DISCERNMENT: At Risk in the Christian Mind

This was published in August 2026. It's fresh and relevant. You can purchase a paperback or kindle copy @ Amazon

DISCERNMENT: At Risk in the Christian Mind

We live in an age overflowing with information, yet increasingly marked by confusion, division, and uncertainty. Never have Christians had greater access to sermons, books, podcasts, and biblical resources. Yet access to information has not automatically produced wisdom.
Something essential is being lost: the ability to discern.

DISCERNMENT: At Risk in the Christian Mind examines a growing crisis within the Christian community: the weakening ability to think carefully, evaluate truthfully, and respond wisely in a world of competing voices. From misinformation and social media influence to emotional reasoning, tribal loyalties, and cultural pressures, Christians face unprecedented challenges in knowing what deserves their trust.
But this is not merely a book about identifying problems. It is a call to recovery.
Drawing from Scripture and engaging the realities of modern life, Ron Unruh explores why discernment matters, how it has been diminished, and how it can be restored. Through four major movements, he examines the symptoms of declining discernment, the forces that shape our thinking, the biblical foundation for recovering wisdom, and the practical application of discernment in everyday life.

The Christian life has never been intended to be guided by impulse, assumption, or untested belief. Scripture calls believers to “test everything” and hold firmly to what is good. In a world where voices compete for our attention and influence our convictions, Christians need more than information. They need minds trained by truth, hearts formed by Christ, and the wisdom to recognize what is faithful, what is false, and what leads toward spiritual maturity.
DISCERNMENT is an invitation to recover the wisdom necessary to follow Christ faithfully in an age of confusion.

Written for thoughtful Christians, parents, small-group leaders, church leaders, and pastors, this book provides a biblical framework for cultivating wisdom, evaluating competing claims, and developing the kind of discernment necessary for faithful living in a complex world.

"OPEN EYES, SOFT HEARTS' : Essays on Death, Heaven and Life To Come

Death is the one certainty every human being shares, yet it remains one of the least discussed realities of life. We avoid it until illness, loss, or age forces the questions upon us: How do we face the end of life? What happens after death? Is there truly something beyond the grave?

In Eyes Open, Hearts Soft, Ron Unruh invites readers into a thoughtful exploration of these enduring questions. Through a series of reflective essays, he examines how people across cultures and centuries have imagined life beyond death, from hopes of reunion and judgment to ideas of reincarnation or cosmic dissolution.

Alongside these perspectives, the book turns carefully to the witness of Christianity and the promises found in Scripture. With pastoral sensitivity and intellectual honesty, the essays consider what can be known, what must remain mysterious, and why the Christian hope of resurrection and life with God continues to speak with clarity and power.

These essays are not arguments or prescriptions. They are invitations, invitations to think deeply, to face mortality with honesty, and to consider the hope that lies at the heart of the Christian faith.

Open your eyes.
Soften your heart.
Join the conversation about death, heaven, and the life to come.

Purchase it from Amazon.

WHEN BOMBS FALL ON A UN MEMBER STATE

WHEN BOMBS FALL ON A UN MEMBER STATE

 

Broad, same-day reporting confirms that in the early hours of February 28, 2026, coordinated U.S. and Israeli military strikes hit targets across Iran, including locations in and around its capital. Washington has described the action as the beginning of “major combat operations,” while President Donald Trump has publicly urged the Iranian population to rise against its ruling authorities. Tehran has already responded with missile launches toward Israel and toward American installations across the Middle East.

What gives this moment its exceptional gravity is not simply the violence itself, but its juridical setting. Iran is a recognized sovereign member of the United Nations. Under the UN Charter — the foundational legal framework governing relations among states since 1945 — the use of force is tightly constrained.

Article 2(4) states: “All members shall refrain from the threat or use of force against the territorial integrity or political independence of any state.” This clause lies at the heart of the modern international order. It means that military action against another UN member state is, in principle, prohibited.

There are only two recognized pathways by which such force may be lawfully used. The first is collective authorization by the Security Council under Chapter VII of the Charter, particularly Article 42, which allows military enforcement action when international peace and security are deemed to be under threat. No such authorization has been reported in this case. The second is self-defense. 

Article 51 provides: “Nothing in the present Charter shall impair the inherent right of individual or collective self-defense if an armed attack occurs against a Member of the United Nations.” Accordingly, the central legal question now shaping global interpretation is whether the strikes were undertaken as an act of immediate self-defense; for example, to halt an imminent nuclear threat, or whether they were undertaken to alter the governing structure of another sovereign state.

This distinction has been sharpened by accompanying rhetoric. Public appeals for Iranians to overthrow their own government suggest an objective extending beyond neutralizing military capabilities toward political transformation. Such an aim intersects directly with Article 2(7) of the Charter, which affirms that: “Nothing… shall authorize the United Nations to intervene in matters which are essentially within the domestic jurisdiction of any state.”

While this clause primarily limits UN intervention, it has long been understood to reflect the broader norm of non-interference in the internal political order of sovereign states. 

Iran’s retaliatory missile launches are already being framed by Tehran as actions undertaken in self-defense under Article 51. Many states, even those critical of Iranian policy, may find it difficult to dismiss that legal claim if Iran is judged to have been the initial target of armed attack. Thus, what is unfolding is not merely another Middle Eastern escalation. It is a confrontation taking place within, and testing the limits of the legal architecture that has governed interstate conflict for nearly eight decades.

At stake is not only the trajectory of this conflict, but the continuing authority of the Charter system itself: whether the prohibition on force in Article 2(4), the protections of sovereignty implicit in Article 2(7), and the narrow exception of self-defense in Article 51 still function as meaningful restraints when major powers perceive existential danger.

In short, the crisis now unfolding is forcing the international community to confront a foundational question; whether the rules designed to prevent war among sovereign states still command obedience when the stakes are judged to be ultimate.