wars are over, replaced by a growing consensus that military preparedness is no longer optional. This shift is both inevitable and risky. European nations are beginning to recognize that their security can no longer depend entirely on U.S. intervention. However, rebuilding military capacity will take time, and Europe must contend with the political challenges of refocusing its priorities. Many of today’s European politicians are accustomed to addressing domestic issues like welfare and immigration, not leading military efforts. While Europe is far from being able to mount a credible military challenge to Russia, the recognition of its vulnerabilities marks a turning point. Defense budgets are increasing, foreign weapons are being purchased, and discussions about mandatory military service are gaining traction in several countries. This gradual militarization, while still in its early stages, signals Europe’s growing determination to protect its interests. Bad News for Putin Putin’s actions have inadvertently accelerated Europe’s move toward rearmament. The involvement of North Korea in the conflict has shattered illusions that the war will remain contained to Ukraine. European leaders now see the need to prepare for the possibility of broader conflict, even if they are not yet ready to confront Russia head-on. The coming years will likely witness a steady militarization of Europe, driven by the recognition that relying solely on diplomacy or U.S. protection is no longer sustainable. For Putin, this realization is a strategic setback. As European nations rearm and strengthen their military alliances, the balance of power in the region could shift, limiting Russia’s ability to leverage future conflicts. While Europe’s reawakening may not deter Putin immediately, it sends a clear message: the era of complacency is over, and the continent is beginning to confront the hard realities of the 21st century. War is once again part of Europe’s strategic thinking, and Europe must prepare to stand on its own.

After reading numerous articles about President Trump’s stint as a fry cook at a McDonald’s in Pennsylvania, it became clear that the mainstream media harbors a deep, palpable fear of the prospect of his return to the White House—and not without justification. Trump is a leader who doesn’t bow to political correctness or elite expectations. He challenges the status quo in ways that unsettle those in power, including the media establishment. His return represents more than just a political comeback—it’s a chance to restore values, freedom, and fairness in a country that desperately needs it. The media’s relentless hostility toward Trump is rooted in fear—fear of losing control. For decades, mainstream media outlets have acted as gatekeepers, shaping public opinion and setting the narrative. But Trump’s direct, unfiltered communication disrupts that monopoly. Through platforms like Truth Social, he speaks directly to the American people, bypassing networks that often twist stories to fit their agendas. The media hates that they can’t control his message, and they fear what they can’t control. As Christians, we know that standing for truth often invites opposition. Trump’s willingness to call out corruption and challenge media lies is exactly what this nation needs. When he labeled the media as “fake news,” many in the press were outraged. But the truth is, the media’s bias has become obvious. They often attack conservative voices, while giving a free pass to liberal politicians who push anti-family, anti-faith policies. Trump sees through the hypocrisy, and so do many of us. The media also fears Trump because he stands in the way of their progressive agenda. Under his leadership, we saw policies that protected religious liberty, defended the unborn, and promoted traditional values. Meanwhile, the media has aligned itself with a cultural movement that mocks these principles. They support radical policies on gender, marriage, and life that are at odds with our faith. Another Trump presidency threatens to derail their plans, and that’s why they oppose him so fiercely. Beyond narrative control, the media fears Trump because he exposes their lack of credibility. Over the years, they’ve tried to discredit him with negative coverage, endless investigations, and sensational headlines. But what did it accomplish? Despite all their efforts, Trump’s base has only grown stronger. That’s because people are tired of being lied to and manipulated. We know the media wants us to conform, but Trump gives us the courage to stand firm. The stakes couldn’t be higher in 2024. The media, along with the political elites, want a government that bends to their will. They want a leader who will rubber-stamp their agenda, not one who puts America—and God—first. That’s why they fear Trump, and that’s why I believe he is the right choice for president. We should be voting for Trump not just because of his policies, but because he has the courage to fight for what’s right. He’s not perfect—none of us are—but he stands up against those who seek to silence us. And in a time when truth is under attack, that kind of leadership is exactly what America needs.

The study of woolly mammoths on Wrangel Island offers fresh insight into genetics, extinction, and creation, while providing intriguing parallels with the biblical Flood narrative. Found marooned on this remote Arctic island, the last mammoth population offers clues about their survival, reproduction, and eventual extinction, revealing that creation can endure even through extreme trials. The Mammoth Bottleneck on Wrangel Island Wrangel Island, located in the Arctic Ocean, was once connected to the mainland during the Ice Age. Lower sea levels allowed mammoths to roam freely across Siberia and the Arctic regions. However, as the climate warmed and glaciers melted, rising water levels cut off Wrangel Island, isolating a small group of mammoths. This led to a population bottleneck—a situation where genetic diversity shrinks due to a small starting population. Scientists studying the mammoth remains on the island initially thought these animals had bred themselves out of existence due to intense inbreeding, a process known as mutational meltdown. However, new genetic evidence reveals that these mammoths, despite their isolation, were able to avoid catastrophic genetic collapse. The population started with what scientists call an “effective size” of eight individuals, meaning the genetic diversity in the group was comparable to what would be expected from eight unrelated animals. Although they could not avoid inbreeding entirely, the study found that high-impact harmful mutations did not accumulate over time, allowing the group to remain genetically viable for generations. The mammoths eventually went extinct, but the study raises questions about what ultimately caused their disappearance—whether it was gradual environmental change or a sudden climatic event. A Biblical Parallel: Noah’s Ark and Genetic Bottlenecks The survival story of Wrangel Island’s mammoths offers intriguing parallels with the biblical narrative of Noah’s Ark. After the Flood, only eight people—Noah, his wife, his three sons, and their wives—remained to repopulate the earth. Just as with the mammoths, this bottleneck could have raised concerns about genetic viability. However, the Bible suggests that God’s design allowed humanity not only to survive but to flourish, despite starting with a small population. The mammoth study also challenges fears about bottlenecks causing extinction. Genetic bottlenecks inevitably lead to some loss of diversity, yet they also present an opportunity for harmful mutations to be purged from the population. In small groups, slightly deleterious mutations may increase, but catastrophic mutations that would threaten survival are more likely to be removed over time. This finding reinforces the idea that God’s creation is resilient and capable of thriving even after periods of great hardship, such as the Flood. Additionally, the study offers insight into how life may have thrived in a post-Flood world. Warmer oceans, likely caused by the aftermath of the Flood, created new environmental conditions that allowed animals like the mammoth to survive in areas that are now barren. The survival of these creatures for thousands of years on a remote island highlights the persistence and adaptability that God built into all living beings. A Lesson in Endurance and Hope For believers, the story of the last mammoths provides more than just scientific curiosity—it offers a message of hope. The mammoths faced environmental challenges, isolation, and inbreeding, yet their population persisted for millennia. Similarly, humanity today is not immune to challenges, whether personal, social, or environmental. Yet, just as these mammoths endured for generations, Christians are called to trust in God’s providence, believing that He provides what is needed to thrive, even when circumstances seem overwhelming. This study reminds us that God’s creation, despite its fragility, is designed to endure. It emphasizes that even when life seems reduced to its most basic elements—such as a small group of animals or people—there is still potential for survival, growth, and renewal under God’s care. Just as the mammoths of Wrangel Island persisted in isolation, Christians are called to persevere through trials, knowing that faith in God offers strength and hope. In the end, the fate of the mammoths serves as a call to both marvel at God’s intricate creation and to remain hopeful in life’s uncertainties. The resilience displayed by these animals encourages us to recognize that God’s plan includes not only moments of trial but also opportunities for renewal and growth. References: 1. Dehasque, M., et al. “Temporal Dynamics of Woolly Mammoth Genome Extension Prior to Extinction.” Cell  187 (2024): 3531–3540. 2. Carter, R. “Inbreeding and the Origin of Races.” Journal of Creation  27, no. 3 (2013): 124–127. 3. Carter, R.W. “Effective Population Sizes and Loss of Diversity During the Flood Bottleneck.” Journal of Creation  32, no. 2 (2018): 124–127.

In 2023 and 2024, two groundbreaking archaeological discoveries have emerged, shedding light on significant moments in biblical history. These findings—the discovery of a 2,700-year-old seal in Jerusalem and a Roman prison in ancient Corinth—provide fascinating new insights into the lives of biblical figures and the early Christian community. The Seal of Yeho’ezer: Evidence of Judah’s Bureaucracy and Literacy One of the most recent and remarkable discoveries is the unearthing of a 2,700-year-old seal in Jerusalem. This ancient artifact, dating back to the First Temple period, was found near the Southern Wall of the Temple Mount. The seal bears the inscription “LeYeho’ezer ben Hosh’ayahu” in paleo-Hebrew, alongside a depiction of a winged figure. Such seals were used in official correspondence and are crucial in understanding the administrative and bureaucratic systems of ancient Judah. Rare First Temple-era seal found in Jerusalem (Credit: Emil Aladjem/IAA) What makes this discovery particularly significant is the possible connection between the names on the seal and figures from the Bible. The name Hosh’ayahu (meaning “the Lord saves”) is found in the Old Testament, such as in the name Hosea, and Yeho’ezer (meaning “the Lord helps”) is also a name found in historical contexts. This suggests that the seal may have belonged to a prominent official in the Kingdom of Judah, highlighting the literacy and organization within the kingdom during that period. The Bible speaks to the importance of officials and leaders in the courts of the kings of Judah. For example, in 2 Kings 22:12, King Josiah sent his officials to consult with the prophetess Huldah, indicating the significant role that bureaucrats played in the kingdom’s governance. Credit: Emil Aladjem/IAA The discovery of this seal enriches our understanding of the daily life and administrative workings of the biblical period, reaffirming the Bible’s portrayal of the First Temple era as a time of political and religious activity. Corinth’s Roman Prison: A Glimpse into Early Christian Struggles Another fascinating discovery from 2024 is the identification of a Roman prison in ancient Corinth. Archaeologists uncovered this site along with graffiti left by prisoners, some of which include direct appeals to Christ for divine justice. The prison, dating back to the Roman era, offers a glimpse into the harsh conditions faced by prisoners, particularly early Christians who, like Paul, suffered for their faith. Ancient Corinth The Apostle Paul spent a significant amount of time in Corinth, and the discovery of this prison brings to life the environment that he and other early Christians may have encountered. Paul himself was no stranger to imprisonment, as he mentions several times in his letters, such as in Philippians 1:13: “It has become clear throughout the whole palace guard and to everyone else that I am in chains for Christ.” This prison may have been similar to the places where Paul and others endured suffering for the sake of the Gospel. Moreover, the inscriptions in the prison show how prisoners turned to their faith, echoing Paul’s own message of hope and endurance in the face of persecution. In 2 Corinthians 12:10, Paul wrote, “For the sake of Christ, then, I am content with weaknesses, insults, hardships, persecutions, and calamities. For when I am weak, then I am strong.” The pleas for divine justice found in the graffiti reveal a community that, despite their circumstances, continued to place their trust in Christ, much like the early Christians described in the New Testament. Connecting Past and Present These discoveries reaffirm the historical reliability of the Bible and provide deeper context to the lives of those who lived during the biblical period. The seal from Jerusalem shows how even in times of political and social upheaval, the leaders of Judah maintained a structured and literate society, as portrayed in the Bible. Meanwhile, the prison in Corinth offers a window into the lived experience of early Christians, whose faith endured despite Roman persecution. As Christians today, these archaeological finds invite us to reflect on the faithfulness of God throughout history. The Bible is not just a spiritual text, but a living document rooted in real events and real people. Just as the seal and the prison testify to the existence of these biblical figures and communities, they remind us that our faith is built on a firm foundation—one grounded in history, but pointing us towards an eternal future. The Jerusalem seal and the Corinth prison graffiti stand as powerful witnesses to the truth of the Bible. They provide tangible links to the past, affirming the historical accuracy of the Scriptures while offering new insights into the experiences of biblical figures and early Christians. As these discoveries continue to be studied, they will no doubt deepen our understanding of the Bible and encourage us in our faith journey. “For everything that was written in the past was written to teach us, so that through the endurance taught in the Scriptures and the encouragement they provide we might have hope” (Romans 15:4).