The recent discovery of a 3,500-year-old Egyptian fortress in northern Sinai has provided remarkable confirmation of both Egypt’s early imperial ambitions and the biblical record of the Exodus. The fortress, unearthed at Tell el-Kharouba and dating to the reign of Pharaoh Thutmose I, not only illuminates Egypt’s military reach but also explains why God did not lead the Israelites northward “by the way of the land of the Philistines” (Exodus 13:17).

1. Pharaoh of Moses’ Birth

Thutmose I reigned from approximately 1526-1512 B.C., the very year that Exodus 2 situates the birth of Moses.¹ His daughter, Hatshepsut, born early in his reign to the Great Royal Wife Ahmose, would later become Egypt’s first great female pharaoh.² It was almost certainly this princess—royal daughter of Thutmose I—who found the infant Moses among the reeds of the Nile and raised him as her own son in the Egyptian court.³

This makes Thutmose I the pharaoh during the infancy of Moses and the father of the woman who would shape the young Hebrew prince’s life within the palatial education of the Eighteenth Dynasty. The implications are striking: the very dynasty that nurtured Moses also constructed the fortified barriers God would later guide Israel to avoid.

2. Discovery of the Fortress

In October 2025, Egypt’s Ministry of Tourism and Antiquities announced the discovery of a vast New Kingdom fortress at Tell el-Kharouba, a site near the Mediterranean coast of northern Sinai. Excavations revealed a complex covering roughly 8,000 square meters (86,000 square feet), with a 106-meter-long (350 feet) southern wall and a zigzagging western wall designed to resist wind erosion. Eleven towers, storerooms, and ovens were found, along with fossilized dough—clear evidence of soldiers’ quarters.⁴

Most significant was a jar handle stamped with the royal cartouche of Thutmose I, found in the fortress’s foundational layer. This inscription anchors the structure firmly to his reign, identifying him as the pharaoh who commissioned this and other fortresses along the “Way of Horus,” a chain of garrisons stretching from the Nile Delta to Canaan.⁵ Archaeologists estimate the garrison held between 400 and 700 soldiers, averaging around 500 men—a formidable line of defense across Egypt’s northeastern frontier.⁶

3. The “Way of Horus” and the “Way of the Philistines”

This discovery directly correlates with the biblical geography of Exodus 13:17-18:

“Then it came to pass, when Pharaoh had let the people go, that God did not lead them by way of the land of the Philistines, although that was near; for God said, ‘Lest perhaps the people change their minds when they see war, and return to Egypt.’ But God led the people about, through the way of the wilderness of the Red sea.”

The “Way of the Philistines” described in Scripture is the same route Egyptians called the “Way of Horus.”⁷ It served as the main coastal highway between Egypt and Canaan, fortified by a dozen garrisons and supply stations. Professor James K. Hoffmeier—who excavated a similar fortress at Tell el-Borg—notes that Thutmose I “was the father of Egypt’s empire in Western Asia and likely a key player in the beginning of this defense system to which succeeding kings added more forts.”⁸

Thus, the very network that symbolized Egypt’s military might in Moses’ day also provides the historical backdrop for why the Israelites did not travel north. God’s decision to lead them through the wilderness and across the Red Sea was not only theological but tactical.

4. A Dynasty of Builders and Conquerors

The Eighteenth Dynasty, inaugurated by Ahmose I, was Egypt’s most powerful era. His successors—Amenhotep I, Thutmose I, Thutmose II, Hatshepsut, and Thutmose III—expanded Egypt’s reach from Nubia to the Euphrates River. Thutmose I’s own stela from Tombos in Nubia records that “His Majesty crossed the Euphrates, the first of the kings of Egypt to do so,” confirming his Asiatic campaigns.⁹

This period aligns precisely with the early life of Moses. Thutmose I’s daughter Hatshepsut (the “daughter of Pharaoh” of Exodus 2) would later co-rule with her half-brother and husband Thutmose II, and after his death, reign as sole pharaoh. Her reign (ca. 1483 B.C.) corresponds to Moses’ exile in Midian, while her stepson Thutmose III—the conqueror of Canaan—fits the profile of the pharaoh of the Exodus if one follows an early-date chronology (Exodus 1446 B.C.).¹⁰

The newly discovered fortress of Thutmose I, therefore, represents more than an Egyptian outpost—it is an archaeological witness to the world in which Moses was born, reared, and later led God’s people out of bondage.

5. Archaeology Illuminating Scripture

Every new discovery from Egypt’s New Kingdom adds clarity to the biblical world. The Tell el-Kharouba fortress confirms that Egypt’s northeastern frontier was heavily militarized centuries before Israel’s departure, consistent with the Bible’s description of the “way of the Philistines.”

As Kenneth A. Kitchen writes in On the Reliability of the Old Testament, “the military road from Egypt to Gaza was well-known from pharaonic times … clearly fortified and garrisoned, and not a route for untrained tribes escaping bondage.”¹¹ Even liberal Egyptologists such as Thomas Eric Peet agree that “the writer [of Exodus] meant the great military highway that formed the chief route from Egypt to Syria.”¹²

For modern readers, the archaeology of the Sinai fortresses serves as a vivid reminder that Scripture’s geography and chronology align with the physical record of the ancient world.

6. Conclusion: Stones Cry Out

The fortress at Tell el-Kharouba stands as a silent monument to Egypt’s imperial might—and to God’s providential guidance. The same Pharaoh Thutmose I, who launched campaigns into Canaan and ordered fortresses along the Way of Horus, reigned when a Hebrew infant floated down the Nile into the arms of his daughter. That child would one day challenge the empire’s gods and lead his people to freedom.

Archaeology continues to affirm what faith has long held: the Bible’s history is anchored in reality. Every wall unearthed in Sinai, every seal inscribed with a royal name, and every fortress brick bears witness to the same truth—“the word of the LORD endures forever.”

[Dr. Jonathan Moore is a field archaeologist with the Shiloh Excavation in Israel, an adjunct faculty member at Freed-Hardeman University, and founder of Seeing His World, a missions-based educational nonprofit dedicated to providing academically grounded yet spiritually transformative guided experiences throughout the Bible lands (www.seeinghisworld.com).]

Endnotes

¹ Kenneth A. Kitchen(2003), On the Reliability of the Old Testament (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans), pp. 308-309.

² Joyce Tyldesley (1996), Hatchepsut: The Female Pharaoh (London: Penguin), pp. 44-45.

³ Exodus 2:1-10.

⁴ Egyptian Ministry of Tourism and Antiquities, Press Release, October 2025; Sonja Anderson (2025), “Archaeologists Discover 3,500-Year-Old Egyptian Military Fortress in the Sinai Desert,” Smithsonian Magazine, October 21.

⁵ Micah van Halteren (2025), “3,500-Year-Old Egyptian Fortress Uncovered Along the ‘Way of the Land of the Philistines,’” Armstrong Institute of Biblical Archaeology, November 10.

⁶ Hesham Hussein (2025), quoted in Live Science, October.

⁷ Thomas Eric Peet (1922), Egypt and the Old Testament (Liverpool: University Press), p. 69.

⁸ James K. Hoffmeier (1997), Israel in Egypt: The Evidence for the Authenticity of the Exodus Tradition (New York: Oxford University Press), pp. 116-118.

⁹ Tombos Stela in James H. Breasted (1906), Ancient Records of Egypt (Chicago: University of Chicago Press), 2:301-307.

¹⁰ Douglas Petrovich (2015), “Amenhotep II and the Historicity of the Exodus Pharaoh,” Bible and Spade, 28:35-43.

¹¹ Kitchen, p. 262.

¹² Thomas Eric Peet, Egypt and the Old Testament, p. 70.

The post Fortress of Thutmose I Unearthed Along the “Way of Horus” Validates the Exodus Narrative appeared first on Apologetics Press.

Is it possible to know whether such a statement about ancient history is true? Relativists believe that truth always is relative to the knower, and so there are no statements of universal truths about anything (historical or otherwise). In support of relativism, some have suggested that historical facts are inaccessible to humans due to unavoidable, biased presuppositions that make all of us non-neutral observers. For example, the late Michael Oakeshott, a political historian of the London School of Economics, wrote,

We know nothing of a course of historical events apart from some system of postulates. . . . What is known is always in terms of what is presupposed. [The historian—CC] is represented as starting from a ‘bare fact,’ whereas it is safe to say that he never does so, because such a starting-place is impossible—he begins with an interpretation, which he reinterprets.²

According to this view, there is no way to break out of the cycle of interpretation and re-interpretation to get an accurate understanding of what occurred in history. Similarly, Martha Howell and Walter Prevenier, in their 2001 textbook on historical methodology, wrote “[H]istorians do not discover a past as much as they create it…. Historians always create a past by writing it.”³

In discussions of the facts of biblical history, skeptics of the Christian faith often make similar allegations that such facts are lost to the mists of time. According to the skeptics, any reassembling of a historical narrative would be hopelessly confused by biases—particularly religious ones. For example, in arguing against the knowability of the historical facts about Jesus, Robert M. Price wrote:

[I]n trying to reconstruct the past, the historian is like the futurologist, or even the humble weatherman. . . . [T]hey merely assess the current, admittedly shifting, state of the data and project what is likely to happen, baring the unforeseen, which they warn viewers may nonetheless pop up and throw their projections into a cocked hat. The historian is not projecting but rather retrojecting. . . . Anything may have happened, for all we know.⁴

Christians would be wise to arm themselves with a response to this kind of general skepticism of historical knowledge.

One way of responding is to notice the time-honored distinction between history and propaganda. If a skeptic can admit the distinction between responsible history and propaganda about the past, then he is prepared to admit that techniques for responsible historiography are possible. Professional historians and historical associations roundly and routinely support this distinction. For example, the American Historical Association (certainly no proponent of biblical theism), has published its “Statement on Standards of Professional Conduct.” It reads in part:

All historians believe in honoring the integrity of the historical record. They do not fabricate evidence. Forgery and fraud violate the most basic foundations on which historians construct their interpretations of the past. An undetected counterfeit undermines not just the historical arguments of the forger, but all subsequent scholarship that relies on the forger’s work.⁵

Notice that the AHA recognizes that there is a right way to handle historical evidence and a wrong way.

As an example of this distinction between real historical research and propaganda in practice, consider the words of the Harvard University historian Morton:

It has been shown by students of the Russian Revolution that mountains of books, newspaper, pamphlets, decrees, and documents had to be consigned to the ‘memory hole,’ mashed to pulp, or brought out in corrected editions in order to substitute for Lenin-Trotsky a new duality-unity, Lenin-Stalin.⁶

For another example, the Brick Store Museum of Kennebunk, Maine wrote its “Principles of Research,” and included the following statement as one of its major principles of research:

Identify Bias: Recognize that all people have bias. In primary sources, secondary sources, and in historic interpretation, be able to detect bias and evaluate it. Analyze evidence critically, and question assumptions and interpretations (even your own). Consider alternative explanations. Biases are inherent in human thinking and can influence research. Researchers should reflect on their own backgrounds, beliefs, values, and potential biases that might affect their interpretation of historical events and attempt to remove those biases.⁷

Recognition of the distinction between history and propaganda is not the same as the establishment of standards of historiography, but it clears the way for such standards to be established, and so they have been.⁸

And, in his work on defending biblical historicity, Michael Licona of Houston Christian University listed six factors that historians use to reliably mitigate bias: (1) Proper historical method; (2) Public acknowledgement of one’s horizon and methodology; (3) Peer pressure and review; (4) Submitting hypotheses to hostile experts; (5) The presence of certain minimal facts; (5) A serious effort to detach from biases.⁹

Conclusion

As Norman Geisler pointed out, the only way to acknowledge that one’s worldview could potentially distort how he views history is to affirm that there is aright way to view history; relativism in any area of thought is self-defeating.¹⁰ Thus those who work in history regularly seek to detect and remove biases in order to get at the truth of what happened. If, after doing so, they follow the evidence where it leads, they will come to a saving faith in the historical Jesus Christ.

Endnotes

¹ Cf. Acts 1:3; 2:29-36; Romans 1:4; Philippians 3:20-21; 2 Peter 1:16-21; John 1:1-14; 1 John 1:1-4.

² Michael Oakeshott (1952), “Book Review: An Introduction to Philosophy of History,” The Philosophical Quarterly 2[8]:277.

³ Martha C. Howell and Walter Prevenier (2001), From Reliable Sources: An Introduction to Historical Methods (Ithica: Cornell University Press), p.1.

⁴ Roy Abraham Varghese, et al. (2013), The Case for the Christ of the New Testament: An Adversarial Dialogue Concerning the Existence of Jesus Christ (Vienna, WV: Warren Christian Apologetics Center), p. 67, emp. in orig.

⁵ American Historical Association (2023), “Statement on Standards of Professional Conduct,” historians.org/wp-content/uploads/2024/05/Statement-on-Standards-of-Prof-Conduct-Jan-2023.pdf.

⁶ Morton White (1965), Foundations of Historical Knowledge (New York: Harper & Row), p. 268. Cited in William Lane Craig (2008), Reasonable Faith (Wheaton: Crossway), p. 236, revised edition.

⁷ Brick Store Museum (n.d.), “Principles of History Interpretation,” brickstoremuseum.org/wp-content/uploads/2025/01/BSM_Principles_of_Research.pdf, parenthetical item in orig.

⁸ e.g., C. Behan McCullagh (1984), Justifying Historical Descriptions, Cambridge Studies in Philosophy (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press).

⁹ Michael R. Licona (2010), The Resurrection of Jesus: A New Historiographical Approach (Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity), chapter one.

¹⁰ Norman L. Geisler (1999), Baker Encyclopedia of Christian Apologetics (Grand Rapids: Baker), pp. 328-329.

The post Does Lack of Neutrality Prevent Us from Knowing Historical Facts? appeared first on Apologetics Press.

The post Can Christians Eat Pork? appeared first on Apologetics Press.

This was my first trip to Asia and my first trip to the Philippines. The flight from Nashville to San Francisco was about five hours. Interestingly, I was providentially seated by an atheist on this leg of the trip who lived in a Muslim country. We talked for almost four hours about God and the Bible. In the course of the discussion, he brought up the idea of a loving God and slavery in the Bible. I happened to have an Always Be Ready book that deals with that topic in chapter eight, which I pulled out of my carry-on bag and showed him. We had a great conversation, and I was able to get his contact information, and we are in communication.  After that, the flight from San Fransico to Manila took about 15 hours, with another quick flight from Manila to Ilagan. All the travel went smoothly, and I arrived in Ilagan on Friday evening, prepared to speak on Saturday at the national singing. On Friday night, however, we learned that the super typhoon Fung-Wong was coming in. Thankfully, the national singing still took place, and I spoke to several hundred members of the Lord’s Church on Saturday morning. Because the Filipinos study English from an early age in school, I did not need a translator. The Byrums had shipped over Truth Be Told and Always Be Ready books to distribute at the event. Many of the attendees came from long distances. One young man drove a motorcycle about 10 hours to attend.

After speaking Saturday morning, Dale Byrum and I flew back to Manila to get to the capital before the typhoon hit. I preached twice on Sunday morning at the Metro South church of Christ in Manila and got back to my hotel room that evening before the storm hit. While there was damage in several places in the Philippines, we were safe in Manila and the Lord answered many prayers. On Tuesday, I spoke at an Always Be Ready seminar at the Metro South congregation. Groups from numerous congregations came, some riding buses for more than six hours to be there, and then riding them back when the event ended that night. Because of some geo-fenced advertising that AP did before I got there, we had several visitors who were not associated with the Lord’s Church at all. The local brethren were rather surprised and excited to make these new contacts. We had a book signing, meal, and I preached two lessons: “The Problem of Evil,” and “Hell and a Loving God.” The event lasted from about 3:00 pm to 10:00 pm.

Overall, the trip was eye-opening for me. I had no idea that people in the Philippines access our Apologetics Press materials to the extent they do. Many of the Christians had watched countless hours of our videos (as well as those of GBN and World Video Bible School). The Bible schools and training schools used our materials in their instructions. And the local church members used our articles and written material for Bible study and evangelism purposes. It turns out about 10% of our Facebook followers are from the Philippines, and over 40,000 Filipinos have visited our website this year.

Furthermore, I was impressed by the sincerity and strength of the local Christians and congregations, the work being done by Dale and Karen Byrum, the hospitality and kindness of the Filipino people in general, the lengths the Christians would travel to be a part of spiritual activities and Christian fellowship, and the care that God continues to provide His people as they strive to further the borders of His Kingdom. The trip reminded me that God is working all over the world, and He uses the generosity and kindness of so many people to provide for the spiritual and physical needs of His Church. It was such a privilege to get to see what God is doing through AP, and the work of so many others, in the Philippines.

The post AP in the Philippines appeared first on Apologetics Press.

The post Did Jesus Claim Godhood? appeared first on Apologetics Press.

How did God create the whole world in 1 week? Could He have made it in 1 or 2 years?

Answer:

Dear Kendra,

I’m glad to see you know the Bible account of Creation. The book of Genesis says that God created everything in six days and rested on the seventh day. He did this to give humans a pattern for their week. You are right, He could have taken 1 or 2 years, or 13 billion years. The Bible tells us, however, that He only took one week. You see, God is all-powerful. He could have created our Universe in one second if He wanted. In fact, He could create a billion Universes in one second if He wanted. One reason He did it the way He did was so that humans could have the idea, from the beginning of Creation, that a week is seven days. Thanks for your good question.

The post How Did God Create the Whole World in 1 Week? appeared first on Apologetics Press.

For the past 21 years, Tommy has faithfully served as AP’s General Manager. That title might sound simple, but Tommy wears more hats in a single day than many people do in a year. From payroll and warehouse logistics to website updates and managing mass mailings, Tommy’s job description reads like a small novel.

You’ve heard the phrase “all talk, no action.” Tommy is “all action, no talk” (or very little—at least not any more than he has to).

A graduate of Faulkner University (B.A. and M.B.A.), Tommy combines intellect, resourcefulness, and Christ-like humility. He is one of the most diligent, “cool, calm, and collected” Christians you will ever meet.

Need a large shipment of books tracked and carefully unloaded with a forklift? Tommy’s on it. Something not working on the AP website? Fixed before most people even notice. Is the warehouse running out of a book that’s about to be reprinted? Tommy has already coordinated with the authors, contacted the printer, submitted the files, and arranged payment.

And while he manages all that, he also uploads content weekly to our website, troubleshoots technical issues, oversees building maintenance, and ensures (by the grace of God!) we never miss a payroll deadline. He also lays out the text of R&R every month. All while maintaining an easy-going, fun-loving, subtle sense of humor.

But beyond his remarkable Swiss-army-knife-like skill set, what has made Tommy so valuable to this work for over two decades is his character. He is a dedicated Christian—honest, principled, and thoughtful. He doesn’t seek the spotlight. In fact, he might prefer that this editor’s note never be published. (That’s just who he is: zero fanfare.) But honoring people like Tommy is important (Romans 13:7). The work of AP could not continue as it does without servants like him—quietly doing what needs to be done, never asking for recognition, and always putting the mission ahead of personal interests and praise.

The post AP Staff Spotlight: Tommy Hatfield, General Manager appeared first on Apologetics Press.

Only a few years before the Scopes trial, Darrow authored a short pamphlet titled Absurdities of the Bible. He sought to debunk Scripture through ridicule and rhetorical flair. Despite his impressive understanding of the legal system, Darrow’s approach to the Bible betrayed a conspicuous lack of familiarity with the book he aimed to discredit. His pamphlet featured a staggering amount of misinformation about the Bible, as well as theological illiteracy and a disregard for the Bible’s historical, cultural, and literary context.

What if we were to cross-examine Darrow’s treatment of the evidence? In Absurdities of the Bible, he makes the following blunders:

• Darrow used numerous logical fallacies in his pamphlet. One of his favorites is the strawman fallacy—he caricatures biblical content and treats texts as if all Christians read them with extreme literalness, ignoring genre and figures of speech. He employs ad hominem attacks, as in his description of Christians as decidedly anti-intellectual.² Darrow makes a false analogy by highlighting miraculous birth stories outside of the biblical text, implying that the story of Jesus’ birth must be equally untrue.³ He often commits the fallacy of hasty generalization in condemning the text as morally bankrupt based on isolated and misinterpreted examples. Finally, he commits the fallacy of bifurcation—also known as the false dichotomy—in claiming that either a person uses reason and rejects the Bible or believes biblical stories at the expense of using any intelligence.⁴
• He claims that the Bible teaches a flat Earth,⁵ although it does not.⁶ Critics often mistakenly cite phenomenological language (describing how things appear to an observer, rather than how they objectively are; Ecclesiastes 1:5) or poetic phrases such as “the four corners of the earth” (Isaiah 11:12; Revelation 7:1; see also Ezekiel 7:2) as evidence (it should be telling that the overwhelming majority of texts that supposedly teach a flat Earth are poetic in nature).⁷
• Darrow’s mockery of the Balaam narrative in Numbers 22-24 mistakenly refers to the prophet as a Jew. He also refers to Asia as “a land of myth and fable and ignorance in the main.”⁸ Both statements could be read as ethnocentric in origin and as racially insensitive.

Darrow’s disparaging pamphlet is little more than an intellectually bankrupt screed. He often inserts details not found in the text and dishonestly exaggerates biblical details to accentuate their supposed absurdity. Darrow may have been a skilled lawyer, but when it came to understanding Christianity, he was far out of his depth. Between the Absurdities of the Bible and the Scopes “Monkey” Trial, Darrow had a winless record of 0-2 against Scripture.

For all his courtroom brilliance, the famed attorney gave little indication that he could participate in a serious engagement with the faith he so quickly dismissed.⁹ Darrow’s legacy is an object lesson in what happens when a sharp mind attempts to make a case without first understanding the evidence. He would have been much better served by approaching the Bible with a humble heart and diligence, sincerely desiring to know the truth.

Endnotes

¹ For more information on the trial, see Eric Lyons (2025), “100 Years Later: Revisiting the Scopes ‘Monkey’ Trial,” Reason & Revelation, 45[7]:2-6,8-11, July, apologeticspress.org/100th-anniversary-of-the-scopes-monkey-trial/.

² Clarence Darrow (1929), Absurdities of the Bible, Little Blue Book no. 1637 (Girard, KS: Haldeman-Julius), p. 5.

³ Ibid., pp. 7-8.

⁴ Ibid., pp. 9-10.

⁵ Ibid., p. 4.

⁶ See Justin Rogers (2017), “Does the Bible Teach a Flat Earth?” Reason & Revelation, 37[7]:74-77, July, apologeticspress.org/does-the-bible-teach-a-flat-earth-5428/.

⁷ The phrase “four corners of the earth” is an ancient phrase indicating “all the Earth.” It is derived from a royal title used by ancient kings in Mesopotamia. The first to refer to himself as the “King of the Four Corners of the Earth” (or “Four Quarters”) seems to have been Naram-Sin of Akkad (c. 2254-2218 B.C.). This title simply meant that Naram-Sin considered himself a universal sovereign over the entirety of the Earth. This phrase, like its biblical usage, did not communicate the concept of a flat Earth.

⁸ Darrow, Absurdities, pp. 6 and 9, respectively.

⁹ Here we might point out that Darrow debated the English writer and apologist G.K. Chesterton and appeared to have lost that debate in the eyes of many in the audience. The two met on January 18, 1931 in New York City to debate whether Christianity had been a force for good or ill in the world. Darrow took a hostile, sarcastic tone in attacking the Christian faith for its supposed historical abuses and stifling effect on intellectual progress. His attempts to bait Chesterton into getting angry failed, with Chesterton responding consistently with grace under fire. Although the debate did not produce a clear winner, much of the audience favored Chesterton, including those who did not share his spiritual perspective.

The post Clarence Darrow: The Lawyer Who Couldn’t Beat the Bible appeared first on Apologetics Press.

(1) A Knife That Cuts Both Ways

First, it should be mentioned that migration of animals to islands and remote places before the Flood may be an interesting question, but it is not a potential problem for the Creation model. Creationists argue that the world as God created it may have been something of a supercontinent (called Rodinia),² potentially making travel to places that are now isolated continents or islands much easier. More likely, however, God created animals across the planet already in their designed habitats during Creation week.

After the Flood, however, how can animal dispersion be explained if God was not miraculously involved (which seems to be the implication of the text—e.g., Genesis 8:17-11:9). First, it must be conceded that, ironically, animals in such remote places are as much a problem for the evolutionary model as they are for the biblical Flood model. Whether evolution or Creation is true, animals exist in Australia, have been there for some time, and their arrival must be explained. Whatever explanation the evolutionist uses to explain the existence of animals in Australia may very well be an option for creationists as well.

(2) Closer Continents

It is also important to realize that, as with the evolutionary model, the Creation model has no problem with the idea of plate tectonics—the theory that the Earth’s crust is broken into large pieces that move relative to each other, diverging, converging, and transforming. Therefore, creationists also have no reason to reject the concept of Pangaea—the idea that all of today’s continents were once joined together in one massive continent. In fact, it was a biblical Flood believer by the name of Antonio Snider-Pellegrini who was among the first to suggest that the continents may have once been joined together into one continent³—long before Alfred Wegener, often credited with “continental drift,” was even born. Snider-Pellegrini believed that the Flood may have been the cause of the break-up of the original supercontinent and subsequent rapid movement of its pieces.⁴

The Pangaea concept may even be implied by the description of God’s activities given in Genesis 1:9. As is often the case, however, the problem creationists have with the conventional version of geologic history concerning Pangaea comes from the assumption of uniformitarianism—in this case, the idea that the pieces of the Earth’s crust have always been moving at the rate we observe today. While the continents are spreading on the order of centimeters per year today, if the Flood occurred, and “all the fountains of the great deep [presumably, the ocean floor] were opened” (Genesis 7:11), surely including volcanic and significant tectonic activity, the separation rate could certainly have been much quicker for a period of time. Evidence for just such an accelerated separation rate has been documented.⁵ By implication, immediately after the Flood, remote destinations like Australia, Antarctica, and India could have been much closer together than they are today, in keeping with Pangaea models, allowing migration to islands and remote continents before the continents were too far apart.

(3) Frozen Channels

Other possibilities are also available which vindicate the biblical model. For example, according to the Flood model, a great Ice Age/Ice Advance commenced after the Flood,⁶ caused by warmer oceans (hence, greater precipitation) and increased volcanic activity (due to increased tectonic activity, causing cooler summers from increased volcanic aerosols and ash in the atmosphere). An Ice Age would have allowed animal migration from the Ark across frozen channels. The English Channel, as well as channels to Ireland, Iceland, and Greenland may have been frozen at the time. Significantly, a frozen channel from Russia to Alaska—the Bering Strait—would have allowed animal migration to North America. The water depth between the two is only 100-160 feet deep. With some 30% of the Earth’s continents covered with ice (as opposed to 10% today), the Earth’s sea level would have been significantly lowered making frozen channels common during the height of the Ice Age.

Ironically, in Origin of Species, glacier growth in the past was argued by Darwin to be how animals could have arrived in several remote places, including islands.⁷ As a modern example of animal movement across frozen channels, in 2018 scientists tracked an Arctic fox’s 76 day journey as it traveled from the far north Norway island group of Svalbard, across sea ice, the Greenland ice sheet, and Kane Basin to reach Ellesmere Island, Canada.⁸

(4) Land Bridges

Some Flood skeptics superficially observe on a map the location of Australia in comparison to Asia and summarily dismiss the idea of a land bridge nearly connecting Asia to Australia. However, thanks to modern technology, we know the depth of the ocean across the planet. A closer look at the water depth between the islands of the island chain that span the distance between mainland Asia and Australia reveals that the water depth is only dozens to hundreds of feet in many places along the path. Once again, during the post-Flood Ice Advance period, roughly 30% of the Earth’s land was covered with ice, significantly lowering sea level globally. In fact, secular scientists estimate that the Earth’s sea level may have been 400 feet lower at the peak of the Pleistocene Ice Age,⁹ which would have nearly completely opened a land path from Asia all the way to Australia.

That fact has led evolutionary scientists to postulate that that is how humans reached Australia during the Ice Age.¹⁰ Gemma Tarlach, writing in Discover magazine, explained,

From the North Sea to the island-dotted tropics between Asia and Australia, from the frigid waters of the Bering Strait to the sunny Arabian Peninsula, now-submerged coastal landscapes were exposed and accessible to our ancestors at multiple times in prehistory, including key periods of human expansion across the globe. The square mileage of these areas now under the seas is equal to that of modern North America.¹¹

Tarlach applies the same concept to the pathway between central Europe and England/Scotland during the Ice Age.

Look at a map of today’s Europe and its northern epicenters of population and commerce: London, Paris, Amsterdam, Copenhagen. Now consider that these hubs were once hinterland, mere fringes of an expanse rich in conifer forests, meadows, rivers and wetlands, all of it teeming with game. Prehistoric travelers could have walked from what’s now central Europe to northern Scotland without even seeing a coastline. As the massive glaciers and ice sheets of the…Ice Age began melting…, rising seas inundated this world. The North Sea was born.¹²

Bottom line: using the geography of today to draw conclusions about the past is unreliable at best, even according to many evolutionists. Humans and animals could have used land bridges to disperse after the Flood.

(5) Log “Islands”

It is also likely that for some time, remnants of the great forests of the pre-Flood period would have been floating on the receding waters of the Earth until their decay was completed. As is the case from localized floods today, small “land masses” composed of trees and debris are often found floating on the water (e.g., traveling down rivers). Much larger islands of plant material and debris are found associated with larger catastrophes as well. For example:

• Such a land mass of trees can still be seen on Spirit Lake, a result of the eruption of Mount Saint Helens volcano 45 years ago.
• After the 2011 Japan tsunami, an island of debris was spotted floating across the Pacific Ocean towards the U.S. west coast. The island was 69 miles in length and covered an expanse of over 2.2 million square feet.¹³

But is it likely that animals would be found floating on such debris islands? Some scoff at the idea, but they only do so out of ignorance. After all, three weeks after the 2011 Japan tsunami, the Japan Coast Guard found and rescued a dog that had been floating on one of the tsunami’s debris islands.¹⁴ Such a scenario may very well explain the existence of dingoes in Australia. Graham Lawton, writing in New Scientist, even noted that,

After the 2011 Tohoku earthquake and tsunami in Japan, around 300 Japanese marine species were found on the shoreline of British Columbia having been carried on artificial debris. Some larger vertebrates, such as tortoises, crocodilians and possibly even hippos, may be able to float or swim. Of course, sceptics can’t just pour cold water on the idea. The presence of particular animals in certain faraway places still requires an explanation, so what have they got?¹⁵

Paleontological and archaeological evidence indicates that humans made it to the continent of Australia after the Flood and before Abraham.¹⁶ Lawton explained that scientists have long thought that humans could have arrived there accidentally, assuming that

[p]eople must have arrived on the currents after being washed into the sea by a tsunami or flood, perhaps clinging to a mat of floating vegetation or a raft of pumice. This so-called “sweepstake colonization” is often invoked to explain how terrestrial reptiles and mammals make it onto distant tropical islands, and it could plausibly account for the peopling of Sahul. Prevailing ocean currents are favourable and any floating castaways caught in them would have found the vast Sahul “hard to miss”, according to archaeologist Jane Balme at the University of western Australia in Perth.¹⁷

Bruce Hardy, the chair of the Department of Anthropology at Kenyan College in Ohio, agreed about the plausibility of the rafting hypothesis for human migration to isolated locations, arguing that migration could have occurred by “natural rafts drifting and leading to human occupation of some of these islands.”¹⁸ They could have “drifted to islands atop natural vegetation mats.”¹⁹ If humans could drift in such an accidental manner, why not animals?

Lawton agreed, arguing that monkeys and other animals also could have “sailed across oceans on floating islands of vegetation.”²⁰ Colin Barras, writing in New Scientist, said, “We know…that small monkeys somehow made it across the [strong current, dangerous Wallace—JM] line to Sulawesi and clearly they didn’t use boats—in all likelihood they floated over on mats of vegetation”—possibly even dozens of the monkeys.²¹ In fact, Lawton noted that,

The rafting hypothesis is as old as the theory of evolution itself. In On the Origin of Species, Charles Darwin pointed out that the flora and fauna of the Galapagos Islands were clearly related to those of South America, while Cape Verde’s were distinctly African…. His point was to discredit the belief that each species was a unique, divine creation, but he inadvertently launched the idea that the inhabitants of distant islands must have somehow blown in from the mainland.²²

Concerning how species (e.g., plants, seeds, and invertebrates) dispersed to oceanic islands, Darwin suggested that they could have been transported by seaweed, “floating timber,” “drifted by the prevailing currents,” or could have “floated in chinks of drifted timber.”²³ The Galapagos Conservancy, discussing the “raft theory” of how species arrived on the islands, acknowledged that many must have arrived by

sea while swimming or floating, sometimes with the aid of rafts of tangled vegetation. It is likely that the ancestors of present-day Galapagos animals that are good swimmers (sea lions, sea turtles, penguins) actually swam their way to the islands with the help of some swift ocean currents. On the other hand, it is believed that many of the reptiles and small mammals (rice rats) were carried to the islands from the South or Central American mainland on rafts of vegetation. The vast majority of such rafts would have sunk well before they ever reached Galapagos, but it would have only taken a handful of successful rafts to wash ashore to explain the present reptile diversity in Galapagos.²⁴

Caccone, et al. add that “tortoises probably reached the [Galapagos—JM] islands by rafting from South America, 1000 km to the east” using the Humboldt Current.²⁵ A BBC Documentary on the South Pacific reasoned, “As tsunamis strike the coast, rafts of vegetation can be cast adrift. Perhaps animals were caught up in those rafts, too. Could this have been the answer to how these animals [Fijian crested iguanas—JM] made it to Fiji? After all, they are the heartiest of their kind and could have survived long sea journeys.”²⁶

Bottom line: evolutionists cannot “have their cake and eat it, too”—either raft travel is ridiculous or it’s reasonable. In truth, if evolutionists are right, it is not at all outlandish to suppose that massive debris islands would have been found worldwide after the Flood and that animals could have been found floating on them in the years immediately after the Flood.

Migration by Swimming?

Consider: if one believes animal migration by rafting to be a ludicrous idea, what must he think when he hears the evolutionary theory that dinosaurs may have crossed to islands by swimming? Smithsonian Magazine highlighted research published in Cretaceous Research in 2021, in which scientists concluded that, since (according to the evolutionary timeline) Africa was surrounded by water when it was colonized by dinosaurs, “Swimming would have been the only way for the dinosaur to reach prehistoric Africa from Europe or Asia, reinforcing the idea that exceptional events can help species move between distant continents.”²⁷ Referring to the same research, Phys.org noted that dinosaurs must have arrived in Africa by “water-rafting on debris, floating, or swimming,” and added the following telling statement:

Ocean crossings are rare, improbable events, but have been observed in historic times. In one case, green iguanas travelled between Caribbean islands during a hurricane borne on debris. In another, a tortoise from the Seychelles floated hundreds of kilometres across the Indian Ocean to wash up in Africa. “Over millions of years,” said [Nicholas—JM] Longrich [of the Milner Centre for Evolution at the University of Bath—JM], “Once-in-a-century events are likely to happen many times. Ocean crossings are needed to explain how lemurs and hippos got to Madagascar, or how monkeys and rodents crossed from Africa to South America.”²⁸

While creationists would interpret the data to which evolutionists are referring differently, nevertheless, evolutionists have conceded yet another possibility for how animals could have migrated to various isolated locations.

In a more recent example that gives plausibility to the swimming option, in 2019, a small tsunami that struck the eastern coast of the U.S. during Hurricane Dorian, swept 20 cows and 28 horses from Cedar Island into the Atlantic Ocean off the coast of North Carolina. Three of the cows were later found alive over four miles away on a barrier island in the Outer Banks National Park. Apparently, the cows survived by swimming. One of the cows was pregnant while adrift and later gave birth to a healthy calf.²⁹

Tertiary Ocean Currents—Evidence of the Rafting Hypothesis?

Could land animals have arrived on the Australian continent after the Flood via log mat? As added evidence of the legitimacy of that theory, recent genetic analysis suggests that Australian marsupials originated in South America before moving to Australia.³⁰ When we look at the projections of what the ocean currents are thought to have been like during the Tertiary period (immediately after the Flood), we find that an ocean current was present, traveling directly from South America to Australia.³¹

Bottom line: if tsunamis are virtually certain to create floating islands of debris, what would be expected from a global Flood with rapid tectonic activity creating enormous earthquakes and subsequent tsunamis?³² If animals and humans are known to be able to travel aboard such makeshift vessels, who’s to say that such mini-“continents,” with various animals along for the ride, would not have been commonly spotted immediately following the Flood? A radically different terrestrial environment, with species clamoring to find food on the newly disheveled Earth, could have caused accelerated dispersal of the Ark’s population from Ararat to Australia before Australia had moved too far from the mainland.

One would want to be cautious not to be too quick to invoke supernatural explanations for proposed scientific problems with Bible teaching, since it can lead to scientific laziness and effectively halt scientific investigation into the great works of the Lord (Psalm 111:2).³³ However, when the biblical text suggests that divine assistance may have played a role in a biblical event, it would be poor hermeneutics to dismiss the possibility without consideration. In this case, Genesis 6:20 suggests that God gathered the animals for Noah before the Flood. It is plausible, therefore, to postulate that God would have been involved, at the very least Providentially, in the dispersal of the animals after the Flood. Clearly, He had several reasonable avenues with which to do so that would not have required miraculous assistance.³⁴

(6) Humans Brought Them

Of course, one final possibility as to how animals dispersed to remote islands like Australia would be that humans carried them. After all, evolutionists themselves argue that is precisely how some animals were able to populate certain islands.³⁵ As noted earlier, physical evidence appears to place humans in Australia after the Flood and before Abraham, during the Babel dispersion period.³⁶ Who’s to say they did not arrive with animals in tow?

Lawton argued: “Another option, at least for more recent animal crossings, is that small creatures such as lizards were accidentally or deliberately transported by prehistoric humans. We know that our Stone Age ancestors were skilled seafarers, navigating across hundreds of kilometres of ocean to reach Japan…and perhaps even sailing from South-East Asia to Australia….”³⁷ Granted, human transportation of animals is not available to evolutionists as an option in many instances, since they do not believe humans were on the scene yet (for example, when dinosaurs roamed the Earth). From a biblical perspective, however, humans have been on the scene “from the beginning of the creation” (Mark 10:6).

Conclusion

While post-Flood migration from the Ark to remote places like Australia has often been a charge used by evolutionists against the Bible and its account of a global Deluge, ironically, evolutionists themselves answer their own challenges with plausible options at the creationists’ disposal. Such attacks merely provide the biblical model another opportunity to prove itself to be reliable. “[S]coffers will come in the last days, walking according to their own lusts…. For this they willfully forget: that by the word of God the heavens were of old and the earth standing out of water and in the water, by which the world that then existed perished, being flooded with water…. Therefore, since all these things will be dissolved, what manner of persons ought you to be in holy conduct and godliness, looking for and hastening the coming of the day of God…?” (2 Peter 3:3b-12).

Endnotes

¹ E.g., Bill Nye and Ken Ham (2014), Uncensored Science: Bill Nye Debates Ken Ham (Petersburg, KY: Answers in Genesis); Janet Kellogg Ray (2021), Baby Dinosaurs on the Ark? The Bible and Modern Science and the Trouble of Making It All Fit (Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans), pp. 101-103.

² Andrew A. Snelling (2014), “Noah’s Lost World,” Answers in Genesis, https://answersingenesis.org/geology/plate-tectonics/noahs-lost-world/.

³ A. Snider-Pellegrini (1858), La Création et Ses Mystères Dévoilés (Paris: A. Franck et E. Dentu).

⁴ Today, creationists argue that Pangaea formed and broke apart during the Flood and, therefore, only ever existed underwater. Rodinia is thought to have been the supercontinent of the pre-Flood world. See Snelling.

⁵ E.g., Ross N. Mitchell, David A.D. Evans, and Taylor M. Kilian (2010), “Rapid Early Cambrian Rotation of Gondwana,” Geology, 38[8]:755-758; Brian Thomas (2010), “Continents Didn’t Drift, They Raced,” Institute for Creation Research, http://www.icr.org/article/continents-didnt-drift-they-raced/; Steven Austin, John Baumgardner, D. Russell Humphreys, Andrew Snelling, Larry Vardiman, and Kurt Wise (1994), “Catastrophic Plate Tectonics: A Global Flood Model of Earth History,” Proceedings of the Third International Conference on Creationism, ed. R.E. Walsh (Pittsburgh, PA: Creation Science Fellowship), pp. 609-621; S.P. Grand (1994), “Mantle Shear Structure Beneath the Americas and Surrounding Oceans,” Journal of Geophysical Research, 99:11591-11621; J.E. Vidale (1994), “A Snapshot of Whole Mantle Flow,” Nature, 370:16-17.

⁶ Michael Oard (2004), “The Genesis Flood Caused the Ice Age,” Answers in Genesis, http://www.answersingenesis.org/articles/fit/flood-caused-ice-age.

⁷ Charles Darwin (1859), On the Origin of Species by Means of Natural Selection, or the Preservation of Favoured Races in the Struggle for Life (London: John Murray), https://darwin-online.org.uk/content/frameset?itemID=F373&viewtype=text&pageseq=2, pp. 346-410.

⁸ “Argos Used to Track Fox’s 2,700-mile Journey from Norway to Canada” (2019), NOAA NESDIS, July 17, https://www.nesdis.noaa.gov/news/argos-used-track-foxs-2700-mile-journey-norway-canada.

⁹ United States Geological Survey (2022), “How Does Present Glacier Extent and Sea Level Compare to the Extent of Glaciers and Global Sea Level During the Last Glacial Maximum (LGM)?” January 27, https://www.usgs.gov/faqs/how-does-present-glacier-extent-and-sea-level-compare-extent-glaciers-and-global-sea-level; see also Gemma Tarlach (2019), “Return to Aquaterra,” Discover, 40[5]:56, June.

¹⁰ See Graham Lawton (2020), “Finding Sahul,” New Scientist, 245[3266]:39, January 25—Due to lower sea levels during the Ice Age, “the Sahul coast would have been significantly closer to the easternmost of the south-eastern Asian islands”; also, Christopher Bae, Katerina Douka, and Michael Petraglia (2017), “On the Origin of Modern Humans: Asian Perspectives,” Science, 358[6368]:1269, December 8; Kate Ravilious (2017), “The First Australians,” Archaeology, 70[4]:49, July/August. Uncovered land bridges are also how scientists are postulating that dinosaurs migrated from North America to Africa [Vicky Just (2020), “The First Duckbill Dinosaur Fossil from Africa Hints at How Dinosaurs Once Crossed Oceans,” Phys.org, November 5, https://phys.org/news/2020-11-duckbill-dinosaur-fossil-africa-hints.html].

¹¹ Tarlach, p. 56; see also Colin Barras (2018), “Stone Age Sailors,” New Scientist, 238[3180]:36-37, June 2.

¹² Ibid., p. 62.

¹³ Danielle Demetriou (2011), “Massive Floating Rubbish Islands from Japan Tsunami Spotted on Pacific,” The Telegraph, April 8, http://www. telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/asia/japan/8437632/Massive-floating-rubbish-islands-from-Japan-tsunami-spotted-on-Pacific.html.

¹⁴ “Japan Earthquake: One Month Later” (2011), The Atlantic: Photo, April 7, http://www.theatlantic.com/photo/2011/04/japan-earthquake-one-month-later/100041/.

¹⁵ Graham L. Lawton (2021), “On a Raft and a Prayer,” New Scientist, 252[3365/3366]:52, December 18/25.

¹⁶ Lawton (2020), p. 39. Conventional dating methods suggest that humans arrived in Australia 65,000 years ago, during the Ice Age [Danielle Demetrioue (2011), “Massive Floating Rubbish Islands from Japan Tsunami Spotted on Pacific,” The Telegraph, April 8, http://www. telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/asia/japan/8437632/Massive-floating-rubbish-islands-from-Japan-tsunami-spotted-on-Pacific.html]. Accounting for the continuing, though diminishing, accelerated nuclear decay in the post-Flood years [Jeff Miller (2013), “Don’t Assume Too Much: Not All Assumptions in Science Are Bad,” Reason & Revelation, 33[6]:62-70], 65,000 years correlates to a pre-Abraham date ca. 2,200-2,100 B.C.

¹⁷ Lawton (2020), p. 38, emp. added.

¹⁸ As quoted in Sam Walters, et al. (2024), “Everything Worth Knowing About Neanderthals,” Discover, 45[3]:33, May/June.

¹⁹ Ibid.

²⁰ Lawton (2021), p. 50.

²¹ Barras, pp. 38-39.

²² Lawton (2021).

²³ Darwin, pp. 360,391,397,399.

²⁴ “History of Galapagos” (no date), Galapagos Conservancy, accessed February 11, 2025, https://www.galapagos.org/about_galapagos/history/, emp. added.

²⁵ Adalgisa Caccone, et al. (1999), “Origin and Evolutionary Relationships of Giant Galapagos Tortoises,” Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 96[23]:13223, November 9, emp. added.

²⁶ “South Pacific: Castaways (Episode 2)” (2009), BBC Studios: Natural History Unit, aired May 17. The documentary also postulates that geckos may have reached the Solomon Islands by vegetation raft.

²⁷ Riley Black (2020), “The Top Ten Dinosaur Discoveries of 2020,” Smithsonian Magazine on-line, December 22, https://www.smithsonianmag.com/science-nature/top-ten-dinosaur-discoveries-2020-180976578, emp. added.

²⁸ Just; The saltwater crocodile is thought to have swam 60 miles from New Guinea to the Solomon Islands (“South Pacific…”).

²⁹ Mark Price (2020), “Cow That Swam 5 Miles to Outer Banks in a Hurricane Was Pregnant. It Just Gave Birth,” The News & Observer, February 20, https://www.newsobserver.com/news/local/article239953898.html.

³⁰ Clara Moskowitz (2010), “Marsupials Not From Down Under After All,” LiveScience.com, July 27, https://www.livescience.com/6770-marsupials.html.

³¹ Warren D. Allmon (2023), “Tertiary Period,” Encyclopaedia Britannica on-line, https://www.britannica.com/science/Tertiary-Period. Note that an ocean current is also thought to have been present that led from the theorized location of Ararat to South America.

³² For more information about the modern biblical Flood model accepted by most Creation geologists, see Jeff Miller (2019), “Was the Flood Global? Testimony from Scripture and Science,” Reason & Revelation, 39[4]:38-47, https://apologeticspress.org/wp-content/uploads/2021/08/1904w.pdf.

³³ Jeff Miller (2024), “Is it Ever Appropriate to Say ‘God Did It’ in Response to a Scientific Challenge?” Reason & Revelation, 44[6]:11, June,  https://apologeticspress.org/wp-content/uploads/2024/05/2406-web.pdf.

³⁴ An example of a supernatural option would be the miraculous transportation of animals to remote continents/islands.

³⁵ “Enigmatic Falklands ‘Fox’ Might Have Hitched a Ride with Humans” (2021), Nature, 599[7883]:10, November 4.

³⁶ Lawton (2020).

³⁷ Lawton (2021), p. 52, emp. added.

The post If the Flood Happened, How Did Animals Get Back to Australia? appeared first on Apologetics Press.

ICHTHYOSAURUS

The name Ichthyosaurus means “fish lizard.” This creature grew to be about 6 feet long. It had large eyes that it probably used to see in murky waters. It was shaped much like a dolphin and had four prominent flippers that helped it be a swift swimmer. As a reptile and not a fish, it would have needed to surface and breathe air, much like dolphins and whales. Scientists have found fossil remains of this reptile that included embryos of its babies, giving us evidence that it gave birth to live babies and did not lay eggs. Interestingly, the first fossil ever found of an Ichthyosaurus was discovered by a 12-year-old girl named Mary Anning in Dorset, England in 1812. As she grew up, she found many more fossils and became a well-known fossil hunter. Just think, there are most likely lots of fossils of unknown creatures out there that have not yet been discovered. How cool would it be if one of our Discovery readers found one and was able to use the media attention to point people to the Creator?

ELASMOSAURUS

The name Elasmosaurus means “metal-plated or thin-plated lizard.” It was given this name, because it has bone plates that line its chest and hip area. When you look at artists’ drawings of this creature, you may wonder why it was not called the “long-necked lizard.” The Elasmosaurus had 72 vertebrae in its neck, which is the second-highest number of any known animal ever to live. In early artistic works showing this lizard, artists would draw its neck being very flexible, almost like a snake. Modern studies of the neck indicate that it was not very flexible but was most likely straight and somewhat stiff. This reptile was a member of a group called plesiosaurs that lived in oceans and seas. While many of these creatures were “fearfully great lizards” (which is what the word dinosaur means), they are not classified as dinosaurs. Scientists who study and name these creatures only use the word dinosaur to describe land-living reptiles that had certain types of hip structures. So, in the same way that a Tyrannosaurus rex is a dinosaur, an Elasmosaurus is a plesiosaur. And what a plesiosaur it was! It could grow to be between 30-40 feet long and weigh up to 10,000 pounds. At the end of its long neck, this lizard had a small head that contained about 40 teeth, several of which were long and sharp. It was a predator that fed on other marine animals such as fish and squid. Like the other marine reptiles, it was not a fish and did not have gills. It breathed air and would have needed to surface regularly.

KRONOSAURUS

This massive marine reptile gets its name from the mythological Greek Titan named Kronos—the “lizard of Kronos.” Like the Elasmosaurus, it is a plesiosaur that lived in the oceans and seas. It could be about 35 feet long. Unlike the Elasmosaurus, it did not have a long neck. Instead, it had a much shorter neck and a larger head. Its head composed about one-third of its entire length. Scientists believe this was an apex predator that would have been able to eat most other creatures that swam in the seas with it. The fossils that have been found suggest that it ate sea turtles, sharks, other marine reptiles, and possibly even members of its own species. Research done on the jawbones and teeth of this animal indicates that it had an extremely powerful bite. Bite force is measured in a scientific unit of force called newtons (named after Isaac Newton). The average human has a bite force of about 700 newtons. A dog, such as a pitbull, has a bite force of about 1,000 newtons. The most powerful bite force of any living animal today is that of the saltwater crocodile, measured at 16,000 newtons. Where does the Kronosaurus rank on the bite force scale? Its estimated bite force was a whopping 30,000 newtons, almost twice the force of the most powerful bite of any creature alive today. Needless to say, you would not want to have been anywhere close to this reptile’s mouth when it decided to snap its bone-crushing jaws shut. 

“SEA REX”

In Dorset, England in 2023, scientists uncovered the most complete pliosaur (which is a kind of plesiosaur) skull ever found. In fact, it holds the Guinness Book of World Records top spot for that distinction. It is a 6.5-foot skull that has about 95% of its surface area fossilized and still together. One remarkable aspect of the fossil is the number of teeth it contains. It has 130 razor sharp teeth! Because of its ferocious, huge mouth and teeth, it has been named “Sea Rex,” the “T-rex” of the sea. 

In the book of Job, God talks to Job about a fearsome sea creature named Leviathan. God draws attention to this animal to show Job that God made (and can control) even the largest and most dangerous beasts. God said to Job, “I will not conceal his limbs, his mighty power or his graceful proportions. Who can remove his outer coat? Who can approach him with a double bridle? Who can open the doors of his face, with his terrible teeth all around (Job 41:12-14)? Could “Sea Rex” be the Leviathan? Its huge head and massive mouth filled with 130 razor sharp teeth sound much like an animal with “terrible teeth all around.” In truth, however, we will probably never know if “Sea Rex” is the creature God was describing to Job as Leviathan. We can know, however, that God was talking to Job about a real creature that once lived, and “Sea Rex” helps us imagine what that beast may have looked like. We can also know that God created all the kinds of marine reptiles on Day Five of Creation, just one day before He created humans. And we can know that all God’s creatures are designed to bring Him glory. “Praise the Lord from the earth, you great sea creatures and all the depths” (Psalm 148:7).

The post Marine Reptiles appeared first on Apologetics Press.

1. The Pool of Siloam in the Time of Jesus (1^st Century A.D.)

In John 9:1-11, the Gospel writer recounts how the Lord Jesus anointed the eyes of a blind man with clay and told him to “Go, wash in the Pool of Siloam.” For centuries, the pool’s exact location was uncertain. Many assumed it was the small Byzantine basin near the Church of St. Saviour until 2004, when workers repairing a water pipe in the southern City of David uncovered stone steps descending into a vast plastered pool. Archaeologists Ronny Reich and Eli Shukron soon identified this as the authentic Second-Temple Pool of Siloam, the very site referenced in the New Testament.²

The stepped pool—roughly 225 feet long and 15 feet deep—was constructed during the reign of Herod the Great in the late first century B.C., at the height of Jerusalem’s expansion.³ Fed by the ancient Siloam Tunnel, the pool collected water from the Gihon Spring and served both as a public reservoir and as a massive mikveh (ritual bath) for pilgrims ascending the Pilgrimage Road toward the Temple Mount.⁴ Its architectural grandeur reflects Herod’s vast building program, which included the Temple complex itself. When Jesus performed His miracle there, He stood amid a system that had already been serving God’s people for over seven centuries—a line of hydraulic continuity stretching back to the time of Judah’s earliest kings.

2. Hezekiah’s Tunnel: Engineering Under Siege (Late 8^th Century B.C.)

Long before Herod’s reconstruction, the same spring that fed the Siloam Pool had already been secured by one of the Bible’s most famous engineers: King Hezekiah. Facing the Assyrian invasion in 701 B.C., Hezekiah ordered the diversion of Jerusalem’s water supply into the fortified city. As 2 Kings 20:20 records, “He made the pool and the conduit and brought water into the city.” Archaeology confirms this in the Siloam Tunnel, an underground passage roughly 1,750 feet long that connects the Gihon Spring on the east to the lower valley on the west.⁵

Cut through bedrock, the tunnel winds in an S-shaped path and terminates near the location of the later Herodian pool. Its ancient Hebrew inscription—carved near the southern exit—commemorates the meeting of the two work crews who tunneled toward one another.⁶ The engineering precision required to complete such a project testifies to the royal resources and administrative capacity of Hezekiah’s reign.

By channeling water inside Jerusalem’s walls, Hezekiah effectively replaced an earlier open reservoir, transforming an external valley dam into a protected, internal water source. His system not only supplied the city during siege but also paved the way for the later Herodian expansions that pilgrims of Jesus’ day would see.

3. The Newly Discovered Siloam Dam of King Joash (Early 8^th Century B.C.)

Beneath these familiar works lies an even older foundation. In 2025, Johanna Regev, Nahshon Szanton, Filip Vukosavović, Itamar Berko, Yosef Shalev, Joe Uziel, and Elisabetta Boaretto published the results of their radiocarbon analysis of mortar samples from a massive stone wall at the southern mouth of the Tyropoeon Valley.⁷ The results—calibrated to between 805 and 795 B.C.—place the wall firmly within the reign of King Joash (r. ca. 835-796 B.C.).⁸

The wall, more than 40 feet high and 26 feet thick, sealed the valley and impounded both runoff and overflow from the Gihon Spring, forming an enormous open reservoir—the earliest known Pool of Siloam. Excavations revealed that this dam and its reservoir lay within the southern extent of ancient Jerusalem, inside what became the lower City of David. By Hezekiah’s time, the area was fully fortified, ensuring that the reservoir stood within the city’s defensive walls, precisely where the later Herodian pool would be expanded in the first century B.C. This confirms a continuous chain of hydraulic development at the same site—from Joash’s dam to Hezekiah’s tunnel to Herod’s monumental pool.⁹

Radiocarbon dating of embedded twigs and straw produced a tight 10-year range, while paleo-climatic data from Dead Sea cores and Soreq Cave stalagmites confirmed that Jerusalem faced alternating drought and flash floods during this era. The construction of such a dam provided both flood control and long-term water storage, demonstrating advanced planning under royal oversight. In every sense, the Joash dam anticipates the later biblical account of Hezekiah’s engineering reforms.

Its discovery vindicates the biblical portrayal of Judah’s early monarchy as organized, literate, and technologically capable—precisely the kind of kingdom that could undertake monumental civic works consistent with the historical books of 2 Kings and 2 Chronicles.

4. Canaanite Foundations: Jebus, the Water Systems Before Israel

Long before Israelite kings ruled Jerusalem, the Canaanite city of Jebus—the stronghold later conquered by King David (2 Samuel 5:6-9)—had already fortified the Gihon Spring with towers, tunnels, and a rock-cut pool inside its wall. Excavations by Kathleen Kenyon in the 1960s and Ronny Reich and Eli Shukron in the 1990s revealed a monumental Spring Tower—a defensive structure enclosing access to the spring from within the city.¹⁰ This earliest water system included a stepped tunnel descending to a protected pool, ensuring access to water during siege. Although the Bronze-Age pool differs in scale and purpose from the later Siloam installations, it set the hydraulic pattern that successive builders—Joash, Hezekiah, and finally Herod—would each adapt for their generation.¹¹

Moreover, the biblical book of Genesis identifies the city as Salem when Melchizedek is called “king of Salem” (Genesis 14:18-20), and Psalm 76:2 equates Salem with Zion, reinforcing the view that Jerusalem’s geographical identity stretches back into the early patriarchal period.

5. Continuity and Theological Significance

From the Bronze-Age foundations to the Herodian expansion, the Pool of Siloam embodies the continuity of Divine provision in Jerusalem’s history. Through every era, God’s people found both physical and spiritual refreshment in the same flowing waters of the Gihon Spring. Isaiah warned those who “refused the waters of Shiloah that flow gently” (Isaiah 8:6), while later prophets spoke of “drawing water from the wells of salvation” (Isaiah 12:3). Hezekiah’s tunnel fulfilled this prophecy in physical form—securing the city’s lifeline amid peril.

Centuries later, Jesus transformed that physical image into spiritual truth: “If anyone thirsts, let him come to Me and drink” (John 7:37). The Siloam Pool thus stands as both a technological marvel and a living parable of redemption. The recent discovery of the Joash-era dam reinforces that Scripture’s record of royal infrastructure was not theological metaphor but historical reality—its stones still bearing witness to the ingenuity and faith of ancient Judah.

Conclusion

The unveiling of the Siloam Dam beneath Jerusalem’s City of David represents one of the most significant discoveries in decades—an engineering bridge linking Joash, Hezekiah, Herod, and Jesus. Each generation modified the same life-giving spring: Joash contained it with a massive dam; Hezekiah redirected it with a tunnel; Herod adorned it with stone steps; and Jesus sanctified it with a miracle.

Modern science has now dated the earliest phase of this system with remarkable precision, confirming that Judah’s kings were capable of large-scale, organized public works as the Bible describes. The stones cry out in testimony that the biblical narrative stands—not on myth—but on measurable history. In the Pool of Siloam—past and present—the waters still proclaim the truth of God’s Word: “With joy you will draw water from the wells of salvation” (Isaiah 12:3).

[Dr. Jonathan Moore—Field Archaeologist with the Shiloh Excavation, Israel; Adjunct Faculty at Freed-Hardeman University; and Founder of Seeing His World, a missions-based educational nonprofit dedicated to providing academically grounded yet spiritually transformative guided experiences throughout the Bible lands (www.seeinghisworld.com).]

Endnotes

¹ King Joash (Jehoash) reigned in Judah ca. 835-796 B.C. following a period of protection and oversight by Jehoiada the priest (see 2 Kings 11-12; 2 Chronicles 24). Crowned at age seven, he initially “did what was right in the eyes of the LORD” under Jehoiada’s guidance but later turned from faithfulness, permitting idolatry and ordering the death of the prophet Zechariah (2 Chronicles 24:20-22). He was assassinated by his servants and succeeded by his son Amaziah.

² Ronny Reich and Eli Shukron (2005), “The Second-Temple Period Pool of Siloam in Jerusalem,” Israel Exploration Journal, 55:153-167.

³ “The Siloam Pool: Where Jesus Healed the Blind Man,” Biblical Archaeology Society, www.biblicalarchaeology.org/daily/biblical-sites-places/biblical-archaeology-sites/the-siloam-pool-where-jesus-healed-the-blind-man/.

⁴ Nahshon Szanton and Joe Uziel (2019), “The Pilgrimage Road: Jerusalem’s Ascent from the Pool of Siloam to the Temple,” City of David Studies.

⁵ Dan Gill (1983), “The Siloam Tunnel Reconsidered,” Nature 305:515-517.

⁶ James B. Pritchard (1969), Ancient Near Eastern Texts Relating to the Old Testament (Princeton University

⁷ Johanna Regev, et al. (2025), “Radiocarbon Dating of Jerusalem’s Siloam Dam Links Climate Data and Major Waterworks,” Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 122[35], https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.2510396122.

⁸ Note that radiocarbon dating does, in fact, sometimes result in ages of materials that exceed 10,000 years. Radiocarbon dating, however, is understood to be suspect for objects thought to be older than roughly 3,000-4,000 years old [cf. George H. Michaels and Brian Fagan (2013), “Chronological Methods 8—Radiocarbon Dating,” University of California Santa Barbara Instructional Development.]. Further, biblical creationists argue that radioactive decay rates were apparently accelerated during the Flood and afterward, possibly up to 1,500-1,000 B.C., making all dating techniques unreliable for ages beyond that time. For evidence of accelerated radioactive decay in the past, see Don DeYoung (2008), Thousands…Not Billions (Green Forest, AR: Master Books).

⁹ City of David Foundation (2025), “Monumental Dam from the Time of Biblical Kings Uncovered,” August 29.

¹⁰ Kathleen M. Kenyon (1967), Jerusalem: Excavating 2000 Years of History (New York: McGraw-Hill), pp. 31-45.

¹¹ See “Salem (Bible),” Wikipedia, en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Salem_(Bible) (accessed September 2025); Armstrong Institute, “The Incredible Origins of Ancient Jerusalem,” armstronginstitute.org/843-the-incredible-origins-of-ancient-jerusalem/ (accessed September 2025).

The post Jerusalem’s Newly Discovered Siloam Dam Confirms Biblical Engineering from Joash to Jesus appeared first on Apologetics Press.

The post Jesus: The Theme of the Bible appeared first on Apologetics Press.

The post Are Fossils on Mountains Evidence of the Flood? appeared first on Apologetics Press.

A Clay Echo from the Assyrian Empire

Preliminary translation suggests the fragment recorded an official financial demand—possibly a warning of overdue tribute—issued from Assyria to a Judahite administrator. Petrographic testing showed the clay was not local but originated from the Tigris basin, the Assyrian heartland, indicating the tablet had traveled to Judah as part of imperial correspondence.²

According to Haaretz, the inscription even references the “month of Av,” a dating formula characteristic of Assyrian bureaucratic tablets, and may allude to “delay of payment,” implying Judah was falling behind on its obligations.³ If so, the fragment captures a precise historical moment when Hezekiah began resisting Assyrian domination, exactly as described in Scripture: “Hezekiah rebelled against the king of Assyria and would not serve him” (2 Kings 18:7).

What makes this discovery remarkable is not only its antiquity but its context. It surfaced in soil from near the Temple Mount—the very administrative heart of Hezekiah’s Jerusalem—and dates to the same decades when prophets like Isaiah thundered warnings against political compromise.

Hezekiah’s Reign: The Historical Framework

Biblically, Hezekiah (ca. 715-686 B.C.) stands at the crossroads of faith and foreign policy. His reforms centralized worship in Jerusalem, purged idolatry, and reasserted reliance on Yahweh. Yet he ruled in the shadow of Assyria, whose kings—from Tiglath-pileser III to Sennacherib—extended their control across the Levant.

Archaeology reveals how Hezekiah’s spiritual resolve was matched by logistical preparedness. During this same period, two monumental engineering projects transformed Jerusalem’s defenses:

• Hezekiah’s Tunnel, a 1,750-foot conduit carved through bedrock to redirect the Gihon Spring into the city, securing its water during siege (2 Chronicles 32:2-4).
• The Broad Wall, a massive fortification up to 23 feet thick, unearthed in Jerusalem’s Jewish Quarter, likely built in anticipation of the Assyrian invasion.

Both align perfectly with the Bible’s description of Hezekiah’s fortifications: “He strengthened himself, built up all the wall that was broken, and raised it up to the towers” (2 Chronicles 32:5). These structures, still visible today, are physical testimonies to Judah’s crisis-driven expansion during the reign of a king facing Assyria’s wrath.

Seals from a Turbulent City: Hezekiah and Isaiah

Within sight of the Temple Mount, archaeologists also discovered two clay seal impressions (bullae) that connect directly to the Hezekiah narrative.

1. The Hezekiah Bulla—unearthed in the Ophel excavations—reads “Belonging to Hezekiah [son of] Ahaz king of Judah.” Its imagery includes a sun disk flanked by ankh symbols, reflecting both royal and religious motifs.⁴
2. The Isaiah Bulla—found just ten feet away—bears the inscription “[Belonging to] Isaiah nvy […],” possibly short for navi (prophet). Though partly broken, it dates to the same stratigraphic layer and suggests the prophet’s physical presence in Jerusalem’s royal quarter.⁵

Together, these two sealings embody the relationship between the prophet and the king described in Isaiah 36-39. Their proximity is not coincidence; they were likely impressed in the same administrative complex that managed correspondence like the newly discovered Assyrian tablet.

The Assyrian Side: The Taylor Prism

While Jerusalem yields Judah’s voice, Assyria speaks through its own clay. The Taylor Prism, one of three prisms inscribed by Sennacherib (701 B.C.), chronicles his western campaigns and his siege of Jerusalem. In elegant Akkadian, the king boasts: “As for Hezekiah the Judean, who did not submit to my yoke, I shut him up like a bird in a cage in Jerusalem, his royal city.” This inscription⁶ perfectly matches the events of 2 Kings 18-19 and Isaiah 36-37, except that the Assyrian record omits the outcome—the miraculous deliverance of Jerusalem. Scripture records that 185,000 Assyrian soldiers perished overnight (2 Kings 19:35), and even Sennacherib’s annals admit that Jerusalem remained unconquered—a rare omission for the empire that prided itself on total subjugation.

Faith and Deliverance

The convergence of evidence paints a vivid picture.

• The new Assyrian fragment reveals an administrative relationship between Judah and Assyria consistent with the period of tribute and rebellion.
• The Hezekiah and Isaiah bullae testify to the historical figures at the heart of that rebellion.
• The Tunnel and Wall illustrate the practical measures taken in response to the threat.
• The Taylor Prism provides Assyria’s own corroboration of the campaign, siege, and Hezekiah’s resistance.

These independent lines of evidence converge with stunning precision on the late 8^th century B.C.—the exact era of the biblical narrative.

Historical Tension, Prophetic Clarity

Isaiah’s counsel during this period was clear: trust not in Egypt, nor in silver sent to Assyria, but in the Lord. The prophet warned that reliance on foreign powers would invite destruction, yet faith would bring deliverance (Isaiah 30-31). When Hezekiah humbled himself and sought God’s guidance, Jerusalem was spared.

This moment of mercy, however, was fleeting. The Bible presents the later kings—Manasseh, Amon, and Josiah’s sons—as reversing Hezekiah’s faithfulness. By the time of Nebuchadnezzar II, Judah’s unfaithfulness reached its climax in 586 B.C. with the Babylonian destruction of Jerusalem. The contrast is theological and historical: the generation that trusted was preserved; the generations that forsook were judged.

Why This Discovery Matters

From an evidential standpoint, the cuneiform fragment represents the first tangible Assyrian document found in Jerusalem. It bridges the worlds of archaeology and Scripture, showing that the city was indeed part of Assyria’s bureaucratic orbit. The convergence with the prophetic books gives fresh weight to the Bible’s historical memory:

• The language is Akkadian, exactly as expected.
• The location aligns with Hezekiah’s administrative center.
• The theme—tribute and defiance—mirrors the biblical account.

Each artifact alone might be intriguing; together, they form a mosaic of historical credibility. As The Times of Israel observed, this inscription “adds an Assyrian voice to Jerusalem’s First Temple history.”⁷

A Voice from the Dust

In the end, the clay that once bore imperial demands now speaks for Scripture’s authenticity. The kings and empires that threatened Judah have crumbled, but their tablets, seals, and tunnels endure to testify that the events described in Kings and Isaiah were not mythic abstractions—they were lived history.

Hezekiah’s faith and Isaiah’s prophecy stand vindicated not only by the text but by the stones and shards beneath Jerusalem’s soil. The Assyrian scribe who pressed his stylus into that clay could not have known he was recording more than a bureaucratic transaction; he was leaving a fragment of evidence that, nearly three millennia later, would confirm the faithfulness of the God who delivers.

Endnotes

¹ See Dario Radley (2025), “Rare Assyrian Inscription Found in Jerusalem,” Archaeology Magazine, October, archaeologymag.com/2025/10/rare-assyrian-inscription-found-in-jerusalem/.

² Christopher Eames (2025), “A 2,700-Year-Old Assyrian Inscription Demanding Tribute Found in Jerusalem,” Armstrong Institute of Biblical Archaeology, October 21, armstronginstitute.org/1353-a-2700-year-old-assyrian-inscription-demanding-tribute-found-in-jerusalem.

³ Ruth Schuster (2025), “Assyrian Cuneiform Hinting at Tax Dodging Found in First Temple Jerusalem,” Haaretz, October 22, www.haaretz.com/archaeology/2025-10-22/ty-article/assyrian-cuneiform-hinting-at-tax-dodging-found-in-first-temple-jerusalem/0000019a-0b0b-d44f-ab9e-9b2b54e60000.

⁴ “King Hezekiah’s Seal Comes to Light” (2015), Biblical Archaeology Review.

⁵ “Does This Seal Show the Signature of the Prophet Isaiah?” (2018), National Geographic.

⁶ “Sennacherib’s Annals—The Taylor Prism” (1680), British Museum K.

⁷ “Biblical Tax Notice: 1st-Ever Assyrian Inscription Found Near Jerusalem’s Temple Mount” (2025), The Times of Israel, October 22.

The post Echoes of Empire: The Jerusalem Cuneiform Fragment and the Biblical Record of Hezekiah and Isaiah appeared first on Apologetics Press.

The post Does Evil in the Animal Kingdom Disprove a Good God? appeared first on Apologetics Press.

Rob holds three earned degrees from Freed-Hardeman University: a B.S. in biology (with a minor in chemistry), a B.A. in art (with a minor in Bible), and an M.Ed. If that combination sounds unique, that’s because it is—and it’s part of what makes Rob such a rare asset in the Kingdom of God. He knows Scripture, understands science, and communicates both through compelling visuals that are biblically sound and graphically striking.

Rob has served as the Graphics Designer at Apologetics Press for the past 21 years. That title alone doesn’t do him justice, however. To call Rob “multi-talented” is to vastly understate the breadth of his God-given creativity, work ethic, and contribution to the work of AP.

Rob doesn’t just design—he creates. He takes the black and white text of the AP writers and brings the words to life with color and creativity. Whether it’s a new children’s book, a tract layout, a video thumbnail, or an artifact display at AP, Rob consistently delivers high-quality work that uplifts and educates man and honors God.

In addition to his full-time work at AP, Rob has also served as the youth minister at the Wetumpka church of Christ for the past 12 years. His love for teaching young people and his ability to connect with them are evident every June, when he serves as the director of AP Camp at ICYC in Oakman, Alabama. If you’ve never been, imagine a week overflowing with biblical teaching, beautiful singing, and a lot of fun—and a relentlessly energetic camp director who somehow has more fire on day five than most people do on day one.

Rob is a creative encourager and one of the hardest-working people I’ve ever known. His impact at AP and on the Kingdom of Christ is immeasurable—not just in the beauty of his designs, but in the strength of his faith and the contagious joy he brings daily to AP and all who know him.

The post AP Staff Spotlight: Rob Baker, Graphics Designer appeared first on Apologetics Press.

[EDITOR’S NOTE: Part I of this two-part series appeared in the October issue of R&R. Part II follows below and continues, without introductory comments, where the first article ended.]

Second, the Bible is clear that there is only one reason God ever gives humans any commands at all. In Deuteronomy 6:24, Moses wrote: “And the Lord commanded us to observe all these statutes, to fear the Lord our God, for our good always, that He might preserve us alive, as it is this day.” According to this verse, God’s commandments are always given for the benefit of those who receive them. In 2 Peter 1:3, we read that God’s divine power “has given to us all things that pertain to life and godliness.” If God does not need human worship, why then does He so adamantly command it? He commands worship, “for our good always,” so we can have everything we need for “life and godliness.”

Why Do We Need to Worship God?

With a proper understanding of what the Bible teaches about God, worship, and God’s relationship to humans, we can easily answer the initial question, “Why does God demand that we worship Him?” The simple answer is, “Because humans need to worship God in order to experience their best possible life.” I think, however, that if this article ended with that answer, the reader would be less than satisfied. What we really want to know is why is it best for humans to worship God? What is it about the fact that humans need to think and say that God is awesome, almighty, worthy of praise, honor, and glory that helps humans achieve their highest potential?

The answer lies in the fact that it is always best to understand, recognize, and admit the truth of objective reality. Furthermore, a person must recognize objective reality in order to behave in a way that will bring about the most beneficial outcome. We can illustrate this truth in a number of ways.

Imagine that a person needs to cross the Grand Canyon. A failure to recognize and admit the truth of gravity could bring about catastrophic results. Gravity is real. It is powerful. If a person wants to go across the Grand Canyon, a refusal to admit this, or a momentary lapse in judgment, in which this reality is not considered, can be fatal. Now, there are several options that a person has for getting across the canyon safely. That person could fly across, recognizing that he would need some source of power, such as hot air in a balloon or fuel for a plane. The individual could build a bridge, a rather costly endeavor, but given the time and resources, one that would be effective. Whatever the person chooses, however, he must calculate the Law of Gravity. The second he attempts anything that does not take that reality into account, he is destined for failure. He must think, believe, and understand that gravity is real, powerful, ever present on Earth, and something to remember and think about.

Take the example of the theoretical “Perpetual Motion Machine.” You may be aware that the U.S. Patent Office has been forced to refuse to consider all patents for any machine that claims it can run forever without an external source of energy. They have taken this stand because the Second Law of Thermodynamics states, in layman’s terms, that all closed systems are moving toward a state of disorder. If no more energy is coming in, and energy is less usable after every energy transaction, then eventually all machines run down. You can imagine a wise engineering professor who has been teaching mechanical engineering for many years explaining this situation to his eager class of new recruits. What does he insist that they recognize and learn? There are no perpetual motion machines. The Second Law of Thermodynamics is real. It is powerful. It cannot be broken. Every machine you ever build must admit this truth. He does not want the students to think and say these things so that the Second Law feels good about itself. He wants them to admit the truth so that they can build machines that work.

What happens, then, when an objective reality that needs to be recognized and admitted is “housed” in a person? All of us have experienced this to some degree. Imagine you are in a trivia game and there is a sports fanatic on your team. Every sports question he gets right. He has studied sports stats all his life. He collected sports cards from the time he could read. Your team is asked a question about Barry Bonds and the Baseball Hall of Fame. Who does your team want to answer the question? You do not ask the guy who knows science or the girl who has a doctorate in English literature. You turn to the sports guy who insists that he knows the right answer.

Now, I said we have all experienced this “to some degree,” but let’s take our illustration a step further. What if this man actually does know every single fact about every sport ever played? Any actions that failed to recognize this reality could be catastrophic. Imagine your team is asked a sports question worth 10 million dollars. Your teammate confidently says he knows every question about sports that could be asked and insists that you let him answer it. He explains that if you do not, your team will lose 10 million dollars. He is not bragging. He is not trying to force you to build up his ego. He simply wants you to admit the truth that he knows more about sports than you do, so that your team achieves the best outcome.

Any good sports team understands this concept. If there is a person on a football team who is quicker on his feet, more agile, and throws the ball faster and more accurately than anyone else on the team, everyone needs to recognize that he should play quarterback. If those on the team or the coaches refuse to recognize and admit this truth, they will not arrange the team in the best way. When it comes down to the wire, and a 70-yard pass needs to be made, the quarterback would not be bragging to say that he needs the ball and can make the throw better than anyone else on the team. He is simply stating a truth that everyone involved with the team needs to recognize and admit.

Let us shift this discussion slightly and consider how we often train children to think and behave. Imagine a mother is sitting with her child at the park. They are watching the other kids play. One little boy runs past a young girl, bumping her, causing her to fall. He immediately stops, apologizes, and helps her to her feet. The mother might turn to her child and point out the boy’s actions and explain that this is the correct way to behave. When we see laudable, honorable, just, loving, kind, benevolent, wise, competent behavior, we praise it so that it will be imitated. In this case, the child who performed the kind deed may never hear the words of the mother, but both the mother and her child need to recognize and admit the justice and kindness of the action if they want to behave in a just, kind way.

Of course, all illustrations break down at some point and do not provide a perfect analogy to the concept that is being illustrated. These illustrations can help us see, however, that recognizing and admitting reality is the only way to make decisions that will provide the best possible outcome. That being the case, any attempt to help us understand reality is one that will help us get the most out of life. If it is true that God is all-powerful, a refusal to admit this will only cause us harm. God asks us to understand this, say it to ourselves, to other people, and back to Him, not to stroke His ego, but to help us make the best possible decisions.

You can imagine the engineering professor demanding: Professor: “Say it again class. What must be calculated in all machines?” Class: “The Second Law of Thermodynamics.” Professor: “Why must it be calculated?” Class: “Because it never fails.” Professor: “Where and when does the Second Law work?” Class: “Everywhere in the Universe all the time.” Professor: “What will happen if you forget this Law?” Class: “You will be a terrible engineer!” You can see how this would go. The Second Law does not need us to understand it and “praise” it. We need to understand it in order to function properly in a world where it is a reality.

Does It Seem Like a Little Much?

Even knowing the truth, that we need to recognize objective spiritual reality, some will argue that the repeated insistence by the God of the Bible that humans worship Him is overkill. Why does God feel the need to repeat, over and over, that humans recognize His power, brilliance, and majesty?¹ And if God already knows all this about Himself, why does He require that humans keep repeating back to Him how good, glorious, and awesome He is?

First, God often wants us to express to Him things He already knows. When He asked Adam, “Have you eaten from the tree of which I commanded you that you should not eat?” (Genesis 3:11), God already knew the answer. Adam needed to confess his sins to God for his, Adam’s, sake, not to provide God with information. In the New Testament, Jesus taught His disciples to pray and ask God for things such as food and forgiveness. He then explained to them that “your Father knows the things you have need of before you ask Him” (Matthew 6:8). God does not need us to inform Him of His majesty. We need to keep repeating it back to Him so we do not lose sight of the truth of it.

Second, the history of humankind reveals that humans come pre-programmed with a religious instinct to worship something. When humans aim their praise and worship toward the wrong entities, it ends in sinful behavior that leads to disaster and destruction. The apostle Paul wrote about how the pagan Gentiles “changed the glory of the incorruptible God into an image made like corruptible man—and birds and four-footed beasts and creeping things….[A]nd worshiped and served the creature rather than the Creator, who is blessed forever. Amen” (Romans 1:23-25). Even with God’s repeated and insistent demand that humans recognize the spiritual objective reality of His all-mighty nature, humans turned their attention to “those which by nature are not gods” (Galatians 4:8).

We can illustrate what happens when a person attributes to something a power it does not have. Imagine a person believing that a dense rock will float. He is standing on the deck of a ship, ties himself to a large rock, and jumps in the water, fully trusting that he will float. His attributing the ability to float to something that does not have that ability could easily cost his life. Or think back to our Grand Canyon example. What if a person believes that a trash bag acting as a cape is stronger than the force of gravity? He jumps off, fully trusting the ability of his plastic cape, yet his “flight” does not end how he planned. When people worship the wrong entity or idea, they “serve” things that are not the ultimate, all-powerful reality, and it can never lead to their best life.

Modern, enlightened individuals may insist that they do not worship anything. They do not bow down to statues, or anything else for that matter. They believe in themselves, in the power of humanity to do good and make moral progress, and they hope for a better world that will come about when we get rid of religious baggage and traditional monotheistic thought. Try as they may, however, to deny their instinct to worship, they have set up an idol in their hearts—themselves. Moses warned about such self-worship. In his speech to the Israelites, who were going into the land of Canaan, he told them about all the good things God would do for them. They would “eat bread without scarcity” and “lack nothing” (Deuteronomy 8:9). He warned them to beware not to “forget the Lord your God” (8:11). And how would they forget a God who performed miracles, brought them out of Egypt with a mighty hand, fed them manna for 40 years, and personally directed them through the wilderness? 
“[T]hen you say in your heart, ‘My power and the might of my hand have gained me this wealth’” (8:17). Humans cannot bring themselves into existence. They do not have the power to make the Sun rise and set. Humans are so limited that we cannot “add a single hour” to our lives (Matthew 6:27, ESV). How then can we pretend that we are the ultimate reality, responsible for our own success and final destiny? No, when humans put themselves in the place of God, their end is destruction, their god is their appetites, and their glory is in their shame (Philippians 3:19). History has shown that only a constant recognition and repeated recital of God’s reality and true nature grounds a person in the understanding of objective reality.

Conclusion

God is the ultimate reality. He is infinite in all His attributes. He knows everything, has all power, is all-loving, never makes a mistake, and wants only what is best for His creation. When we recognize and admit these truths, we are able to make the best possible decisions. When we fail to admit these objective spiritual realities to ourselves, to others, and to God, we are arranging our physical and spiritual lives in ways that can only end in catastrophe. “Let everything that has breath praise the Lord. Praise the Lord” (Psalm 150:6).

Endnotes

¹ The admonitions are actually scattered over a period of 1,600 years and addressed to many different people.

The post Why Does God Demand We Worship Him? (Part 2) appeared first on Apologetics Press.

Do these beautiful words from Romans 10 mean that sinners only need to confess a belief in Jesus to be saved? Does this passage mean that repentance and baptism are unnecessary for salvation? Do these verses teach that to become a Christian, we merely “Pray this Prayer: Dear Jesus, I am a sinner. I believe that You died and rose from the dead to save me from my sins. I want to be with you in heaven forever. Jesus forgive me of all my sins that I have committed against You. I open my heart to You now and ask You to come into my heart as my personal Lord and Savior. In Jesus’ name, Amen”?²

Romans in Context

The Bible is not hard to understand,³ but we are as unlikely to properly interpret an isolated biblical statement as we are to open a random 9,000-word letter,⁴ skip to the middle of it, read a couple of sentences, and accurately know what the author was communicating. Someone may misunderstand the statement, “I’ve been hiding it from everyone, even my wife, for the past three months. I hope she doesn’t suspect anything,” to mean that a man is being unfaithful to his wife. In reality, the husband is going to great lengths to plan an elaborate surprise birthday party for his cherished spouse.

A visitor to a local high school may walk by a classroom where two people are intensely arguing and think, “If someone doesn’t intervene, I’m going to have to. I can’t believe the teacher is tolerating such behavior.” However, upon further investigation, the passerby realizes the two individuals are in a drama class practicing their lines for an upcoming theatrical performance. Additional information and proper context are two of the most fundamental, key components to correctly understanding anything in life. From letters to lectures and from books to news reports, additional (and especially contextual) information is vital to a fair and accurate interpretation.

Overall Context of Romans

Paul’s letter to the Christians in Rome in approximately A.D. 56-57⁵ is all about how the perfectly holy and just Creator lovingly and powerfully saves sinners—making sinners righteous—by means of the sacrificial death and resurrection of Jesus. Apart from God’s heavenly plan to justify sinners through Jesus’ free-will sacrifice (Romans 1:16-17; 5:6-11), there is no hope for anyone (3:10,22-23), even for the Jews, the descendants of Abraham, to whom was given the Law of Moses (2:1-3,17-24; 3:9-10,19-20). Though the Law of Moses had (and still has—15:4) some great benefits,⁶ it cannot save lawbreakers from the eternal consequences of sin (6:23).

Justification (i.e., being found “not guilty,” but “righteous” by God our Judge) is only through faith in Jesus, not trusting in the Law of Moses (or any other law) or in one’s ability to obey it perfectly. Only Jesus obeyed the Law of Moses flawlessly (5:18-19; 8:3-4; Hebrews 4:15); only Jesus, His perfect holiness, and His death on our behalf would appease the justice of God (3:23-26; 5:6-9); and only Jesus saves, not the law (cf. Acts 4:12). “[W]hat the law could not do…God did by sending His own Son” (Romans 8:3).⁷ “There is therefore now no condemnation to those who are in Christ Jesus” (8:1). Indeed, Jesus “justifies” (8:33), not the Law of Moses. Yet so many first-century Jews, tragically, were putting their confidence in the Law rather than in Jesus.

Immediate Context of Romans 9-11

Paul was “an Israelite, of the seed of Abraham, of the tribe of Benjamin” (11:1), and it distressed him with “great sorrow and continual grief” (9:2) that so many of his countrymen were lost in sin. He was so grieved by their stubborn⁸ commitment to the Law of Moses rather than to Jesus that he selflessly wrote: “I could wish that I myself were accursed from Christ for my brethren, my countrymen according to the flesh” (9:3).

In Romans chapters 9-11, Paul detailed in no uncertain terms that, while many Jews have rejected God’s plan to save sinners through Jesus, many Gentiles “have attained to righteousness, even the righteousness of faith” (9:30), just as the Jews’ Holy Scriptures prophesied (9:25-26; 10:19-20). The death, burial, and resurrection of Jesus is God’s power to save Jews and non-Jews (1:16). “For there is no distinction between Jew and Greek, for the same Lord over all is rich to all who call upon Him. For ‘whoever calls on the name of the Lord shall be saved’” (10:12-13). Sadly, rather than receiving Jesus as the cornerstone of their salvation, most Jews trusted in their law-keeping and in their expectations of a Messiah Who would reaffirm their own righteousness. In doing so, they stumbled over the Savior and stubbornly refused to acknowledge Him as the Deliverer of their souls (9:30-33).

In the middle of this hard-hitting section⁹ are the beautiful, deeply meaningful words of Romans 10:9-10: “[I]f you confess with your mouth the Lord Jesus and believe in your heart that God has raised Him from the dead, you will be saved. For with the heart one believes unto righteousness, and with the mouth confession is made unto salvation.”

5 Things to Remember When Reading Romans 10:9-10

Romans 10:9-10 was not meant to be a stand-alone, all-encompassing, quick, shallow, “accept Jesus into your heart,” altar-call-type salvation incantation. Just as Israel misunderstood the purpose of the Law of Moses and the very Messiah it pointed to, many professed Christians enthusiastically quote Romans 10:9-10, yet “not according to knowledge” (cf. 10:2). When stripped from its context and reduced to more of a slogan, these verses are dangerously, if not fatally, misunderstood¹⁰ to mean that repentance and/or baptism are not required to become a Christian and that a life of continued submissive obedience to Christ may be unnecessary.

To correctly understand Romans 10:9-10, we must allow the Bible to explain the Bible¹¹—both in Romans and within the entire biblical message of salvation. If the Bible is the inspired Word of God, then it will be internally consistent with itself about whatever it teaches,¹² including about being saved from our sins and living a faithful Christian life.

#1—Recognize What Paul Is and Is Not Contrasting

In Romans 9-11, Paul is contrasting Jews and Gentiles (i.e., their rejection and acceptance of Jesus), law and faith, works and grace (11:6), as well as stumbling (in unbelief) and standing (by faith—11:20). The Jews were doing things their way while God was calling them to submit to His way—through Jesus (10:3-4). If non-Christian Jews wanted to be saved, they had to move from an unbelief and denial of Jesus…to a knowledgeable, heartfelt belief in and confession of Him.

Neither in Romans 10 nor anywhere else in Romans is Paul contrasting belief and repentance, or confession and baptism, or faith in and obedience to Jesus—as if repentance, baptism, and obedience to God are unnecessary. In Romans 10, Paul was focusing on the Jews’ rejection of Jesus, the very One they needed to acknowledge to be saved. Until they came to a proper understanding of Who Jesus was, they were lost.

To illustrate, consider the case of a doctor who must try to convince his extremely skeptical patient that he is seriously ill and needs a specific medicine that the doctor is prescribing in order to live. The doctor is not immediately concerned with the details of the treatment plan—how often to take the pills, how many at a time, what time of day, or with or without food. None of that matters if the currently stubborn patient will not first accept that he’s sick and needs the cure. Similarly, Paul knows that if Jews want to be saved from their spiritual sickness, they must first understand and acknowledge Who the Answer is: Jesus. Otherwise, nothing else matters.

#2—Consider Paul’s Parallel Use of “Faith” and “Obedience”

While Paul contrasted several ideas in Romans 10, he also utilized some notable terms and concepts in important complementary ways, specifically faith and obedience, which many “faith-alone,” “just-accept-Jesus-into-your-heart” advocates are resistant to connect. Yet Paul did. Romans 10 verses 9-10 are bookended within Romans 10 and within the letter of Romans as a whole by evidence signifying that obedience to Jesus and confessed faith in Jesus are perfectly harmonious. That is, it’s not one without the other(s); they go together. A confessed faith is an obedient faith.

Paul noted at the beginning of the chapter how the Jews “did not know the righteousness of God”; “they did not submit to God’s righteousness” (10:3, NIV). This lack of submission underscores that true faith is not merely an intellectual assent but involves a willful alignment with God’s righteousness—a submissive obedience that flows from genuine belief. The reason, for example, that the Old Testament “priests of the Lord”—Hophni and Phinehas (sons of Eli)—were said to “not know the Lord,” is because they did not submit to His sovereign Will—they “were corrupt” (1 Samuel 1:3; 2:12). Indeed, only those who sincerely submit to God are those who really know Him (i.e., believe in Him).

Later in Romans 10, Paul wrote that though the Gospel is preached, “they have not all obeyed the gospel. For Isaiah says, ‘Lord, who has believed our report?’” (10:15-16). Some 700 years before Paul, Isaiah had uttered these words, prophesying that many Jews would not believe in the Messiah when He came (Isaiah 53:1; cf. John 12:37-38). Paul noted the fulfillment of Isaiah’s words and paralleled the Jews’ disbelief with disobedience. Those who had not “believed” were those who had “not all obeyed the gospel.” The apostle John similarly connected these important concepts: “Whoever believes in the Son has eternal life; whoever does not obey the Son shall not see life, but the wrath of God remains on him” (John 3:36, ESV).

Furthermore, in Romans 1:5 Paul began this epistle exalting the resurrected Jesus, saying, 
“[T]hrough Whom we received grace and apostleship for obedience of faith among all the nations for his name’s sake” (WEB). Paul then concludes the epistle with the same allusion to obedient faith,¹³ noting that the Gospel had been “made known to all nations for the obedience of faith” (16:26, KJV). To be obedient to the faith is to believe the Gospel; to believe the Gospel is to obey Jesus. If we want to be saved, we must “obey the Gospel.”

#3—Investigate the Meaning of “Obeying the Gospel”

Indeed, in the very chapter of Romans so frequently misused to teach that a sinner must just “accept Jesus into your heart” to be saved or to “say the sinner’s prayer,” Paul references obeying the Gospel, specifically referring to those Jews who “have not all obeyed the gospel” (10:16). But what does it mean to “obey” the Gospel? Ask the average person on the street who claims an affiliation with some denomination if he or she has “obeyed the Gospel,” and you will likely get a blank stare or perhaps a suspicious, confused look. Why? It seems that very few denominations use this biblical terminology,¹⁴ much less impress upon hearers the heavenly requirement—to “obey the Gospel.”

Paul used this same terminology in his second epistle to the church in Thessalonica in a very sobering context. Referring to the return of Jesus at the end of time, Paul wrote that the Lord would be “revealed from heaven with His mighty angels, in flaming fire taking vengeance on those who do not know God, and on those who do not obey the gospel of our Lord Jesus Christ” (2 Thessalonians 1:7-8). The apostle Peter also used this language in his first epistle, asking, “what will be the end of those who do not obey the gospel of God? Now ‘If the righteous one is scarcely saved, where will the ungodly and the sinner appear?’” (1 Peter 4:17-18; cf. Proverbs 11:31). If, as Peter and Paul clearly indicate, “obeying the Gospel” is directly tied to our eternal destiny, then everyone needs to know the Gospel and how to obey it! Thankfully, Paul specifically addressed this vital subject matter earlier in his epistle to the Romans.

In Romans 6:17-18, Paul wrote about the point in time in which the Roman Christians had originally “obeyed” the Gospel (when they initially left their previous lives of sin and became children of God—servants of God). “But God be thanked that though you were slaves of sin, yet you obeyed from the heart that form of doctrine to which you were delivered. And having been set free from sin, you became slaves of righteousness.” What is this doctrinal “form” (or “figure,” “model,” or “pattern”)¹⁵ that slaves of sin “obeyed from the heart” in order to become “slaves of righteousness”—to become Christians? Is it not what Paul had only just discussed in the immediate context of Romans 6?

What shall we say then? Shall we continue in sin that grace may abound? Certainly not! How shall we who died to sin live any longer in it? Or do you not know that as many of us as were baptized into Christ Jesus were baptized into His death? Therefore we were buried with Him through baptism into death, that just as Christ was raised from the dead by the glory of the Father, even so we also should walk in newness of life. For if we have been united together in the likeness of His death, certainly we also shall be in the likeness of His resurrection, knowing this, that our old man was crucified with Him, that the body of sin might be done away with, that we should no longer be slaves of sin. For he who has died has been freed from sin. Now if we died with Christ, we believe that we shall also live with Him, knowing that Christ, having been raised from the dead, dies no more. Death no longer has dominion over Him. For the death that He died, He died to sin once for all; but the life that He lives, He lives to God. Likewise you also, reckon yourselves to be dead indeed to sin, but alive to God in Christ Jesus our Lord (6:1-11).

The Gospel is the death, burial, and resurrection of Jesus (1 Corinthians 15:1-4). And this Good News—that a holy, just, and loving God makes sinners right[eous] through Jesus’ sacrificial death and resurrection—is the “form” or “pattern” that sinners “obey.” Paul clearly outlines in Romans 6 how the Christians in Rome had “obeyed from the heart that form of doctrine”; they “obeyed” the death, burial, and resurrection of Jesus. Specifically, Paul, looking back on their obedience to the Gospel, indicated that when, as sinners, they were “baptized into Christ Jesus,” they “were baptized into His death.” “Therefore we were buried with Him through baptism into death, that just as Christ was raised from the dead by the glory of the Father, even so we also should walk in newness of life” (Romans 6:3-4). Contextually speaking, “obey[ing] from the heart that form of doctrine” is being immersed into the watery grave of baptism, dying to the old man of sin, and rising from spiritual death (through the power of Jesus’ resurrection) as a new person, no longer a servant of sin, but a slave to the righteousness of God.

#4—Acknowledge the Foolishness of Isolating Bible Verses to the Exclusion of Others

“Are you saying that all a person must do to obey the Gospel is be baptized in water?”

“Not at all.”

“But you just said that when sinners are baptized into Jesus they become Christians.”

“According to Romans 6, being immersed in water is the actual point at which sinners become followers of Christ—when we sincerely die to the old man of sin and rise with Christ as a new spiritual creation of God in Christ Jesus.”

“But what about Romans 10:9-10?”

“Great question. Let’s talk more about Romans 10 and other New Testament passages.”

If a person is using the exclusionary, “this-verse-says-it-all” interpretation method (e.g., referring to Romans 10:9-10 to suggest that “all” a sinner must do to be saved is believe and confess Jesus), then it begs the question: What about other verses that say something different?

The fact is, various verses just before and after Romans 10:9-10 emphasize faith without mentioning confession:

• 9:32—The Jews were still lost because they did not seek righteousness “by faith.”
• 9:33—“[W]hoever believes on Him [Jesus] will not be put to shame” (cf. Isaiah 28:16).
• 10:4—“Christ is the culmination of the law so that there may be righteousness for everyone who believes” (NIV).
• 10:11—Once again, Paul quotes Isaiah 28:16 in reference to salvation found only in Jesus: “Whoever believes on Him will not be put to shame.”

There is nothing about the sweet confession of Jesus in these verses in Romans, as well as in many other New Testament passages. When the Philippian jailor asked Paul and Silas in Acts 16: “Sirs, what must I do to be saved?” Paul and Silas said: “Believe on the Lord Jesus Christ, and you will be saved” (16:30-31). When the Jews in Acts 2 asked Peter and the apostles, “Men and brethren, what shall we do?” Peter said: “Repent, and let every one of you be baptized in the name of Jesus Christ for the remission of sins” (2:37-38). All of these verses are as different from Romans 10:9-10 as Mark 16:15-16, where Jesus said: “Go into all the world and preach the gospel to every creature. He who believes and is baptized will be saved; but he who does not believe will be condemned.” We should no more exclude confession from believing (based upon Romans 9:32-33, 10:4, and 10:11) than we should exclude repentance and baptism from believing and confessing (based upon an isolated reading of Romans 10:9-10).

If the Bible is the inspired Word of God,¹⁶ and if, as the psalmist said to God, “The entirety of Your word is truth” (Psalm 119:160), then human beings do not have the authority to dismiss one verse for another. We must “rightly divid[e]” and “accurately handl[e] the word of truth” (2 Timothy 2:15, NASB) and never accept one truth to the exclusion of others.

Most Bible students seem to understand the rationality and importance of this holistic approach to Bible interpretation when considering a host of biblical subjects—from the genealogy of Jesus to His sinless life. Rarely does someone quote from Matthew 1:1 and contend that David and Abraham were the immediate earthly father and grandfather of Jesus, since other verses say otherwise. Likewise, virtually no one points to Romans 3:23 and says Jesus must have been a sinner because “all have sinned.” Such verse isolation would be an egregious misuse of Scripture, as Jesus is the one exception among accountable human beings—He never sinned (cf. Romans 8:3; 5:19; Hebrews 4:15).

It is also an egregious misuse of Scripture to contend that God calls sinners to “just accept Jesus into their hearts to be saved” or to “say the sinner’s prayer.”¹⁷ The fact is, Romans 10:9-10 actually proves that “faith alone” does not save, since Paul also detailed how such faith in Jesus Christ must be confessed.¹⁸ “Believing” and “confessing” are two different things, as we learn in John 12:42-43, where “among the rulers many believed in Him, but because of the Pharisees they did not confess Him, lest they should be put out of the synagogue; for they loved the praise of men more than the praise of God.”

Remember that Paul’s emphasis in Romans 10 was on the many Jews who disbelieved that Jesus was the Messiah. Paul was pleading with them to recognize Jesus for Who He is (and Who the Law of Moses said He was; 10:4)—the Rock of our salvation, Who at that time was still “a stumbling stone and rock of offense” to the many Jews who rejected Him (9:33). Logically speaking, there was no more reason to plead with disbelieving Jews to, for example, be baptized than there is today to impress upon Muslims, Hindus, or atheists to be baptized—if they know nothing about or care nothing about Jesus. Nothing else matters until Jesus matters! Nothing else means anything until Jesus means everything!

When sinners come to sincerely believe in their hearts and confess with their mouths the Lord Jesus, then they will do exactly what Paul reminded the Christians in Rome that they had previously done on their way to becoming Christians: “[A]s many of us as were baptized into Christ Jesus were baptized into His death”; “we were buried with Him through baptism into death, that just as Christ was raised from the dead by the glory of the Father, even so we also should walk in newness of life” (Romans 6:3-4).

It’s not Romans 6 without Romans 10, any more than it is Luke 24:47 without Mark 16:16 or Acts 2:37-38 without Acts 16:30-31. These verses (and the eternal spiritual truths that they teach) are as harmonious as the different resurrection accounts of Jesus. May we never isolate one passage to the exclusion of other verses, but recognize their perfectly supplemental, complementary nature, whether about the nature of Jesus or how to become a Christian.

#5—To “Call on the Name of the Lord” Means More Than Confessing Christ or Saying the “Sinner’s Prayer”

What did the apostle Paul—the one God used to communicate the marvelous message of Romans—what did he do to become a Christian? Paul (formerly Saul the sinner) was on his way to Damascus to persecute Christians when Jesus supernaturally appeared to him from heaven. Paul asked Jesus, “What shall I do?” to which Jesus responded, “Arise and go into the city, and you will be told what you must do” (Acts 9:4-6; 22:10). Paul (demonstrating his belief in Jesus) proceeded to Damascus (with some assistance) where he fasted for three days and was “praying” (Acts 9:8-11), awaiting further instructions.

As we see throughout the book of Acts and even as Romans 10:14-15 reminds us, God always uses people to teach people the Gospel. Even in Paul’s case, God used a man named Ananias, who said to Paul: “And now why are you waiting? Arise and be baptized, and wash away your sins, calling on the name of the Lord” (Acts 22:16). Notice carefully that Ananias, God’s specially chosen messenger to Paul, did not tell Paul that his sins were washed away when Paul spoke to Jesus on the road to Damascus (Acts 9:4-6), or when he fasted for three days (9:9), or when he prayed (9:11). Even though Paul had seen Jesus, talked to Jesus, and sincerely fasted and prayed, he had not yet “called upon the Lord.” Acts 22:16 indicates that he “called upon the Lord” and had his sins washed away by the blood of Jesus when he took the final step on his way to becoming a Christian—when he was “baptized into Christ Jesus” (Romans 6:3-4).

Paul’s “calling on the name of the Lord” harmonizes perfectly with what Peter instructed the thousands of people to do in Acts 2. Peter quoted from the prophecy of Joel and told those in Jerusalem on Pentecost that “whoever calls on the name of the Lord shall be saved” (Acts 2:21; Joel 2:32). The people in Acts 2 did not understand Peter’s quotation of Joel to mean that a sinner must pray to God for salvation. Their question in Acts 2:37 (“Men and brethren, what shall we do?”) indicates such. Furthermore, when Peter responded to their question and told them what to do to be saved, he did not say, “I’ve already told you what to do. You can be saved by petitioning God for salvation through prayer. Just call on His name.” On the contrary, Peter had to explain to them what it meant to “call on the name of the Lord.” Instead of repeating this statement when the crowd sought further guidance from the apostles, Peter commanded them, saying, “Repent, and let every one of you be baptized in the name of Jesus Christ for the remission of sins” (Acts 2:38).¹⁹

In Romans 10:13, Paul (like Peter in Acts 2) also quoted from Joel 2:32: “[W]hoever calls on the name of the Lord shall be saved.” When we allow “the Bible to explain the Bible,” we will not come to the erroneous conclusion that Paul is commanding the unbelieving Jews in Romans 10 to merely “cry out to the Lord” (cf. Matthew 7:21) or to “pray the sinner’s prayer.” Rather, with Paul’s own conversion in mind (his “calling on the name of the Lord”—Acts 22:16), as well as those on Pentecost (Acts 2), we realize that in Romans 10 Paul is pleading with (especially) the Jews, who “have not all obeyed the gospel” (Romans 10:16) to “call on the name of the Lord”—that is, to “obey the gospel.” And to “obey the Gospel” is to hear and believe the Gospel (Romans 10:17), to repent of sins (Romans 6:2,6; Acts 2:38), to make the good confession that Jesus Christ is the Son of God (Romans 10:9-10), and to be immersed in water for the remission of sins (Romans 6:3-4; Acts 2:38; 22:16). This is what it means for sinners to “call upon the name of the Lord.”²⁰

Conclusion

Romans 10:9-10, though often quoted in isolation, must be interpreted in harmony with its immediate and overall context. Paul was not offering a shallow, minimalist formula for salvation. Rather, he was urging hardened, unbelieving Jews to confess the very Messiah they had rejected. Faith and confession are foundational, essential components of salvation, but not exclusive. In Romans—and the entire New Testament—faith, repentance, confession, and baptism are presented as inseparable steps of obeying the blessed Gospel of Christ and beginning one’s all-important journey of walking in the light of the Lord (1 John 1:5-10).

Endnotes

¹ And perhaps John 3:16 and Ephesians 2:8-9, which we have addressed elsewhere: Eric Lyons (2019), “‘Believing’ in John 3:16,” Reason & Revelation, 39[9]:98-101,104-107, September, https://apologeticspress.org/believing-in-john-316-5723/; Eric Lyons (2000), “Ephesians 2:8-9: Contradictory, or Perfectly Consistent,” Reason & Revelation, 40[10]:110-113,116-119, October, apologeticspress.org/ephesians-28-9-contradictory-or-perfectly-consistent-5870/.

² This “accept-Jesus-into-your-heart” kind of prayer is typical of what you will hear and read online, in print, and in person among many denominations. This particular wording of the “sinner’s prayer” has circulated widely in social media circles in recent years.

³ Some sections may be more difficult than others, but it is not difficult to learn what the Bible teaches about how to become a Christian and how to live the Christian life. Cf. Kyle Butt (2020), “Why Is the Bible So Hard to Understand?” Reason & Revelation, 40[4]:38-41,44-47, April, apologeticspress.org/why-is-the-bible-so-hard-to-understand-5775/.

⁴ A typical English translation of Paul’s letter to the Romans is a little over 9,000 words.

⁵ In Romans 15:25-26, Paul specifically mentions his upcoming journey to Jerusalem to deliver support from Christians in Macedonia and Achaia to poor saints in Judea (cf. 1 Corinthians 16:1-3; Acts 24:17). Thus, this letter was written before that time—apparently when Paul was in Greece on his third missionary journey (Acts 20:1-3; cf. Romans 16:1-2,23; 1 Corinthians 1:14).

⁶ The commands of God, even commandments under the Law of Moses, are “holy and just and good” (Romans 7:12). After all, the holy, just, and good God was the Author of the Law of Moses. The Old Testament helped the Jews understand sin (3:20). What’s more, it pointed forward to Jesus, the Messiah (10:4).

⁷ Emphasis in Bible quotations is added unless otherwise noted.

⁸ Romans 2:5; 10:21; 11:7-8.

⁹ Chapters 9-11.

¹⁰ Cf. 2 Peter 3:14-17.

¹¹ Cf. Eric Lyons (2018), “Letting the Bible Explain Itself,” Reason & Revelation, 38[8]:86-88,92-95, August, apologeticspress.org/letting-the-bible-explain-itself-5589/.

¹² See Kyle Butt and Eric Lyons (2015), “3 Good Reasons to Believe the Bible Is From God,” Reason & Revelation, 35[1]:2-5,8-11, January, apologeticspress.org/3-good-reasons-to-believe-the-bible-is-from-god-5089/.

¹³ For more information, see Dave Miller (2021), “The Obedience of Faith in Romans,” Reason & Revelation, 41[3]:34-35, March, https://apologeticspress.org/the-obedience-of-faith-in-romans-5955/.

¹⁴ It may be impossible to know with certainty, but general AI inquiries suggest that such language “is not especially common in most mainstream denominations…. It is infrequently used, and sometimes absent.”

¹⁵ From the Greek “tupos,” Frederick Danker, et al. (2000), Greek English Lexicon of the New Testament (Chicago, IL: University of Chicago), p. 1020.

¹⁶ 2 Timothy 3:16-17; 2 Peter 1:20-21. For evidence of the Bible’s divine inspiration, see Kyle Butt (2022), Is the Bible God’s Word? (Montgomery, AL: Apologetics Press). See also Dave Miller (2020), The Bible Is From God: A Sampling of Proofs (Montgomery, AL: Apologetics Press); Kyle Butt and Eric Lyons (2021), Defending the Bible (Montgomery, AL: Apologetics Press); apologeticspress.org/category/inspiration-of-the-bible/.

¹⁷ The “sinner’s prayer” for salvation is nowhere found in the New Testament.

¹⁸ Cf. 1 Timothy 6:12-13.

¹⁹ For more information on why different answers are given in the New Testament to the same basic question (“What must I do to be saved?”), see Eric Lyons (2004), “One Question: Three Different Answers,” apologeticspress.org/one-question-three-different-answers-646/.

²⁰ This is not to say becoming a Christian is always synonymous with “calling on the name of the Lord.” Abraham was obviously not baptized into Christ when he “called on the name of the Lord” (Genesis 12:8; cf. 4:26). What’s more, when the New Testament describes people who were already Christians “calling on the name of the Lord” (Acts 9:14,21; 1 Corinthians 1:2), it certainly does not mean that Christians were continually being immersed in water after having been baptized to become a Christian (cf. 1 John 1:5-10). Depending on when and where the phrase is used, “calling on the name of the Lord” may be referring to (1) becoming Christians, (2) worshiping God, or (3) faithful service to the Lord. However, it is never used in the sense that all a non-Christian sinner must do to be saved is to cry out and say, “Lord, Lord, save me.” The sinner’s prayer is without biblical backing.

The post Romans 10:9-10: Going Beyond Salvation Slogans appeared first on Apologetics Press.

What tools do you think Noah used to build the Ark?

Dear Lizzie,

I love this question. It helps us think about the Bible stories as real history involving real people. Noah’s family had a lot of work to do to build the massive Ark that was three stories tall and about 450 feet long. The Bible does not tell us the tools they used, so we would have to speculate. Since the primary material for the Ark was gopher wood, then we know wood working tools were important. Also, we know they had metal available to them (read Genesis 4:22). Therefore, they most likely had saws, axes, planes, mallets for inserting wooden pegs, pots for boiling pitch, brushes for putting pitch on the wood, buckets for carrying pitch, ladders, oxen and carts for hauling supplies, and scores of other tools and materials.  Can you imagine the hard work and long days they put into building the Ark? I like how the Bible summarizes Noah’s work. “Thus Noah did, according to all that God commanded him, so he did.” Let’s all be like Noah and use whatever tools we need to do all that God commands us.

The post What Tools Did Noah Use? appeared first on Apologetics Press.

Bearer of Bad News 

Without any introduction or explanation, Elijah is introduced in 1 Kings 17:1 as “the Tishbite, of the inhabitants of Gilead.” The first thing we see him doing is giving the wicked King Ahab a message from God: “As the LORD God of Israel lives, before whom I stand, there shall not be dew nor rain these years, except at my word.” God then instructed Elijah to leave and “hide by the Brook Cherith,” where God told him that he would “drink from the brook,” and that He had commanded the ravens to feed him there (1 Kings 17:2-4). 

Bearer of Better News

After a period of time, the water in the land dried up—including the Brook Cherith, where Elijah had been staying. God then told Elijah to “Arise, go to Zarephath…and dwell there. See, I have commanded a widow there to provide for you” (1 Kings 17:9). But when Elijah arrived, the widow had felt the painful effects of this long drought, and she did not think she had enough food to help him. She told Elijah, “I do not have bread, only a handful of flour in a bin, and a little oil in a jar; and see, I am gathering a couple of sticks that I may go in and prepare it for myself and my son, that we may eat it, and die” (1 Kings 17:12). 

Isn’t this a sad situation? The good news is that Elijah had a message from God to deliver to this woman, a much better message than the one he had given Ahab! The Lord’s message was this: “The bin of flour shall not be used up, nor shall the jar of oil run dry, until the day the LORD sends rain on the earth” (1 Kings 17:14). Just as Elijah had delivered “bad news” to Ahab, he delivered “good news” to this poor widow and her son. This is what God’s faithful prophets have always done—they simply delivered the messages that God told them to deliver. Sometimes those messages were difficult to hear, and sometimes they brought joy and comfort. 

While Elijah was staying with the widow, her son became sick and died. Elijah prayed to God that the child would come back to life, and God answered his prayer by reviving the child. In so many important ways, God was able to bless this woman and her family through the presence and work of Elijah. 

Brave Baal Challenger

The next thing that God told Elijah to do was to “Go, present yourself to Ahab, and I will send rain on the earth” (1 Kings 18:1). At this point, “there was a severe famine in Samaria” (1 Kings 18:2), and King Ahab was “hunting” everywhere for Elijah, since he blamed him for the drought and famine in the land. In truth, it was Ahab’s idolatry and unfaithfulness to God that was the cause of the trouble. Elijah’s conversation with Ahab ended with Elijah challenging the hundreds of false prophets who served Baal and Asherah to meet him on Mount Carmel. Elijah intended to demonstrate the amazing power of the one and only God of heaven! When everyone had arrived at Mount Carmel, Elijah proposed a “contest” to determine whether Baal or the LORD was “God.” The challenge was this:

“I alone am left a prophet of the LORD; but Baal’s prophets are four hundred and fifty men. Therefore let them give us two bulls; and let them choose one bull for themselves, cut it in pieces, and lay it on the wood, but put no fire under it; and I will prepare the other bull, and lay it on the wood, but put no fire under it. Then you call on the name of your gods, and I will call on the name of the LORD; and the God who answers by fire, He is God” (1 Kings 18:22-24a). 

Like any “good sport,” Elijah let the prophets of Baal go first. They prepared their altar and their sacrifice, “and called on the name of Baal from morning even till noon, saying, ‘O Baal, hear us!’ But there was no voice; no one answered” (1 Kings 18:26). Elijah showed the ridiculousness of idolatry by mocking them and saying, “Cry aloud, for he is a god; either he is meditating, or he is busy, or he is on a journey, or perhaps he is sleeping and must be awakened” (1 Kings 18:27). The prophets of Baal continued to cry out to their false god “until the time of the offering of the evening sacrifice” (verse 29), even cutting themselves “with knives and lances,” but there was no answer. 

Then it was Elijah’s turn. After repairing and preparing the altar of the LORD that had been broken down, he made a trench around the altar, put the wood and the bull on the altar, and said, “Fill four waterpots with water, and pour it on the burnt sacrifice and on the wood” (verse 33). He did this three times and “filled the trench with water” (verse 35). Elijah then said a simple prayer to God, calling on Him to hear him and to turn the hearts of the people back to God. The results were instant: “Then the fire of the LORD fell and consumed the burnt sacrifice, and the wood and the stones and the dust, and it licked up the water that was in the trench” (verse 38). In one of the most “one-sided” contests in human history, God (through Elijah) defeated the prophets of Baal in memorable fashion. 

Broken Human Being

Interestingly, immediately after this encouraging victory, Elijah became overwhelmingly discouraged. After the prophets of Baal were defeated, Ahab’s wife, Jezebel, “sent a messenger to Elijah, saying, ‘So let the gods do to me, and more also, if I do not make your life as the life of one of them by tomorrow about this time’” (1 Kings 19:2). When he heard this threat, Elijah “ran for his life,” “went a day’s journey into the wilderness, and came and sat down under a broom tree. And he prayed that he might die” (verse 4). Elijah was a powerful prophet and servant of God, but—like all of us—he was also a human being who struggled with emotions, discouragement, and fear. 

How did God respond to Elijah’s request to die? God handled Elijah with gentleness, patience, and understanding. He sent an angel to feed Elijah, He allowed him to rest, and He appeared to him in a meaningful and powerful way to encourage and instruct him in his upcoming work (1 Kings 19:5-18). Elijah was told by God to anoint Elisha to replace him as God’s prophet, but Elijah continued to serve God. Elijah had one more encounter with King Ahab—this time to condemn him and his wife, Jezebel, for murdering a man named Naboth and taking his vineyard for himself (1 Kings 21). 

Beloved by God

In 2 Kings 2, we see the amazing account of God taking Elijah into heaven. The Bible says that “suddenly a chariot of fire appeared with horses of fire and separated the two of them [Elijah and Elisha]; and Elijah went up by a whirlwind into heaven” (2 Kings 2:11). Along with Enoch (Genesis 5:24), Elijah was one of only two people who never died. God simply took them home to be with Him. 

Elijah lived an amazing life of service to God. It was not “normal,” it was not always easy, and it was sometimes even scary, but he was a faithful servant and prophet who spoke God’s messages plainly and boldly. The New Testament refers to Elijah as an example of someone “with a nature like ours” who “prayed earnestly” (James 5:17). He was not a perfect person—only Jesus could be described in this way—but he shows us the importance of faith, obedience, and fully trusting in the one true God!  

Doc’s Corner: Are Spiral Galaxies Evidence of a Young Universe?

If you stir a hot foamy drink with cinnamon sprinkled on top, you might see a spiral galaxy shape in the foam. As the foam continues to spin, the part of the spiral close to the center spins faster than the “arms” of the shape, which causes the spiral to become a “blob” after a few spins. If spiral galaxies are billions of years old (as is argued by scientists who believe in an old Universe), they should all look like “blobs” today. However, over 77% of the galaxies in the Universe are still recognized to be spiral galaxies, because we can still see their arms. Logically, they must be young, just as the Bible teaches. [If you get a chance, check out the Andromeda spiral galaxy through a telescope!]

The post Meet Elijah appeared first on Apologetics Press.