Lunes, Marso 27, 2023

I WILL POUR WATER (Robert Murray M'Cheyne, 1813-1843)

Isaiah 44:3 - 44:4

 3 For I will pour water upon him that is thirsty, and floods upon the dry ground: I will pour my spirit upon thy seed, and my blessing upon thine offspring:

4 And they shall spring up as among the grass, as willows by the water courses.

These words describe a time of refreshing. There are no words in the whole Bible that have been oftener m my heart, and oftener on my tongue than these, since I began my ministry among you. And yet, although God has never, from the very first day left us without some tokens of his presence, yet he has never fulfilled this promise; and I have taken it up to-day, in order that we may consider it more fully, and plead it more anxiously with God. For, as Rutherford said: “My record is on high, that your heaven would be like two heavens to me; and the salvation of you all like two salvations to me.”

I. Who is the author in a work of grace? It is God: “I will pour.”

1. It is God who begins a work of anxiety in dead souls. So it is in Zech. 12: “I will pour out the Spirit of grace and supplications, and they shall look upon me whom they have pierced and mourn.” And so the promise is in John 16: “When he is come, he will convince the world of sin; because they believe not on me.” And so is the passage of Ezek. 37: “Come from the four winds, O breath, and breathe upon these slain, that they may live.” if any of you have been awakened, and made to beat upon the breast, it is God, and God alone that hath done it. If ever we are to see a time of wide-spread concern among your families, children asking their parents, parents asking their children, people asking their ministers, “ What must I do to be saved?” if ever we are to see such a time as Mr. Edwards speaks of, when there was scarcely a single person in the whole town left unconcerned about the great things of the eternal world, God must pour out the Spirit: “I will pour.”

2. It is God who carries on the work, leading awakened persons to Christ. “I will pour out my Spirit upon all flesh,” Joel 2:28 “and whosoever shall call upon the name of the Lord shall be delivered.” Joel 2:32. And again, in John: “He shall convince the world of righteousness.” If ever we are to see souls flying like a cloud, and like doves, to Jesus Christ, if ever we are to see multitudes of you fleeing to that city of refuge, if ever we are to see parents rejoicing over their children as new-born, husbands rejoicing over their wives, and wives over their husbands, God must pour out the Spirit. He is the author and finisher of a work of grace: “I will pour.”

3. It is God who enlarges his people. You remember, in Zech. 4., how the olive trees supplied the golden candlesticks with oil — they emptied the golden oil out of themselves. If there is little oil, the lamps burn dim; if much oil, the lamps begin to blaze. Ah! if ever we are to see you who are children of God greatly enlarged, your hearts filled with joy, your lips filled with praises; if ever we are to see you growing like willows beside the water-courses, filled with all the fullness of God — God must pour down his Spirit. He must fulfil his word; for he is the Alpha and Omega — the author and finisher of a work of grace: — “I will pour.”

First Lesson. Learn to look beyond ministers for a work of grace. God has given much honor to his ministers; but not the pouring out of the Spirit. He keeps that in his own hand, “I will pour.” “It is not by might, nor by power, but by my Spirit, saith the Lord of hosts.” Alas! we would have little hope, if it depended upon ministers; for where are our men of might now? God is as able to do it for to-day as he was at the day of Pentecost; but men are taken up with ministers, and not with God. As long as you look to ministers, God cannot pour; for you would say it came from man. Ah! cease from man, whose breath is in his nostrils. One would think we would be humbled in the dust by this time. In how many parishes of Scotland has God raised up faithful men, who cease not day and night to warn every one with tears! and yet still the heavens are like brass, and the earth like iron. Why? Just because your eye is on man, and not on God. Oh! look off man to him, and he will pour; and his shall be all the glory.

Second Lesson. Learn good hope of revival in our day.

Third Lesson. Learn that we should pray for it. We are often for preaching to awaken others; but we should be more upon praying for it. Prayer is more powerful than preaching. It is prayer that gives preaching all its power. I observe that some Christians are very ready to censure ministers, and to complain of their preaching — of their coldness — their unfaithfulness. God forbid that I should ever defend unfaithful preaching, or coldness, or deadness, in the ambassador of Christ! May my right hand sooner forget its cunning! But I do say, where lies the blame of unfaithfulness? — where, but in the want of faithful praying? Why, the very hands of Moses would have fallen down, had they not been held up by his faithful people. Come then, ye wrestlers with God — ye that climb Jacob’s ladder — ye that wrestle Jacob’s wrestling — strive you with God, that he may fulfil his word: “I will pour.”

II. God begins with thirsty souls: “I will pour water upon him that is thirsty.”

1. Awakened persons. There are often souls that have been a long time under the awakening hand of God. God has led them into trouble, but not into peace. He has taken them down into the wilderness, and there they wander about in search of refreshing waters; but they find none. They wander from mountain to hill seeking rest, and finding none; they go from well to well, seeking a drop of water to cool their tongue; they go from minister to minister, from sacrament to sacrament, opening their mouth, and panting earnestly; yet they find no peace. These are thirsty souls. Now, it is a sweet thought that God begins with such: “I will pour water upon him that is thirsty.” The whole Bible shows that God has a peculiar tenderness for such as are thirsty. Christ, who is the express image of God, had a peculiar tenderness for them: “The Lord God hath given me the tongue of the learned, that I should know how to speak a word in season to him that is weary.” “Come unto me, all ye that are weary and heavy laden, and I will give you rest” “If any man thirst, let him come unto me and drink.” Many of his cures were intended to win the hearts of these burdened souls. The woman that had spent all upon other physicians, and was nothing better but rather worse, no sooner touched the hem of his garment, than she was made whole. Another cried after him, “Lord, help me,” yet he answered not a word; but at last said: “O woman, great is thy faith; be it unto thee even as thou wilt.” Another was bowed down eighteen years; but Jesus laid his hands on her, and immediately she was made straight.

Weary sinner, (1.) This is Jesus; this is what he wants to do for you: “I will pour water upon him that is thirsty.” Only believe that he is willing and able, and it shall be done. (2.) Learn that it must come from his hand. In vain you go to other physicians; you will be nothing better, but rather worse. Wait on him; kneel and worship him, saying: “Lord, help me.” (3.) Oh! long for a time of refreshing, that weary souls may be brought into peace. If we go on in this every-day way, these burdened souls may perish — may sink uncomforted into the grave. Arise, and plead with God, that he may arise and fulfil his word: “I will pour water upon him that is thirsty.”

2. Thirsty believers. All believers should be thirsty; alas! few are. Signs: (1.) Much thirst after the Word. — When two travellers are going through the wilderness, you may know which of them is thirsty, by his always looking out for wells. How gladly Israel came to Elim, where were twelve wells of water, and seventy palm trees! So it is with thirsty believers; they love the Word, read and preached, they thirst for it more and more. Is it so with you, dear believing brethren? In Scotland long ago, it used to be so. Often, after the blessing was pronounced, the people would not go away till they heard more. Ah! children of God, it is a fearful sign to see little thirst in you I do not wonder much when the world stay away from our meetings for the Word and prayer; but, ah! when you do. I am dumb, my soul will weep in secret places for your pride. I say, God grant that we may not have a famine of the Word ere long. (2.) Much prayer. —When a little child is thirsty for its mother’s breast, it will not keep silence; no more will a child of God who is thirsty. Thirst will lead you to the secret well, where you may draw unseen the living water. It will lead you to united prayer. If the town were in want of water, and thirst staring every man in the face, would you not meet one with another, and consult, and help to dig new wells? Now, the town is in want of grace, souls are perishing for lack of it, and you your selves are languishing. Oh! meet to pray. “If two of you shall agree on earth as touching anything that they shall ask, it shall be done for them of my Father which is in heaven.” (3.) Desire to grow in grace. — Some persons are contented when they come to Christ. They sink back, as it were, into an easy chair, they ask no more, they wish no more. This must not be. If you are thirsty believers, you will seek salvation as much after conversion as before it. Forgetting those things which are behind, and reaching forth unto those things which are before, press towards the mark for the prize of the high calling of God in Christ Jesus.”

To thirsty souls. Dear children, I look for the first drops of grace among you, in answer to your prayers, to fill your panting mouths. Oh, yes, he will pour. “A vineyard of red wine, I the Lord do keep it; I will water it every moment: lest any hurt it, I will keep it night and day.” Isa. 27:2, 3. “With joy shall ye draw water out of the wells of salvation.” Isa. 12:3.

III. God pours floods on the dry ground.

The dry ground represents those who are dead I trespasses and sins. Just as you have seen the ground, I a dry summer, all parched and dry, cracking and open, yet it speaks not, it asks not the clouds to fall; so is it with most in our parishes. They are all dead and dry, parched and withered, without a prayer for grace, without even a desire for it. Yet what says God? “I will pour floods upon them.”

Marks: —

1. They do not pray. I believe there are many in our parishes who do not make a habit of secret prayer, who, neither in their closet nor in the embowering shade, ever pour out their heart to God. I believe there are many who are dropping into hell who never so much as said: “God be merciful to me, a sinner.” Ah! these are the dry ground. Oh! it is sad to think that the souls that are nearest to hell are the souls that pray least to be delivered from it.

2. They do not wish a work of grace in their souls. I believe many of you came to the house of God to-day who would rather lose house, and home, and friends, than have a work of grace done in your heart. Nothing would terrify you so much as the idea that God might make you a praying Christian. Ah! you are the dry ground; you love death.

3. Those who do not attend to the preached Word. I have heard anxious persons declare that they never heard a sermon in all their life till they were awakened, that they regularly thought about something else all the time. I believe this is the way with many of you. You are the dry ground. What will God pour out on you? Floods, floods of wrath? No; floods of grace, floods of the Spirit, floods of blessing. Oh! the mercy of God, it passes all understanding. You deserve the flood that came on the world of the ungodly: but he offers floods of blessing. You deserve the rain of Sodom; but, behold he offers floods of his Spirit.

First Lesson. Learn how much you are interested that there should be a work of grace in our day. You are the very persons who do not care about lively preaching; who ridicule prayer-meetings, and put a mock on secret prayer; and yet you are the very persons that are most concerned. Ah! poor dry ground souls, you should be the first to cry out for lively ministers; you should go round the Christians, and, on your bended knees, entreat them to come out to our prayer-meeting. You, more than all the rest, should wait for the fulfillment of this word; for if it come not, oh! what will come of you? Poor dead, dead souls, you cannot pray for yourselves! One by one, you will drop into a sad eternity.

Second Lesson. Learn, Christians, to pray for floods. It is God’s word, he puts it into your mouth. Oh! do not ask for drops when God offers floods.” Open thy mouth and I will fill it.”

IV. Effects.

1. Saved souls will be like grass. They shall spring up as grass. So, in Ps. 72: “They of the city shall be like grass of the earth.” Many will be awakened, many saved. At present, Christ’s people are like a single lily amongst many thorns; but in a time of grace they shall be like grass. Count the blades of grass that spring in the clear shining after a rain; so many shall Christ’s people be. Count the drops of dew that come from the womb of the morning, shining like diamonds in the morning sun; so shall Christ’s people be in a day of his power. Count the stars that sparkle in night’s black mantle; so shall Abraham’s seed be. Count the dust of the earth; so shall Israel be in the day of an outpoured Spirit. Oh! pray for an outpoured Spirit, ye men of prayer, that there may be many raised up in our day to call him blessed.

2. Believers shall grow like willows. There is nothing more distressing in our day than the want of growth among the children of God. They do not seem to press forward, they do not seem to be running a race. When I compare this year with last year, alas! where is the difference? the same weaknesses, the same coldness; nay, I fear, greater languor in divine things. How different when the Spirit is poured out! They shall be like willows. You have seen the willow, how it grows, ceases not day or night, ever growing, ever shooting out new branches. Cut it down, it springs again. Ah! so would you be, dear Christians, if there were a flood-time of the Spirit, a day of Pentecost. (1.) Then there would be less care about your business and your workshop, more love of prayer and sweet praises. (2.) There would be more change in your heart, victory over the world, the devil, and the flesh. You would come out, and be separate. (3.) In affliction, you would grow in sweet submission, humility and meekness. There was a time in Scotland when Sabbath-days were growing days. Hungry souls came to the Word, and went away filled with good things. They came like Martha, and went away like Mary. They came like Samson, when his locks were shorn, and went away like Samson when his locks were grown.

3. Self-dedication. “One shall say, I am the Lord’s.” Oh! there is no greater joy than for a believing soul to give himself all to God. This has always been the way in times of refreshing. It was so at Pentecost. First they gave their ownselves unto the Lord. It was so with Boston, and Doddridge, and Edwards, and all the holy men of old. “I have this day been before God,” says Edwards, “and have given myself — all that I am and have — to God; so that I am in no respect my own. I can challenge no right in myself, in this understanding, this will, these affections. Neither have I right to this body, or any of its members; no right to this tongue, these hands, these feet, these eyes, these ears. I have given myself clean away.” Oh! would that you knew the joy of giving yourself away. You cannot keep yourself. Oh! this day try and give all to Him. Lie in his hand.

Little children, O that you would become like him who said: “I am God’s boy altogether, mother!” Write on your hand; “I am the Lord’s.”

Amen


Author

ROBERT MURRAY M’CHEYNE - The youngest child of the family, Robert M’Cheyne was born in Edinburgh, Scotland, May 21, 1813. His father was Adam M’Cheyne. writer to the Signet. At the age of four years, he taught himself to name and to write the Greek alphabet, while recovering from an illness. In October, 1821, he entered high school; November, 1827, the University of Edinburgh, and the winter of 1831, he commenced his studies in the Divinity Hall. The death of his eldest brother David, made a deep impression upon him. He looked upon this event as the means that awoke him from the sleep of nature.

The Presbytery of Annan licensed him to preach the gospel on July 1, 1835. He was ordained a minister November 24, 1836, of St. Peter’s Church, Dundee. This was his only pastorate, which he held until his death. The following Sunday he preached for the first time as a Pastor from Isaiah 61:1-3. This sermon was a means of awakening many souls. To keep up the remembrance of this solemn day, he would in the years that followed, preach from the same text on the anniversary of his ordination. He died on March 25, 1842, at the age of 29 years.

Only a few of M’Cheyne’s sermons were published during his lifetime. His well known biography was written by his friend, Andrew Bonar, Memoir and Remains of R.M. M’Cheyne.



https://www.the-highway.com/

Miyerkules, Marso 22, 2023

The Use Of Faith Under Reproaches And Persecutions (John Owen, 1616-1683)

 

Habakkuk 2:4

“Behold, his soul which is lifted up is not upright in him: but the just shall live by his faith.”


  You may remember, I spake occasionally from that of the psalmist, Ps. xcvii. 2, "Clouds and darkness are round about him: righteousness and judgment are the habitation of his throne;" and from thence took occasion to consider what is our especial duty when clouds and darkness are round about us, as they are at this day. And some of you know I have had a great persuasion that the clouds that are gathering will, at least in their first storm, fall upon the people of God. I must repeat it again and again; I have been warning you for some years, and telling you it would be so. The present frame wherewith I have to conflict in my own spirit, and that frame of spirit which I have observed in others, the state and condition of all churches and professors, so far as I know, is, -- they are gone into a dreadful security. I speak my heart, and what I know with reference unto our present state and the cause of God; we are gone, I say, into a dismal security: which still confirms me that the storm will come upon us, and that it will not be long ere we feel it. My design is, therefore, to show you how we ought to behave ourselves under the perplexities and difficulties we are to conflict withal in this world. And I have not sat studying for things to speak, but only tell you the experience of my own heart, and what I am labouring after. I have already showed you what our duty is under the approach of these distressing, calamitous times that are coming upon us, and what faith will do in such a season.

      II. I am now, in the second place, to show you how faith will carry it under other perplexities, that either are present or are coming upon us. And here I shall show you, -- 1. How we may live by faith, under all the reproaches and persecutions that do or may befall us, upon the account of that order and fellowship of the gospel, of that way of God's worship, which we do profess. 2. How we may live by faith, with reference unto the returning upon us of antichristian darkness and cruelty, if God shall suffer it so to be. 3. How we may live by faith under an apprehension of great and woeful decays in churches, in church members, in professors of all sorts, and in the gradual withdrawings of the glory of God from us upon that account.

      1. How may we live by faith, with reference unto those reproaches, that scorn and contempt, which are cast upon the ways of God which we profess, that worship of God wherein we are engaged, and that order of the gospel that we do observe, with the persecutions that will attend us upon the account thereof? Truly, I may say of it as the Jews said to Paul about Christianity, Acts xxviii. 22, "As for this sect, we know that everywhere it is spoken against." The whole world seems to be combined, that the name of Israel, in this way, may no more be had in remembrance. There are few that are concerned about these things while it is well with them, their families, their relations, estates, inheritances. Let the ways of God be reproached, what is that to them? they are not concerned in it. They cannot say, as the psalmist doth, when he speaks in the person of Christ, Ps. lxix. 9, "The reproaches of them that reproached thee are fallen upon me." Perhaps some of us are more sensible than others (or, at least, have reason so to be) of those reproaches that are continually cast upon the ways of God, seeing they are more particularly upon us; but to those that are not concerned in this scorn and contempt, I would say three things:--

      First. What evidence have you that you have a concern in God's glory? For these things are those whereby God is glorified in this world; and if you are not concerned when there are so many reflections thrown upon it, pray consider what evidence you have in yourselves of any concernment in the glory of God.

      Secondly. What evidence have you that you have a love to these things, that can hear them reproached, scorned, contemned, and never be moved at it? An honest, good man, would find himself concerned if his wife or children were reproached with lies and shameful things, because of his interest in them; but for them that can hear the ways of God reproached every day, and, so long as it is well with them and theirs, are not concerned thereat, -- they can have no evidence that they have a love unto them. Nehemiah cries out upon such an occasion, Neh. iv. 4, "Hear, O our God; for we are despised: and turn their reproach upon their own head, and give them for a prey in the land of captivity." God hath made special promises to such as are thus concerned: Zeph. iii. 18, "I will gather them," saith he. Whom will he gather? "Them that are sorrowful for the solemn assembly, who are of thee, to whom the reproach of it was a burden." The solemn assemblies were reproached and mocked; and there were some of them (not all) to whom this reproach was a burden. "These," saith God, "I will gather;" -- "gather them under my gracious protection."

      Thirdly. To add one word more: If you are not concerned in the reproaches that are cast upon the ways of God, persecution shall awaken you, and either make you concerned or put an end unto all your profession.

      Now, the inquiry is, how, under these difficulties that we have to conflict withal, we shall glorify God, and pass through them without loss, -- unto our spiritual advantage?

      The apostle, in the 10th chapter to the Hebrews, where he describes this very condition I have been speaking of, doth fully direct us. "Ye endured," saith he, "a great fight of afflictions; partly, whilst ye were made a gazingstock both by reproaches and afflictions; and partly, whilst ye became companions of them that were so used. For ye had compassion of me in my bonds, and took joyfully the spoiling of your goods," etc., verses 32-34. But how shall we carry ourselves under this condition here described? "Now," saith he, verse 38, "the just shall live by faith."

      What is the work of faith in this condition, that we may glorify God, and carry it through to a good and comfortable issue to ourselves? Call your own hearts to an account, and see how faith will work to give you support and supply. I will tell you what I am labouring after in my own heart; and the Lord direct you to find out what will be more useful! What will faith do in such a case? I answer, --

      (1.) Faith will give us such an experience of the power, efficacy, sweetness, and benefit of gospel ordinances and gospel worship, as shall cause us to despise all that the world can do in opposition unto us. Here I would cast my anchor, and exhort you not to be confident of yourselves; for nothing else will keep and preserve you. An opinion, a well-grounded opinion and judgment, will not preserve you; love to this or that man's ministry, will not preserve you; that you are able to dispute for your ways, will not preserve you (I can give you instances wherein they have all failed); -- resolutions that, if all men should leave them, you would not, are insufficient. Nothing can preserve you but a sense and experience of the usefulness and sweetness of gospel administrations, according unto the mind of Jesus Christ. This faith alone can give you. "Desire," saith the apostle Peter, "the sincere milk of the word," 1 Epist. ii. 2; -- "Desire, and labour to continue in, the ordinances of the gospel, and the worship of God under the administration of the word." How? "If so be ye have tasted that the Lord is gracious," verse 3; otherwise you will never desire it. I should hope that, through the grace of God (and otherwise I do not hope it), I might yet continue (if, indeed, I could keep alive) an experience that, in the dispensation of the word, I find a constant exercise of faith in God, delight in him, love to him; -- if I find that I come to the word as expecting to receive from God a sense of his love and supply of his grace; I should then, I say, have good hope, through grace, that ten thousand difficulties should never shake me in my continuance in this way. But if it be otherwise, there will be no continuance nor abiding. I mention these things, because, to the best observation such a poor worm as I am can make, there is a mighty coldness and indifferency grown upon the spirits of men in attending to the worship of God. There is not that life, spirit, courage, and delight in it as hath been in times past; and if so, where it may end God only knows. This, I say, is the first thing that faith will do in this state, if we set it on work. If we would but labour to stir up faith to find those supplies of spiritual life and strength in the ways of his worship and ordinances, -- if we would labour to overcome prejudices, and set ourselves against sloth and negligence, -- we should find ourselves as other men, and greatly set at liberty as to what the world can do unto us. This is that which faith can do for us in such a state of things; and this is that I would be labouring to bring my own heart unto.

      (2.) Faith, in such a season, will bring the soul into such an experimental sense of the authority of Jesus Christ, as to make it despise all other things. I profess, if it were not for the authority of Christ, I would renounce all your meetings; they would have neither form nor comeliness in them why they should be desired. But a deep respect unto the authority of Christ (unless our evil hearts are betrayed by unbelief and weakness) is that which will carry us through all that may befall us. Faith will work this double respect unto the authority of Christ:--

      [1.] As he is the great head and lawgiver of the church, who alone hath received all power from the Father to institute all worship; and whoever imposes herein usurps his crown and dignity. All power to institute spiritual worship is given unto Christ in heaven and in earth. What then? "Go, therefore," saith he, "and teach men to observe all things whatsoever I have commanded you," Matt. xxviii. 18-20. Bring your souls to this exercise of faith, that those things we do are commanded us by Christ, who is the sovereign Lord of our consciences, who hath sovereign authority over our souls. We must all appear before his judgment-seat, who will require of us whether we have done and observed what he hath commanded us or no. Do not only say these things, but labour greatly by faith to affect your consciences with this authority of Christ, and you will find that all other authorities will come to nothing, however you may suffer for it.

      [2.] Faith respects the authority of Christ, as he is "Lord of lords, and King of kings;" as he sits at the right hand of God, expecting all his enemies to become his footstool; as he hath not only a golden sceptre in his hand, "a sceptre of righteousness," wherewith he rules his church, but also an iron rod, to break all his enemies in pieces like a potter's vessel. If faith exercises itself upon this power and authority of Christ over his enemies, it will pour contempt upon all that the world can do. You cannot be carried before any magistrate, but Christ is there present, greater than them all, -- who hath their breath in his hands, their lives and their ways at his disposal, and can do what he pleases with them. Faith will bring in the presence of Christ in such a season; when otherwise your hearts would fail for fear, and you would be left unto your own wisdom, which is folly, and your own strength, which is but weakness. But if you have but faith working in the sense of this authority, it will make you like those well-composed persons in the 3d of Daniel. Do not wonder at the greatness of their answer and the composure of their spirits when they looked on the fiery furnace on the one hand, and the fiery countenance of terrible majesty on the other. "Know, that God," say they, "whom we serve, is able to deliver us out of thy hand; but if not, -- if God will not give us this present deliverance, be it known unto thee, O king, we will not serve thy gods, nor worship thy golden image," verses 17, 18. Faith will give us the same composure of spirit, and the same resolution; and with these things should we relieve ourselves under the worst that can befall us.

      (3.) Faith, in such a case and condition, will bring to mind, and make effectual upon our souls, the examples of them that have gone before us in giving the same testimony that we do, and in the sufferings that they underwent upon that account. When the apostle had told the believing Hebrews, that through all their trials, tribulations, and sufferings, they must live by faith, Heb. x., "What encouragement," might they say, "shall we receive by faith?" Why, saith he, "Faith will bring to mind all the examples of them that have gone before you, that have suffered, and been afflicted, and distressed as you now are;" -- which account takes up the whole 11th chapter, and a good part of the beginning of the 12th. It is a great thing when faith revives an example. Let us, then, by faith, carry in our minds the examples that are recorded in the Scripture. There is the example of Moses, the apostle gives it us; and it is an eminent instance: "He chose rather to suffer affliction with the people of God, than to enjoy the pleasures of sin for a season; esteeming the reproach of Christ greater riches than the treasures in Egypt." He, by the dark promise he had to live upon, endured the reproach of Christ. My brethren, take the prophets for an example of them that have suffered; and consider how the apostles have gone before us: but do not stop at them; for there is a greater than Moses, and the prophets, and apostles, -- greater than even a cloud of witnesses; and that is no less a person than the Lord Jesus Christ. Heb. xii. 2, "Looking unto Jesus, the author and finisher of our faith; who for the joy that was set before him endured the cross, despising the shame." He underwent the contradiction of sinners against himself, "and is now set down at the right hand of God." Faith, calling to mind these great examples, would give us great support under all the trials we may be brought unto, and conflict with. Whither are we going? what do we hope for? We would be where Moses is, and where the prophets are; but how got they thither? They did not get thither through the increase of riches, and multiplying to themselves lordships in the world; but by sufferings and the cross. Through many tribulations they entered into the kingdom of heaven.

      (4.) Faith will receive in the supplies that Christ hath laid up for his people, in such a season. Christ hath made peculiar provision for suffering saints. And it consists in two things:-- First, In his special presence with them. He will be with them in the fire, and in the water. Secondly, In the communication of the sense of God's love unto them. Their "tribulation worketh patience, and patience experience, and experience hope; and then the love of God is shed abroad in our hearts by the Holy Ghost, which is given to us," Rom. v. 3-5. Faith will bring all these things into the soul. But your minds must be spiritual, or you cannot put forth one act of faith for the bringing in this special provision that is laid up for suffering saints; -- and very few attain this spiritual frame, where faith fetches in these spiritual consolations Christ hath prepared for such souls. This is one way whereby we may live by faith in such a season. Search, therefore, and make inquiry in your entrance into troubles, what sense faith gives you of the love of God, to carry you through these difficulties.

      (5.) It is faith alone that can relieve us with respect unto the recompense of reward. Moses "suffered affliction with the people of God; for he had respect to the recompense of reward," Heb. xi. 25, 26. The light and momentary affliction which we undergo in this world, "worketh for us a far more exceeding and eternal weight of glory," 2 Cor. iv. 17. Who knows, but in a few days some of us may be taken into that incomprehensible glory, where we shall eternally admire that ever we did put any manner of weight on things here below? Faith will fix your eye on the eternal recompense of reward. We have, indeed, a faith now at work, that fixes the minds of men upon this and that way of deliverance, and this and that strange accident; but we shall find that true faith will burn up all this as stubble.

      (6.) And lastly, faith will work by patience. The apostle tells us "we have need of patience, that, after we have done the will of God, we might receive the promise;" and we are to be "followers of them who through faith and patience inherit the promises," Heb. x. 36, vi. 12.

      This is something of what I had to offer unto you, and, I hope, both seasonable and useful. However, it is what I can attain unto in these times of reproach, scorn, and contempt, that are cast upon us, and persecutions approaching. I say, faith will discover to us that efficacy, sweetness, power, and advantage in spiritual ordinances, as to make us willing to undergo any thing for them. Faith will bring our souls into such subjection unto the authority of Christ, as Head of the church, and Lord over the whole creation, that we shall not be terrified with what man can do unto us. Faith will furnish us with examples of the saints of God, whom he hath helped and assisted to go through sufferings, and who are now crowned and at rest in heaven. Faith will help us to keep our eye fixed, not upon the things of this world, but upon the eternal recompense of another world, and glory therein. And faith will also work by patience, when difficulties shall be multiplied upon us.

https://www.monergism.com/

Sabado, Marso 18, 2023

The Word of Forgiveness (A. W. Pink, 1886-1952)

 

Luke 23:34

“Then said Jesus, Father, forgive them; for they know not what they do. And they parted his raiment, and cast lots.”


MAN HAD DONE HIS WORST. THE ONE BY WHOM THE WORLD was made had come into it, but the world knew Him not. The Lord of Glory had tabernacled among men, but He was not wanted. The eyes which sin had blinded saw in Him no beauty that He should be desired. At His birth there was no room in the inn, which foreshadowed the treatment He was to receive at the hands of men. Shortly after His birth Herod sought to slay Him, and this intimated the hostility His person evoked and forecast the Cross as the climax of man’s enmity. Again and again His enemies attempted His destruction. And now their vile desires are granted them. The Son of God had yielded Himself up into their hands. A mock trial had been gone through, and though His judges found no fault in Him, nevertheless, they had yielded to the insistent clamoring of those who hated Him as they cried again and again “Crucify Him.”

The fell deed had been done. No ordinary death would suffice His implacable foes. A death of intense suffering and shame was decided upon. A cross had been secured: the Saviour had been nailed to it. And there He hangs — silent. But presently His pallid lips are seen to move — Is He crying for pity? No. What then? Is He pronouncing malediction upon His crucifiers? No. He is praying, praying for His enemies — Then said Jesus, Father, forgive them: for they know not what they do” ( Luke 23:34).

This first of the seven cross-sayings of our Lord presents Him in the attitude of prayer. How significant! How instructive! His public ministry had opened with prayer (Luke 3:21), and here we see it closing in prayer. Surely He has left us an example! No longer might those hands minister to the sick, for they are nailed to the Cross, no longer may those feet carry Him on errands of mercy, for they are fastened to the cruel tree; no longer may He engage in instructing the apostles, for they have forsaken Him and fled; — how then does He occupy Himself? In the Ministry of Prayer! What a lesson for us.

Perhaps these lines may be read by some who by reason of age and sickness are no longer able to work actively in the Lord’s vineyard. Possibly in days gone by, you were a teacher, you were a preacher, a Sunday-school teacher, a tract-distributer: but now you are bed-ridden. Yes, but you are still here on earth! Who knows but what God is leaving you here a few more days to engage in the Ministry of Prayer — and perhaps accomplish more by this than by all your past active service. If you are tempted to disparage such a ministry remember your Saviour. He prayed, prayed for others, prayed for sinners, even in His last hours.

In praying for His enemies not only did Christ set before us a perfect example of how we should treat those who wrong and hate us, but He also taught us never to regard any as beyond the reach of prayer. If Christ prayed for His murderers then surely we have encouragement to pray now for the very chief of sinners! Christian reader, never lose hope. Does it seem a waste of time for you to continue praying for that man, that woman, that wayward child of yours? Does their case seem to become more hopeless every day? Does it look as though they had gotten beyond the reach of Divine mercy? Perhaps that one you have prayed for so long has been ensnared by one of the Satanic cults of the day, or he may now be an avowed and blatant infidel, in a word, an open enemy of Christ. Remember then the Cross. Christ prayed for His enemies. Learn then not to look on any as beyond the reach of prayer.

One other thought concerning this prayer of Christ. We are shown here the efficacy of prayer. This Cross-intercession of Christ for His enemies met with a marked and definite answer. The answer is seen in the conversion of the three thousand souls on the Day of Pentecost. I base this conclusion on Acts 3:17 where the apostle Peter says, “And now, brethren, I wot that through ignorance ye did it, as did also your rulers.” It is to be noted that Peter uses the word “ignorance” which corresponds with our Lord’s “they know not what they do.” Here then is the Divine explanation of the three thousand converted under a single sermon. It was not Peter’s eloquence which was the cause but the Saviour’s prayer. And, Christian reader, the same is true of us. Christ prayed for you and me long before we believed in Him. Turn to John 17:20 for proof. Neither pray I for these (the apostles) alone, but for them also which shall believe on Me thro’ their word” (John 17:20). Once more let us profit from the perfect Exemplar. Let us too make intercession for the enemies of God, and if we pray in faith we also shall pray effectively unto the salvation of lost sinners.

To come now directly to our text: “Then said Jesus, Father, forgive them for they know not what they do.”

1. HERE WE SEE THE FULFILLMENT OF THE PROPHETIC WORD.

How much God made known beforehand of what should transpire on that Day of days! What a complete picture did the Holy Spirit furnish of our Lord’s Passion with all the attendant circumstances! Among other things it had been foretold that the Saviour should “make intercession for the transgressors” (Isa. 53: 12). This did not have reference to the present ministry of Christ at God’s right hand. It is true that “He is able also to save them to the uttermost that come unto God by Him, seeing He ever liveth to make intercession for them” (Heb. 7:25), but this speaks of what He is doing now for those who have believed on Him, whereas Isaiah 53:12 had reference to His gracious act at the time of His crucifixion. Observe what His intercession for the transgressors is there linked with — “And He was numbered with the transgressors; and He bare the sin of many, and made intercession for the transgressors.”

That Christ should make intercession for His enemies was one of the items of the wonderful prophecy found in Isaiah 53. This chapter tells us at least ten things about the humiliation and suffering of the Redeemer. It declared that He should be despised and rejected of men; that He should be a Man of sorrows and acquainted with grief; that He should be wounded, bruised and chastised; that He should be led, unresistingly, to slaughter; that He should be dumb before His shearers; that He should not only suffer at the hands of man but also be brusied by the Lord; that He should pour out His soul unto death; that He should be buried in a rich man’s tomb; and then it was added, that He would be numbered with transgressors; and finally, that He should make intercession for the transgressors. Here then was the prophecy — “and made intercession for the transgressors;” there was the fulfillment of it — “Father, forgive them, for they know not what they do.” He thought of His murderers. He pleaded for His crucifiers; He made intercession for their forgiveness.

“Then said Jesus, Father, forgive them, for they know not what they do.”

2. HERE WE SEE CHRIST IDENTIFIED WITH HIS PEOPLE.

“Father, forgive them.” On no previous occasion did Christ make such a request of the Father. Never before had He invoked the Father’s forgiveness of others. Hitherto He forgave Himself. To the man sick of the palsy He had said, `Son, be of good cheer; thy sins be forgiven thee” (Matt. 9:2). To the woman who washed His feet with her tears in the house of Simon, He said, “Thy sins are forgiven” (Luke 7:48). Why then should He now ask the Father to forgive, instead of directly pronouncing forgiveness Himself?

Forgiveness of sin is a Divine prerogative. The Jewish scribes were right when they reasoned “Who can forgive sins but God only?” (Mark 2:7). But you say, Christ was God. Truly; but Man also — the God-man. He was the Son of God that had become the Son of Man with the express purpose of offering Himself as a Sacrifice for sin. And when the Lord Jesus cried “Father forgive them” He was on the Cross, and there He might not exercise His Divine prerogatives. Mark carefully His own words, and then behold the marvellous accuracy of Scripture. He had said “The Son of Man hath power on earth to forgive sins” (Matt. 9:6). But He was no longer on earth! He had been “lifted up from the earth” (John 12:32)! Moreover, on the Cross He was acting as our Substitute: the Just was about to die for the unjust. Hence it was that hanging there as our Representative He was no longer in the place of authority where He might exercise His own Divine prerogatives, therefore takes He the position of a suppliant before the Father. Thus we say that when the blessed Lord Jesus cried, “Father, forgive them,” we see Him absolutely identified with His people. No longer was He in the position “on earth” where He had the “power” or “right” to forgive sins; instead, He intercedes for sinners — as we must.

“Then said Jesus, Father, forgive them, for they know not what they do.”

3. HERE WE SEE THE DIVINE ESTIMATE OF SIN AND ITS CONSEQUENT GUILT.

Under the Levitical economy God required that atonement should be made for sins of ignorance. “If a soul commit a trespass, and sin through ignorance, in the holy things of the Lord; then he shall bring for his trespass unto the Lord a ram without blemish out of the flocks, with thy estimation by shekels of silver, after the shekel of the sanctuary, for a trespass offering: And he shall make amends for the harm that he hath done in the holy thing, and shall add the fifth part thereto, and give it unto the priest: and the priest shall make an atonement for him with the ram of the trespass offering, and it shall be forgiven him” (Lev. 5:15,16). And again we read, “And if ye have erred, and not observed all these commandments, which the Lord hath spoken unto Moses, even all that the Lord hath commanded you by the hand of Moses, from the day that the Lord commanded Moses, and hence-forward among your generations; Then it shall be, if ought be committed by ignorance without the knowledge of the congregation, that all the congregation shall offer one young bullock for a burnt offering, for a sweet savor unto the Lord, with his meat offering, and his drink offering, according to the manner, and one kid of the goats for a sin offering. And the priest shall make an atonement for all the congregation of the children of Israel, and it shall be forgiven them; for it is ignorance: and they shall bring their offering, a sacrifice made by fire unto the Lord, and their sin offering before the Lord, for their ignorance” (Num. 15: 22-25). It is in view of such scriptures as these that we find David prayed, “Cleanse Thou me from secret faults” (Psa. 19:12).

Sin is always sin in the sight of God whether we are conscious of it or not. Sins of ignorance need atonement just as truly as do conscious sins. God is Holy, and He will not lower His standard of righteousness to the level of our ignorance. Ignorance is not innocence. As a matter of fact ignorance is more culpable now than it was in the days of Moses. We have no excuse for our ignorance. God has clearly and fully revealed His will. The Bible is in our hands, and we cannot plead ignorance of its contents except to condemn our laziness. God has spoken, and by His Word we shall be judged.

And yet the fact remains that we are ignorant of many things, and the fault and blame are ours. And this does not minimize the enormity of our guilt. Sins of ignorance need the Divine forgiveness as our Lord’s prayer here plainly shows. Learn then how high is God’s standard, how great is our need, and praise Him for an Atonement of infinite sufficiency, which cleanseth from all sin.

“Then said Jesus, Father, forgive them for they know not what they do.”

4. HERE WE SEE THE BLINDNESS OF THE HUMAN HEART.

“They know not what they do.” This does not mean that the enemies of Christ were ignorant of the fact of His crucifixion. They did know full well that they had cried out “Crucify Him.” They did know full well that their vile request had been granted them by Pilate. They did know full well that He had been nailed to the Tree for they were eye-witnesses of the crime. What then did our Lord mean when He said, “They know not what they do?” He meant they were ignorant of the enormity of their crime. They “knew not” that it was the Lord of Glory they were crucifying. The emphasis is not on “They know not but on “they know not what they do.”

And yet they ought to have known. Their blindness was inexcusable. The Old Testament prophecies which had received their fulfillment in Him were sufficiently plain to identify Him as the Holy One of God. His teaching was unique, for His very critics were forced to admit “Never man spake like this man’ (John 7:46). And what of His perfect life! He had lived before men a life which had never been lived on earth before. He pleased not Himself. He went about doing good. He was ever at the disposal of others. There was no self-seeking about Him. His was a life of self-sacrifice from beginning to end. His was a life ever lived to the glory of God. His was a life on which was stamped Heaven’s approval, for the Father’s voice testified audibly “This is My beloved Son, in whom I am well pleased.” No, there was no excuse for their ignorance. It only demonstrated the blindness of their hearts. Their rejection of the Son of God bore full witness, once for all, that the carnal mind is “enmity against God.”

How sad to think this terrible tragedy is still being repeated! Sinner, you little know what you are doing in neglecting God’s great salvation. You little know how awful is the sin of slighting the Christ of God and spurning the invitations of His mercy. You little know the deep guilt which is attached to your act of refusing to receive the only One who can save you from your sins. You little know how fearful is the crime of saying, “We will not have this man to reign over us.” You know not what you do. You regard the vital Issue with callous indifference. The question comes today as it did of old, “What shall I do with Jesus which is called Christ?” for you have to do something with Him: either you despise and reject Him, or you receive Him as the Saviour of your soul and the Lord of your life. But, I say again, it seems to you a matter of small moment, of little importance, which you do. For years you have resisted the strivings of His Spirit. For years you have shelved the all-important consideration. For years you have steeled your heart against Him, closed your ears to His appeals, and shut your eyes to His surpassing beauty. Ah! you know not WHAT you do. You are blind to your madness. Blind to your terrible sin. Yet are you not excuseless. You may be saved now if you will. “Believe on the Lord Jesus Christ, and thou shalt be saved.” O come to the Saviour now and say with one of Old, “Lord, that I might receive my sight.”

“Then said Jesus, Father, forgive them, for they know not what they do.”

5. HERE WE SEE A LOVELY EXEMPLIFICATION OF HIS OWN TEACHING.

In the Sermon on the Mount our Lord taught His disciples “Love your enemies, bless them that curse you, do good to them that hate you, and pray for them which despitefully use you and persecute you” (Matt. 5:44). Above all others Christ practised what He preached. Grace and truth came by Jesus Christ. He not only taught the truth but was Himself the truth incarnate. Said He, “I am the Way, the Truth and the Life” (John 14:6). So here on the Cross He perfectly exemplified His teaching of the mount. In all things He has left us an example.

Notice Christ did not personally forgive His enemies. So in Matt. 5:44 He did not exhort His disciples to forgive their enemies, but He does exhort them to “pray” for them. But are we not to forgive those who wrong us? This leads us to a point concerning which there is much need for instruction today. Does Scripture teach that under all circumstances we must always forgive? I answer emphatically, it does not. The Word of God says, “If thy brother trespass against thee, rebuke him; and if he repent, forgive him. And if he trespass against thee seven times a day, and seven times in a day turn again to thee saying, I repent; thou shalt forgive him” (Luke 17:3,4). Here we are plainly taught that a condition must be met by the offender before we may pronounce forgiveness. The one who has wronged us must first “repent,” that is, judge himself for his wrong and give evidence of his sorrow over it. But suppose the offender does not repent? Then I am not to forgive him. But let there be no misunderstanding of our meaning here. Even though the one who has wronged me does not repent, nevertheless, I must not harbor ill-feelings against him. There must be no hatred or malice cherished in the heart. Yet, on the other hand, I must not treat the offender as if he had done no wrong. That would be to condone the offence, and therefore I should fail to uphold the requirements of righteousness, and this the believer is ever to do. Does God ever forgive where there is no repentance? No, for Scripture declares, “If we confess our sins He is faithful and just to forgive us our sins and to cleanse us from all unrighteousness” (I John 1:9). One thing more. If one has injured me and repented not, while I cannot forgive him and treat him as though he had not offended, nevertheless, not only must I hold no malice in my heart against him, but I must also pray for him. Here is the value of Christ’s perfect example. If we cannot forgive, we can pray for God to forgive him.

“Then said Jesus, Father, forgive them, for they know not what they do.”

6. HERE WE SEE MANS GREAT AND PRIMARY NEED.

The first important lesson which all need to learn is that we are sinners, and as such, unfit for the presence of a Holy God. It is in vain that we select noble ideals, form good resolutions, and adopt excellent rules to live by, until the sin-question has been settled. It is of no avail that we attempt to develop a beautiful character and aim to do that which will meet with God’s approval while there is sin between Him and our souls. Of what use are shoes if our feet are paralyzed. Of what use are glasses if we are blind. The question of the forgiveness of my sins is basic, fundamental, vital. It matters not that I am highly respected by a wide circle of friends if I am yet in my sins. It matters not that I have made good in business if I am an unpardoned transgressor in the sight of God. What will matter most in the hour of death is, Have my sins been put away by the Blood of Christ?

The second all-important lesson which all need to learn is how forgiveness of sins may be obtained. What is the ground on which a Holy God will forgive sins? And here it is important to remark that there is a vital difference between Divine forgiveness and much of human forgiveness. As a general rule human forgiveness is a matter of leniency, often of laxity. We mean forgiveness is shown at the expense of justice and righteousness. In a human court of law, the judge has to choose between two alternatives: when the one in the dock has been proven guilty, the judge must either enforce the penalty of the law, or he must disregard the requirements of the law — the one is justice, the other is mercy. The only possible way by which the judge can both enforce the requirements of the law and yet show mercy to its offender, is by a third party offering to suffer in his own person the penalty which the convicted one deserves. Thus it was in the Divine counsels. God would not exercise mercy at the expense of justice. God, as the judge of all the earth. would not set aside the demands of His Holy law. Yet. God would show mercy. How? Through One making full satisfaction to His outraged law. Thro’ His own Son taking the place of all those who believe on Him and bearing their sins in own body on the Tree. God could be just and yet merciful, merciful and yet just. Thus it is that “grace reigns through righteousness.”

A righteous ground has been provided on which God can be just and yet the justifier of all who believe. Hence it is we are told, “Thus it is written, and thus it behoved Christ to suffer and to rise from the dead the third day; And that repentance and remission (forgiveness) of sins should be preached in His name among all nations, beginning at Jerusalem” (Luke 24:46,47). Anti again, “Be it known unto you therefore, men and brethren, that through this Man is preached unto you the forgiveness of sins: And by Him all that believe are justified from all things, from which ye could not be justified by the law of Moses” (Acts 13: 38,39). It was in view of the Blood He was shedding that the Saviour cried, “Father, forgive them.” It was in view of the atoning sacrifice He was offering, that it can be said “without shedding of blood is no remission.”

In praying for the forgiveness of His enemies Christ struck right down to the root of their need. And their need was the need of every child of Adam. Reader, have your sins been forgiven? that is, remitted or sent away. Are you, by grace, one of those of whom it is said, “In whom we have redemption through His blood, even the forgiveness of sins” (Col. 1:4)?

Then said Jesus, Father, forgive them, for they know not what they do.”

7. HERE WE SEE THE TRIUMPH OF REDEEMING LOVE.

Mark closely the word with which our text opens: “Then.” The verse which immediately precedes it reads thus, “And when they were come to the place, which is called Calvary, there they crucified Him, and the malefactors, one on the right hand and the other on the left. “Then, said Jesus, Father, forgive them. “Then” — when man had done his worst. “Then” — when the vileness of the human heart was displayed in climacteric devilry. “Then” — when with wicked hands the creature had dared to crucify the Lord of Glory. He might have uttered awful maledictions over them. He might have let loose the thunderbolts of righteous wrath and slain them. He might have caused the earth to open her mouth so that they had gone down alive into the Pit. But no. Though subjected to unspeakable shame, though suffering excruciating pain, though despised, rejected, hated, nevertheless, He cries, “Father, forgive them.” That was the triumph of redeeming love. “Love suffereth long, and is kind . . . beareth all things . . . endureth all things” (I Cor. 13). Thus it was shown at the Cross.

When Samson came to his dying hour he used his great strength of body to encompass the destruction of his foes; but the Perfect One, exhibited the strength of His love by praying for the forgiveness of His enemies. Matchless grace! “Matchless,” we say, for even Stephen failed to fully follow out the blessed example set by the Saviour. If the reader will turn to Acts 7 he will find that Stephen’s first thought was of himself, and then he prayed for his enemies — “And they stoned Stephen, calling upon God, and saying, Lord Jesus, receive my spirit. And he kneeled down and cried with a loud voice, Lord, lay not this sin to their charge” (Acts 7:55, 60). But with Christ the order was reversed: He prayed first for His foes, and last for Himself. In all things He has the pre-eminence.

And now one concluding word of application and exhortation. Should this chapter have been read by an unsaved person we would earnestly ask him to weigh well the next sentence — How dreadful must it be to oppose Christ and His truth knowingly! Those who crucified the Saviour “knew not what they did.” But, my reader, there is a very real and solemn sense in which this is not true of you. You know you ought to receive Christ as your Saviour, that you ought to crown Him the Lord of your life, that you ought to make it your first and last concern to please and glorify Him. Be warned then; your danger is great. If you deliberately turn from Him, you turn from the only One who can save you from your sins, and it is written, “If we sin willfully after that we have received the knowledge of the truth, there remaineth no more sacrifice for sins. But a certain fearful looking for of judgment and of fiery indignation, which shall devour the adversaries” (Heb. 10:26, 27) .

It only remains for us to add a word on the blessed Completeness of Divine forgiveness. Many of God’s people are unsettled and troubled upon this point. They understand how that all the sins they had committed before they received Christ as their Saviour have been forgiven, but oftentimes they are not clear concerning the sins which they commit after they have been born again. Many suppose it is possible for them to sin away the pardon which God had bestowed upon them. They suppose that the Blood of Christ dealt with their past only, and that so far as the present and the future are concerned, they have to take care of that themselves. But of what value would be a pardon which might be taken away from me at any time? Surely there can be no settled peace when my acceptance with God and my going to Heaven is made to depend upon my holding on to Christ, or my obedience and faithfulness.

Blessed be God, the forgiveness which He bestows covers all sins — past, present and future. Fellow-believer, did not Christ bear your “sins” in His own body on the Tree? And were not all your sins future sins when He died? Surely, for at that time you had not been born, and so had not committed a single sin. Very well then: Christ bore your “future” sins as truly as your past ones. What the Word of God teaches is that the unbelieving soul is brought out of the place of unforgiveness into the place to which forgiveness attaches. Christians are a forgiven people. Says the Holy Spirit: “Blessed is the man to whom the Lord will not impute sin” (Rom. 4:8)1 The believer is in Christ, and there sin will never again be imputed to us. This is our place or position before God. In Christ is where He beholds us. And because I am in Christ I am completely and eternally forgiven, so much so that never again will sin be laid to my charge as touching my salvation, even though I were to remain on earth a hundred years. I am out of that place for evermore. Listen to the testimony of Scripture: “And you being dead in your sins and the uncircumcision of your flesh, hath He (God) quickened together with Him (Christ), having forgiven you all trespasses” (Col. 2:13). Mark the two things which are here united (and what God hath joined together let not man put asunder) — my union with a risen Christ is connected with my forgiveness! If then my life is “hid with Christ in God” (Col. 3:3), then I am forever out of the place where imputation of sin applies. Hence it is written, “There is therefore now no condemnation to them which are in Christ Jesus” (Rom. 8:1) — how could there be if “all trespasses” have been forgiven? None can lay anything to the charge of God’s elect (Rom. 8:33). Christian reader, join the writer in praising God because we are eternally forgiven everything.*

*It should be added by way of explanation, that it is the judicial aspect we have dealt with. Restorative forgiveness — which is the bringing back again into communion of a sinning believer — dealt with in I John 1:9 — is another matter altogether.


Author

Arthur W. Pink, born in Great Britain in 1886, immigrated to the U.S. to study at Moody Bible Institute. He pastored churches in Colorado, California, Kentucky, and South Carolina before becoming an itinerant Bible teacher in 1919. He returned to his native land in 1934., taking up residence on the Isle of Lewis, Scotland, in 1940 and remaining there until his death twelve years later. Most of his works first appeared as articles in the monthly Studies in the Scriptures, published from 1922 to 1952.


 https://www.the-highway.com/

Lunes, Marso 13, 2023

The Testimony of Geologic History (Henry M. Morris, 1918-2006)

 As far as present-day biological change is concerned, therefore, we insist that there is no evidence whatever that any real evolutionary changes are now taking place. Genetic variations, certainly in at least the overwhelming majority of instances, are within rigidly fixed limits, so that the basic species remain essentially unchanged. When change occurs outside of these limits, as a result of mutations of some kind, then again in the overwhelming preponderance of cases, the change is either harmful or, at best, neutral to the creature experiencing it.

These facts are in perfect accord with the two universal laws of thermodynamics, which describe a universal condition of quantitative stability and qualitative deterioration. At the very best, therefore, either quantitative or qualitative evolution must be accomplished by means of some sort of mechanism which, locally and temporarily, may be able to supersede the effects of the laws of thermodynamics. Natural selection is supposed by evolutionists to be the needed mechanism. A modern leader in this field says:

“The general picture of how evolution works is now clear. The basic raw material is the mutant gene. Among these mutants most will be deleterious, but a minority will be beneficial. These few will be retained by what Muller has called the sieve of natural selection. As the British statistician R. A. Fischer has said, natural selection is a `mechanism for generating an exceedingly high level of improbability.’ It is Maxwell’s famous demon superimposed on the random process of mutation. Despite the clarity and simplicity of the general idea, the details are difficult and obscure.”1

The last statement above is strikingly descriptive of the entire theory of evolution. The idea is simple and powerfully persuasive to the natural mind, but the details of evidence supporting it become increasingly obscure the more closely they are examined. The “beneficial minority” of mutations which can supposedly be preserved by natural selection, for example, is vanishingly small, and the almost infinite accumulation of beneficial mutations that would be required for the true evolution of even a single major kind of animal surely requires natural selection to be a remarkable type of mechanism, one which can truly generate an “exceedingly high level of improbability.” Maxwell’s demon, indeed! It is much easier to suppose that the very idea of evolution was generated by this ubiquitous demon!

If, then, there is no evidence for true evolution occurring in the present, the only way in which the fact of evolution could be demonstrated would be to show that it had occurred in the past, throughout geologic time. It is everywhere admitted that there has been no more evolution in historic times than there is occurring in the present. In fact, the most ancient written records of plant and animal life reveal no significant changes of a truly evolutionary nature to have occurred at all. Walter E. Lammerts has recently reminded us of this:

“As K. Patau has shown, even mutations having a one per cent survival advantage increase in frequency from 0.01 to 0.1 per cent of the population only after 900,230 generations. Another 100,511 generations are needed to increase the frequency to 100 per cent. Certainly the time needed for natural selection to effect a change in a large population is enormous even geologically speaking. That is why Sir Charles Lyell’s concept of slow change by presently acting causes is so necessary for any concept of general evolution.”2

Since neither present nor past human observations record any evidence of true evolution, it is necessary to buttress the theory by claiming that evolution occurred in pre-historic times. In effect, the evolutionist says: “Although we can’t prove that evolution has occurred within historic times, it must have occurred in the past in order for the present state of the biological world to have been attained. Therefore, it must be occurring in the present, and anyone who doubts the fact of evolution is hopelessly ignorant!”

The only evidence (apart from divine revelation, which the evolutionist refuses to accept) concerning pre-historic life on the earth is that which can be deduced from the fossil remains of creatures now buried in the rocks of the earth’s crust. These fossiliferous deposits are interpreted to show a gradual evolution of the earth and its inhabitants over long ages, and this is considered the real core of the evidence supporting the theory of evolution. As the Yale geologist, Carl O. Dunbar, says:

“Although the comparative study of living animals and plants may give very convincing circumstantial evidence, fossils provide the only historical, documentary evidence that life has evolved from simpler to more and more complex forms.”3

But in what way do fossils of dead animals provide evidence for evolution? Since they were deposited in most cases prior to human historical observations and records, it is obviously impossible to know for certain just how and when they lived and were buried. In order to interpret their testimony, one must start from some premise concerning their significance and then attempt to deduce a theory which can explain the data on the basis of his premise. If he cannot do this, then he must try some other premise and the resulting theory. Even if he does hit upon a satisfactory theory, which seems to explain the data he still cannot be certain that it is right, since it may be possible to find several theories which can correlate all the data to at least some degree.

The almost universally promoted theory for interpreting the fossils is summarized by Dunbar as follows:

“Since fossils record life from age to age, they show the course life has taken in its gradual development. The facts that the oldest rocks bear only extinct types of relatively small and simple kinds of life, and that more and more complex types appear in successive ages, show that there has been a gradual development or unfolding of life on the earth.”4

This superficially seems very convincing and, indeed, is so convincing that it is really, as we have seen, the very foundation of the theory of evolution, which, in turn, has been appropriated as the philosophical basis of nearly all modern disciplines of human knowledge.

But at least two important questions must be satisfactorily answered before it can legitimately be concluded that the theory of evolution is the best explanation for the fossil record. One question is: “Are the ages of the rocks determinable independently of the theory of evolution which is supposed to be deduced from their fossil contents?” The other is: “Is the theory of evolution the only theory which can satisfactorily explain the fossil data?” Both of these questions must be answered in the affirmative if we should be expected to accept the fossils as real proof of evolution. But as a matter of fact, both questions must really be answered in the negative.

The problem of determining the age of a given rock formation is very important to this whole issue. How is it decided which rocks are old and which are young and, in general, how do we determine the entire chronology of geologic time? Again, we shall let Professor Dunbar explain:

“Inasmuch as life has evolved gradually, changing from age to age, the rocks of each geologic age bear distinctive types of fossils unlike those of any other age. Conversely, each kind of fossil is an index or guide fossil to some definite geologic time. . . . Fossils thus make it possible to recognize rocks of the same age in different parts of the Earth and in this way to correlate events and work out the history of the Earth as a whole. They furnish us with a chronology, “on which events are arranged like pearls on a string.”5

Examination of this statement makes it immediately obvious that there is a subtle example of circular reasoning here. Rocks are dated by the fossils they contain, rocks containing simple fossils being considered old and vice versa. This amounts simply to assuming as a prior fact that evolution is known to have occurred throughout geologic time. Then, the resulting geologic column, with its fossil series, is said to be the main, and indeed the only, proof that evolution has occurred.

This is such an important point that we shall call in other authorities as confirming witnesses. Cornell geologists, O. D. von Engeln and Kenneth E. Caster, state:

“The geologist utilizes knowledge of organic evolution as preserved in the fossil record, to identify and correlate the lithic records of ancient times.”6

E. M. Spieker, of Ohio State, emphasizes that the geologic time-scale is based predominantly on the paleontological evidence (that is, on the fossil sequences postulated by evolution) rather than on any physical evidence (such as the physico-chemical nature of the rocks, or their relative position in terms of vertical succession, etc.):

“And what essentially is this actual time-scale . . .on what criteria does it rest? When all is winnowed out, and the grain reclaimed from the chaff, it is certain that the grain in the product is mainly the paleontologic record and highly likely that the physical evidence is the chaff.”7

One of the most prominent European paleontologists has said:

“The only chronometric scale applicable in geologic history for the stratigraphic classification of rocks and for dating geologic events exactly is furnished by the fossils. Owing to the irreversibility of evolution, they offer an unambiguous time scale for relative age determinations and for world-wide correlations of rocks.”8

In spite of this frank recognition of the pre-eminent importance of the fossils in dating rock formations, the obvious circle of reasoning involved in this process is rarely admitted, at least in print.9 One exception was R. H. Rastall, of Cambridge University, who said:

“It cannot be denied that from a strictly philosophical standpoint geologists are here arguing in a circle. The succession of organisms has been determined by a study of their remains buried in the rocks, and the relative ages of the rocks are determined by the remains of organisms that they contain.”10

Now of course these men, as well as other geologists and paleontologists, would hasten to insist that, even though the time scale is built upon the basis of an assumed evolution, the resulting system is so consistent and so universally verified that this assumption is fully validated. That is, the fossils are always found in the same order, no matter in what part of the world they are discovered, and always the order is from simple to complex. Rocks buried lowest have the simpler fossils and those nearer the surface have the more complex fossils. The “geologic column” is the same everywhere.

But this is simply not so, in spite of the evolutionists’ wishful thinking which would like for it to be so. There are great numbers of exceptions and contradictions to this generalization. As a matter of fact, the geologic column really exists only in the minds of the historical geologists, since it has been built up by superposition of deposits from various parts of the world.

“If a pile were to be made by using the greatest thickness of sedimentary beds of each geologic age, it would be at least 100 miles high. . . . It is, of course, impossible to have even a considerable fraction of this at one place. The Grand Canyon of the Colorado, for example, is only one mile deep. . . . By application of the principle of superposition, lithologic identification, recognition of unconformities, and reference to fossil successions, both the thick and thin masses are correlated with other beds at other sites. Thus, there is established, in detail, the stratigraphic succession for all the geologic ages.”11

Neither is much of the geologic column present at any one site necessarily continuous. Fossils are almost always found in sedimentary rocks, and below whatever sedimentaries are found in a given location there will always be found at the bottom crystalline rocks of the so-called “basement complex.” The latter presumably is remnant from that period in the earth’s history before the formation of sedimentary rocks began. It is significant that literally any rock system in the entire geologic column may be found lying directly on the basement complex and that any combination of rock systems may be found above it, at any given location.

“Further, how many geologists have pondered the fact that lying on the crystalline basement are found from place to place not merely Cambrian, but rocks of all ages?”12

And, similarly, any series of rock systems may be found above the bottom, and there need be no difference in appearance, except for the fossils they contain.

“An unconformity separating the oldest Pre-Cambrian from the latest Pleistocene may have the same physical appearance as one between the latest Pleistocene and the middle Pleistocene. The fossils of the strata bounding an unconformity are the only indicators of time-value, and these are not always decisive for determination within narrow limits.”13

An unconformity is supposedly a boundary between two rock formations of widely different ages, supposedly caused by erosion during those ages. These often are found with perfectly parallel bedding and every other appearance of immediate succession of deposition instead of long ages intervening. They are then called, variously, “disconformities,” “paraconformities,” or even “deceptive conformities.”

Far more serious than this is the fact that it is common to find supposedly “ancient” rock formations resting in essential conformity on supposedly “young” formations. This is exactly contrary to the requirements of evolution, which would necessitate that the oldest rocks should be at the bottom. Nevertheless, this anomalous condition is quite common. Carl O. Dunbar admits these conditions in the following words:

“In disturbed areas, of course, the normal succession may be locally inverted, as in the lower limb of an overturned fold, or it may be interrupted or duplicated, by faults, but such abnormalities will betray themselves in evidences of disturbance and in an unnatural sequence of fossils.”14

Although sometimes there may be evidences of physical disturbance (leading to faulting and folding) in these “upside-down” areas, it is quite often true that they can only be revealed by an “unnatural sequence of fossils,” which means that the fossils are not found in the order presupposed by their evolutionary relationships. Walter E. Lammerts comments:

“The actual percentage of areas showing this progressive order from the simple to the complex is surprisingly small. Indeed formations with very complex forms of life are often found resting directly on the basic granites. Furthermore, I have in my own files a list of over 500 cases that attest to a reverse order, that is, simple forms of life resting on top of more advanced types.”15

In order to account for these numerous exceptions to the supposed universal order of evolutionary development as revealed in the fossiliferous rocks, theory has to be piled on top of theory. Thus, the missing ages indicated by a disconformity are explained by a supposed regional uplift and period of erosion. An inverted order of fossils is explained by a regional uplift followed by a horizontal thrust fault followed by a period of erosion. And so forth. One is reminded of Occam’s Razor, the principle that cautions against any unnecessary multiplication of hypotheses to explain a given set of phenomena.

In any case, it becomes obvious that the theory of evolution does not really provide a very simple and satisfactory framework for the correlation of the data of paleontology. It is emphatically clear that evolution is assumed in building up the geologic time scale and that, even so, there are so many problems involved that subsidiary theories continually have to be appended to it in order to explain the exceptions and contradictions.16 The charge of circular reasoning which has been lodged against the critically important paleontological evidence of evolution is not simply to be laughed off or ignored as evolutionists too commonly attempt to do. It quite plainly involves the presupposition of evolution, with numerous involved deductions based on that premise. It is not, therefore, valid to offer this presupposition and these deductions as proof of evolution, and especially in view of the tremendously important fact that there is no real evidence of present evolution, and of the even more significant fact that the two universal laws of thermodynamics plainly imply universal stability or deterioration rather than evolution!

The first of the two questions asked concerning this main proof of evolution, namely its logical independence of presuppositions involving its own proof, must therefore be answered emphatically in the negative. But even if it did not involve circular reasoning and even if it did present a fully consistent explanation of the fossil record, the second question would still have to be faced. Is evolution the only, or even the best, possible explanation of the fossils? And the answer is, most certainly, that it is not! The Biblical revelation of early terrestrial history, together with the solid scientific foundation of the first and second laws of thermodynamics, lead to a much more satisfying explanation of the fossil record than does the theory of evolution.

The Biblical framework involves three major facts of history, each of tremendous importance with respect to the scientific study of data bearing on these problems. These facts are of such obvious significance that to ignore them means that one is arbitrarily rejecting even the possibility that God could have given a genuine revelation of beginnings in His Book of Beginnings. The three facts are: (1) a real Creation; (2) the Fall of man and resultant Curse on the earth; and (3) the universal Deluge in the days of Noah.

The first two have already been discussed in part. According to the Bible, God created all things in heaven and earth, including all living kinds of animals, as well as man, in the six-day period of creation. Following this period of creation, He rested. Thus, no true creation is now taking place in the world, and this revelation is confirmed by the great principle of mass and energy conservation.

Now this can only mean that, since nothing in the world has been created since the end of the creation period, everything must then have been created by means of processes which are no longer in operation and which we therefore cannot study by any of the means or methods of science. We are limited exclusively to divine revelation as to the date of creation, the duration of creation, the method of creation, and every other question concerning the creation. And a very important fact to recognize is that true creation necessarily involves creation of an “appearance of age.” It is impossible to imagine a genuine creation of anything without that entity having an appearance of age at the instant of its creation. It would always be possible to imagine some sort of evolutionary history for such an entity, no matter how simple it might be, even though it had just been created.

This is seen most clearly in the record of the creation of Adam and Eve. According to the record, Adam was created as a mature man, formed by God out of the elements of the physical earth. He was not created first as an embryo or a baby, and then allowed to develop. Similarly, Eve was created directly out of Adam. In like manner, everything was created as a fully developed, perfectly functioning whole. Soil was created for the plants to grow in; chemical molecules and compounds were created; light from the sun and stars and moon was seen on the earth at the instant of their creation; and so on. Thus, everything in the earth must have had an appearance of age, if there had been any true creation at all. The earth and universe constitute a great clock which was originally wound up by God, in a manner and at a time which can only be known, if at all, by means of divine revelation. The “apparent age” at which the “clock” was originally set may have been anything that pleased him. In any case, when the creation was finished, God judged it all to be “very good” — perfectly functioning and fully harmonious, with nothing incomplete or out of order, and then God “rested.” And this primeval condition continued until “sin entered into the world.”

The possibility of creation of apparent age is recognized by even such a doctrinaire evolutionist as George Simpson, Professor of Vertebrate Paleontology at Harvard University, who says:

“We cannot disprove the postulate that the universe was created one second ago, complete with all our apparent memories of our own earlier days, or that it was not created in 4004 B.C., with all the apparent record of earlier billions of years. But that would not make sense, and we must pretend, at least, that both we and the universe are sane.”17

Simpson is obviously caricaturing the problem and, since he is an avowed disbeliever in any divine purpose in the universe, the concept of “creation” of any kind to him would not “make sense.” Others would say that the concept of apparent age involves the Creator in some kind of deception and, therefore, they reject it out of solicitude for the divine honor. But, as we have pointed out above, to say that God could not create anything with apparent age is tantamount to saying nothing could be created and, therefore, is essentially the same position as the atheism of Simpson. In fact, rather than honoring God’s truthfulness by rejecting any supposed “deception” on his part in creating apparent age, such men in reality are charging him with falsehood, since they deny the truth of his revealed Word concerning the creation. We insist as emphatically as we know how that the doctrine of creation of apparent age does not in the remotest degree involve a divine deception, but is rather inherent in the very nature of creation. Further, God in grace has even revealed much concerning the true age of the creation, in His written Word, but men have simply refused to accept it.

The second great revealed fact of earth history is that of the fall of man, followed by God’s divine curse on the whole creation. The effects of the curse, manifested particularly in the universal tendency toward decay and disorder and death in the world, have been discussed somewhat already. The second law of thermodynamics has been seen to approximate a scientific statement of the effects of the curse.

For our present purposes, the point to be noticed is that, in the fossil record, there is an abundance of testimony to the effect that decay, disorder, and death have existed in the world during all the geologic ages represented by the fossil-bearing rocks. The very fact of fossil animals demonstrates the fact of death, and there is also much geologic evidence of disease, of physical catastrophes, of suffering, of struggle — in short, of a pre-historic world which was “groaning and travailing together in pain.” Even the very concept of evolution itself, especially as furthered by natural selection, involves a struggle for existence, with the strong exterminating the weak. It is certainly difficult to imagine that this was the state of things at the end of the creation period when God, who is Love, saw everything that he had made and pronounced it to be “very good.”

The Biblical framework, therefore, requires that we categorically reject the fossil record as a record of the history of the development of life on the earth. It cannot possibly be ascribed to the period and events recorded in the first chapter of Genesis, during which God was creating the heavens and the earth and everything in them.

And the same is the testimony derived from the two laws of thermodynamics. There is certainly no indication that the sedimentary rocks of the earth’s crust, with their fossil contents, were laid down under conditions and at a time when the two laws were not in existence. Such a notion would certainly be completely contrary to the doctrine of uniformitarianism which supposedly governs the interpretation of the geologic records. Now, since the bringing into existence of matter and energy and order — in a state of low entropy (that is, of high order and high energy availability) — essentially requires a process or processes of creation, and since such processes are precisely opposite to those of stability and deterioration postulated by the first and second laws of thermodynamics, it therefore follows that the period of true creation (even call it true evolution, if you will) could not possibly have been the same period as the period represented by the deposition of the fossil-bearing rocks. They simply cannot scientifically be regarded as a record of the evolution (or “creation,” as preferred) of higher and higher forms of life on the earth.

But then what do they represent? They must have been laid down after the introduction of the present order of things into the universe and deposited under the action of the present physical laws which now control the behavior of nature. (Uniformitarians should not object to this statement!) This means that they must have been deposited after God finished creating all things, since the law of conservation of mass and energy was in operation when they were laid down. It also means that they must have been deposited after God pronounced the curse on the creation, since they were laid down while the second law of thermodynamics was in operation. More directly to the point, they could only have been deposited after death entered into the world, which means after man had sinned! Therefore, it is both scientific and Scriptural to insist that the fossil deposits of the earth’s crust must have all been brought into place at some time or times after the creation and fall of man.

But these deposits are so extensive and so thick, spread all over the earth’s crust, sometimes to a depth measured in miles, that it is quite impossible that they could have been formed by the ordinary processes of deposition that are taking place at present. They were undoubtedly formed under the operation of the same basic physical laws that now exist (and this is true uniformitarianism), but they could not have been formed by geologic processes acting at the same rates as at present. Rather these processes (sedimentation, erosion, volcanism, tectonism, radioactivity, glaciation, etc.) must have operated at greatly augmented rates and over greatly enlarged areas. In short, the old geologic doctrine of catastrophism, which has been stigmatized ever since the days of Lyell and Darwin, must be revived if there is to be any hope of a scientific accounting for the facts of the fossil record.

Once this is recognized, and the doctrinaire uniformitarianism of the past one hundred years rejected as completely unable to correlate all the facts of the record, then it will be seen that a much more satisfactory explanation of the fossil record can be developed than is possible on the basis of evolution. Two Canadian geologists contrast catastrophism and uniformitarianism as follows:

“One of the aids to the interpretation of sedimentary rocks is the principle of uniformitarianism. This principle states that the processes we see at work on the crust of the earth today are sufficient to account for all the events of the past that have formed the crust. In other words, `the present is the key to the past.’ When the science of geology was young and the great age of the earth unknown, geologists believed that the features of the crust were formed by a series of catastrophes.”18

This type of uniformitarianism has been extremely important in geologic interpretation for over a century.

“This is the great underlying principle of modern geology and is known as the principle of uniformitarianism. . . . Without the principle of uniformitarianism there could hardly be a science of geology that was more than pure description.”19

With true uniformitarianism, based on the strict application of the two laws of thermodynamics and other basic physical laws, we have no quarrel whatever. For if these universal laws were given full consideration in the development of a geologic history, it would soon be recognized that evolution is practically impossible statistically and that, therefore, the geologic data must be explained in terms of creation and subsequent deterioration. But this perfectly legitimate and proper application of the principle of uniformity has been ignored in favor of the entirely unwarranted assumption that secondary processes such as radiogenic accumulations, erosion and deposition must have always been occurring, not in accordance with the same physical laws as at present, but rather at the same rates as at present! For this assumption, there is not the slightest warrant whatever, except that it yields the tremendous expanse of geologic time that is necessary to give even a semblance of plausibility to the evolutionary hypothesis.

As a matter of fact, this assumption does not at any point provide a satisfactory explanation for the geologic data. For example, the most recent geological epoch before the present one is called the Pleistocene. By all rights, if the standard geologic time table is at all valid, the record of this epoch ought to be the plainest and easiest to interpret in uniformitarian terms. But, on the other hand, the Pleistocene has been interpreted in terms of a geologic catastrophe of first magnitude, namely, as the great Ice Age, or perhaps series of ice ages! And so inadequate is the principle of uniformity, for explaining the onset, oscillations, and decline of the great complex of continental ice sheets supposedly characteristic of this period, that theories by the carload have been proposed, each in turn rejected for one reason or another! As Loren Eiseley has recently observed:

“Even on a more dramatic scale no one to date has been quite able satisfactorily to account for that series of rhythmic and overwhelming catastrophes which we call the Ice Age.”20

Other types of geologic deposits fare little better in terms of a really consistent application of geologic uniformitarianism. Practically all fossils are found in sedimentary rocks, especially in shales and limestones, and most of these were presumably laid down in relatively shallow water, such as might be found along the continental shelves. But little success has been attained in relating these sedimentary rocks to actual sedimentary environments of deposition, such as are now actually observed in the present. A prominent marine geologist, Francis P. Shepard, has said:

“Most sedimentary rocks are believed to have been deposited in the seas of the past. One of the primary purposes in geological investigations has been to interpret the conditions under which these ancient sediments were deposited. One of the obvious places to look for guidance in these interpretations is in the deposits of the present. It is, therefore, rather surprising to find how little attention geologists had paid to these recent marine sediments until very recent years.”21

Similarly, the great expanses of volcanic terrains in the Pacific Northwest, the Canadian Shield, the Indian plateaus, and many other places, have to be explained in terms of great systems of volcanic vents and fissures which are completely incommensurate with any type of volcanic activity ever observed by man in modern times. The tremendous earth movements implied by the great faults and folds in the earth’s crust and even by the obviously recent uplifts of most of the world’s great mountain regions certainly have no present-day parallel. In fact, wherever one looks in the deposits of the crust, he finds phenomena that cannot possibly be explained in terms of present-day rates of geologic processes. The inadequacies of geological uniformitarianism to account for the fossiliferous rocks have been rather thoroughly discussed and documented22 and need not be discussed in more detail here.

One further aspect of this particular problem should be mentioned, however, and that is the matter of the fossils themselves. Remember that the fossils in the rocks provide the very means of dating the rocks and that, the paleontologic series thus constructed is the only real proof of evolution. Consider also that these rocks are supposed to have been laid down by means of the slow operation of geologic processes occurring at present.

And then meditate upon the remarkable fact that, for the most part, the fossils simply must have been laid down under sudden and probably catastrophic conditions or else they would never have been preserved as fossils at all! Even such a consistent evolutionary uniformitarian geologist as Dunbar recognizes that practically all fossils must have been formed by floods or other catastrophes.

“A carcass left exposed after death is almost sure to be torn apart or devoured by carnivores or other scavengers, and if it escapes these larger enemies, bacteria insure the decay of all but the hard parts, and even they crumble to dust after a few years if exposed to the weather. If buried under moist sediment or standing water, however, weathering is prevented, decay is greatly reduced, and scavengers cannot disturb the remains. For these reasons burial soon after death is the most important condition favoring preservation. . . . Waterborne sediments are so much more widely distributed than all other kinds, that they include the great majority of all fossils. Flooded streams drown and bury their victims in the shifting channel sands or in the muds of the valley floor.”23

Other catastrophes such as falls of volcanic ash can account for some large concentrations of fossils. In fact, it could be said that with only insignificant exceptions, all of the fossils must have been deposited by some kind of catastrophe or else they would not have been preserved at all. Normal rates of sedimentation, etc., as postulated by the uniformity principle, are meaningless as far as the fossil record is concerned.

And even the occasional destructive flood or volcanic eruption that occurs in modern times cannot be taken as typical of the cause of the most important fossil deposits. Some of these have no modern parallel at all. The fantastic deposits of hundreds, possibly millions, of mammoths and other animals in the mucks of the Arctic provide an example. The great “fossil graveyards” found in many parts of the world, sometimes containing millions of fish, sometimes hordes of dinosaurs or other animals, sometimes a heterogeneous mixture of animals of all kinds, all testify that present-day rates and phenomena cannot possibly account for them.

Modern paleontologists are beginning to be more realistic than they once were with regard to the necessity of at least some degree of catastrophism in the interpretation of the fossil record. Norman D. Newell, of Columbia University and the American Museum of Natural History, has recently commented: “Yet the fossil record of past life is not a simple chronology of uniformly evolving organisms. The record is prevailingly one of erratic, often abrupt changes in environment, varying rates of evolution, extermination and repopulation. Dissimilar biotas replace one another in a kind of relay. Mass extinction, rapid migration and consequent disruption of biological equilibrium on both a local and a worldwide scale have accompanied continual environmental changes. . . . The cause of these mass extinctions is still very much in doubt and constitutes a major problem of evolutionary history.”24

Eric Larrabee, discussing the recent revival of interest in catastrophism and, in particular, the type of catastrophism proposed a decade ago by Immanuel Velikovsky, appropriately observes:

“The nineteenth century found it natural to think in terms of continuity and reassurance, of slow evolution and gradual processes undisturbed by sudden and unpredictable disruptions. We of the twentieth have known a different universe, have seen the overturning of stability in every sphere, have come to live from day to day with the constant threat of violence unimaginable. For us catastrophes are less difficult to visualize. . . .”25

Now since catastrophes of tremendous severity must certainly be invoked to explain most of the geological deposits and formations, the next question is how many such catastrophes are involved. Application of Occam’s Razor would suggest that the smallest possible number of such catastrophes that can explain the data would provide the best hypothesis. If it should be at all conceivable that only one great catastrophe, with many more or less simultaneous concomitant effects, could suffice for the purpose, then this should very seriously be considered as the most reasonable of all possible explanations for the fossil record. And this, of course, brings us to the third great historical fact revealed by the Bible, namely the universal deluge of the days of Noah.


Notes

  1. James F. Crow: “Ionizing Radiation and Evolution,” Scientific American, Vol. 201, September, 1959, p. 142.
  2. “Growing Doubts: Is Evolutionary Theory Valid?”, Christianity Today, Vol. VI, September 14, 1962, p. 4.
  3. Historical Geology (New York: Wiley, 2nd Ed., 1961), p. 47.
  4. Ibid.
  5. Ibid., pp. 47-48.
  6. Geology (New York: McGraw-Hill, 1952), p. 417.
  7. “Mountain-Building Chronology and Nature of Geologic Time-Scale,” Bulletin, American Assoc. of Petroleum Geologists, Vol. 40, August, 1956, p. 1803.
  8. O. H. Schindewolf : “Comments on Some Stratigraphic Terms,” American Journal of Science, Vol. 255, June, 1957, p. 394.
  9. A number of geologists have acknowledged this verbally, off the record.
  10. Article “Geology,” in Encyclopedia Britannica, 1956, Vol. 10, p. 168 (University of Chicago Press).
  11. O. D. von Engeln and Kenneth E. Caster: Geology, pp. 417-418.
  12. E. M. Spieker: “Mountain-Building Chronology and Nature of Geologic Time-Scale,” p. 1805.
  13. “W. H. Twenhofel: Principles of Sedimentation (2nd Ed., New York, McGraw-Hill, 1950), p. 562.
  14. Historical Geology (New York, McGraw-Hill, 1961), p. 9.,
  15. “Growing Doubts: Is Evolutionary Theory Valid?”, p. 4.
  16. Space limitations necessarily restrict discussion of the problems involved in the evolutionary interpretation of the paleontological data. For a considerably fuller discussion, see The Genesis Food, by John C. Whitcomb, Jr., and Henry M. Morris (Nutley, N. J.: Presbyterian & Reformed Publishing Co., 1961), pp. 130-211.
  17. “The History of Life,” in The Evolution of Life (Sol Tax, Ed., University of Chicago Press, 1960), p. 175.
  18. Thomas H. Clark and Colin W. Steam: The Geological Evolution of North America, (New York: Ronald Press, 1960), pp. 5, 6.
  19. William D. Thornbury: Principles of Geomorphology (New York: Wiley, 1954), pp. 16, 17.
  20. “Man, the Lethal Factor,” American Scientist, Vol. 51, March, 1963, p. 74.
  21. “Marine Sediments,” Science, Vol. 130, July 17, 1959, p. 141.
  22. Whitcomb and Morris, op. cit., pp. 130-169.
  23. Op. cit., pp. 35-36, 39.
  24. “Crises in the History of Life,” Scientific American, Vol. 208, February, 1963, p. 77.
  25. “Scientists in Collision: Was Velikovsky Right?”, Harper’s Magazine, August, 1963, p. 55.

Author

Henry M. Morris attended the University of Minnesota (M.S.; Ph.D.), and Rice University (B.S.).

He was Head of the Civil Engineering Department at Southwestern Louisiana University; Assistant Professor of Civil Engineering at University of Minnesota; Instructor of Civil Engineering at Rice University; Junior Engineer to Assistant Hydraulic Engineer, International Boundary and Water Commission. He was also Professor of Hydraulic Engineering and Head of the Department of Civil Engineering, Virginia Polytechnic Institute.

Books authored by him are Applied Hydraulics in Engineering; The Bible and Modern Science; That You Might Believe; and The Genesis Flood, co-authored with John C. Whitcomb.

This article is taken from his book The Twilight of Evolution, (Baker: Grand Rapids) 1963, pp. 47-64.

https://www.the-highway.com/