Rex M Rogers - Discerning What Is Best

Discerning What Is Best
with Dr. Rex M. Rogers

Details: Written by: Rex M. Rogers; Published: 27 October 2025

The Ark Encounter, a life-size replication of the biblical Noah’s Ark, is a wonder to behold.

Hi, I’m Rex Rogers and this is episode #231 of Discerning What Is Best, a podcast applying unchanging biblical principles in a rapidly changing world, and a Christian worldview to current issues and everyday life.

The Ark Encounter, located on 800 beautiful rolling and wooded acres just off I-75 in Williamstown, Kentucky, opened in 2016, is truly impressive.

This Noah’s ark replication is the brainchild and work of prolific Australian Christian author and speaker, Ken Ham, who with two others founded Answers in Genesis and then developed the Creation Museum, opened in 2007 in nearby Petersburg, KY. According to Wikipedia’s snarky description, Ken Ham’s Answers in Genesis “advocates young Earth creationism on the basis of its literal, historical-grammatical interpretation of the Book of Genesis and the Bible as a whole. Out of belief in biblical inerrancy, it rejects the results of scientific investigations that contradict their view of the Genesis creation narrative and instead supports pseudoscientific creation science. The organization sees evolution as incompatible with the Bible and believes anything other than the young Earth view is a compromise on the principle of biblical inerrancy.” In other words, the people who wrote this piece for Wikipedia go with the evolutionary, old earth, i.e., billions of years, anti-Creation evolutionary theory that has dominated the sciences since not long after Charles Darwin published his Origin of the Species (1859) and The Descent of Man (1871).

Ken Ham has authored more than 30 books and has been an evidence-based proponent of a literal Bible, young earth, i.e., 6,000-10,000 years, and Creationism his entire career. The Ark Encounter is a direct expression and representation of a literal interpretation of the Bible.

The Ark replication is over 100 feet high at the top of the bow fin, like a ten-story building, 85 feet wide, and 510 feet long, compared for example to the Statue of Liberty lying down at 306 feet or a Boeing 747 at 250 feet.

The ark replication features a ground floor and three upper decks, supported throughout by enormous 65’ by as much as 36” diameter logs. Each wooden “rib” framing the hold of the ark weighs 25,000 pounds and utilizes 1,200 pounds of bolts, so to put it mildly, the ark you’ll find in Kentucky is huge.

An opening video in the Welcome Center explains how the project came together, including Amish men who’d built large wooden barns and later oversaw the ark’s construction. The massive pillars are Englemann spruce, the squared timbers throughout are Douglas fir, the exterior is radiata pine from New Zealand, and the flooring is bamboo. This ark consists of 3.1 million board feet of lumber, making it the largest free-standing timber-frame structure in the world.

In the process of designing the ark, when Answers in Genesis could not determine how something was done, like water and food storage, ventilation, or waste removal, they developed plausible systems based upon current knowledge of ancient technology, systems that work and might have been used. Ken Ham and company do not assert “it must have been done this way” but offer a reasonable presentation, demonstrating how indeed sufficient material supplies, animal areas, and a survivable environment were crafted inside the ark. Another plausible idea they suggest, not mature but young or baby animals were taken on the ark. They require smaller living space, eat less, sleep more, and are easier to care for.

A large section on one of the decks is devoted to responding to the common question, “How could Noah fit all the animals on the ark?” The answer is, one, only land-dependent animals—not fish or sea creatures—were brought on the ark, and two, only animals representing animal “kinds,” not every species, were brought on the ark.

An animal “kind” referenced in Scripture refers to a group of animals that were originally created to reproduce within their own group — essentially, animals that can breed and produce offspring. The word “kind” comes from the Hebrew word min (מִין) in Genesis, where God created living creatures “according to their kinds.”

Creationists interpret “kinds” as broader categories than modern biological species. For example, all domestic cats, lions, tigers, and leopards belong to the same “cat kind.” All dogs, wolves, coyotes, and foxes are considered part of the “dog kind.”

The idea is that within each “kind,” animals can diversify or adapt over time (what is called “microevolution”), but they do not evolve into new kinds (which is rejected as “macroevolution”). An “animal kind” is, therefore, a biblical term roughly equivalent to a “created family group” of animals that share a common ancestry and can interbreed.

Much of modern biology views all life as related through common descent over long evolutionary timescales, classifying organisms by shared evolutionary ancestry. Creationism views each “kind” as an original created group that has diversified since creation, for example, through adaptation after the Flood, but without crossing boundaries into new “kinds.” So, while some contemporary scientists might trace all mammals back to common ancestors millions of years ago, creationists would say that each “kind,” e.g., cat kind, horse kind, dog kind, was separately created and has only diversified within that kind since then.

Each kind possesses the DNA to diversify through breeding, thus while only two of the dog kind were on the ark, today there are wolves, coyotes, dingoes, foxes, and some 375 recognized breeds of domestic dogs. Noah did not need to bring every species, just representatives of each kind. The dimensions of Noah’s ark could, therefore, realistically carry all necessary animal kinds — often estimated at 1,400–1,600 “kinds” rather than millions of species.

In Genesis 7:2–3, God instructs Noah to “take with you seven pairs of all clean animals, the male and his mate, and a pair of the animals that are not clean, the male and his mate, and seven pairs of the birds of the heavens also…” Clean animals were those suitable for sacrifice and later for food. Unclean animals were not used for sacrifice and, later in Mosaic law (Lev. 11, Deut. 14), not eaten. Noah brought extra pairs of clean animals so that he could offer sacrifices after the flood (Genesis 8:20), and so that the clean kinds would have more individuals available to reproduce afterward.

At the Ark Encounter, the clean/unclean distinction is used to:

Emphasize obedience to God’s commands (as Noah followed them precisely).
Show that sacrifice and atonement — key biblical themes — existed long before Moses’ Law.
Demonstrate that God provided for post-Flood worship and renewal, symbolized by clean animals used for offerings (Genesis 8:20).

Together with Scripture’s indication God commanded Noah to take more of certain clean animals, this animal kinds approach means an estimated 6,744 animals lodged on Noah’s ark.

Considerable signage is posted throughout the ark explaining things like dinosaurs, ancient man, Ice Age, the decline of human culture prior to the flood, fossils and flood geology, the history and authenticity of the Bible (sponsored by Museum of the Bible in Washington, DC), the many flood legends found in various cultures around the world, God’s rainbow covenant, the Gospel, and more. A few videos are also presented with seating, telling various Noah-related stories, some animatronic figures are set in displays, like Noah sitting in his workshop and “answering” questions about how he accomplished this monumental task.

The cafe next door is very good, featuring many life-size taxidermy animals from the present day. The Ark Encounter now also offers a zoo, zip lines, and a few other activities. A large new welcome center is being constructed that will house an old Jerusalem display. The current welcome center is booked throughout the year with Christian concerts and conferences.

This was my wife’s and my second visit. Considering what it took with modern equipment today to build this ark and contemplating how Noah and his sons built the original is truly mind-boggling. Whether the Ark Encounter got it all correct did not bother me. What I appreciated is what, based upon the Word of God, they did get correct, building a life-size ark. This presentation is not “schlock,” not cheap, so-called “blind faith” stuff but well researched and presented sophisticated Christian worldview re science.

People understandably spend a lot of time and money to travel to Israel, or on a 7 churches tour in Turkey, including the incredible excavated Ephesus. We’ve been blessed with these experiences, so I get that. But this one is in your backyard, so I highly recommend you make the trip to northern Kentucky and experience The Ark Encounter for yourself.

Well, we’ll see you again soon. This podcast is about Discerning What Is Best. If you find this thought-provoking and helpful, follow us on your favorite podcast platform. For more Christian commentary, see my website, r-e-x-m as in Martin, that’s rexmrogers.com, or check my YouTube channel @DrRexRogers.

And remember, it is for freedom that Christ has set us free. Stand firm.

*This podcast blog may be reproduced in whole or in part with a full attribution statement. Contact me or read more commentary on current issues and events at www.rexmrogers.com/ or my YouTube channel @DrRexRogers, or connect with me at www.linkedin.com/in/rexmrogers.

Details: Written by: Rex M. Rogers; Published: 20 October 2025

On the cusp of a special birthday, America is in polarizing turmoil, so is our future one of pessimism or optimism?

Hi, I’m Rex Rogers and this is episode #230 of Discerning What Is Best, a podcast applying unchanging biblical principles in a rapidly changing world, and a Christian worldview to current issues and everyday life.

Dr. Os Guinness has long been one of my favorite Christian philosophers and cultural commentators, and his latest book America Agonistes: America’s 250^th and the Restoration of a Nation in Conflict with Itself and Its Past (2025), did not disappoint.

First, let’s deal with the title. “Agonistes” means “a person engaged in a struggle” or “a person enduring an inner struggle.” Perhaps Dr. Guinness drew this word from the poem, “Samson Agonistes,” a tragic drama by John Milton that appeared with the publication of Milton's Paradise Regained in 1671? In any event, Dr. Guinness’s writings are noteworthy for their expansive vocabulary.

It reminds me of a time early in our marriage when my wife, Sarah, gave me a gift of Sir Arthur Conan Doyle’s The Complete Sherlock Holmes: All Four Novels/All Fifty-Six Adventures. I had begun reading these stories and eventually read them all. This was back before the internet or cell phones, and I remember reading his stories with a large dictionary nearby, for he invariably used words I had never encountered. I can’t think of another author who comes close, except maybe Dr. Os Guinness.

Dr. Guinness’s book is the second in a quartet of books he plans focusing upon the United States of America’s challenges. The first book was Our Civilizational Moment: The Waning of the West and the War of the Worlds (2024) examined “the crisis of Western civilization with a wide-angle lens,” while America Agonistes “is a closer look at the intense and self-destructive conflicts now playing out in the world’s lead society…the American people, blinded and convulsed with self-destructive forces in open conflict with themselves and their past.”

Guinness is optimistic, but he’s a realist too. He sees the best and greatest of America’s persona and achievements, even as he acknowledges its failures even from the beginning remarkable generation of Founders like no other.

America did not achieve its expansive freedom and blessings of opportunity and well-being because of a given race, ethnic group, or even the country’s abundant natural beauty and resources. America became the leading nation in the free world because of its intentions and ideals, it’s belief that humanity was created in God’s image, that God bestowed our human rights, that individual life and liberty were sacrosanct because of this, not because of government, power, nationality, social class, or riches.

Guinness is worried that Americans, including the current presidential administration, do not really know what made America great in the first place, so the question becomes, will America work to return to and restore its founding ideals? The jury is out. This is our civilizational moment.

Dr. Guinness said, “Yet the heart of America's crisis lies deeper still. If America had become great primarily through economic and military means, then a successful restoration of the economy and the military might be enough to make America great again. But that is not how it happened. "Man does not live by bread alone" is the reminder of both the Hebrew and the Christian Scriptures (Deuteronomy 8:3; Matthew 4:4).” “Humanity has always been more than the "economic Man," and the "new American man" (and woman) of the era of the American Revolution was certainly much more. Neither economic prosperity nor national security are ends in themselves. Unless they serve a higher human end, they will only generate animosity against themselves, as the troubling trend towards socialism shows currently. But if, as the history of America's founding surely shows, the secret of America's freedom and greatness was spiritual, moral, cultural, and constitutional in character too, then the crisis must be addressed accordingly. It requires a much deeper analysis, taking such essential elements into account. Unless that happens, America's crisis will only be exacerbated. America will fight the crisis using weapons of power without principle, which will only transform the Republic into the very character of the enemy it fights. In setting out to fight what Americans see as monsters they will either risk failure or indeed become monsters in the process. In truth, the success or failure of the movement to Make America Great Again will pivot on its success or failure in recognizing and restoring what made America great in the first place— the politics and culture of covenantal freedom that lies at the heart of the American Republic. The decisive issue for America today is the restoration of the American Republic and of citizenship, and the vision of freedom that this means.”

Did you hear that? Restoration of commitment and culture to the founding ideals is the only way to assure an America that is great in the future.

Again, Guinness observes, “To have defeated the Left-leaning Democrat Party in the election is one thing. To overcome the Left and its full arsenal of cultural Marxism across the board and restore a nationwide commitment to the first principles of the American experiment is quite another, though not yet attempted.

But to restore the great majority of Americans to be citizens capable of playing their role as fully responsible and participating partners and stakeholders in republican freedom is the supreme challenge in making America great again.”

So, for Dr. Guinness, what will make a golden age possible “requires profound renewal of the meaning and responsibilities of citizenship among all Americans of every persuasion.”

The Founders ingeniously recognized that for freedom to work, it needed both a government with a built-in system of checks and balances, and a citizenry who possessed civic virtue, the inner moral character that sustains liberty. Citizens with civic virtue place the common good above their private interests, exercise self-restraint, and possess moral integrity and public spirit. This is what Dr. Guinness believes is now largely lost to American culture and which must be systematically rebuilt for America to survive and thrive as a truly free nation.

Guinness notes what Americans no longer understand; that is, “as the first great modern nation, the United States never was linked by natural racial, ethnic, or linguistic ties as most other nations were…America was diverse almost from the beginning, and thus America was, and is, a nation by intention and by ideas.” E pluribus unum.

Because civic education or even American history are no longer taught in public schools, many within Gen Z, Millennials, Gen X, do not understand how or why America became a free country, nor what it takes to sustain this rare and precious experience called freedom. This makes many of them easy dupes for Marxist Critical Race Theory or radical multiculturalism or morally relative postmodernism or any of a number of leftist ideas.

Who would have predicted that the front-runner for Mayor of New York City is an on-record antisemitic, Democratic Socialist, who talks constantly about affordable living, by which he means hand out more freebies paid by someone’s taxes?

In his book, Dr. Guinness notes that, “rightly understood, the freedom of the American Republic is a vision of freedom like no other. It stands as the world's most powerful alternative to the authoritarian forces in the world.”

To address the American agonistes, Guinness believes “every American is responsible for the American Republic, and the condition of the American Republic is the health of the relationships of American citizens at large. Like the Hebrew Republic, the American Republic should always be cherished with the strength of liberty, loyalty, and love. Nationalism can be idolatry and truly dangerous and should always be watched and guarded against. But patriotism as love of one's homeland is natural and good. Indeed, the American Republic will only last so long as its citizens love their homeland, understand how their nation works, and support it with their whole hearts, even when they must criticize the nation's shortcomings in challenging it to live up to its ideals.”

Guinness says, “I will argue strongly for the necessity and possibility of renewal, and therefore for hope, but Americans should take seriously the possibility of decline.” A sobering thought.

“Spiritual and moral disobedience always lead to physical or cultural disorder, dislocation, and displacement…America, having broken its founding covenant, now finds itself on the verge of losing— perhaps forever —the distinctive freedom that was its American birthright. Yet according to the…Jewish and Christian understanding, Decline need not lead to Fall because Exile can lead to Return”

From my perspective, Dr. Os Guinness, now in his 80s, is one of our best Christian cultural critics. I highly recommend this book.

And remember, it is for freedom that Christ has set us free. Stand firm.

Details: Written by: Rex M. Rogers; Published: 13 October 2025

What can we learn from ancient King Nebuchadnezzar about our nation’s longevity and our political leaders’ pronouncements and projections?

Hi, I’m Rex Rogers and this is episode #229 of Discerning What Is Best, a podcast applying unchanging biblical principles in a rapidly changing world, and a Christian worldview to current issues and everyday life.

Ancient rulers, let’s just say thought very highly of themselves, some to the point of proclaiming themselves gods. Most early history people groups considered themselves the greatest, the salt of the earth.

For example, the Sumerians, the first known civilization, 3500–2300 BCE, saw Sumer (or Mesopotamia) as the center of civilization. Other lands were “foreign” or “barbaric.” The Babylonians believed Babylon was the navel of the world; the Etemenanki ziggurat, considered by many scholars to be the site and replication of the biblical “Tower of Babel,” was literally called “the temple of the foundation of heaven and earth.” The Romans saw Rome as caput mundi (“the head of the world”), the center of civilization and the divine order. The Middle Kingdom Chinese considered China the world’s center; surrounding peoples were “barbarians.” In old Japan, the term Nippon means “Origin of the Sun,” implying their land was where the sun (and thus the world) begins. Aztecs believed their capital, Tenochtitlán, was built at the center of the universe, where the “four directions” met. Among 9th–20th century nationalisms, various nations, e.g., British Empire, Imperial Japan, Nazi Germany, Soviet Union, the United States, portrayed themselves as the bearers of civilization or destiny — “the people” leading history’s center stage.

All this is to say that President Donald J. Trump’s “Make America Great Again” and other nationalistic pronouncements are not anything new.

Thinking highly of one’s nation or people group, it seems, is part of human nature. And on one level, there’s nothing wrong with selfless patriotism and humble confidence aimed at one’s nation or people.

Problems arise when patriotism gives way to ethnocentrism, the idea one’s nation or people are inherently superior to others, which usually partners with another negative attitude, xenophobia, an intense, irrational dislike, fear, or hatred of people from other countries or cultures.

And problems arise when confidence morphs into hubris, an arrogant conceit that God had nothing to do with our blessings, power, and well-being; in fact, we don’t need God for we are gods, with the character Jack Dawson in the Titanic movie we say, “I’m king of the world!”

During his 43-year reign, ancient King Nebuchadnezzar the Great, the second king of the Neo-Babylonian Empire, 605-562 BCE, was without question the most powerful person in the world. He built a colossal golden statue of himself and commanded people to bow down to it (Dan. 3).

And though God had warned him via the captive prophet Daniel’s words, still, Nebuchadnezzar later looked upon his city and said,

“Is not this great Babylon, which I have built by my mighty power as a royal residence and for the glory of my majesty?” (Dan. 4:30).

At that moment, God judged Nebuchadnezzar, causing him to lose his mental faculties for seven years, thinking he was a beast, living in the wilderness, and eating grass like an ox. At the end of his time, God restored Nebuchadnezzar’s faculties and throne, and the King said, “Now, I, Nebuchadnezzar, praise and extol and honor the King of heaven, for all his works are right and his ways are just; and those who walk in pride he is able to humble” (Dan. 4:37).

King Nebuchadnezzar is mentioned in the Bible more than 90 times. He became a symbol of God’s authority over nations, even over pagan empires. There is much we can learn from his story.

In the Bible, God makes it clear, as Nebuchadnezzar discovered, that God is sovereign over nations and rulers. For example, the Scripture says, “God reigns over the nations; God sits on his holy throne” Ps. 47:8. And, “He makes nations great, and he destroys them; he enlarges nations, and leads them away” Job 12:23.

And another, “Behold, the nations are like a drop from a bucket, and are accounted as the dust on the scales” Is. 40:15.

Then the Word also says the Lord is sovereign over rulers. For example, in the book of Daniel (2:20-21), it says, “Blessed be the name of God forever and ever, to whom belong wisdom and might. He changes times and seasons; he removes kings and sets up kings.” In Psalms (22:28), the Word says, “For kingship belongs to the Lord, and he rules over the nations.” And then in Proverbs (21:1), it states, “The king's heart is a stream of water in the hand of the Lord; he turns it wherever he will.”

So, I find it interesting and instructive that the Word both commands us to pray for rulers and warns us about them. The Apostle Paul said, “First of all, then, I urge that supplications, prayers, intercessions, and thanksgivings be made for all people, for kings and all who are in high positions, that we may lead a peaceful and quiet life, godly and dignified in every way. This is good, and it is pleasing in the sight of God our Savior, who desires all people to be saved and to come to the knowledge of the truth. For there is one God, and there is one mediator between God and men, the man Christ Jesus” (1 Tim. 2:1-5).

But even as we pray for them, in the book of Psalms (146:3-4) the Scripture reminds us about who ultimately is in charge. “Put not your trust in princes, in a son of man, in whom there is no salvation. When his breath departs, he returns to the earth; on that very day his plans perish.”

Remember I said there is much to learn from King Nebuchadnezzar’s story?

Neither we, nor fate, nor rulers, nor forces determine our’s or our nation’s future; God does.

It is not wrong to develop a vision or goals, plan, prepare, or work toward a better tomorrow for our families, our work, or our nation, but we should always do so remembering what Nebuchadnezzar learned—God does according to his will (Dan. 4:35). This is not limiting but liberating, for the truth that we serve a living omniscient, omnipotent Creator God who loves us, redeems us, and grants us freedom sets us loose from fear of mysterious fates and forces, bad luck, or various ideological determinisms. No, we are rational, reasoning beings made in the image of God who can use the talents he has given us to build, contribute, and bless for the glory of God.

Nations do not last forever, nor do rulers.

This is a reminder that, blessed as the experience is of living in any country, especially one that celebrates life and liberty, one that perhaps we patriotically love and appreciate, even these United States of America, no empire, no nation – not even the three thousand years of the Egyptian kingdom – continues eternally. The USA is not mentioned in the Bible and is not cited relative to End Times scripture.

This does not mean the USA won’t be around when the Lord returns, but we don’t know this. The USA celebrates its 250^th Anniversary in year 2026, but there are many undermining ideas afoot in the US today, ideas that have consequences and some like Cultural Marxism, left-wing radicalism, and creeping bureaucracy directly attack the foundations of the American republic. There is no guarantee the United States of America will continue another 250 years.

President Donald J. Trump is a dynamic personality, who if he lives will be 80 years old at the time of the nation’s 250^th birthday. I pray God’s blessings upon Mr. Trump’s health and well-being, but he, like the rest of us, will not live forever. Nor will his legacy.

So, what else do we learn from King Nebuchadnezzar and scripture?

Do NOT put your trust in nations, including the USA, or national leaders, only God.

I am patriotic. I am grateful for my American birth and life, and I’m grateful for the intention and the ideals that made this country strong in the first place, most especially freedom. I hope we can see America not simply great again but restored and renewed based on its founding principles. But either way, the USA will not take care of us into eternity.

As Os Guinness reminded us, “Humans are still mortal. Superpowers and civilizations are mortal too. They all have expiration dates.” Scripture says, God “makes nations great, and he destroys them.” With King Nebuchadnezzar, we can bless the Most High, praise and honor him who lives forever, for his dominion is everlasting, and his kingdom endures from generation to generation (Dan. 4:34).

And remember, it is for freedom that Christ has set us free. Stand firm.

Details: Written by: Rex M. Rogers; Published: 06 October 2025

It’s discouraging to me to hear that nurses are quitting their jobs because the public is so abusive – nurses, people trying to help. But this is the state of American culture.

Hi, I’m Rex Rogers and this is episode #228 of Discerning What Is Best, a podcast applying unchanging biblical principles in a rapidly changing world, and a Christian worldview to current issues and everyday life.

The elder President George H.W. Bush, 41, is remembered for several pithy phrases, among them “voodoo economics,” “1,000 points of light,” and the one that got him in political trouble later when partisan budget wrangling forced him to renege on his promise, “Read my lips: No new taxes.”

But President Bush’s phrase that I’ve thought a lot about recently came out of his run for the presidency in 1988 and his vision for what he called “a kinder, gentler nation.” Later in his Inauguration speech, Jan. 20, 1989, Bush said, “America is never wholly herself unless she is engaged in high moral principle. We as a people have such a purpose today. It is to make kinder the face of the nation and gentler the face of the world.”

I thought of this phrase immediately as I watched the 45^th Ryder Cup matches played at the Black course, Bethpage State Park, Farmingdale, New York on Long Island. The European team won the Ryder Cup, 15-13.

Crowd behavior was relatively benign the first sessions but then chaos broke loose Saturday afternoon and Sunday as a small but extremely vocal percentage of the crowd let loose with abusive comments hurled at the Europeans, particularly the golf world’s number 2, Rory McIlroy. Oft-repeated f-bombs, “Rake out the Irish trash,” “Remember Pinehurst,” “Choker,” “Leprechaun,” “Overrated,” middle fingers held high, insults questioning manhood, a beer can thrown near McIlroy’s wife, at one tee box, a guy yelled “Rory, don't let your boyfriend down!” followed by three more gay slurs that cannot be shared. “By (one) reporter's count, 30-something f-bombs had been hurled at McIlroy in the first four holes alone.” More sexually explicit comments were made throughout the day aimed at various players’ wives.

American player Justin Thomas repeatedly tried to calm the crowd as did other American golfers from time to time to minimal cooperation and eventually a handful of spectators were identified and tossed off the property.

The next day, American golfing great Tom Watson said on social media, “I'd like to congratulate @RyderCupEurope on their victory. Your team play the first few days was sensational. More importantly, I'd like to apologize for the rude and mean-spirited behavior from our American crowd at Bethpage. As a former player, Captain and as an American, I am ashamed of what happened.”

Lack of civility, including use of profane language, is now publicly commonplace in American culture. Scholars and pundits often use the term “coarsening” to refer to the trend.

And this is also sadly true of political leaders. President Bush’s kinder, gentler “words stand in stark contrast to the incivility and name-calling that has come to define today’s politics.” This includes a growing trend of antagonistic, disrespectful rhetoric in politics, including ad hominem attacks and name-calling.

Leaving aside here any discussion of President Donald J. Trump’s politics and policies, it can be said without fear of exaggeration that Mr. Trump often critiques people he calls his “enemies” by using rather crass, at times harsh, attack-mode language.

President Richard M. Nixon’s infamous White House Watergate tapes provided audio evidence of his penchant for using ethnic slurs, foul language, and derogatory comments during meetings. Mr. Trump’s use of corrosive or caustic language is not reserved for private meetings because they make media coverage nearly every week.

Now I am not blaming Mr. Trump for the coarsening of American culture. Presidents are more often symptoms than causes of American trends. Nor am I suggesting Mr. Trump is worse than others. I’m just noting that Mr. Trump says things in what Teddy Roosevelt called “the bully pulpit” that no other president has ever said, and as the leader of the free world, he is heard and has influence.

American political leaders now regularly make videos using vulgarities, then post them on social media, or they use so-called “fighting words” or expletives in media interviews, I guess, in an effort to sound tough and sincere. No question President Joe Biden regularly used profanity when he became frustrated or wanted to sound forceful, but I thought he just sounded degraded. Democrats and the left or Progressives have been calling Mr. Trump “Hitler,” a Nazi, and a “fascist” since at least 2016, and now the same anti-Trump American political leaders have publicly labeled ICE officers “modern-day Gestapo,” “secret police,” “authoritarian,” “slave patrols,” “thugs,” and more.

Clearly, American politics has become increasingly polarized. Don Sipple, a veteran communications strategist who helped shape campaign messages for George W. Bush, Arnold Schwarzenegger, and Jerry Brown, among many others, said, “Everything’s a war. Everything’s a battle. There’s no collaboration, no coordination, no civic pride.”

And another trend is important to note, the increase in political violence. “Hateful demonization clearly played a role in the assassination of Charlie Kirk—a murder victim whom the left continues to smear and attack, even after his violent death at the hands of a leftist…When people are told, on repeat, that their opposition are authoritarian Hitler Nazis, some of them will act accordingly.”

Civilization is in part built upon civility, and this is what’s gone out the window. I can remember when men would use a four-letter word in the presence of women and say, “Oh, pardon my French.” Now maybe that was disingenuous or too cute, but at least there was some sense of what should be acceptable. No more.

“We've become a mean-spirited culture. We've become increasingly rude and cruel and abusive and violent.” And I haven’t even talked about the crude and lewd, or the manufactured anger paraded in reality shows, nor the nastiness on TV talk shows, the social distance and anonymity of social media, and much of pop music.

American culture is subjected to more centrifugal than centripetal forces, pulling us apart without much glue holding us together.

We are experiencing a "decline of the American sacred canopy." This is a term coined by sociologist Peter Berger, which describes the erosion of a shared, overarching religious framework that once provided common meaning and values to society. Since America’s founding and until the last fifty years, that sacred canopy was comprised of what scholars called a Judeo-Christian moral consensus.

Our laws, mores, and morality were rooted in biblical values, even if not everyone or even most Americans were themselves believing Christians. Our culture, indeed, Western Civilization, found sustenance in this moral outlook. It gave us definition, purpose, and vision.

“The decline of faith has left a void, and people have tried to fill it with politics, social media, gaming and countless other distractions. Yet none of these substitutes provides the deeper sense of purpose we were made to seek. Over the past few decades, the erosion of religion and the rise of political polarization have gone hand in hand. As faith receded, the longing for meaning, belonging and community did not disappear -- it was redirected. Too often, that hunger has been channeled into the far less healthy pursuit of politics.”

Along the way, apparently thinking Judeo-Christian principles are too sensitive or irrelevant for schools, scouts, even religious groups or families, we discarded moral formation. Now there is no self-restraint, no ethics, no respect, no truth, no direction, no hope. They aren’t taught.

“Any sense of an objective moral order is gone. Any sense of transcendent truth is gone. We now have little more than radical individualism.” If we don’t “train up a child” as Proverbs directed (22:6), then they’ll learn their morality in the streets or on social media where they are taught that they are gods who define their own moral compass. We do what’s right in our own eyes.

“We’ve become hyper-politicized. Ideology has replaced theology, even in the lives of Christians. Good and evil aren’t about the human heart—they’re about groups: us vs. them…Morality isn’t about personal conduct, but rather where you are on the political spectrum. Much of it fueled by resentment. And that is how we got so mean.”

We’re a long way from a kinder, gentler nation.

And remember, it is for freedom that Christ has set us free. Stand firm.

Details: Written by: Rex M. Rogers; Published: 29 September 2025

How do we maintain freedom of speech in an era of hate speech and ideologically unacceptable views?

Hi, I’m Rex Rogers and this is episode #227 of Discerning What Is Best, a podcast applying unchanging biblical principles in a rapidly changing world, and a Christian worldview to current issues and everyday life.

For the past several years, the so-called cancel culture and political correctness movements put pressure on organizations, especially universities, to silence or fire people who shared or even held "unacceptable views." Somehow, freedom of speech was willingly sacrificed in the name of ideology.

Then, Charlie Kirk was murdered as he exercised his free speech on a university campus.

Following this horrific nonsensical crime, conservatives, who earlier vigorously decried how liberals and the Left worked to curtail freedom of speech via cancel culture, now cheered people being fired, or they call for them to be called out or doxxed for expressing negative views on air or online about Kirk or his politics.

Now in the interests of accuracy, we should note that many of the conservative reactions to anti-Kirk comments are pointing to those comments that endorse or call for political violence. In other words, some anti-Kirk comments celebrated his death, or called for, even named, others to be killed.

But, still, there’s a problem here. However disgusting or insensitive anti-Kirk comments may be, aren’t even these anti-Kirk media comments just “sticks and stones,” and aren’t these comments, even if ugly, still protected speech under the First Amendment?

The First Amendment to the United States Constitution, ratified 1791, states: “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.”

American freedom of speech case law allows for distasteful even despicable comments, as long as they don’t call for violence, directly threaten, or become what in the past thirty years or so come to be called “hate speech.”

One common definition of hate speech is “any form of expression through which speakers intend to vilify, humiliate or incite hatred against a group or a class of persons on the basis of race, religion, skin color, sexual identity, gender identity, ethnicity, disability or national origin.” U.S. courts have ruled that restrictions on hate speech would conflict with the First Amendment’s protection of the freedom of expression.

So, free speech in the U.S. includes not only support for popular views but also the expression of unpopular, offensive, or controversial opinions. Remember the old maxim attributed to Voltaire? “I may not agree with what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it.”

An American core ideal, this protection extends to commentary on public figures, including after their deaths, again, as long as it does not cross legal lines such as defamation, threats, targeted harassment, or calls for political violence.

Maintaining a commitment to free speech gets difficult in highly emotional times like the wake of Charlie Kirk’s assassination—and it was an assassination, killed with deliberate premeditation using a long-range, high-powered hunting rifle.

Recently, it’s been liberals or the Left arguing they are being suppressed or silenced. Note the fooforaw regarding what late night host Jimmy Kimmel said about the Charlie Kirk assassination, his network ownership, ABC and Disney, suspending his show, then barely a week later restoring it on most ABC outlets. Kimmel advocates are screaming “Free speech violation,” yet the government had nothing to do with this decision.

And on the conservative side of things, here’s another example of free speech controversy. On a recent Fox program, host Brian Kilmeade and his cohost were discussing the unprovoked horrible murder of Ukrainian refugee Iryna Zarutska by a knife-wielding, homeless man. The cohost said if such individuals refuse mental health assistance should be sent to jail. Kilmeade responded, "Or involuntary lethal injection, or something. Just kill 'em." He later apologized, saying he made an “extremely callous” remark. Conservative Kilmeade advocates are defending him, saying it was a foolish slip-up. Liberals are arguing if Kimmel could be suspended, why not Kilmeade? Kilmeade’s comment was certainly more than callous, more than a slip-up—he called for summary execution of undesirables—he has to-date not been fired.

The tension in these situations highlight a societal confusion around free speech. For years, many conservatives criticized “cancel culture,” arguing that people were being punished socially or professionally for expressing views that deviated from progressive norms. Their concerns were warranted, for as Google just admitted, responding to pressure from the Biden Administration, the corporation suppressed conservative viewpoints on its platform and YouTube app.

So, suppression of free speech has indeed taken place. But whether suspending Kimmel or Kilmeade qualifies as a free speech matter is debatable. The First Amendment restricts government censorship, not private consequences. Employers, especially in at-will employment states, often have broad discretion to fire employees for speech that could damage the company’s image or workplace environment. So, while Kimmel’s insensitive Kirk comments and Kilmeade’s insensitive Zarutska murder comments are likely legally protected, they are not immune to social or professional backlash or consequences.

For the record, while I strongly defend and support the First Amendment and thus citizens’ right to freedom of speech, I don’t consider either the Kimmel or Kilmeade incident a bona fide free speech matter. I’d maintain Kimmel’s suspension because he is losing the network money, and I’d fire Kilmeade for his crude remarks calling for the execution of people he considers unworthy.

In essence, while hateful or bigoted speech is often deeply offensive, it remains protected unless it is directly linked to violence, threats, or illegal conduct. The U.S. legal system emphasizes protecting even “disturbing” speech to preserve the broader principle of free expression.

If we value free expression, we must be consistent—even when the speech offends us or targets someone we respect. If we argue that people shouldn’t lose jobs over political views, that principle ought to apply universally. Otherwise, “free speech” becomes a partisan tool rather than a shared democratic value. Defending only the speech we agree with is not defending free speech at all.

In the United States, the First Amendment protects a wide range of speech, including controversial, offensive, and unpopular ideas. But not all speech is protected.

Hate speech is protected under the First Amendment unless it falls into specific, narrowly defined exceptions established by the courts.

Incitement to Imminent Lawless Action: Speech that is intended to incite or produce immediate illegal acts and is likely to do so is not protected.
True Threats or Fighting Words: Speech that communicates a serious intent to commit violence against a specific individual or group is not protected.
Harassment or Targeted Hate Crimes: Speech that is part of criminal conduct, such as stalking or hate crimes, involving intimidation or harassment.

Meanwhile, there is growing concern among free‑speech advocates that some Western democracies in Europe have increasingly curtailed online expression — particularly around topics like immigration, gender, religion, or protests — sometimes through arrests, prosecutions, or fines.

In Germany, authorities carried out raids and prosecuted individuals accused of spreading hate speech online.
Sweden: a prosecution of a 70‑year‑old woman for what was deemed a "disparaging view of refugees" on Facebook.
Poland and Germany: flagged cases where anti‑immigration content was removed.

Vice President J.D. Vance, making his first major speech in Europe, challenged leaders to show consistency: do they truly defend democratic values — including free expression — or are the limitations being applied selectively?

There is a fear that laws against hate speech, defamation, or “offensive” commentary could become tools for political control. When citizens are arrested, sanctioned, or punished not for credible threats or incitement of violence, but for expressing unpopular or harsh views (even insensitive or inflammatory ones), critics view this as a slippery slope that chills debate.

Freedom of speech, enshrined in the First Amendment, sits at the core of the American creed, as famously articulated by Thomas Jefferson in the Declaration of Independence. It is not hyperbole to say this freedom is quintessentially American, and no one, liberal/the Left or conservatives should play fast and loose with this ideal.

And remember, it is for freedom that Christ has set us free. Stand firm.

Details: Written by: Rex M. Rogers; Published: 22 September 2025

On social media, have you been hearing on about the revivals taking place at public universities, many via football teams?

Hi, I’m Rex Rogers and this is episode #226 of Discerning What Is Best, a podcast applying unchanging biblical principles in a rapidly changing world, and a Christian worldview to current issues and everyday life.

Revivals, or spiritual awakenings if you wish, are taking place across the country, primarily on public university campuses. I talked about this before, first the Christian College Revivals–Asbury University and More phenomenon, then Spiritual Awakening in the American University.

In those earlier podcasts, I noted that to discern wisely, we needed to ask questions:

Is this revival consistent with the Word of God?
Is Jesus Christ exalted?
Does this revival involve confession and repentance, obedience, salvation by faith in Christ, open confession of love for Christ?
Will God move this revival to public universities?

Asking these questions is not a masquerade for doubting God or being skeptical for the sake of skepticism but a careful stewardship of what we are hearing, determining what is true and trustworthy. In those earlier reviews of college revivals, I concluded God indeed seemed to be working and that I hoped the movement would continue.

I also noted that students coming of age in America have been sold a bill of goods. Our culture has taught youth to reject God, absolute truth, morality, even biological science. Instead, they’ve been taught cynicism, that nothing deserves their faith, that nothing and no one is worthy of their trust.

Youth are taught in school, in their music, in their celebrity worship, in their sexual confusion that nothing matters, that there is no purpose, just uncertainty, angst, disquietude.

And nothing has been put in place of this deconstruction of timeless verities. All young people have is nihilism – the idea life is absurd and meaningless. Is it any wonder that there is an epidemic of mental health issues among America’s young people?

Think about this. If you truly believed life was hollow, inconsequential, that your own life was pointless, that it had no purpose, you have no value or worth, why wouldn’t you seek escape in hedonism, lust or substance abuse? Who cares?

And if your life has no value or worth, certainly other human beings have no value or worth. If we believe this hopelessness, what’s left?

It is in this academic context that I prayed the Lord would send his Spirit upon the land beginning perhaps with the most spiritually bereft of places in America, the college and university campus. Now it appears God is doing exactly that.

While there’s no official count, a number of organizations, student ministries, media, and Christian commentators have documented dozens of events, across both public and private schools, where students gather for extended worship, prayer, confession, baptisms, and renewed commitment to faith.

Over 1,000 college students reputedly accepted Jesus this week at West Virginia University. Carson-Newman University experienced public professions of faith and baptisms of football players.

Ohio State University football players led “An Invitation to Jesus” night of praise inviting students to Christ with many coming forward to profess faith. Over 2,000 people gathered. About 50 students were baptized.

“Against the backdrop of anti-Israel protests, violence, and death chants at college and university campuses recently, some GenZers are choosing instead to uplift Jesus Christ. (Some) 8,000 students gathered on the campus of the University of Tennessee to praise His Name alone.”

Auburn University: A revival event there drew 5,000 students, resulting in over 200 baptisms. Florida State University: Another Christian service saw 4,500 students attend, with around 350 baptisms. Nebraska University and University of Cincinnati football players united in prayer after the game. The University of Alabama quarterback Ty Simpson recently shared his faith in Christ with media. Pennsylvania State University players prayed in endzone before the game. A UniteUS event at the University of Oklahoma drew nearly 9,000 students in early September 2025 to worship, pray, and hear evangelistic preaching.

Many universities experiencing revivals. Arizona State Georgia Bulldogs, Auburn Tigers, Miami Hurricanes, Boise State, and others have been doing this for years but not to this extent.

Earlier in 2025, at University of Kentucky, UniteUS held a large revival: ~8,000 students in attendance, ~2,000 responded to the gospel message. At Ohio State in spring, ~6,500 students gathered, nearly 2,000 made first‑time commitments, many baptisms were conducted even in severe cold. Purdue University had a revival‐style event; about 4,500 attended and hundreds responded. Baylor University also hosted a “72‑hour prayer tent” event, continuous prayer and worship, part of the UniteUS / campus ministries outreach.

The UniteUS movement is a major organizer behind many of these events. These revivals often combine: worship music, evangelistic preaching, altar calls/decision points for Christ, baptisms (sometimes spontaneous, even outdoors or in unconventional setups like tubs or trucks). Student‐athletes are increasingly visible participants. There seems to be momentum early in the fall semester with “kickoff” events, likely because new students and returning students are gathering, and events are timed to the start of term. OSU’s “Fall Kickoff” is a case in point.

Before college football kickoff, Tim Tebow led a stadium of 100,000 in prayer, sharing the Gospel plainly and pointedly, praying people would respond. His prayer elicited an ovation and cheers.

UniteUS began, September 12, 2023, when “thousands of college students gathered at Auburn University’s Neville Arena with one singular focus–to lift the name of Jesus. What began in Auburn, Alabama has continued to grow into a movement reaching college campuses across the nation. Unite exists to see college students gathered to lift the name of Jesus. Every Unite gathering has three main objectives:

SALVATION
For non-believers to hear a clear presentation of the Gospel in a welcoming environment. Acts 16:31; Romans 10:9
FREEDOM
For believers to know and experience true freedom from sin and burdens on their hearts. Galatians 5:1
COMMUNITY
For students to find community and discipleship through connection to local ministries and the local church. Ephesians 4:1-6.”

UniteUs is itself a phenomenon, founded by Tonya Prewett, in a little more than two years it has become a national force in the Christian evangelism of Gen Z. To assure fidelity to the Word and avoidance of faddish religion or easy-believism, the questions we asked of earlier of Christian college revivals should continue to be asked of UniteUs revivals: Are these revivals consistent with the Word of God?

Is Jesus Christ exalted? Do these revivals involve confession and repentance, obedience, salvation by faith in Christ alone, and open confession of love for Christ? At this point, early and continuing testimonials are consistently affirmative.

“Despite the fact the events are held on secular college campuses, every place UniteUS goes they're finding thousands of students desperate to know Jesus and eagerly jumping into fountains, lakes, and the backs of pickup trucks in order to be baptized. One of the keys to the UniteUS events is their partnership with local churches that help disciple the students who come to the events and dedicate their lives to Jesus.” One pastoral supporter of UniteUS said, “Universities are pregnant with revival.”

Several public universities experienced revival sessions during 2024, and when I say “several” I mean a lot, and it appears this is continuing in 2025. Some are saying, “Aside from what we have been seeing take place on social media, there is undeniable evidence that the Holy Spirit is moving in this place. Gen Z is hungry for truth, seeking an anchor to put their hope in, and ready to give their lives to the one person who can set them free.”

Clearly, Christian revivals on American university campuses are being reported with increasing frequency, and many if not most of these events are cited on social media. They are driven by a mix of spiritual craving, societal stresses, desire for meaning, and, I believe, the Lord’s Spirit choosing to work in the lives of young people.

If you want something positive to pray about, pray for more genuine Christian spiritual revivals or awakenings specifically on American university campuses.

And remember, it is for freedom that Christ has set us free. Stand firm.

Subcategories