Douglas F. Kelly compares God's ability to speak light into the dark human soul and make it reborn to God's speaking light into existence.

The Sending Forth of Light

The Ancient of Days (William Blake, 1794)

A third divine action occurred on the first day of creation: 'And God said, Let there be light: and there was light' (Gen 1:3).  Elsewhere in Scripture we learn that God Himself is uncreated light (e.g. John 8:12; 1 John 1:5; Revelation 21:23; 22:5).  But now the One who is light and 'swells in light inapproachable' (1 Timothy 6:16) commands forth created light into the darkness of t he yet unformed earth.

The mighty hand of God shaping and organizing the dark, watery mass in the direction of a beautiful garden

The Creation – Bible Historiale (c. 1411)

The speaking into existence of the created light is the first of a series of three separations accomplished by the Creator which were essential to make the chaos into a cosmos.  On Day One, light separates day and night; on Day Two the 'firmament' separates the upper waters from the earth, constituting an atmosphere or 'breathing space'; and on Day Three, the waters below the heavens are collected into seas, and thus separated from the dry land.  These three separations show the mighty hand of God shaping and organizing the dark, watery mass in the direction of a beautiful garden; a fit and lovely swelling place for plants, animals, and humankind.

The Genesis Flood: The Biblical Record and its Scientific Implications is a 1961 book by young Earth creationists John C. Whitcomb and Henry M. Morris that, according to Ronald Numbers, elevated young Earth creationism "to a position of fundamentalist orthodoxy."

Henry Morris would seem to be right in suggesting that with the coming of the light on the first day, '... there was established a cyclical succession of days and nights -- periods of light and periods of darkness.' He adds:

'Such a cyclical light-dark arrangement clearly means that the earth was now rotating on its axis and that there was a source of light on one side of the earth corresponding to the sun, even though the sun was not yet made' (Genesis 1:16).  [Since] '... the presence of visible light waves necessarily involves the entire electromagnetic spectrum … setting the electromagnetic forces into operation completed the energizing of the physical cosmos ...'

The biblical view of reality never separates God

from the elements He created and controls

Depiction of Genesis 1:2 by Wenceslaus Hollar

The question of how there was light on earth before the sun was created (on Day Four -- Genesis 1:14) brings us back to the biblical view of reality, which never separates in deistic fashion God from the elements He created and controls.  We are simply not told what the source of light was before the sun was placed in the sky.  All the text says is that God spoke and the light was there.

Reality is untrammeled by man-centered assumptions

which would bring God down to our finite level

Creation of Light, by Gustave Doré

John Calvin's admonition should be taken to heart if we wish to grasp reality as it is, untrammeled by man-centered assumptions which would bring God down to our finite level:

Therefore the Lord by the very order of the creation, bears witness that he holds in his hand the light, which he is able to impart to us without the sun and moon.

Should this be thought difficult for One who is light?

The first time God speaks in Scripture, light appears and a person whose life is darkened and condemned by sin, becomes 'light in the Lord'

The Conversion of Saul on the road to Damascus as painted by Michelangelo

It is significant that the first time God speaks in Scripture, light appears.  According to Psalm 119:130, 'The entrance of they words giveth light'.  It was so in the old, original creation, and the apostle Paul tells us that something similar happens in 'the new creation', when a person whose life is darkened and condemned by sin, becomes 'light in the Lord' (Ephesians 5:8).  In 2 Corinthians 4:6, he quotes directly from Genesis 1:3: 'For God, who commanded the light to shine out of darkness, hath shined in our hearts, to give the light of the knowledge of the glory of God in the face of Jesus Christ.'  Such an enlightening of the human personality as it is enabled to see who the Son of God really is, constitutes nothing less than 'a new creation' (2 Corinthians 5:17).

Only someone so great as the mighty Creator God could speak light into the darkness of the primeval earth and able to speak light into the dark human soul making the chaos of sin into the cosmos of a new creation in Christ

Separation of light and darkness on the first day of creation, from the Sistine Chapel ceiling by Michelangelo

The analogy between the two creations is fascinating.  Only someone so great as the mighty Creator God could speak light into the darkness of the primeval earth in the first creation.  Only He -- the Almighty Word, the uncreated Light -- is able to speak light into the dark human soul of the smallest child or greatest king, and thus bring it into a new birth (see John chapter three and Jeremiah chapter thirty-one), making the chaos of sin into the cosmos of a new creation in Christ.  And in both cases, the instrument of transforming enlightenment is His spoke word, which never 'returns to him void' (Isaiah 55:11).  His 'fiat' command (as the Latin translation of the Bible phrases 'let there be') always finds fulfillment.  Whenever God commands light into the dark, formless elements of earth or into the spiritually blind energies of self-defeating human psychology, light appears in both scenes and beauty replaces disorder.

Source: Kelly, Douglas F.  Creation and Change -- Genesis 1.1 - 2.4 in the Light of Changing Scientific Paradigms.  Scotland, U.K.: Christian Focus Publications, 2017, pages 108-110.

Records from the King of Assyria recovered in the 19th and 20th centuries back up the explanation in the Old Testament of the exile from Judah to Babylon

Explaining the Exile from Judah to Babylon

for later Generations

James Tissot, The Flight of the Prisoners.

… The prediction of the future was necessary to explain the exile.  Without the messages of the prophets, the people might have concluded that the gods of the nations were more powerful than Yahweh, which was why they had been captured and taken away into exile by these nations.  This wrong belief is clearly illustrated in Isaiah 36:16-20 and 37:1-13.  During that time period, the Assyrians attacked Judah and Jerusalem and conquered most of the cities in Judah.  Today we have the documents and records from the King of Assyria, which were uncovered by archaeologists. 

The Annals of Sennacherib were recorded

on a clay prism

The Annals of Sennacherib were recorded on a clay prism on which the Assyrian king states:

As for Hezekiah, the Judean, I besieged forty-six of his fortified walled cities and surrounding smaller towns, which were without number.  Using packed-down ramps and applying battering rams, infantry attacks by mines, breeches and siege machines, I conquered [them].  I took out 200,150 people, young and old, male and female, horses, mules, donkeys, camels, cattle, and sheep.  He himself I locked up in Jerusalem, his royal city, like a bird in a cage.  I surrounded him with earthworks and made it unthinkable for him to exit by the city gate. (Mordecai Cogan, "Sennacherib's Siege of Jerusalem (2.11B)," in The Context of Scripture, ed. William W. Hallo and K. Lawson Younger Jr. (Leiden, NL: Brill, 2003), 2:303.)

The gods of Assyria are bigger and better than Yahweh,

Rabshakeh claims

Assyrian soldier, using a dagger, about to behead a prisoner from the city of Lachish. Detail of a wall relief dating back to the reign of Sennacherib, 700–692 BC. From Nineveh, Iraq, currently housed in the British Museum

In Isaiah 36 and 37 the commander general of the Assyrian army, Rabshakeh, gives a message to the people in Jerusalem telling them not to trust in Yahweh and not to let King Hezekiah deceive them by telling them that Yahweh will deliver Jerusalem.  The Rabshakeh gives a list of countries that Assyria has conquered and demonstrates that the gods of those conquered places had been unable to deliver their people.  Then Rabshakeh insults and mocks Yahweh, saying that he is no different from the gods of the conquered nations and will not be able to deliver Judah and Jerusalem.  The gods of Assyria are bigger and better than Yahweh, Rabshakeh claims.  According to Deuteronomy 32:27, this is exactly what Yahweh said the enemies would think.

Imagine undertaking the journey on foot,

in chains for weeks, perhaps months,

and finally arriving in Babylon

in a land far away from home

Illustration from the Nuremberg Chronicle of the destruction of Jerusalem under the Babylonian rule

The reconstruction of the Ishtar Gate in the Pergamon Museum in Berlin

Apart from the prophetic word, imagine what the people of Jerusalem would have thought when the Babylonians came and conquered the city and razed it to the ground, exiling the citizens to Babylon.  Imagine undertaking the journey on foot, in chains for weeks, perhaps months, and finally arriving in Babylon in a land far away from home.  Imagine walking down a corridor of high walls, beautifully decorated, and arriving at the massive Ishtar Gate of the city of Babylon.  Archeologists have reconstructed this gate, and it is displayed in a museum in Berlin.  Even today, simply viewing the reconstruction is an overwhelming experience.  Were it not for the prophetic word, the people of Judah and Jerusalem would surely have concluded: "Now we know why the Babylonians conquered us.  It is because the gods of Babylon are bigger and more powerful than Yahweh."

They were conquered for only one reason:

they had violated the covenant

Destruction of the Temple of Jerusalem (1867 painting by Francesco Hayez)

Such a conclusion, of course, would have been utterly wrong.  They were conquered for only one reason: they had violated the covenant, and the covenant curses of Deuteronomy 28 had come upon them.  God had promised that he would send enemies and kick them out of their land, and he had finally kept his word and done it.  God brought the Assyrians and the Babylonians against his own people for violating the covenant.  It was necessary, then, for the predictions of Isaiah, Jeremiah, and Ezekiel to be written down so that when those events occurred, the people of Israel would draw the right conclusions.

Source: Gentry, Peter J. How to Read and Understand the Biblical Prophets. Wheaton, IL: Crossway, 2017.

Charles Wesley (1707-1788) saves a slave on death row from hell rather than from execution by hanging

Let us, then, go to him outside the camp,

bearing the disgrace he bore, (Hebrews 13:13).

Charles Wesley (18 December 1707 – 29 March 1788) was an English leader of the Methodist movement, most widely known for writing about 6,500 hymns.

May We Spend the Night on Death Row?

Newgate exercise yard, 1872, by Gustave Doré

Charles Wesley gives us an example of how one might obey Hebrews 13:13 and go “out the camp” and bear the abuse he (Jesus Christ) endured. On July 18, 1738, two months after his conversion, Charles Wesley did an amazing thing. He had spent the week witnessing to inmates at the Newgate prison with a friend named “Bray,” whom he described as “a poor ignorant mechanic.” One of the men they spoke to was “a black [slave] that had robbed his master.” He was sick with a fever and was condemned to die.


On Tuesday, Wesley and Bray asked if they could be locked in overnight with the prisoners who were to be executed the next day [this is outside the camp!]. That night they spoke the gospel. They told the men that “One came down from heaven to save lost sinners.” They described the sufferings of the Son of God, his sorrows, agony, and death.

The "Tyburn Tree". For many centuries, the name Tyburn was synonymous with capital punishment, it having been the principal place for execution of London criminals and convicted traitors, including many religious martyrs. It was also known as 'God's Tribunal', in the 18th century.

The next day the men were loaded onto a cart and taken to Tyburn. Wesley went with them. Ropes were fastened around their necks so that the cart could be driven off, leaving them swinging in the air to choke to death.


The fruit of Wesley and Bray’s nightlong labour was astonishing. Here is what Wesley wrote:

“They were all cheerful; full of comfort, peace and triumph; assuredly persuaded Christ had died for them, and waited to receive them into paradise… The black [slave]… saluted me with his looks. As often as his eyes met mine, he smiled with the most composed, delightful countenance I ever saw.

Descent from the Cross, depicted by Rubens (1616-17)

We left them going to meet their Lord, ready for the Bridegroom. When the cart drew off, not one stirred, or struggle for life, but meekly gave up their spirits. Exactly at twelve they were turned off. I spoke a few suitable words to the crowds; and returned, full of peace and confidence in our friends’ happiness. That hour under the gallows was the most blessed hour of my life.”

The astonishing power of Wesley's message

about the truth and love of Christ

Quid Est Veritas? Christ and Pilate, by Nikolai Ge.

Two things in this story amaze and inspire me. One is the astonishing power of Wesley’s message about the truth and love of Christ. All the condemned prisoners were converted, and they were so deeply converted that they could look death in the face (without a long period of “follow up” or “discipling”) and give up their lives with confidence that Christ would receive them. Their suffering was not for righteousness’ sake, but the same dynamics were at work to sustain them. They looked on their suffering as something they must pass through on the way to heaven, and the hope of glory was so real that they died in peace. Oh, for such power in witness!

Wesley went to the prison and asked

to be locked up all night

Prisoners picking oakum at Coldbath Fields Prison in London, c. 1864.

The other thing that amazes me is the sheer fact that Wesley went to the prison and asked to be locked up all night with condemned criminals who had nothing more to lose if they killed another person. Wesley had no supervisor telling him that this was his job. He was not a professional prison minister. It would have been comfortable and pleasant to spend the evening at home conversing with friends. Then why did he go?

Michelangelo Merisi da Caravaggio - The Conversion of St. Paul

God put it in his heart to go. And Wesley yielded. There are hundreds of strange and radical things God is calling his people to do in the cause of world missions. Not everyone will hear the same call. Yours will be unique. It may be something you never dreamed of doing. But I urge you to listen to the leading of the Spirit to see where “outside the camp” he may be taking you “to bear the reproach he endured.”

Source: Piper, John. Let The Nations Be Glad!: The Supremacy of God In Missions. 3rd ed. Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Academic, 2010, pages 103-105.

Shocking: Douglas J. Moo, PhD, Professor at Wheaton College, argues that persons apart from Christ are totally depraved and are totally unable to please God.

Douglas J. Moo, born in La Porte, Indiana in 1950.

The mind governed by the flesh is hostile to God;

it does not submit to God’s law, nor can it do so.

Those who are in the realm of the flesh

cannot please God,

(Romans 8:7-8).

Saint Jerome in the Wilderness The saint spent four years in the Syrian desert as a hermit, mortifying his flesh and elevating his spirit through study.

Paul's assessment of persons apart from Christ may justly be summed up in the theological categories of total depravity and total inability.

Every person apart from Christ

is thoroughly in the grip of the power of sin

Cain killing Abel (c. 1600) by Bartolomeo Manfredi

"Total depravity" does not mean that all people are as evil as they possibly could be -- that all people commit every possible sin -- nor does it deny that there is knowledge of the good within each person.  What is meant rather is that every person apart from Christ is thoroughly in the grip of the power of sin, and that this power extends to all the person's faculties.

All non-Christians have a "mind-set"

that is innately hostile to God

Wrath, by Jacques de l'Ange

Paul's language makes this clear: all non-Christians have a "mind-set," a total life-direction, that is innately hostile to God (v. 7).  All people, by nature derived from Adam, are incurably bent towards their own good (incurvatus in se) rather than the good of others or of God.

The symptoms of this underlying sickness

The Worship of Mammon (1909) by Evelyn De Morgan.

The various sins to which we are attracted -- desire for riches, or station in life, or power, or sexual pleasure -- are but different symptoms of this underlying sickness, this idolatrous bent toward self-gratification.  Once again, we must remember that Paul is not here using "flesh" as we often do, to denote sexual sin specifically.

Persons are manifesting that destructive, self-centered

rebellion against God and his law

which can be overcome

only by the power of God's Spirit in Christ

A Sistine Chapel fresco depicts the expulsion of Adam and Eve for transgressing God's command not to eat the fruit of the Tree of the knowledge of good and evil.

To be "in the flesh," or "carnal," or "fleshly," includes, in the sense Paul is using flesh here, all sins.  The person who is preoccupied with his or her own success in business, at the expense of others and of God, is just as much dominated by the flesh as the person who commits adultery.  Both persons are manifesting, in different ways, that destructive, self-centered rebellion against God and his law which can be overcome only by the power of God's Spirit in Christ.  Verse 8, on the other hand, plainly shows that people cannot rescue themselves from this condition.  As long as people are "in the flesh" -- and only the Spirit can rescue us from this envelopment in the flesh -- they are totally unable to please God.

Source: Moo, Douglas J. The Letter to the Romans. 2nd ed. New International Commentary on the New Testament. Grand Rapids, MI: William B. Eerdmans Publishing Company, 2018, page 511.

Is it rational to believe in God?

1929 cover of the USSR League of Militant Atheists magazine, showing the gods of the Abrahamic religions being crushed by the Communist 5-year plan.

The Christian perspective is rational; the unbeliever's is based on blind faith

A Lion Attacking a Horse by George Stubbs 1770

a. When the unbeliever attacks Christianity for being based on "faith" as opposed to "reason," it is important to reverse the complaint.  The unbeliever, too, has presuppositions that he does not question and that govern every aspect of his thought and life.  Thus in a relevant sense, he too has "faith."  He too argues in a circle.  It is not as if the two are equal, however, for the non-Christian has no basis for trusting reason, except his blind faith.  If this world is ultimately the product of chance plus matter, of space and time, why should we assume that events in our heads will tell us anything reliable about the real world?  The Christian, though, knows that God has given reason to us as a reliable tool for knowing Him, the world, and ourselves.  Thus the shoe is on the other foot.  The Christian perspective is rational; the unbeliever's is based on blind faith.

Scripture says that the unbeliever has refused to acknowledge and obey God, exchanged the truth for a lie, and sought to suppress the truth

Quid Est Veritas? Christ and Pilate, by Nikolai Ge.

b. It is also appropriate for the apologist to point out to the unbeliever what Scripture says about him.  Although he is made in God's image and surrounded by God's clear revelation, he has refused to acknowledge and obey God, exchanged the truth for a lie, and sought to suppress the truth, to hinder its functioning.

The unbeliever seeks to substitute the truth with idolatry or nihilism

Moses Indignant at the Golden Calf by William Blake, 1799–1800

c. Something also can be said about what the unbeliever seeks to substitute for the truth -- the rationalist-irrationalist dialectic.  We may recall that the non-Christian rationalist claims an autonomous criterion of truth apart from God's revelation; the non-Christian irrationalist denies the existence of truth and rationality.  These are the only two possibilities if one rejects the God of Scripture: idolatry or nihilism.

The rationalist could also be the Pharisee, the church elder who thinks that because of his good works or doctrinal knowledge he deserves God's favor

The Pharisee and the Publican (Le pharisien et le publicain) by James Tissot, 1886-94

Rationalists and irrationalists are not found only among professional philosophers.  Ordinary unbelievers also demonstrate these commitments, though not in such epistemologically self-conscious ways.  The rationalist could be the self-made businessman who sees himself as the master of his fate or the local politician who thinks that by careful government planning we may overcome all of our social woes or the bartender who has an opinion on everything or the neighbor who thinks that "modern science" has utterly disproved Christianity.  (He could also be the Pharisee, the church elder who thinks that because of his good works or doctrinal knowledge he deserves God's favor, or the "black sheep" -- actually a Pharisee in another garb -- who thinks that he must become a much better person before he will have the right to seek God.)  The irrationalist could be the town drunk who couldn't care less about anything or the happy milkman who lives on sentimentality and seems bewildered when anyone asks him his basis for living or the angry teenager who hates all authority and seeks to destroy everything he sees.



Rationalists and irrationalists are often at odds with one another, but under the skin they are the same, united in unbelief.

The non-Christian accepts reason

only by an irrational leap

The Sacrifice of Isaac by Caravaggio

(i) Rationalism is irrationalistic.  The non-Christian has no right to have faith in reason.  He accepts it only by an irrational leap.  The rationalist's rational scheme never gives him the divine knowledge that he claims.  Since this is God's world, the facts never fit into his godless system.  Faced with this problem, three courses are possible to the unbeliever: become an irrationalist, compromise with irrationalism (admitting that the scheme is not fully adequate), or cling to his scheme and deny the existence of any discrepancies.  The latter course is the most consistently rationalistic, but it too has pitfalls.  It pulls the rationalist father away from reality and isolates him in a world of his own.  The farther he goes in this direction, the more he is isolated, the more he comes to know only his own system, the less he comes to know the world.  And what do we call it when someone is locked in a fantasy world, knowing only his own thought processes, ignorant of reality?  Well, we could call him an irrationalist!  Thus the rationalist is forced to become an irrationalist -- either directly or by way of some compromise with irrationalism as a middle ground.  The middle ground, however, is unstable.  Where do we draw the line between the competence of reason and its limitations?  The Christian has the guidance of revelation to do that, but the non-Christian has no basis for making any decision.  He can only follow his inclinations -- irrationalistically.  In all of those ways, then, rationalism must lead to irrationalism.

Irrationalism, once compromised, is refuted

Dr. Philippe Pinel at the Salpêtrière, 1795 by Tony Robert-Fleury.

(ii) Irrationalism is rationalistic.  (A) Irrationalism can only be asserted on a rationalistic basis.  How can one know that there is no truth or meaning?  To know that, he would have to know the whole universe.  It is that difficult to prove a negative.  (B) Irrationalism is self-refuting.  It claims to know that there is no knowledge; it believes it to be true that there are no truths, thus asserting rationalism and denying it at the same time!  (C) Irrationalists generally compromise their irrationalism in the way they live.  Remember Schaeffer's example of John Cage, who preaches irrationalism through his music but who assumes an orderly world when he grows mushrooms.  Short of the lunatic asylum, such inconsistence is inescapable.  But irrationalism, once compromised, is refuted.  Once one concedes the existence of any meaning or order, he is no longer able to deny the existence of meaning or order.

Rationalism and irrationalism are opposed to Christianity, yet depend on Christianity

Pure Rationalism Painting by Matthew Quick

(iii) Rationalism and irrationalism are parasitic on Christianity.  Of course, rationalism and irrationalism are both radically opposed to Christianity, yet they depend on Christianity in some ways for their plausibility.  It is, after all, the Christian revelation that informs us that human reason has both powers and limitations.  Rationalism and irrationalism build on those notions of powers and limitations, respectively, but they do so independently of God, and neither is able to specify what those powers and limitations are.  Thus rationalists and irrationalists have no principle to keep them from the extremes of sheer irrationalism and sheer rationalism.


In those ways, both rationalism and irrationalism (as well as the various compromise positions) are vulnerable to Christian attack.  None of these positions is really distinct from the others, and thus each is subject to all the difficulties mentioned.  These positions would have no plausibility at all if it were not for their resemblance to Christianity.


Those analyses can guide our witness to many different kinds of people.  Of course, people may not be willing to listen to us.  They may lose interest and walk away -- at that point becoming irrationalists, abandoning the search for truth.  Or an inquirer may become so irrationalistic that he will not be moved by anything you say to him.  If you charge him with inconsistency between his irrationalism and his life-decisions, he may answer, "So what?  Who cares about consistency?"  Once a person's thinking gets that far from the truth, there isn't much you can say to him as an apologist, except to witness to him by your life and proclamation.  A person like that is much like someone who is catatonic or otherwise withdrawn from reality.  With my colleague Jay Adams, I agree that in such cases you should keep talking but don't expect (at first, anyway) to carry on any rational arguments.

Point to Jesus as the only one who can give a lasting peace and comfort in a harsh world.

The Descent from the Cross (van der Weyden)

This discussion has been a bit philosophical, and the reader might well wonder if any of it will help in witnessing to "ordinary people."  Well, remember what I said earlier: we find rationalists and irrationalists not only among philosophers but also among all sorts of people.  Consider the fellow who has "dropped out" of life.  In a rare sober moment, he confesses to you that he sees no meaning in life.  Ask him why he drinks.  His answer will reveal that he does value something, whether that is drunkenness itself or freedom from pain or whatever.  Further questions will reveal additional contradictions with his irrationalist perspective.  Ask him why he values what he values, and you will be able to show him how arbitrary his values are.  Point to Jesus as the only one who can give a lasting peace and comfort in a harsh world.  Of course, at some point, he may lose interest or be unwilling to talk any further.  No apologetic method can guarantee that that won't happen.  We can only do our best and pray for God to work.

Source: Frame, John. The Doctrine of the Knowledge of God. New Jersey: P&R Publishing. Pages 360-363. 1987.