Reuters is reporting on a recent finding by paleontologists in Brazil. They are calling it the “missing link” to the modern-day crocodile. The artist renderings are fantastic, all that detail from some old gray bones.

Let me admit here that I am going out on a limb with this one, so I am asking for comments and criticism on what I am about to say.

First of all, those subscribing to the theory of evolution seem to be far past this idea of a “missing link”. Today’s evolutionist believes that life evolved in very, very small steps. There is disagreement as to how bursty these steps were, some say they were gradual and consistent, others say they occurred in bursts with long lengths of time in between. So the idea that they would find one set of remains that would bridge the awkward gap between animals of noticeably different characteristics is, yes I’m going to do it, extinct. A missing link would basically be some kind of half-way point between a species that has gone through thousands of changes, so what kind of evidence would this provide? You’d need to find another missing link between your current species and your newly discovered species, and then another one after that, and so on. Otherwise, you are just finding remains of different looking animals at different periods in time, you need more than a flipper that is larger than previously found flippers.

But this got me thinking. If life started evolving billions of years ago, shouldn’t we have an overabundance of fossils to prove these theories with? I mean, we should be finding this things every time little Billy tries to dig his way to China. It is difficult for something to fossilize, the conditions need to be almost perfect so I can see how our fossil record would be full of so many gaps. Generally, something needs to die and then be preserved before it decomposes for it to be fossilized. So it is difficult, I realize. But, with the sheer numbers evolutionists are talking about, this shouldn’t matter at all. You need a lot of animals to have lived for evolution to have occurred.

Think of how many species there are today. The theory of evolution says that they all came about through micro-changes in physical characteristics. Your newborn boy may be a more evolved human than you are but you would never know it from looking at him. But over time, some of these characteristics prove to be more useful to a species and that characteristic becomes more common, you can almost think of it as survival of the fittest but not really in a my claw is bigger than yours so I’ll get more food and live kind of way. But for this to happen, you need lots and lots of genes to pick from. Even if remains are only preserved during snapshots of history, it seems like there should be a lot more than there are.

Again, I may be stretching things here so I’m looking for some feedback. Thanks!

About a month ago, I shared a story about a man I gave a copy of the Bible to. I didn’t expect to hear from him ever again given the fact that he lives on the other side of the country. But one month later, I am truly excited.

He is reading it.

He is sharing it with his family.

He is reading it to his kids and they are interested in what it says. The Word of God is in his house and it is going forth. Please join me in praying that Christ would open his heart.

Our reflection on the gospel comes from John Owen this week as he wrote in “The Glory of Christ”.

This, therefore, deserves the severest of our thoughts, the best of our meditations, and our utmost diligence in them. For if our future blessedness shall consist in being where he is, and beholding of his glory, what better preparation can there be for it than in a constant previous contemplation of that glory in the revelation that is made in the Gospel, unto this very end, that by a view of it we may be gradually transformed into the same glory?

I was struck as I read this in how simple Owen makes this. He basically says that if our futures will be with Christ in glory (Colossians 3:4) then we can do nothing better with our time than to think about what is made known in the gospel. But he doesn’t use the words “think about”, he uses the word “contemplate”. Contemplating something does not mean we give it a passing thought and then we’re done. Contemplate means we get so wrapped-up in our thoughts that everything else loses its importance and we will not stop thinking about an issue until it is resolved. The problem is, we cannot resolve an infinite God. There is something new to learn of His mercy and grace every day. So, while we wait to be with Christ in glory we are urged to continue to contemplate the good news of Jesus Christ. His death on the cross for our sins and resurrection for His glory.

“And there they continued to preach the gospel” - Acts 14:7

Each Tuesday a different reflection on the gospel and its continual effect on our lives

There are a few passages in the Scriptures where it says that God foreknew us in the context of choosing us or predestining us. Have a look at 1 Peter 1:1-2:

To those who reside as aliens…who are chosen according to the foreknowledge of God the Father, by the sanctifying work of the Spirit, to obey Jesus Christ and be sprinkled with His blood:

and also Romans 8:28-30:

And we know that God causes all things to work together for good to those who love God, to those who are called according to His purpose. For those whom He foreknew, He also predestined to become conformed to the image of His Son, so that He would be the firstborn among many brethren; and these whom He predestined, He also called; and these whom He called, He also justified; and these whom He justified, He also glorified.

The interpretation of these passages can be fairly different depending on who you talk to, with the main difference between them being “on what basis are we predestined?” Or, “how does God choose who will go heaven and who will go to hell?” I want to dive right into this topic assuming you already believe we are predestined, see Revelation 17:8 if you don’t and post a comment, maybe we can post on that later.

Some would say that the foreknowledge spoken of in these passages is a foreknowledge that God has of our actions and our faith such that when God sees in eternity past that we will respond in faith to his gracious calling, He predestines us and writes our names in the book of life. So the thought is: all men are given the same amount of grace but only those who accept God’s grace in faith will be saved. God, having known and seen this event taking place in eternity past (remember God sees all things at all times, past, present, future), will call those his elect and predestines them for eternal life with Him. You might call this a brief description of Arminianism.

Others would say that the foreknowledge spoken of in these passages is a foreknowledge that God has about His plan for each and every soul such that God chooses whomever He will in eternity past and predestines them to eternal life. The idea here is that not every man is given the same amount of grace but that only those whom God has chosen in eternity past will be regenerated by His Spirit to the point where man can respond in faith. You might call this a brief description of Calvinism.

The difficult part of the argument is how we accept these ideas in our human natures. One side seems fair. The other side seems unfair. One side gives man the freedom to choose. The other side gives God the freedom to choose. But these are human reasonings, what does the Word of God say about…God?

• Deuteronomy 7:7-8 - The LORD did not set His love on you nor choose you because you were more in number than any of the peoples, for you were the fewest of all peoples, but because the LORD loved you and kept the oath which He swore to your forefathers, the LORD brought you out by a mighty hand and redeemed you from the house of slavery, from the hand of Pharaoh king of Egypt.
• Ephesian 2:8-10 - For by grace you have been saved through faith; and that not of yourselves, it is the gift of God; not as a result of works, so that no one may boast. For we are His workmanship, created in Christ Jesus for good works, which God prepared beforehand so that we would walk in them.
• Romans 9:16 - So then it does not depend on the man who wills or the man who runs, but on God who has mercy.
• Romans 9:11 - for though the twins were not yet born and had not done anything good or bad, so that God’s purpose according to His choice would stand, not because of works but because of Him who calls
• All of Romans 9 (sorry I should have just put that whole chapter)
• John 6:37 - All that the father gives Me will come to Me, and the one who comes to Me I will certainly not cast out.
• John 6:44 - No one can come to Me unless the Father who sent Me draws him; and I will raise him up on the last day.
• John 6:65 - …For this reason I have said to you, that no one can come to Me unless it has been granted him from the Father.
• Acts 13:48 - …and as many as had been appointed to eternal life believed.
• 2 Timothy 1:9 - who has saved us and called us with a holy calling, not according to our works, but according to His own purpose and grace which was grated us in Christ Jesus from all eternity.
• Philippians 1:29 - For to you it has been granted for Christ’s sake, not only to believe in Him, but also to suffer for His sake.

Hopefully we can get a sense of God’s “freedom” of choice, if you will, from these passages. But, you might say, how can we get around the fact that:

• 1 Timothy 2:3-4 - …God our Savior, who desires all men to be saved and to come to the knowledge of the truth

is in the Scriptures? Doesn’t this mean that God wants all men to be saved and it’s only their unbelief that keeps them from salvation? If we read through 1 Timothy 2:1-2 we see that Paul is saying that God desires all types of men to be saved. Paul tells Timothy to pray for all men, then he specifically spells out kings and those in authority in verse 2. So Paul is dispelling a common belief that only certain people can be saved, only the poor and destitute, the common man and not the rich or those in authoritative positions. Paul is saying that God wants all people to be saved, the rich, the poor, the Jew, the Gentile, the slave, the freeman, etc.

So, again, when we look into these discussions it always seems to come down to how we see the character of God throughout the Scriptures. When we come across some verses that don’t seem to make a lot of sense, it is helpful to “let Scripture interpret Scripture”. Comments are very welcome, please let me know of some other verses that make the case for God’s foreknowledge being of our faith and actions and that being the basis of his election. My knowledge in that area is very weak so I would appreciate the help!

John Piper preached on Psalm 106 last weekend and related the passage to abortion. You can find the sermon text here. Then Abraham Piper added some great resources on different types of abortion procedures as well as some crisis pregnancy centers.

Piper’s closing prayer:

I pray that the horrors of abortion and the glory of God’s grace will move you to take up the challenge of prayer on the back of the worship folder and to extend yourself in other practical ways for life, both temporal and eternal. Amen.

Give justice to the weak and the fatherless;
maintain the rights of the afflicted and the destitute.
Rescue the weak and the needy;
deliver them from the hand of the wicked.
(Psalm 82:3-4)

Anyone with an interest in church planting in an urban environment should have a look at this upcoming conference: Dwell.

Looks like it will take place at Redeemer but is co-sponsored with Acts29 Network. Scheduled to speak are Tim Keller, Mark Driscoll, C.J. Mahaney, Ed Stetzer and Darrin Patrick.

I am reading through one of the many great Christmas presents I received this year (does my family know me or what?) and I was really struck with how much George Whitefield prayed through Scripture early on in his walk. I’m sure he continued to do it later on in his walk to some extent but Dallimore’s biography does not say.

The thing that really struck me was the sheer amount of time men like G.W. used to spend studying through the Scriptures. He would read/pray/study for hours at a time, multiple times per day in his youth. As he grew older and began preaching, he may have had less time to devote to this practice but again we don’t know. Whitefield would sometimes preach to three different crowds three times a day. There is no way to prepare that many sermons so the author concludes that G.W. wrote down some sermons but was able to “wing” a lot of his preaching because of the tremendous amount of time he spent studying the word. The author says Whitefield slept very little; between his time spent in quietness, his time spent preaching and in ministry, and his time devoted to various projects there was just no time for sleep.

It makes me stop and think. Do I devote my time to God and to others in this way? What takes up my time that may not be edifying to myself or others? Where exactly does my time go? What does God tell us to do with our time? I thought these passages might help out:

• Ephesians 5:15-16 - Therefore be careful how you walk, not as unwise men but as wise, making the most of your time, because the days are evil.
• Ephesians 6:18 - With all prayer and petition pray at all times in the Spirit, and with this in view, be on the alert with all perseverance and petition for all the saints
• 1 Thessalonians 5:17 - pray without ceasing;
• 1 Peter 4:1-2 - Therefore, since Christ has suffered in the flesh, arm yourselves also with the same purpose, because he who has suffered in the flesh has ceased from sin, so as to live for the rest of the time in the flesh no longer for the lusts of men, but for the will of God.
• 1 Peter 1:17 - If you address as Father the One who impartially judges according to each one’s work, conduct yourselves in fear during the time of your stay on earth;
• Isaiah 55:1-3 - “Ho! Every one who thirsts, come to the waters; And you who have no money come, buy and eat Come, buy wine and milk Without money and without cost. “Why do you spend money for what is not bread, And your wages for what does not satisfy? Listen carefully to Me, and eat what is good, And delight yourself in abundance. “Incline your ear and come to Me Listen, that you may live; And I will make an everlasting covenant with you, According to the faithful mercies shown to David.

I think that passage in Isaiah is particularly helpful. We should not spend our money/time/resources on what is not necessary and satisfying. It’s interesting that both necessary (bread) and satisfying is used there. Sometimes I get so caught up in trying to get rid of everything in my life that is not necessary that I forget to look to what is satisfying. I forget that God desires us to be a joyful people, fully satisfied in Him, not wanting of anything but Him.

The picture above is a rendering of George Whitefield at an early age. You’ll notice an interesting feature in his eyes if you look close enough. Apparently, George contracted the measles at an early age and was left with an eye disorder that made him appear to squint all the time. God used this squint effectually though, it was said that when he preached this squinting made you feel like he was starring right at you and speaking directly to your hearing.

I wanted to recommend a great book, Sam Storms’ Signs of the Spirit: An Interpretation of Jonathan Edwards’ “Religious Affections”.

The book is actually divided into two very distinct parts. The first part is Storms’ interpretation of Jonathan Edwards’ classic Religious Affections. The second is Edwards’ Narrative mixed in with Storms’ own thoughts on Edwards’ life. I might actually recommend reading over the biographical part of the book first to get a little more into the life of Jonathan Edwards and then read through the first part.

The reason I enjoyed this book so much is because as I read through it, I really had to stop and think about some of my own “religious experiences” I’ve had during my walk with the Lord. Edwards does an extensive job of covering what constitutes an experience given by the Holy Spirit verses those of no consequence and Storms puts it into a language that is easy to understand. Edwards’ work was written after he had experienced revival in his own town and then saw revival fall off. All types of controversies rose up after this from people saying that the revival was a fraud and that Edwards faked emotions in his congregation. Edwards sought to define what types of experiences could be thought of as being born of the Spirit and what types were not or were difficult to discern. There is nothing in the book on the current day Pentecostal/charismatic movement but one could certainly learn more about these movements as a result of the knowledge found in this book.

Maybe this is turning into Jonathan Edwards Month here and not just Edwards Week…

If you want to find out if today is Jesus’ birthday go here

Thanks Mark!

The best part is, there’s an RSS feed. If you want to see this in your favorite reader everyday

then by all means subscribe.

These past two weeks there has been a lot of news on abortion. I was most excited to read John Ensor’s commentary on the Desiring God blog. He says:

The end of abortion as a business is in sight when the prolife movement is not only joined by, but led by, the African-American and Latino Christian Community. I call it the Third Wave.

So you can see why I was excited at his posting. The article gives a brief summary of how he defines these three waves so have a read to understand more about this.

Here were some more articles in the news:

• Justin Taylor interviews Scott Klusendorf on his upcoming book Pro-Life Christians in the Brave New World. Here is a quick excerpt:
  

  JT: You’ve stated before that many abortion-choice arguments are flawed because they ignores the central philosophical question in the abortion debate: What is the unborn? Can you give us an example of what you mean?

  SK: Certainly. Many well-intentioned people cite rape as a justification for abortion. Aside from the fact that few actual pregnancies result from rape, this argument is a case of using worst-case scenarios and emotion to avoid clear thinking on the matter. That is to say, while the rape objection has rhetorical force, it misses the key moral question: How should we treat innocent human beings that remind us of a painful event? Is it okay to kill them so that we can feel better? True, pro-life advocates must do all they can to lovingly care for victims of sexual assault, but if the unborn are human, hardship does not justify homicide.

• Another interview from Justin Taylor. This time he speaks with Robert P. George on the Roe v. Wade decision.
• This video has been on YouTube for a long time. It very graphically shows the results of aborted children at various stages of pregnancy. I hesitate to even post it due to its very graphic nature, but this is reality and it happens to more than 0 children a year so it must stop.
• Denny Burk posts on Sanctity of Life Sunday.
• The Washington Post has an article on the recent pro-life rally in DC and how encouraged protesters were that abortion rates fell to the lowest they have ever been in the past thirty years.
• Here is a post from the Evangelical Outpost on comparing slavery with abortion.

Please join me in praying for those who are considering abortion as an option and those struggling from regret from their past decisions, please join me in praying for changed hearts.