Christian Principles for the Workplace

Posted on July 30, 2025 by russellmckinney

Slaves, obey your earthly masters in everything; and do it, not only when their eye is on you and to curry their favor, but with sincerity of heart and reverence for the Lord. Whatever you do, work at it with all your heart, as working for the Lord, not for human masters, since you know that you will receive an inheritance from the Lord as a reward. It is the Lord Christ you are serving. (Colossians 3:22-24, N.I.V.)

Some scholars estimate that half the population of the Roman empire were slaves. Since the majority of these slaves were people Rome’s armies had conquered, some of the slaves came from backgrounds of education while others did not. This meant that some were allowed to do skilled labor while others were relegated to manual labor. For example, Rome’s slaves could work as common laborers for mines, farms, and vineyards or they could work as physicians, tutors, or accountants.

Interestingly, when Christianity began to sweep over the empire, scores of slaves became Christians. Just as interestingly, scores of slave owners became Christians. This set up a challenging dichotomy for all involved. Should the Christian slave remain in his/her slot in life or say, “I am free in Christ” and rebel? And what about the Christian slave owner? Should he release all his slaves from their service and in so doing deal himself a heavy financial loss, not to mention a crippling blow to the upkeep of his home, property, and business interests? These were monumental questions with which the early Christians wrestled.

The apostle Paul wrote under the inspiration of God and provided purposefully consistent counsel for the questions. That counsel went as follows:

  • Jesus placed Himself in the role of a slave when He laid aside His glory in heaven, came to the earth in the likeness of man, and died a sacrificial death on the cross. That proved that being a slave didn’t prohibit a person from being used greatly in God’s service. (Philippians 2:5-8)
  • Every Christian — whether that Christian was a slave or a free person — was an equal part of the body of Christ. (1 Corinthians 12: 12-13; Galatians 3:26-28)
  • Every Christian should think of himself or herself as being a slave to Jesus Christ. (Romans 1:1; Philippians 1:1; 1 Corinthians 7:22-23; Ephesians 6:9, Colossians 4:1)
  • Christian slaves should continue to show their masters honor and not talk back to them, so that the God of Christianity and His teachings wouldn’t be misrepresented and blasphemed. (Romans 13:7; 1 Timothy 6:1; Titus 2:9-10)
  • Christian slave owners should actually serve their Christian slaves rather than looking down on them. (1 Timothy 6:2)
  • Christian slaves should remain in their place, continue to obey their masters in all things, and do quality work in complete honesty, as if they were rendering the service to Jesus Himself rather than to the masters. (1 Corinthians 7:20-22; Ephesians 6:5-7; Colossians 3:22-23; Titus 2:9-10; 1 Peter 2:18-25)
  • Even if the Christian slave’s owner did not appreciate the slave’s quality work and reward the slave for it, Jesus would grant the slave eternal rewards. (Ephesians 6:8; Colossians 3:24)
  • Christian slave owners should treat their slaves well, giving them what was fair and not threatening them with punishment, knowing that their own Master (Jesus) was watching from heaven. (Ephesians 6:9; Colossians 4:1)

It can been said that by addressing the issue in this way, Paul accomplished two things. First, he kept the Christian slaves from throwing the entire empire into chaotic upheaval. Such an upheaval would have gotten Christianity labeled as the religion of rebellion, and that reputation would have trumped the fact that Christianity is all about submission (submission to Jesus Christ). Second, with Paul’s God-inspired counsel, he provided the seeds for slavery’s eventual downfall. You see, when a master has to start treating his slave with kindness and seeing himself as a servant to that slave, that takes away the sadistic allure of him viewing that slave as his property.

But how can we, as Christians today, apply all these ancient passages to our lives? We can do it by pulling out some divine principles concerning the workplace. Therefore, I’ll offer a list of those principles as a close to this post. Consider each one carefully:

  • Workplace Principle #1: We should understand that Jesus placed Himself in the role of a worker when He laid aside His glory in heaven, came to earth in the likeness of man, and did the work of God the Father. (see John 4:34; 5:36; 9:4; 17:4; 19:30)
  • Workplace Principle #2: We should understand that each Christian has equal standing in Christ and we are all part of one body, and that applies to any Christian coworkers we might have.
  • Workplace Principle #3: We should think of ourselves as being slaves to Jesus Christ and bring all areas of our lives, including the workplace, under His lordship.
  • Workplace Principle #4: In the workplace, we should render appropriate honor to our bosses and in so doing cultivate a good testimony as a follower of Christ.
  • Workplace Principle #5: In the workplace, we should always do the best job we can because we should see ourselves as doing our work for Jesus even more than for our employers.
  • Workplace Principle #6: We should always keep in mind that even if our quality work goes unappreciated at our place of employment, Jesus will reward us handsomely for it in eternity.
  • Workplace Principle #7: If God places us in a position of authority in the workplace, we should rule in humility and fairness, treat our workers well, and understand that a God-given role of authority is merely the God-given opportunity to be a servant to those over whom we rule.
Posted in Business, Christ's Birth, Discipleship, God's Will, God's Work, Leadership, Service, Slavery, Submission, Work | Tagged , , , , , , | 2 Comments

Building With the Right Materials

Posted on July 28, 2025 by russellmckinney

For no other foundation can anyone lay than that which is laid, which is Jesus Christ. Now if anyone builds on this foundation with gold, silver, precious stones, wood, hay, straw, each one’s work will become clear; for the Day will declare it, because it will be revealed by fire; and the fire will test each one’s work, of what sort it is. If anyone’s work which he has built on it endures, he will receive a reward. If anyone’s work is burned, he will suffer loss; but he himself will be saved, yet so as through fire. (1 Corinthians 3:11-15, N.K.J.V.)

The fact that Paul begins this passage by emphasizing that the foundation is Jesus Christ proves that these words are written to Christians. Only Christians have lives that are built upon that eternal foundation. But that common foundation is where the similarities end in the lives of Christians. Why? It’s because some Christians build wisely upon the foundation while others build foolishly upon it.

Building wisely upon the foundation of Christ equates to the Christian: serving Christ well, incorporating His teachings into daily affairs, living a life of personal holiness, being Christian salt and light in every situation, seeking God’s will regarding decisions, and being sensitive and obedient to the voice of the indwelling Holy Spirit. Such things make for what Paul describes as “gold,” “silver,” and “precious stones,” and they will stand the test of God’s judgment by fire in heaven. In so doing they will merit heavenly, eternal rewards for the Christian.

By way of contrast, building foolishly upon the foundation of Christ equates to the Christian: serving Christ poorly, ignoring His teachings in daily affairs, living a life of carnality and worldliness, failing to be Christian salt and light in every situation, refusing to seek God’s will regarding decisions, and being insensitive and disobedient to the voice of the indwelling Holy Spirit. Such things make for what Paul describes as “wood,” “hay,” and “straw,” and they will get burned into obliteration by God’s judgment of fire in heaven. In so doing they will fail to merit heavenly, eternal rewards for the Christian.

In light of this, Christian, you need to ask yourself: “What does the life I am building upon the foundation of Christ look like right now? Am I building with gold, silver, and precious stones? Or am I building with wood, hay, and straw?” Putting it another way, all that stuff that you are getting accomplished, how much of it will translate to heavenly rewards at the judgment seat of Christ (Romans 14:10-12; 2 Corinthians 5:10)? Be careful that you don’t find yourself standing before Christ with a bunch of wood, hay, and straw. Jesus won’t kick you out of heaven for such inferior building materials, but He certainly won’t reward you for them either.

Posted in Backsliding, Coming Judgment, Death, Discipleship, Disobedience, Doing Good, Eternity, Faithfulness, God's Judgment, God's Will, God's Work, Heaven, Obedience, Priorities, Repentance, Reward, Salvation, Sanctification, Service, Sin, The Judgment Seat of Christ | Tagged , , , , | Leave a comment

In-Laws & Outlaws

Posted on July 25, 2025 by russellmckinney

And he answered and said unto them, Have ye not read that he who made them at the beginning, made them male and female; And he said, For this cause shall a man leave father and mother, and shall cleave to his wife, and they two shall be one flesh? Wherefore, they are no more two, but one flesh, What, therefore, God hath joined together, let not man put asunder. (Matthew 19:4-6, K.J.V.)

Adrian Rogers, the longtime pastor of Bellevue Baptist Church in Memphis, Tennessee, used to tell the story of the elderly couple who were making the trip from Memphis to Nashville. The husband’s hearing was fine, but he could barely see. The wife’s vision was fine, but she could barely hear. Consequently, she drove the car, and he communicated everything to her by leaning into her ear and speaking loudly.

Sometime during the trip, the couple pulled into a full-service gas station to get gas. (This was back in the days when such stations existed.) The attendant came out, looked at the wife in the driver’s seat, and asked, “Fill ‘er up?” Since the husband knew that she didn’t hear the question, he answered, “Yes.” The wife immediately turned to him and asked, “What did he say?” The husband leaned over to her right ear and answered loudly, “He asked, ‘Fill ‘er up?’ and I said, ‘Yes.’”

As the gas was filling into the tank, the attendant took advantage of the cut-off mechanism on the pump handle and walked around to the passenger door to strike up a friendly conversation with the husband. He soon found out, though, that even though the wife’s hearing was almost gone, she still liked to be informed. So, the conversation went as follows:

Attendant: “You have a nice car. What kind is it?”

Husband: “It’s a Chrysler.”

Wife (looking at the husband): “What did he say?”

Husband (leaning toward his wife’s ear): “He said we have a nice car and asked what kind it is. I told him it’s a Chrysler.”

Attendant: “Where are you folks headed?”

Husband: “We’re going to Nashville.”

Wife: “What did he say?”

Husband: “He asked where we’re headed. I told him we’re going to Nashville.”

Attendant: “Where are you from?”

Husband: “We’re from Memphis.”

Wife: “What did he say?”

Husband: “He wanted to know where we’re from. I told him we’re from Memphis.”

Attendant: “Memphis? Oh, I used to know a woman there. She was the meanest, hardest, bitterest, coldest woman I’ve ever known in my life.”

Wife: “What did he say?”

Husband: “He thinks he knows your sister.”

Sadly, there are many spouses who would agree with the old line, “I don’t have in-laws; I have outlaws.” And what is the cause of this unique problem in families? While there can be differing answers, one that is found on all the lists is: “My spouse has never really left home.” In other words, some married individuals still rate their parents or siblings ahead of their spouses when it comes to loyalty, devotion, time, energy, and (let’s just say it) LOVE.

In our text passage, Jesus references Genesis 2:24 and teaches that there are two things involved in marriage. First, there is the leaving, as the spouse leaves father and mother. Second, there is the cleaving, as the spouse cleaves to the other spouse. And make no mistake, there cannot be a thorough cleaving until there is a thorough leaving.

Unfortunately, however, this is where the breakdown so often occurs. Sometimes the parents, for whatever reason, simply won’t fully release their child to the new spouse. Other times the child, for whatever reason, won’t cut the umbilical cord from home. Sometimes the siblings won’t let go, and so they become a nuisance in the life of the newlyweds. Other times the newlywed husband or wife is the one who won’t properly let go of a brother or a sister. All of these situations create problems.

The bottom line is that God’s word places the marriage relationship above all other earthly relationships. While parents and siblings certainly play their roles in the grand scheme of life, everything changes once a person gets married. Even when a marriage produces a child, the relationship between that couple and that child never outranks the relationship the couple has between themselves. As Jesus said, the husband and wife become “one flesh” (Matthew 19:5). You see, that isn’t said regarding any other relationship on earth, and it means that once a person gets married, that relationship takes priority over all other relationships. The only exception, of course, is the relationship between the married person and Jesus Himself.

Posted in Children, Family, Fatherhood, Husbands, Love, Marriage, Motherhood, Parenting, Priorities, Wives | Tagged , , , , , , | Leave a comment

Salvation & Works

Posted on July 23, 2025 by russellmckinney

For by grace you have been saved through faith, and that not of yourselves; it is the gift of God, not of works, lest anyone should boast. For we are His workmanship, created in Christ Jesus for good works, which God prepared beforehand that we should walk in them. (Ephesians 2:8-10, N.K.J.V.)

In the summer of 1994, the Chicago Tribune newspaper ran the story of Marcio da Silva. He was a twenty-one-year-old Brazilian artist who fell into total despair when his nineteen-year-old girlfriend ended their four-year relationship. As the story went, da Silva performed an act of great devotion in an effort to win back his girl. He tied pieces of car tires to his kneecaps and walked on his knees for nine miles to reach her home. Motorists and passersby cheered him on as he made his way to the girl’s home in Santos, Brazil. It took him fourteen hours, but he did finally reach his destination. And how did the girl respond to da Silva’s incredible effort? She wasn’t even home. She had intentionally left the house to avoid having to see him.

Now, that story is very odd and very sad, but it makes the point that sometimes all the devotion, passion, and effort in the world don’t make any difference at all. And would you believe this is true of salvation? A person can spend his or her entire life doing so-called “good” works to get into heaven, but that person will end up even more disappointed than Marcio da Silva. I won’t say that God won’t be at home after all those works are done, but I will say that He will be thoroughly unimpressed. How can I put it so that you will get it and never forget it? NO AMOUNT OF WORKS OR QUALITY OF WORKS CAN EVER PRODUCE SALVATION!!!

The Bible teaches that salvation only comes by God extending His saving grace, and He does that the moment an individual places faith (or belief, the words “faith” and “belief” are used interchangeably in the New Testament) in Jesus Christ. You see, salvation is a gift. That’s what our text passage (as well as Romans 6:23) plainly says, and you can’t do anything to earn a gift. The moment you earn something it becomes payment or reward. All you can do with a gift is accept it or reject it. Those are the only two options. And you accept God’s gift of salvation by placing your faith (belief) in Jesus, the divine Savior who died on a cross as the full payment for the sin debt you owe your holy Maker.

Someone says, “But surely a person’s works must have some bearing on the matter.” No, the importance of works doesn’t come into play until after the gift of salvation has been accepted. At that point, the person’s good works become the evidence of the salvation. In other words, good works aren’t the root of salvation; they are the fruit of it. They aren’t the cause of salvation; they are the consequence of it. They don’t flow into salvation; they flow out of it. This is what the book of James tells us. James wrote an entire letter (epistle, book) to say, “If you want to know whether or not I’m saved, all you have to do is examine my works. They prove that something supernatural has happened in my life. They evidence that I am a changed person.”

And so, let me ask each and every professing Christian right now: Do your works provide clear evidence of your salvation? If they don’t, then something is very much askew with you. You aren’t acting right. You aren’t functioning correctly. Your behavior is strange. Could it be that you’ve never experienced genuine salvation? That’s an explanation you should consider. Then again, maybe you are truly saved but you are severely backslidden. If that’s the case, you need to repent of your sins and change your ways.

Sadly, this world is filled with spiritual Marcio da Silva’s who think they can somehow earn their way into heaven by way of their works. There are even some who try to mix and mingle faith (belief) in Jesus plus a list of good works to produce salvation. But such an equation doesn’t compute any more than a purely works-based plan of salvation does. As Paul points out in our text passage, if works could play any part whatsoever in producing salvation, that would give the saved person the opportunity to boast about having met the necessary requirements to “get in.” And I promise you that whoever else ends up in heaven, one person who won’t be there is the braggart who spends eternity boasting about what all he did to earn the right to be there.

Posted in Assurance of Salvation, Backsliding, Belief, Eternal Security, Faith, Good Works, Grace, Heaven, Salvation | Tagged , , , , , , , , | 1 Comment

Contentment

Posted on July 21, 2025 by russellmckinney

Now godliness with contentment is great gain. (1 Timothy 6:6, N.K.J.V.)

How content are you right now? You might as well tell the truth. After all, God knows the correct answer, anyway. Are you content with your spouse? Are you content with your children? Are you content with your job? Are you content with your place of residence? Are you content with your finances? Are you content with your church? Are you content with your appearance? Are you content with your automobile? Are you content with your clothes? Are you content with your cell phone? Are you content with your computer? Are you content with your television? Are you content with your ….?

In my previous post, I told you about Haman. I won’t rehash all that information, but let’s just say that Haman was a man who had it all: a prestigious job, wealth, power, influence, honor among his peers, a fine home, a supportive wife, friends, etc. If anybody on planet earth should have been content, it was Haman.

And yet Haman allowed one little wrinkle, one problem, one area that wasn’t going to his liking, to completely ruin his contentment. That one thing was the fact that a man named Mordecai wouldn’t render him appropriate honor. How bad was Haman’s lack of contentment? One day he went home to his wife, Zeresh, and told her, “Yet all this avails me nothing, so long as I see Mordecai the Jew sitting at the king’s gate” (Esther 5:13, N.K.J.V.)

Isn’t that amazing? How could Haman have been so shallow, so narrow-minded, so childish? We might ask the same thing of ourselves. Sit down sometime and list all the good things about your life, the things that are going well for you. Then list all the bad things, the things that aren’t going to suit you. Also, as you make these lists, be sure to differentiate between the grander things of life (family, health, home, friends, etc.) and the trivial things (a bad haircut, your breakfast was terrible, your goldfish just died, the car needs tires, etc.) You might just be surprised at how much Haman you have in you.

Christian, being content doesn’t mean that you should stop striving for upward mobility at work. It doesn’t mean that you should never put a new roof on your house. It doesn’t mean that you shouldn’t lose those twenty pounds your doctor keeps telling you to lose. But what it does mean is that no matter what is going on with you, your life is marked by an overriding sense of contentment. No matter what comes you way, you don’t stress out and worry yourself down to a frazzle. Why not? It’s because Jesus (God the Son) died on a cross to prove His great love for you, and you know that any God who loves you enough to die for you has His sovereign hand over every corner of your life.

I don’t think anyone ever put it any better than the apostle Paul. And so, I’ll leave you with his words from Philippians 4:11-13. As you read the words, keep three things in mind. First, know that the consensus view is that Paul wrote these words while he was being held in chains during his years of house arrest in Rome. Second, note the context of his famous line, “I can do all things through Christ who strengthens me.” Contextually, he was saying, “I can be content in any situation — and that includes situations that are extremely difficult — through Christ who enables me to do so.” Finally, third, ask yourself the question: “Have I learned yet what Paul had learned?” Truth be told, most of us still need some classes in the subject.

   “…for I have learned in whatever state I am, to be content. I know how to be abased, and I know how to abound. Everywhere and in all things I have learned both to be full and to be hungry, both to abound and to suffer need. I can do all things through Christ who strengthens me.” (N.K.J.V.)

Posted in Adversity, Attitude, Children, Christ's Death, Church, Complaining, Contentment, Desires, Disappointment, Dress and Appearance, Family, God's Love, God's Provision, Greed, Impatience, Jealousy, Marriage, Money, Parenting, Persecution, Perseverance, Problems, Prosperity, Suffering, Thankfulness, Trusting In God, Work, Worry | Tagged , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

Fighting on God’s Side

Posted on July 18, 2025 by russellmckinney

Haman had it all. Persia’s powerful king, Ahasuerus, had advanced him above all of Persia’s other princes (Esther 3:1). Ahasuerus had even decreed that whenever Haman was inside the gate of the royal grounds, all of Ahasuerus’ servants were to pay homage to Haman (Esther 3:2). Haman also had friends, not to mention his devoted wife, Zeresh (Esther 5:10).

And yet there was one little item that Haman couldn’t mark as checked on his life’s list of accomplishments. You see, there was this guy, this one little man, who wouldn’t pay Haman the appropriate homage. Every time Haman walked past him, this servant of the king would disobey the king’s decree and act as if Haman was a nobody (Esther 3:2-5; 5:9). This man’s name was Mordecai.

The feud between Haman and Mordecai was actually bigger than both men and reached back into history many centuries. The problem was that Haman was an Agagite, a descendant of the kings of the Amalekites (Esther 3:1). Mordecai, on the other hand, was a Jew from the tribe of Benjamin who had been born and raised in the Persian empire, his great-grandfather, Kish, having been part of the deportation of the Jews from Jerusalem to Babylon under the reign of Babylon’s Nebuchadnezzar (Esther 2:5-6). As for the history between the Amalekites and the Jews, well, that was very long and very bloody.

The Amalekites traced their history back to Esau (Genesis 36:12,16). That alone made them a natural rival to Israel, whose history traced back to Esau’s twin brother, Jacob. But the Amalekites also attacked Israel unprovoked as Moses and the Israelites made their way up from Egypt toward their promised land of Canaan (Exodus 17:8-16).

The Israelites, led by Moses’ freshly appointed general, Joshua, defeated the Amalekites and resumed their march, but the Amalekite ambush so angered God that He swore to be at war with the Amalekites from generation to generation and to utterly blot them out of existence (Exodus 17:14-16). As a plan to do this, He eventually told Moses, “When Israel has conquered and settled Canaan, and I have given her rest from her enemies, they will remember the Amalekite’s sneak attack and blot them out forever” (Deuteronomy 25:17-19). It surely didn’t help Amalekite’s case that they also fought against Israel alongside the Canaanites (Numbers 14:39-45), the Moabites (Judges 3:12-13), and the Midianites (Judges 6:1-3) at various times in history.

Not surprisingly, God instructed Israel’s first king, Saul, to go to war against the Amalekites and kill them all (1 Samuel 15:1-3). God even commanded Saul to kill their livestock! But Saul disobeyed by sparing not only the best of the livestock but also by taking the Amalekite king, Agag, as a prisoner of war. When Samuel the prophet showed up at the battlefield, he promptly did two things. First, he announced to Saul that God was taking the kingship from him because of his disobedience (1 Samuel 15:10-29). Second, he hacked Agag into pieces (1 Samuel 15:32-33).

Next up in the ongoing conflict between Israel and Amalek was David, God’s chosen successor as Israel’s king. Once, while David and his followers were encamped at Ziklag and David was still waiting for Saul’s death so that he could officially become king, the Amalekites attacked Ziklag when David and his men were away. The Amalekites burned Ziklag with fire, looted the site, and carried off all the wives and children of David’s men. Among the captives were David’s two wives: Ahinoam and Abigail (1 Samuel 30:1-6).

After consulting the Lord, David led 600 of his men and ultimately found the Amalekite raiding party, killed them all, reclaimed the wives and children, and reclaimed all the loot as well (1 Samuel 30:7-31). For good measure, many years later one of David’s descendants, Judah’s King Hezekiah, also enjoyed a resounding victory over some Amalekites who were living in the area of Mount Seir (1 Chronicles 4:41-43).

Understanding all this history, you can understand why Haman and Mordecai didn’t get along. You can also understand just how tenacious Satan is in his efforts to harm God’s people. Down through the ages, the Amalekites were a chosen people of Satan’s, chosen to war against Israel, and they played their role very well. But what they didn’t realize was that they were always fighting against not just the people of Israel but also against God’s longstanding promise to Abraham (and by implication his descendants): “I will bless those who bless you, and I will curse him who curses you” (Genesis 12:3).

Today, each of us would be well advised to make sure that we are on the Lord’s side in any battles we are fighting. Family conflicts. Arguments at work. Infighting at church. Problems with a neighbor. Political differences. Disagreements with a coach about playing time. In all of these (as well as any others we might name) we want to be with Israel rather than Amalek, with Mordecai rather than Haman, and with God rather than Satan. If you know the story of Esther, you know that Haman, in a God-ordained ironic twist of fate, ended up hung on gallows that he had built for Mordecai’s execution (Esther chapters 3 through 7). The image of his corpse hanging there should serve as a warning to us all. Since conflicts in life are inevitable, we had better be sure that we are fighting with God and not against Him.

Posted in Choices, Church, Complaining, Criticism, Decisions, Discernment, Family, God's Will, Leadership, Marriage, Parenting, Politics, Problems, Revenge, Sports, Work | Tagged , , , , , , | 3 Comments

What About the Dinosaurs?

Posted on July 16, 2025 by russellmckinney

“How Old Is the Earth” series (post #8)

If you’ve been with me for this series, you know by now that I believe the universe, the earth, and the human race are all less than 10,000 years old. And I’ve given you a whole series worth of reasons (Biblical, scientific, and practical) why I believe that. There is, however, one obvious question that any Young-Earth creationist eventually has to answer, and that question is, “What about the dinosaurs?” So, let’s talk about that in this last post.

I’m going to give you five statements that, in my opinion, answer the dinosaur question by way of the Bible. Under each statement I’ll elaborate on the statement. Ready? Here we go.

Statement #1: God created the dinosaurs on days 5 and 6 of the creation week.

Dinosaurs were the products of God, not evolution. He created the marine dinosaurs on day 5 of the creation week as part of the “great sea creatures and every living thing that moves, with which the waters abounded” (Genesis 1:21, N.K.J.V.). Also on day 5, He created the flying dinosaurs as part of “every winged bird according to its kind” (Genesis 1:21, N.K.J.V.). The next day, day 6, He created the land dinosaurs as part of “the beast of the earth according to its kind, cattle according to its kind, and everything that creeps on the earth according to its kind” (Genesis 1:25, N.K.J.V.).

If you try to explain the creation of the dinosaurs in any other way, you get out of the banks of scripture. The Bible does not teach that they lived in some prehistoric time spoken of in Genesis 1:1. Neither does it teach that they lived in some theorized gap of millions or billions of years that exists between Genesis 1:1 and Genesis 1:2. (I covered all that in the post “The Gap Theory.”) No, the only way to make the dinosaurs fit rightly into the Bible is to place the very first ones right there in Adam and Eve’s freshly created world.

Statement #2: Dinosaurs and people coexisted in the centuries before Noah’s flood.

We know that mankind certainly didn’t go extinct before the flood. Much to the contrary, Genesis 6:1 teaches that humans flourished in those pre-flood centuries as men and women multiplied on the face of the earth. The reasons for this increase are easy to understand. First, Genesis 5:1-32 records that the people of that historical era lived to incredible ages — some of them close to 1,000 years. Second, living that long gives you time to produce lots of children.

But what about the earth’s creatures during those centuries? Did they thrive, too? Absolutely. The earth’s climate and atmosphere were very different from what we know now. For one thing, the indication is that it didn’t rain back then (Genesis 2:5). Instead, the ground was watered by means of a mist (Genesis 2:6). For another thing, there was a firmament (an incredible canopy of water) that surrounded the earth’s atmosphere (Genesis 1:1-10). It is often theorized that this firmament kept the earth’s temperature regulated at a constant degree, as in a greenhouse, without the extremes of either heat or cold. It is also theorized that the firmament acted as a shield to filter out the sun’s rays and thus allow earth’s people and creatures to live to extended ages.

Statement #3: Dinosaurs were on board Noah’s Ark.

In Williamstown, Kentucky, Ken Ham has erected a tourist attraction the size of a football field. The attraction is called the Ark Encounter, and it is nothing less than a life-sized Noah’s Ark that Ham had built according to his understanding of the Bible’s specifications for the Ark: 510 feet (155 m) long, 85 feet wide (26 m), and 51 feet (16 m) high. The site attracts thousands of Christians each year, but even among Bible believers Ham has been mocked by some for his inclusion of dinosaurs in the exhibit. Ham, as you might guess, is a Young-Earth Creationist.

But could two — a male and a female — of every kind of dinosaur have been aboard the Ark, along with two of every kind of other creature from Noah’s world, as the Bible says? Young Earth creationists say yes, and here are some of the factors they cite to defend their case:

  1. There were no water creatures aboard the Ark. The Ark was only for land creatures and flying creatures (Genesis 6:19-20).
  2. Scientists tell us that the majority of the dinosaurs were between the size of a German Shepherd and an elephant. Actually, even the largest dinosaurs — the ones bigger than an elephant — began life small. So, the pair of each type of land dinosaur or flying dinosaur could have been very young and small. As a matter of fact, it would have been preferable to have young ones.
  3. It makes sense that Noah wouldn’t have taken two of each specific breed of (let’s say) horse, lion, or tiger aboard the Ark. Even more than that, it seems probable that God went to even further extremes to limit the animal selection. Creationists note that the word “kind” is not the same as the word “species,” and this allows for quite a bit of limiting. Ken Ham, for example, says, “A good rule of thumb is that if two things can breed together, then they are of the same created kind.” One thing we can with scriptural certainty is that Noah wasn’t in charge of either choosing or gathering all the animals. God had the appropriate animals come to him (Genesis 6:19-20).
  4. Noah’s Ark was colossal. A legal football game could have been played inside the thing. Experts who have studied the subject say the Ark could have had 1,400,000 feet of cubic storage. That’s the equivalent of over 500 livestock cars for a modern train. Since we know that 240 sheep can be transported inside just one of those livestock cars, the Ark could have held 125,000 animals.

Statement #4: Dinosaurs and humans coexisted after Noah’s flood.

If God had Noah take two of each kind of land creature and flying creature aboard the Ark, that would have included dinosaurs. And if God had two of each kind of land dinosaur and flying dinosaur safely taken aboard the Ark, he certainly meant for dinosaurs to exist upon the earth after the flood waters receded. You see, once you accept the literalness of Genesis chapters 1 through 9, the only conclusion left to be drawn is that dinosaurs and humans coexisted after the flood.

A skeptic says, “But the dinosaurs would have hunted the humans to extinction.” Such a statement stands in direct contradiction to not only the Bible, but also mankind’s history. Let me explain.

In Psalm 8:5-8, David sings God’s praises for the fact that God has given man dominion over all the beasts of the field, the birds of the air, and the fish of the sea. This dominion goes back to Adam and Eve in the garden of Eden, and it stems from the fact that man, and man alone, was made in the image of God (Genesis 1:26-28).

Furthermore, God added in a new wrinkle to this dominion when He told Noah following the flood, “And the fear of you and the dread of you shall be on every beast of the earth, on every bird of the air, on all that move on the earth, and on all the fish of the sea. They are given into your hand. Every moving thing that lives shall be food for you. I have given you all things, even as the green herbs” (Genesis 9:2-3, N.K.J.V.).

The teaching of this new wrinkle is that in God’s original plan mankind wasn’t supposed to eat the earth’s creatures. For that matter, Genesis 1:29-30 tells us that the earth’s creatures weren’t even supposed to eat each other. It can be debated as to when exactly the earth’s creatures started eating one other, but it possibly happened immediately following Adam and Eve’s sin. After all, the apostle Paul does say in Romans 8:18-22 that creation itself was subjected to futility and delivered into bondage because of mankind’s sin. But what can’t be debated is that when Noah and his family disembarked from the Ark, God sanctioned all kinds of new dietary options for them.

As for what mankind’s history teaches us on this subject, it proves that mankind has always been able to figure out how to outdo nature’s creatures, no matter how large or ferocious those creatures might be. A great white shark might kill one of us, but sharks haven’t stopped the progress of human civilization. Blue whales are magnificent creatures twice the size of the largest land dinosaurs, but whalers almost hunted them to extinction. The American settlers, in their push west, did the same to the buffaloes. The people of India actually domesticated the mighty elephants in their land and learned how to use them for farming and transportation. The point in all these examples is that if Noah’s family and the dinosaurs got off the ark together, it was the dinosaurs that were in long term danger of ending up extinct, not the humans.

Statement #5: The dinosaurs gradually died off in the centuries that followed Noah’s flood.

What happened to all the dinosaurs? Most of them were drowned or killed some other way by Noah’s flood as the flood created the wildly unique conditions that allow for fossilization. Even the marine dinosaurs weren’t totally safe in that flood as the earth’s “fountains of the great deep” were broken up (Genesis 7:11).

But what about the dinosaurs that were aboard the Ark? Surely, when those dinosaurs left the Ark they produced baby dinosaurs, right? Yes, they did, but the post-flood climate was undoubtedly different than the pre-flood one had been. The flood wasn’t just caused by the “fountains of the great deep” being broken up, it was also caused by the “windows of heaven” being opened (Genesis 7:11). That is a reference to the firmament (that canopy of water) that had surrounded the earth’s atmosphere being dissolved and poured out in the flood.

Because of this elimination of the earth’s protective, watery firmament, the post-flood climate featured rain, storms, and cold weather as part of nature’s cycle. Also, the lush vegetation that had been so abundant before was no doubt not nearly as prevalent as it had been. None of these things worked in the dinosaurs’ favor, and so this was not a world in which they could thrive as they once had. Therefore, over the course of the centuries, they slowly and systematically died off and went extinct.

However, it should be noted that some of the last ones must have still been around in Job’s day. The book of Job is one of the oldest books in the Bible. Conservative scholars figure that Job lived in the Genesis patriarchal time period of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob. Interestingly, the book of Job mentions creatures that can only be described as dinosaurs. That would be the “behemoth” of Job 40:15-24 and the “leviathan” of Job 41:1-34. I won’t go into a thorough analysis here of the Bible’s elaborate descriptions of both those bizarre creatures, but suffice is to say that these days there is nothing around that adequately measures up to either creature. That’s why I and many others believe the “behemoth” was a land dinosaur and the “leviathan” was a marine dinosaur.

Still, as astonishing as the Bible’s descriptions of those creatures are, it is perhaps even more astonishing that God actually used both creatures as real-life examples from nature, examples that He encouraged Job to learn from by studying. As we look at the descriptions in their context, we find that the behemoth and the leviathan were simply the last two creatures in a lengthy list of animals that God used as object lessons to instruct Job. The other creatures were: the lion (38:39-40), the raven (38:41), the wild mountain goat (39:1-4), the wild donkey (39:5-8), the wild ox (39:9-12), the ostrich (39:13-18), the war horse (39:19-25), the hawk (39:26), and the eagle (39:27-30). Obviously, these other creatures were all very much real and very much alive for Job to study, and so it seems obvious that the behemoth and the leviathan were as well.

It is for this reason that commentators and Bible teachers who don’t hold to a Young-Earth view of creation insist on cramming wrong identifications down onto the behemoth and the leviathan. They say, “The behemoth is a hippopotamus or an elephant.” Oh, really? I would ask them, “Have you ever seen the tail of a hippopotamus or an elephant?” That’s a relevant question because God says the behemoth moves his tail like a cedar (40:17). Additionally, God calls the behemoth “the first of the ways of God” (40:19). Now you tell me, does a hippopotamus give you the impression that he is “the first of the ways of God”? Please, give me a break.

Likewise, those same commentators and Bible teachers say, “The leviathan is a crocodile.” Are we seriously supposed to buy into such a ludicrous idea? God says that light flashes forth when the leviathan sneezes, burning lights go out of his mouth, sparks of fire shoot out from him, smoke goes out of his nostrils, his breath kindles coals, and a flame goes out of his mouth (Job 41:18-21). That sounds more like a fire-breathing dragon than a crocodile! And if that isn’t enough, God also describes the creature as a sea creature that leaves a wake behind him and makes the white water of the deep bubble up like a pot of boiling water when he descends down into the depths (Job 41:32). A crocodile? Again, give me a break.

No, the only reasonable answer to the question of the identifications of Job’s behemoth and leviathan is that they were dinosaurs, creatures that were still around in Job’s day but went extinct over time. And it is on this note that I will close out this post and this series by leaving you with a quote from Dr. Henry Morris, the man whom many call the father of the Young-Earth creationist movement. In his commentary on Job, entitled The Remarkable Record of Job, Dr. Morris writes the following concerning the behemoth (and by implication the leviathan also):

The reason commentators are unable to identify this mighty animal is that it is now extinct. Modern Bible scholars, for the most part, have become so conditioned to think in terms of the long ages of evolutionary geology that it never occurs to them that mankind once lived in the same world with the great animals that are now found only as fossils.

The Bible teaches clearly that all animals, living or extinct, were made on the fifth and sixth days of creation week, along with man, who was given dominion over them (Gen. 1:20; Exod. 20:8-11). Although most of the earth’s great fossil graveyards were formed by the flood, representatives of each animal “kind” in the dry land were preserved on Noah’s ark to repopulate the world after the flood.

Thus, Job and his contemporaries could easily have seen many kinds of animals that later became extinct due to the earth’s more rigorous climate and vastly depleted resources after the flood.

Posted in Creation, Dinosaurs, Series: "How Old is the Earth?" | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , | 7 Comments

3 Practical Evidences of a Young Earth

Posted on July 14, 2025 by russellmckinney

“How Old Is the Earth” series (post #7)

I’m going to use this post to name three practical evidences that the earth is less than 10,000 years old. However, I’ll admit right up front that these three evidences are not what we might call “scientific.” That’s not to say that there isn’t scientific evidence. (There is, to be sure.) It’s just that I’m not going to get into all that right now.

Can I let you in on a little secret? The unceasing debates between Young-Earth scientists and Old-Earth scientists start to give me a headache after a while. Even though both sides work from exactly the same empirical evidence, they never fail to reach completely different conclusions concerning that evidence, and neither camp will ever give an inch on their core beliefs. Consequently, while I always side with the Young-Earth scientists in such debates, and I am certainly appreciative that qualified men are on the case in defense of the Bible’s account of a six-day creation, I find myself drawn to evidences that I don’t have to have a PhD in physics or geology to fully understand.

Here now are three of those evidences, each one phrased under the heading of a question:

Evidence #1: Where are all the people? 

According to the website worldometers.info, the world’s population is currently growing at a rate of 0.85% per year. That’s down from 0.87% in 2024 and 0.88% in 2023, but it’s up from 0.84% in 2022. The current rate equates to an increase of approximately 70 million people per year. For the record, the growth rate peaked at 2.25% in 1964.

Another website, populationconnection.org, says the world’s population didn’t first total 1 billion until 1804, but from then on the milestones haven’t taken nearly so long to reach. It took just another 123 years (1927) to hit 2 billion, just another 32 years (1959) to hit 3 billion, just another 15 years (1974) to hit 4 billion, just another 12 years (1986) to hit 5 billion, etc., etc. etc. The population total currently stands at 8 billion and is increasing every day.

Yet another website, ourworldindata.org, provides a graph of world population numbers beginning at 10,000 B.C.E. (which stands for “Before Common Era” and is the hip new way of saying B.C.) and ending at 2023 A.D. I found it interesting that the graph lists the 10,000 B.C.E. population total at 0. Since I don’t even think there ever was a 10,000 B.C.E., I’d say that’s a correct total for that year, but I’ll let that go. Here, I simply want to point out that even by that graph’s non-Biblical reckoning it has taken the human race just 12,000 years to go from 0 to over 8 billion.

Okay, according to the hot-off-the-presses evolutionary timeline, Homo sapiens (anatomically modern humans) appeared in Africa approximately 300,000 years ago. I use that description “hot-off-the-presses” because up until June of 2017 the accepted timeline for Homo sapiens began at 200,000 years. But then new dating methods were applied to some previously discovered fossils from Morocco and, presto, us Homo sapiens got 100,000 years older in one fell swoop. That’s the evolutionary timeline for you. It’s always written in pencil, never pen. One new discovery or one new test can change everything 100,000 years or a million years. The textbooks can’t even keep up with it all. Anyway, that age of 300,000 years leads us to the following question: “If it took humans 12,000 years to go from 0 to over 8 billion, what would the current population total be if we had truly had 300,000 years to work on it?”

Keep in mind now that any attempt at doing the math on this must take into account the built-in exponential factor of population growth. Putting it simply, as the numbers increase, it takes increasingly less time for the total to double itself. Since I’m no mathematician, I won’t even try to offer a guess at the total 300,000 years of human reproduction would achieve, but that number would surely be staggering. Isn’t it interesting, then, that the experts who study such things tell us that the earth’s current food resources could not sustain a population of over 10 or 11 billion?

It’s at this point that those who contend for an old earth and evolution will say, “But the population rate hasn’t always been what it is now.” That’s true, but it’s also true that the consistent long-term trend for thousands of years has been growth, either slow growth or rapid growth. You see, growth is still growth. Maybe we’re not growing at the 2.25% clip anymore, but we’re still ending each year with a higher population total than we had when the year began. And such yearly increases have obviously been the trending norm, perhaps even with some years of negative population growth mixed in here and there, for thousands of years. I say “obviously” because we wouldn’t have reached over 8 billion by now if we had been going backward much.

Someone else might say, “But people are living longer lives these days, and that’s what has now gotten everything askew. Humans didn’t live so long 300,000 years ago, and so you can’t make the argument that the yearly population rate always saw increases back then.” Well, there’s no denying that humans certainly are living longer lives these days. Here in America, for example, the average life expectancy has almost doubled since 1900. However, what must also be taken into account is the fact that global birth rates have dropped by more than 50% since 1950. The reason isn’t hard to discern. It was, after all, in the 1950s and 1960s that birth control started becoming a common thing for women to use.

This, you see, provides a pushback to the increase in life expectancy. Yes, we are living longer, and that helps increase the population total, but we are producing only half as many babies, and that helps decrease it. So, all in all, we have good reason to believe that the current population rate isn’t completely apples and oranges different (for example, plus 1% to minus 20% or whatever) from what it has been on average throughout the entire history of the human race. Certainly, there have been high marks and low marks in regards to the ebb and flow of that rate, times of boom and times of war and famine. That’s understood. But there’s just no way that for hundreds of thousands of years the rate was always magically just what it needed to be to allow humans to keep their numbers balanced out precisely enough to match the earth’s food supply at the time.

That, by the way, is another way the advocates for an old earth and a human race that is 300,000 years old explain away the problem of humans eventually overpopulating the planet. They say the population rate has only become a problem in recent times because only then has that rate exploded. Here again, though, the mathematical reality of the exponential aspect of growth would have had to come into play. Once the numbers (pre birth-control numbers, mind you) started piling up, whether it was in the year 100,000 B.C.E. or 10,000 B.C.E., the time it would have taken for the total to double itself would have started shrinking quickly.

That brings us back to the conclusion that if we have been here reproducing for 300,000 years, there wouldn’t be much elbow room left on this planet. At least us Bible believers have God once wiping out the world’s burgeoning population by way of a great flood and starting over with just eight people. Atheists and agnostics don’t even buy that, and they need such a drastic decrease in population much more than we do in order to make sense of the current population total. The best they can offer is the death toll from The Black Plague that swept through Europe and Asia in the 14th century, a death toll estimated to have reduced the world’s population from 450 million to 350 million. But that loss of 100 million lives isn’t nearly enough to explain how 300,000 years of human reproduction has only added up to a world population total of 8 million or so.

Evidence #2: “Where are all the graves?”

This question comes right on the heels of the previous one. If the  “modern” human race has had 300,000 years to multiply, whatever the exact birth rates, death rates, and population rates were during any given eras, where are all the graves? No one denies that large numbers of graves from mankind’s history have been discovered, just as no one denies that large numbers remain undiscovered, but are we to believe that literally billions of graves remain undiscovered?

According to anthropologists, the earliest known human burial dates back 100,000 years to human skeletal remains found at Qafzeh, Israel. That site is a group tomb of fifteen people buried in a cave along with their tools and other ritual artifacts. Anthropologists conclude from the site that humans have been burying their dead for at least 100,000 years.

Further evidence of how long humans have been burying their dead comes from the Neanderthals, a race of ancient humans that (supposedly) lived between 400,000 years ago to 50,000 years ago, with their time actually overlapping the rise of modern humans (Homo sapiens) 300,000 years ago. I agree with the Young-Earth creationists that the Neanderthals were, in fact, fully human, but that’s another post for another time. For now, let me just point out that anthropologists are in agreement that a 50,000 year old Neanderthal skeleton discovered in a cave in southwestern France in 1908 is a case of intentional burial. Additionally, anthropologists are now convinced that twenty other grave sites throughout western Europe fall under the same heading as intentional Neanderthal burials.

Okay, now lets have some fun with numbers. First, let’s ask, “How many people have been born since Homo sapiens came on the scene?” You see, all we have to do is subtract the current population total of 8 billion from that number and we’ll get at least some rough idea of how many humans have been buried in the ground of planet earth, right? Unfortunately, as you might guess, figuring out how many people have been born is a highly inexact science. Nevertheless, on the website prb.org I found a popular chart that estimates that by the year 50,000 B.C.E. 7,856,100,002 people had been born upon the earth. That chart then proceeds onward to reach the conclusion that more than 117 billion people have lived upon the earth. That’s at least a place to start.

So, when we subtract the current 8 billion who are alive on the earth right now from the 117 billion who have supposedly been born throughout history, we conclude that approximately 100 billion people have died in the past 50,000 years, a time frame during which mankind was practicing human burial. That’s when we must ask again, “Where are all those billions of corpses?” Certainly a percentage of them were cremated, and another percentage were buried at sea. And then there is another percentage that only lasted a few centuries because they were buried without the use of coffins or embalming and the condition of the ground in which they were placed turned them to nothing relatively quickly. But even taking these three categories into account, we’re talking about 100 billion graves! You see, those are the kind of bizarre, incomprehensible numbers you get into when you start floating around the idea that the human race is even 50,000 years old, let alone much, much older.

Evidence #3: “Where is all the written history?”

Let me begin my third and final piece of practical evidence by giving you a purported timeline for the milestones of modern humans (Homo sapiens) down through history. I got this from newsdesk.si.edu, a website associated with the Smithsonian Institute. Here goes:

  • By 400,000 years ago, early humans (pre Homo sapiens) were making shelters and inventing wooden thrusting spears.
  • By 250,000 years ago, early humans (still pre Homo sapiens) were beginning to communicate with symbols.
  • By 200,000 years ago, Homo sapiens (modern humans) had evolved in Africa and were gathering together and hunting food.
  • By 164,000 years ago, they were collecting and cooking shellfish.
  • Between 135,000-100,000 years ago, they were making jewelry from shell beads.
  • By 130,000 years ago, they were exchanging resources over long distances.
  • By 104,000 years ago, they were catching and killing dangerous prey.
  • By 100,000 years ago, they were burying their dead.
  • By 90,000 years ago, they were making special tools for fishing.
  • By 77,000 years ago, they were recording information on objects and making clothing from hides.
  • By 60,000 years ago, they were beginning a series of worldwide migrations.
  • By 60,000 to 40,000 years ago, they were creating permanent drawings.
  • By 40,000 to 35,000 years ago, they were creating paintings and figurines.
  • By 35,000 years ago, they were creating musical instruments.
  • By 30,000 to 24,000 years ago, they were making well-fitted clothing using bone needles.
  • By 26,000 years ago, they were making baskets.
  • By 12,000 years ago, they were controlling the breeding and growth of certain animals and plants, which resulted in farming and herding and eventually led to the creation of villages, towns, and cities.
  • By 10,500 years ago, they were domesticating animals.
  • By 8000 years ago, they were using symbols to represent words and concepts.

According to scholars, it was approximately 5,000 years ago that the first system of writing was invented. This was the cuneiform system, which was developed around 3,200 B.C.E. by the Sumerian people. Cuneiform writing involved the Sumerians using a reed stylus to make wedge-shaped indentations upon clay tablets.

Well, this purported timeline of human milestones causes us to ask, “Are we supposed to believe that modern humans lived, thrived, invented things, and steadily advanced civilization for almost 300,000 years before they began to make written records in 3,200 B.C.E.?” These are the same humans, mind you, who by 3,200 B.C.E. had designed and built such impressive structures as:

  • Gobekli Tepe in Turkey (estimated date: 9,000 B.C.E.)
  • Barneze in France (estimated date: 4,850 B.C.E)
  • Tumulus of Bougon in France (estimated date: 4,700 B.C.E.)
  • Tumulus Saint Michael in France (estimated date: 4,500 B.C.E.)
  • Monte d’Accoddi in Italy (estimated date: 4,000 B.C.E.)
  • The Temples of Ggantija in Malta (estimated date: 3,700 B.C.E.)
  • The Knap of Howard in Scotland (estimated date: 3,700 B.C.E.)

Are we really to think that such ingenious people either didn’t see the need to invent writing, or simply couldn’t figure out how to do it, for almost 300,000 years? That seems preposterous. And yet the fact remains that there simply is no written record of human history before 3,200 B.C.E. None. That’s not much of a problem if the Bible’s teaching that the universe, earth, and human race are all less than 10,000 years old is true. It’s a major problem, though, if modern humans have been doing stuff, stuff worth recording for posterity’s sake, for 300,000 years.

Posted in Creation, Series: "How Old is the Earth?" | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , | 4 Comments

The Speed of Light, the Dating of Rocks, & the Earth’s Strata

Posted on July 11, 2025 by russellmckinney

“How Old Is the Earth?” series (post #6)

What I’m going to do with this post is list three pieces of evidence that get trotted out by physicists, scientists, and geologists in their attempts to prove that the earth is billions of years old and the universe is even older. Then I’m going to provide the counter explanations the Young-Earth creationists use to explain how each piece of evidence can be understood to align with a universe and earth that is less than 10,000 years old. My goal here is simply to give you a small taste of how the ongoing debates between the two opposing groups sound. Let it be known that I’m not suggesting that these three pieces of evidence are the only ones the groups debate. Again, I’m just trying to give you the gist of how the debating goes.

Evidence #1: The Speed of Light

Physicists tell us that light travels in a vacuum at a speed of 186,000 miles per second. In layman’s terms, that means it takes light one year to cover a distance of six trillion miles. You say, “Fine, but what does that have to do with estimating the age of the universe and the earth?”

I’ll explain by using starlight. If we can stand on the earth and see light that originates from stars, and if we can reasonably figure out how far those stars are from the earth, then we can possibly assume that the universe is at least as old as the time it takes for that light from those stars to reach the earth. Get it?

Okay, the most distant objects we are currently able to observe are quasars, and by doing the math we learn that the travel time for the light coming from these objects is more than 10 billion years. So, that means that the age of the universe must be at least 10 billion years, right? Actually, the age must be even older than that because those quasars certainly aren’t the innermost extreme of the universe. This is how physicists think.

But how do Young-Earth creationists respond to this evidence from the speed of light? Many of them contend that God created the entire universe as fully mature and “in motion” right from the start. As evidence of this, the Bible plainly teaches that God created Adam as a fully mature man rather than as a baby. Also, He created the fruit trees of the garden of Eden as fully grown trees that bore ripe fruit right from the moment they were created. Therefore, in keeping with this theme, the Bible can be interpreted to indicate that God created the universe and the earth with “age” already on them, even though relatively speaking they were freshly created.

Applying this idea to the universe, it would mean that any light from space was already well on its way to the earth from the moment the object from which the light emanates was created. Young-Earth creationists point out that proof of this can be found in the fact that God specifically said that He created the sun, the moon, and the stars on day four of the creation week to give light on the earth (Genesis 1:14-18). You see, if the light from the sun, the moon, and the stars didn’t actually reach the earth until millions or billions of years later, that makes God a liar.

Furthermore, a second explanation that some Young-Earth creationists cite in regards to the evidence of the speed of light is this: perhaps that speed hasn’t always been what it is now. Could it be possible that God greatly increased the speed of light in the early days of creation and then slowed it down sometime later? If this was indeed the case, light from celestial objects could have traveled to the earth in a fraction of the time it now takes it to reach the earth.

Evidence #2: Radiometric dating

Scientists tell us that radioactive isotopes decay from an unstable to a stable form at measurable, fixed rates. These rates are based upon the amount of radiation each isotope gives off as it moves from unstable to stable. Accordingly, if you know the specific kind of radioactive isotope found within a substance, you can backtrack the math and calculate the age of the substance.

With this in mind, let’s talk about igneous and metamorphic rocks. These are rocks which were once extremely hot and then cooled into solid rock. Basalt (a type of solidified lava) is a type of such rock. By measuring the amount of radiation within a basalt rock, you can presumably calculate how long it has been since that solid rock was in its previous liquid state and thus deduce the rock’s age. Such methods of dating have resulted in data that has led scientists to proclaim that the earth itself must be approximately 5 billion years old, with the universe being much older.

As you might expect, Young-Earth creationists downplay the accuracy of such methods of dating. How do they do this? They do it by casting serious doubts upon three assumptions that must hold true for the methods to be reliable. Here’s a crash course in those assumptions.

First, it is assumed that the decay rate of the radioactive isotopes has never changed since the dawn of creation. Well, maybe it hasn’t, but then again maybe it has. And if it has, all the data is unreliable.

Second, it is assumed that no contamination took place throughout the entire process by which the rock transformed from liquid to solid. This is a major deal because any such contamination would heavily skew the results. And who’s to say that contamination didn’t take place? Even though scientists do their best to find uncontaminated specimens to study, perhaps there aren’t any such specimens.

Third, it is assumed that the original quantity of the radioactive isotopes in the rock’s original liquid state was zero and that the only such isotopes within the rock were formed there as the rock moved from liquid to solid. The problem, however, with this assumption is that it doesn’t always stand up to real-world testing. Specifically, the solidified rocks from volcanic eruptions and lava flows that are well known from relatively recent history have been tested and found to be many thousands of years or even millions of years old. Clearly, using radiometric dating methods to date rocks and in so doing date the earth is highly suspect.

Evidence #3: The Earth’s Strata

Geologists tell us that the earth’s strata are layers of soil that are originally laid down as sediment and are changed into rock, over the course of much time, by pressure, heat, and chemical reactions. One layer is gradually laid down atop the previous layer as time progresses, and the end result is more or less a vertical stacking of layers, with the oldest layer being the bottom one and the newest layer being the top one. This means that the deeper you dig into the ground, the deeper you dig into the layers of earth history. At least that’s the general premise.

Stratigraphy is the study of the layers of the earth’s strata, and by engaging in such studies geologists have come to the conclusion that the layers of the earth’s strata were laid down progressively and systematically over the course of hundreds of millions of years. They reach this conclusion by using radiometric dating, carbon dating, and other such dating methods to date the age of the rocks found within each layer of strata. Incidentally, this is also one of the ways by which they date any fossils found within a layer.

Okay, so how do Young-Earth creationists explain the earth’s strata in light of the fact that they believe the earth is less than 10,000 years old? They do it by asserting that the layers of the earth’s strata were not laid down slowly and gradually but were instead laid down relatively quickly — within a year or so — as a byproduct of Noah’s flood. That flood, after all, was caused not just by rain but by “all the great fountains of the deep” being broken up (Genesis 7:11). This speaks of incredible seismic activity beneath the ocean floors. Consequently, all that seismic activity, as well as the subsequent “waters receding continually from the earth (Genesis 8:3), could have left us with not only the planet’s stacked layers of strata but also the entire fossil record of animals killed by the flood.

One famous example that Young-Earth creationists cite concerning the earth’s strata is known as The Great Unconformity in the Grand Canyon. Basically, this is a gap in the accepted timeline of the strata where two formations that were supposedly formed one billion years apart are nestled right atop one another. This unconformity showcases one of two things. One, either a billion years passed between the two formations and no sediment was laid down for that entire billion years. (Frankly, that option seems unimaginable.) Or, two, a short period of time passed between the forming of the two formations. You can guess which option Young-Earth creationists favor.

Well, as you can see from these three categories of examples, if you want to believe in a universe and an earth that are less than 10,000 years old, you have some Christian physicists, scientists, and geologists out there fighting for your cause. I don’t pretend to be such an expert, but I can certainly read what these experts write and take encouragement from their conclusions. That is what I do, and let me go on record as saying that I greatly appreciate the awesome work these men contribute in defense of the Bible and its account of God’s creation week. I only wish they didn’t have to fight so hard against a lost, unbelieving, academic world that wants nothing to do with God or His written word.

Posted in Creation, Series: "How Old is the Earth?" | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

The Gap Theory

Posted on July 9, 2025 by russellmckinney

“How Old Is the Earth?” series (post #5)

Genesis 1:1 tells us that in the beginning God created the heavens and the earth. But right on the heels of that we get Genesis 1:2, which tells us that the earth was without form (formless), void (empty), covered in water (the deep), and engulfed in complete darkness (hence the need for, “Let there be light”). The apparent conflict between verses 1 and 2 leaves us with two possible interpretations. Interpretation #1: God deliberately created the earth as initially incomplete, in need of more detail work, because the earth was going to be the unique planet upon which He would create human beings. Or, interpretation #2: Sometime after the earth’s creation, a catastrophe struck it that left it in a ruined condition.

As for me, I hold to interpretation #1. There are, however, some sincere students of the Bible who hold to interpretation #2. And how do these folks explain the great catastrophe that left the earth in such a decimated state? Their explanation is commonly known as “The Gap Theory,” with the idea being that there is a great gap of time between Genesis 1:1 and Genesis 1:2.

The basics of the gap theory go as follows:

  • Stage 1: God creates the earth of Genesis 1:1 as perfect, complete, fully detailed, and teeming with life. The earth has vegetation, insects, sea creatures, flying creatures, and land creatures. The dinosaurs live during this time, and perhaps there is even some type of race of pre-Adamic humans (Neanderthals, Homo Sapiens, etc.). All is well upon the earth for an indeterminable amount of time.
  • Stage 2: Satan and his fellow rebellious angels rebel against God, are banished from heaven, are cast down to the earthly realm, and somehow this event causes the earth (and perhaps even all of creation) to be laid to waste. All life on earth is killed off and the planet is left in the condition described in Genesis 1:2. (A more detailed explanation of this stage has God placing the still unfallen angel Lucifer in charge of the earth, and Lucifer ruling over the planet from Eden (Ezekiel 28:13) until he becomes so prideful within himself that he decides to lead a rebellion against God (Isaiah 14:13-14) and is punished for it.)
  • Stage 3: The earth remains in its ruined state for an indeterminable amount of time, with the time span lasting for millions or billions of years.
  • Stage 4: God finally sets Himself to the task of restoring the earth. He accomplishes this restoration by way of the six days that are recorded from Genesis 1:3 to Genesis 1:31. This restoration gives us the earth we have now.

You see, the Gap Theory proposes that Genesis chapter 1’s six days of creation are actually six days of recreation (restoration, reconstruction, renewal, revitalization). But now that we understand the basics of the theory, we must attempt to figure out its validity or lack thereof. To help us do this, I’m going to list the strengths and weaknesses of the theory. To be fair, I’ll list seven from each category, beginning with the strengths.

  1. Strength #1: While Genesis 1:2 says the earth was “without form” (K.J.V., N.K.J.V.), Isaiah 45:18 says that God didn’t create it “in vain” (K.J.V., N.K.J.V.). What’s significant about that is the fact that both phrases translate the same Hebrew word, tohu. Putting it simply, Genesis 1:2 says the earth was tohu, but Isaiah 45:18 says that God didn’t create it tohu.
  2. Strength #2: The Hebrew conjunctive expression tohu wa bohu — which gets translated as “without form, and void” — is used in only two other instances in the Old Testament. Those are Isaiah 34:11 and Jeremiah 4:23, and in both instances the condition is produced by some type of divine judgment.
  3. Strength #3: The Hebrew word translated as “was” in Genesis 1:2 is hayah, and it is possible to translate it as “became.” This would make Genesis 1:2 read: “The earth BECAME without form, and void…” rather than “The earth WAS without form, and void…” Of course, the vast majority of Hebrew translators do not think the word should be translated this way in the context of Genesis 1:2, and that’s why our English translations read “was” instead of “became.” Nevertheless, the fact remains that in certain instances hayah can mean “became.”
  4. Strength #4:  In the original Hebrew of Genesis 1:1-2, there is no break or pause at the end of Genesis 1:1. However, the Masoretes, who were an ancient group of Jewish scholars, added a small mark called a rebia following Genesis 1:1. Such a mark plays the role of informing the reader that there is a break in the narrative and that he should pause before going on to the next verse. The Masoretes added this mark because, in their considered opinion, there was a break between the two verses. Obviously, the Masoretes could have been mistaken in their opinion, but they were a highly respected group of scholars.  
  5. Strength #5: The Gap Theory leaves plenty of room for all the scientific and geological data that supposedly shows that the earth is billions of years old. For example, how should we fit the dinosaurs into Genesis chapter 1? By way of The Gap Theory they become part of the Genesis 1:1 world that got laid to waste by Satan’s fall. How do we categorize the various “subhuman” skeletons that have been dug up around the world? Those supposedly pre-Adamic beings become part of that Genesis 1:1 world, too. How do we explain the multiple layers of strata found in the earth’s geologic column? According to the theory, all those layers got laid down either during the unspecified amount of time of Genesis 1:1 or during the unspecified “gap” of time between Genesis 1:1 and Genesis 1:2.
  6. Strength #6: The old King James translation (the K.J.V.) quotes God in Genesis 1:28 as saying to Adam and Eve, “Be fruitful, and multiply, and replenish the earth…” That word “replenish” seems to indicate that the earth was once home to some type of pre-Adamic race that got wiped out. The Hebrew word translated there as “replenish” is male, and it’s a common word that is used many times in the original Hebrew of the Old Testament. Interestingly, the K.J.V. translators translated it more than fifty different ways, going with “replenish” or “replenished” in only seven of the instances. In the context of Genesis 1:28, only the K.J.V. translates male as “replenish.” Other translations translate it as “fill.”
  7. Strength #7: In 2 Corinthians 4:6, the apostle Paul uses the idea of God commanding the light to shine out of the darkness as a way of illustrating that God has similarly given Christians the light of the knowledge of His glory. And since Christians are part of Adam’s race, a race that was originally created perfect but became ruined by God’s judgment upon sin, such an illustration aligns nicely with the idea of God creating the earth in perfection only to have it ruined by His judgment upon the sin of Satan and his fellow rebellious angels.

Well, as you can see, the strengths of The Gap Theory do make for a compelling case to support it. This explains why noted Bible teachers such as R.A. Torrey, Arthur Pink, Harry Rimmer, M.R. Dehaan, Donald Grey Barnhouse, Merrill Unger, A.C. Gaebelein, Arthur C. Custance, and J. Vernon McGee preached it. Even though Scottish theologian Thomas Chalmers is generally credited with first making the theory popular, it was C.I. Scofield who took it to new heights of popularity. By advocating the theory in the 1909 edition of his Scofield Reference Bible, Scofield made the theory quite prominent among the conservative preachers of the early 20th century. Still, though, before we fully embrace the theory, we must examine its weaknesses. As we will see, there are several of them and they are, to say the least, highly problematic.

  1. Weakness #1: Exodus 20:11 says: “For is six days the Lord made the heavens and the earth, the sea, and all that is in them, and rested the seventh day. Therefore the Lord blessed the Sabbath day and hallowed it.” The Hebrew word translated there as “made” is asah, and it’s the same word that is consistently translated as “made” in the creation story. And it’s not a word that usually means “recreated,” “restored,” “reconstructed,” or “fixed.”
  2. Weakness #2: Genesis 1:31 says: “Then God saw everything that He had made, and indeed it was very good. So the evening and the morning were the sixth day.” First, how could God classify all of His creation (including all His angels) as “very good” if Satan and his fellow rebellious angels were already in a state of rebellion and had been so for some time? Second, how could He classify everything as “very good” if His original earth from Genesis 1:1 had been decimated to the point where He had to step in and redo it? Third, how could He classify everything as “very good” if the remains of all the plant life and animal life — not to mention the possibility of a pre-Adamic race of beings — from that Genesis 1:1 world were now being walked upon by Adam, Eve, and the new creatures?
  3. Weakness #3: In Romans 5:12 and 1 Corinthians 15:21-22, the apostle Paul explains that it was Adam, with his sin in Eden, that brought death into the world. This teaching stands in direct contradiction to The Gap Theory, which contends that it was Satan, with his fall, that brought death into the world. How could Adam have been walking atop what would have amounted to a worldwide fossilized graveyard (complete with dinosaur skeletons) if death didn’t come into the world until he sinned?
  4. Weakness #4: To believe The Gap Theory is to believe, for all intents and purposes, that Genesis 1:1 is its own separate Bible, a Bible that doesn’t give us enough details about itself to amount to anything. Was the Genesis 1:1 earth round? Did it have seasons? Was there a race of pre-Adamic beings that called it home? If there was such a race, did they have souls? Were the creatures of that earth similar to the creatures of our modern earth? Obviously, if we believe The Gap Theory’s version of events, we can’t know the answers to any of these questions because the Bible never addresses them.
  5. Weakness #5: A major strength of The Gap Theory interpretation is the supposed contradiction between Genesis 1:2 and Isaiah 45:18. But are we really to believe that God expects us to get just two verses into reading the Bible and then race over to some obscure passage from Isaiah so that we can correctly interpret what we just read? Pity the poor reader who would have tried to make sense of Genesis 1:1-2 before Isaiah lived and wrote! Doesn’t it make much more sense to conclude that Isaiah 45:18 simply means that God did not create the earth to be uninhabited but from the get-go in Genesis 1:1-2 intended to shortly place Adam, Eve, and their descendants upon it?
  6. Weakness #6: The Gap Theory gives Satan and his fall an incredible amount of influence over God’s creation. Think about it, if God is all knowing, and if He knew going in that Him judging Satan and the other rebellious angels would completely wipe out all life on earth and decimate the planet to the point of inhabitability, why would He choose that course of punishment? Why punish life on earth because of the sin of a group of angels?
  7. Weakness #7: Since Genesis 1:3 has God creating light to illuminate the darkness of the earth of Genesis 1:2, are we to believe that Satan’s fall was so catastrophic that it literally destroyed or extinguished all the light from the completed earth of Genesis 1:1? Such a thought simply defies belief.

And so, in conclusion, I just can’t take all the evidence into account and throw my support behind The Gap Theory. While I understand the theory’s appeal — it certainly makes the job of reconciling the Bible to modern science easier — there are just too many problems with it for me to buy it. I find it so much more believable that God created all of creation (including a crude version of the earth) in Genesis 1:1, and then He singled out the earth from all the other planets for extra detail work because He had to get it ready to sustain the human race. This, to me, is the way a loving God who wants His people to understand how He gave us creation would explain His process, and it’s so much better than believing that He would play homiletical word games with us right out of the opening gate of scripture. As for how we should explain the dinosaurs, the Neanderthals, the earth’s geologic column, and other such conundrums, stay tuned. I promise to address those issues in future posts before we are finished with this series.

Posted in Angels, Bible Study, Creation, Demons, Dinosaurs, God's Word, Satan, Scripture, Series: "How Old is the Earth?", The Bible, The Devil | Tagged , , , , , , , , , | 3 Comments