The Christmas season has inspired a wide and diverse collection of music over the years. Some of the songs of Christmas are just playful parodies, such as “Grandma Got Run Over by a Reindeer,” “All I Want for Christmas Is My Two Front Teeth.” Others are for children, such as “Santa Claus Is Coming to Town,” and “Rudolph the Red-Nosed Reindeer.” However, some of the greatest classical works were composed for the Christmas season, including “The Nutcracker” by Tchaikovsky, “Messiah” by Handel, and “Christmas Eve Suite” by Rimsky-Korsakov. The most popular Christmas song, “White Christmas,” was written by Irving Berlin, a Jewish composer.
Our church songbook includes several songs of Christmas. Some are instructive and teach us meaningful lessons. “Hark the Herald Angels Sing” reminds us that a herald is “an official messenger bringing news.” Verse 2 uses the word “incarnate,” meaning “embodied in flesh.” It reflects John 1:14, which states, “the Word (Christ) was made flesh and dwelt among us.” Also in verse 2, we see the name “Immanuel,” meaning “God with us,” which appears in Matthew 1:23 and was prophesied hundreds of years earlier in Isaiah 7:14. In verse 3, we find the phrase ”healing in His wings,” which comes from Malachi 4:2, referring to Christ’s resurrection which allows us to “mount with wings like eagles” (Isaiah 40:31).
Some songs of Christmas are steeped in human traditions and views. “It Came Upon the Midnight Clear” is one example. Angels do not need golden harps (verse 1) and do not have wings (verse 2). The reference to Babel in the second verse alludes to the confusion of voices on Earth, but the fourth verse talks about the “age of gold,” when peace will extend “over all the Earth.” The author, Edmund Sears, was a Unitarian minister who believed that peace would come to the current Earth rather than the new heavens and new earth described in Revelation.
In “The First Noel,” verse 1 describes the shepherds in the field “on a cold winter’s night.” Luke 2:9 states that the shepherds were in the fields, but they would not have been there during the cold winter months. The second and third verses mention the star and “wise men,” but they arrived at least months later, when Jesus was in a house, not the stable. Although these songs are cherished classics, they are not entirely biblically accurate.
We enjoy the songs of Christmas. The Christmas season is a time of joy and giving, and it certainly has economic significance, but it is not biblical or commanded by God. A better song to reflect Christian faith is “They’ll Know We Are Christians by Our Love,” which embodies what Jesus urges us to do. (See John 13:34-35, 15:9-10, and 1 John chapter 3).
Some parents tell their kids that Santa Claus is God to explain how he does the things he does. How does Santa come down the chimney? How does he know if you are bad or good? How does he make his rounds to every kid in one night? Why can’t I see him on Christmas Eve? These are just a few questions kids ask, leading parents to say that Santa is God. But Santa Claus is not God, and saying so can be harmful to faith.
Children notice that Santa sometimes doesn’t meet their desires, but God always provides for true needs. Kids also see that Santa varies from culture to culture. But God is no respecter of persons, regardless of gender, nationality, or circumstances (Galatians 3:28). Kids need to understand that Santa doesn’t create anything. The gifts they receive are made in workshops (factories) by elves (workers) and have brand names. God creates everything we see and are. Santa may bring toy animals, but God is the creator of all real animals.
Kids can learn that myths are a fun part of life. They eventually realize that Santa Claus is a fun myth, but they should be taught that God’s existence is factual and supported by scientific evidence. The Easter Bunny is a myth. Charlie Brown’s Great Pumpkin is a myth. What they see on TV, at Disney World, and in their video games are all myths. The Santa myth is enjoyable, but we must remember it is not real. It is vital that children know Santa Claus is not God.
Parents should not lie to their children, but sadly, lying has become common in America in advertising, politics, and relationships. Jesus never lied, and He used evidence to support His teachings. The miracles of Jesus were meant to prove who He was. He showed doubters like Thomas the evidence to support what they were asked to believe. Christianity is truth in a world that has very little of that commodity.
The oceans host many symbiotic relationships. In symbiosis, plants and animals live together in ways that benefit them and often others nearby. This is the story of the shrimp and the urchin.
Coleman shrimp (Perclimenes colemani) eat parasites they take from fish that come close to them in the western Pacific Ocean. These shrimp were not discovered until 1975, perhaps because they blend in very well with the sea urchins with which they have a symbiotic relationship. The picture shows the spotted body and striped legs of the Coleman shrimp surrounded by the striped tube feet of the fire sea urchin (Asthenosoma varium).
Coleman shrimp are known as cleaner shrimp because they remove parasites from fish. Most cleaner shrimp live in sea anemones, but Coleman shrimp prefer to live in fire sea urchins. The venom-tipped spines of the fire urchin do not harm the Coleman shrimp, and they protect them from potential predators. Meanwhile, fish infected with parasites approach the Coleman shrimp to have the parasites removed. The parasites are food for the shrimp, and the fish don’t eat the shrimp or the fire sea urchin because of its poisonous spines.
We see a balanced symbiotic relationship among various species of ocean creatures. The shrimp and the urchin, along with many fish that benefit, are just some examples of symbiosis—where different plant and animal species depend directly on each other. In many cases, a species could not survive without this mutual relationship. This is another sign of design in living creatures, and design points to a Designer.
One in every 10 households in the United States rents a self-storage unit. The big question is whether having that much stuff has made Americans happier than people in other cultures. Happiness comes from giving, not possessing.
Brenda and Mark Young, writing in the August 6, 2025, issue of Power for Today, describe their work in Honduras and how much happier the people there are compared to typical Americans. Those Hondurans didn’t have electricity, toilets, or running water in their homes, yet they amazed visitors with their joy. Their happiness came from the time they spent with family and friends, building strong, rich relationships. Their wealth comes from their relationships with people, not with things.
In Mark 12:41-44, Jesus is sitting opposite the temple treasury, watching as people make their donations to the temple. The wealthy are making a show of giving large amounts, but Jesus sees a poor widow who puts in two mites. That is not even enough to buy a sparrow, so two mites are insignificant as far as material goods are concerned. The poor widow gave wholeheartedly of all she had. God isn’t impressed by the amount a person gives. He looks for the heart behind it.
We overestimate the importance God places on our giving. If every Christian on the planet were to stop giving entirely, God’s work would still get done. Our giving is not for God’s benefit, but rather for ours. Our giving enriches our marriages, our kids, our friends, and our jobs when we have a heart to give. My parents were atheists, and to them, the material goods they acquired were the most important things in life. They were not happy people, and our family was in constant conflict because of their obsession with acquiring things.
Church work suffers when we decide what God wants us to build, then mount an all-out campaign to raise enough money to build it. What we need to do is look for the doors that God opens for us and do what God provides for us to do. Building enormous structures and hiring talented preachers to entertain us while people in the neighborhood are without food, medicine, and adequate shelter is not what Jesus taught us to do. Happiness comes from giving. Read Mark 12:41-44 again and pray about how your giving shows God where your heart is.
Scientists aim to answer several very difficult questions about origins. Two of these questions relate to the origins of life and complex life. Some scientists believe they are getting closer to discovering how complex life developed from simple life, and the media often sensationalizes any origin-of-life theories.
Living things are classified into three domains. We are very familiar with multicellular life, which includes plants, animals, and people. That is the domain of eukarya, or complex life. There are two domains of single-celled life—bacteria and archaea. Most people are more familiar with bacteria than archaea. Scientists did not recognize how distinct archaea are from bacteria until the 1970s, when DNA analysis began.
The cells of bacteria and archaea are relatively simple and small compared to eukaryotic cells, which have a nucleus, mitochondria to supply energy, and other internal structures. In the 1960s, one group of microbiologists described the gap between eukaryotes and the single-celled bacteria and archaea as “the greatest single evolutionary discontinuity to be found in the present-day world.” Evolutionists seeking origin-of-life theories had to find a way to bridge this very wide gap.
In 2008, researchers discovered a new type of archaea living in hydrothermal vents on the Atlantic Mid-Ocean Ridge. They said these archaea “seemed to be somehow closer to eukaryotes than what we knew before.” In 2015, a paper published in the journal Nature described them as “the closest known living relatives of eukaryotes,” creating a scientific sensation. Their genomes were said to contain genes that are “hallmarks of eukaryotes.”
Scientists theorized that the Asgard archaea, as they came to be called, absorbed bacteria that became mitochondria, but there was still no evidence of a nucleus. Research and debate on this are expected to continue for years, but it has sparked new speculation about extraterrestrial life. Some have suggested that unicellular life on other planets could evolve into eukaryotic, advanced life. But that assumes there is unicellular life on other planets.
Scientists proposing origin-of-life theories still have no idea how non-living matter could turn into living, reproducing cells. Be cautious when you see media stories about scientists being close to discovering the origin of life or the origin of complex life. Even simple cells are far too complex to have arisen by chance without a Designer.
We previously discussed the dynamics of butterfly flight and how human engineers marvel at their design. (See Here and Here.) One of our readers sent us a scientific discussion about the beautiful colors in butterfly wings. These colors have nothing to do with camouflage. We often see butterflies because their colors stand out so vividly against the leaves and flowers where they rest.
The iridescent colors in butterfly wings are produced by scales that are part of the wings. Each square centimeter of wing has tens of thousands of these scales attached with tiny stems that overlap each other. These scales were living cells until a day or two before the butterfly emerged from its pupa. Each tiny scale consists of a vertical and horizontal frame, within which various pigment sacs hang.
Butterfly wings that shimmer with iridescent blues and greens have scales with tiny lattices and ribbed walls designed to create interference patterns in the high-energy part of the visible spectrum (300-700 nanometers). Our eyes are designed to see those wavelengths, but some of the butterfly’s potential predators cannot. That part of the spectrum is invisible to them.
The physics of the light spectrum and the design of our eyes seem specifically built to enable us to see the beautiful colors in butterfly wings that we often take for granted. The more we learn about physics and design, the more we see evidence that the Creator has made beautiful things just for us to enjoy.
You may not have seen them, but thousands of shrews scurry across the ground, helping keep your garden free of destructive insects, snails, and slugs. Tiny and incredible, shrews are North America’s smallest mammals. They are smaller than a human thumb and have hearts that beat 1,200 times per minute.
There are 39 shrew species in North America, and many more worldwide. There is even one that can walk on water thanks to stiff hairs on its feet. That species feeds underwater using bubble sniffing—a technique of blowing small air bubbles through their noses to detect odor particles in the water.
Shrews are not rodents but insectivores, similar to hedgehogs. Their coat helps them camouflage amid leaf litter and debris. They have scent glands on their sides that emit a foul odor to deter predators such as cats, raccoons, and foxes. Like bats, they can use echolocation to find food.
A shrew’s metabolism is so high that it must eat roughly once an hour, and it only sleeps for a few minutes at a time. Though they don’t hibernate, they make tunnels beneath snow or ice layers. One remarkable trait of the tiny and incredible shrews is that they can actually shrink their head size, including their brains, by 20% during cold weather. Since food becomes scarcer in winter, shrinking their heads and brains helps them require less food. Their head size returns with warm weather.
Shrews are among God’s most useful creations because they help control snails, slugs, insects, and ticks, protecting plants and people. Only in recent years has technology enabled us to study the tiny and incredible shrews.
