About Me

With my lovely wife at the Wailing Wall in Jerusalem. (December 2017)

Hi, my name is Tim Chaffey. I’m a Bible-believing Christian, husband, father, teacher, apologist, author, and cancer survivor.

I have been happily married since 1996 and have a daughter and son. I enjoy spending time with my family, walking, basketball, swimming, and good theological discussions. In 2001, I was the starting center for a national championship basketball team. I swam the relay leg of half-Ironman triathlons in 2012 and 2013, and completed the Nation’s Triathlon in 2013 with Team in Training to raise funds for the Leukemia and Lymphoma Society. In the past several years my wife and I have completed over a dozen half-marathons in more than ten states.

I currently work as the content manager for the Attractions Division at Answers in Genesis, which means that I’m responsible for developing the content for the exhibits at the Creation Museum and the Ark Encounter. I spent five years as a pastor and associate pastor, in which I taught youth ministry, adult Sunday School, and a weekly theology class in addition to regular preaching duties. I have also taught high school Bible and science classes for six years.

In 2023, I earned a Doctor of Ministry degree, specializing in Advanced Biblical and Theological Studies from Shepherds Theological Seminary. The title of my dissertation is A Historical Study of Jerusalem c. AD 33 and Its Implications on Creating an Accurate Scale Model to Enable Believers to Gain a Deeper Understanding of the New Testament.

In 2011, I completed a Th.M. in Church History and Theology from Liberty Baptist Theological Seminary after successfully defending my thesis on The Sons of God and the Nephilim. In 2008, I earned a Master of Divinity degree (summa cum laude) specializing in Apologetics and Theology. I also hold a Master of Arts and a Bachelor of Science in Biblical and Theological Studies.

Overlooking the Dead Sea from the top of Masada. The nation of Jordan is on the opposite side of the water. (December 2017)

I am also a cancer survivor, having been diagnosed with Acute Promyelocytic Leukemia in July 2006. I have been in full remission since September 2006. My second full-length book, God and Cancer, traces my battle with the disease, but focuses on providing insight and advice to others who are going through difficult times. The book concludes with an apologetic for the existence of God. This section demonstrates that suffering and evil do not provide evidence against the God of the Bible, but rather the Bible provides the only solution to this issue.

I started Midwest Apologetics in 2005, a ministry dedicated to defending the word of God from the beginning to the end. With that goal in mind, I have written nearly two dozen books since that time. I co-authored The Truth Chronicles youth fiction series. Book 1 (The Time Machine) was published in April 2010, book 2 (The Contest) in May 2010, book 3 (The Rescue) in June 2010, book 4 (The Thief) in April 2012, book 5 (The Chase) in Fall 2012, and book 6 (The Ark) in December 2013. I wrote the final four books in the series on my own and published them in 2021: book 7 (The Accident), book 8 (The Attack), book 9 (The Tower), and book 10 (The Extras). These exciting books are designed to teach young people how to defend the faith and learn more about the biblical worldview.

Having a little fun during a great day of hiking in Sequoia National Park. (September 2016)

I also co-authored The Remnant Trilogy, a coming-of-age historical fiction series on the life of Noah from his early adult years up until the time of the Flood. It is essentially the official backstory for Noah and his family members as they are portrayed at the Ark Encounter. Visitors to the theme park will be able to see dozens of items or events described in the novels. They are full of adventure and designed to direct the reader to take a close look at Scripture, and each of the books include approximately 30 pages of non-fiction at the end to address questions that many people have about Noah, the Ark, the Flood, and the pre-Flood world. See the following posts for more information about each book—Noah: Man of Destiny, Noah: Man of Resolve, and Noah: Man of God.

But my favorite topic has long been the Resurrection of Jesus Christ. I published In Defense of Easter to address the historicity of the Resurrection, to defend it against the skeptical and critical attacks, and to discuss many of the practical implications of the fact that Jesus rose from the dead.

I have contributed to several other books as either an editor or writer. Notably, I have written chapters in the following books: Searching for AdamHow Do We Know the Bible Is True? Volumes I & II, and Demolishing Supposed Bible Contradictions, Volume II.

Please note: the opinions expressed on this site are my own and do not necessarily represent the views of Answers in Genesis.


About Me — 210 Comments

  1. Dr. Chaffee, I enjoyed your book “Fallen”, and have a question for you. The scriptures say Haman was an Agagite, and I’ve read that that means he was a descendant of King Agag. You indicated that King Agag was a Nephalim. Can you clarify this? If David removed all Nephalim, he cannot be a descendant of King Agag, and if he somehow survived, why wasn’t he a giant?
    Thanks for your time!

    • Hi Jenene,
      Thanks for the kind words about the book. I don’t recall stating that King Agag was one of the Nephilim. Are you possibly confusing him with King Og? Og was definitely a giant, but I’m not aware of any indication that Agag was.

  2. Dr. Chaffey – my wife and I are nearly finished with your “Fallen” book. Great work. My only regret is that it does not have a subject and scripture index. It is the type of reference book that we have combed through on several occasions to compare scripture passages.

  3. Dr. Chaffey,

    Phil Vischer, the co-creator of Veggietales, continues to express support for radical left wing polices via Twitter and on his podcast, the Holy Post. Challenge Phil Vischer to a friendly debate; he needs to be held accountable for promoting an anti-Christian and anti-American worldview. Ten years ago, Ken Ham from Answers in Genesis debated Bill Nye in attempt to challenge Bill Nye’s atheistic worldview; 2024 offers the perfect opportunity for another high-profile debate, but with Phil Vischer.

    Thank you very much,

    • Hi Ben,

      Thanks for taking the time to leave a comment. I’m definitely familiar with Ken Ham’s debate with Bill Nye since I work at the Creation Museum and Ark Encounter. I’m familiar with some of the stuff that Vischer has said over the past few years, although I haven’t really kept up with him. I know he’s mocked biblical creation and has parroted some of the talking points of critical race theory. Based on how I heard him try to handle these things, I really don’t think he would want to do a formal debate or even engage in a civil discussion on these matters on a podcast. If there are some specific issues he’s been pushing that you’d like me to respond to, please feel free to reply to this with some examples.


  4. I just finished reading ‘Fallen:The Sons of God and the Nephilim’ and enjoyed it very much. I had come up with my own somewhat informed theories about the sons of god and daughters of men some years ago. My conclusions were very similar to the presentation in your book. I really appreciated how you provided the biblical framework for what I thought the plain reading was saying.
    Another piece of the puzzle is the record of the Genesis account of creation and the fall embedded in the original characters of the Chinese language. It seems most scholars are not aware of this record. Predating Moses by at least a millennium, these characters give an amazing account that fully agrees with the biblical account. While Moses obviously did not copy their account, it appears that the creators of the Chinese characters used the stories of the pre tower of babel oral tradition to design their language. A good resource is ‘Finding God in ancient China’ by Chan Kei Thong and Charlene L. Fu. I think you would find this book absolutely fascinating.

  5. Hi Tim,

    I hope you are doing well today. I have been listening to you (mostly from videos on YouTube) for about a year, and I’m currently reading Fallen. I also just watched The Ark and the Darkness. Your work is fascinating to me, and I respect your views on scripture. I have been a believer for years, and although I have never lost my faith there are times when I have questions, and I just want to tell you when I listen to you and others from Answers in Genesis, I feel so much better, and my faith is so much stronger. I wanted to ask you a few questions regarding the end times. Do you think God has a 7000-year calendar, do you think we are near the end (I gather from The Ark and the Darkness, the producers believe we are near the end), and lastly what is your view on the rapture, are you pre-trip, mid-trip, or post-trib? Thank you!

    • Hi Tammy,

      Thanks for all the kind words about my work and about my colleagues at AiG. My comments about the end times in response to your questions should not be viewed as being the positions of AiG. The ministry does not take an official view on many of the details surrounding Christ’s return.
      I’m not convinced that God has a 7000-year calendar. Based on my calculations of OT figures, I believe we are already over 6000 years, and I believe there will be a literal millennium where Jesus will reign from Jerusalem over the whole earth for a thousand years. So, that would yield more than 7000 years total, if my calculations are correct.
      I do believe that we are approaching the time in which Jesus will return. However, I have no way of knowing when that will be. But I believe all the pieces are lining up. For example, Israel is once again a Jewish nation on earth, we now know how easily someone can control what people can buy or sell (and whether they are allowed to do that), and we now have the technology to allow every eye to see the two witnesses fallen in the streets of Jerusalem. None of these things made much sense 80 years ago, but now they make perfect sense. Perhaps there are more pieces that need to fall into place, but I don’t think we are too far away.
      I consider myself a pre-trib rapture person. This isn’t primarily from a desire to escape the trials that will befall the earth, although that’s a great bonus. I believe this is the least problematic of the rapture views. The other ones would allow you to calculate the date of the rapture based on when the 7-year covenant is confirmed. Also, there is still one “seven” remaining from the prophecy in Danial 9:27 — a prophecy which was specifically for the Jews and Jerusalem. So, I think the church will be out of way so that those seven years can commence.
      Hope this helps.

  6. Tim, I just finished reading “Fallen The Sons of God and The Nephilim”. Thanks for writing such a great book on a tough subject! Our 10 year old grandson is a deep thinker and has been asking lots of questions about the Nephilim. Some I’ve been able to answer. Not this, perhaps I missed it in your book. Here is his question: “Did the Nephilim have wings?”
    Also, I’m wondering if the Noah Remnant Trilogy be appropriate for teens? Thanks!

    • Hi Ed,

      Sorry for the delay in getting to your comment. I’ve been traveling a lot lately and just missed it.
      Thank you for the kind comments about the book. I do not believe the Nephilim had wings. While there are some angelic beings who have wings (e.g., seraphim – 6 wings / cherubim – 4 wings), the Nephilim are referred to as “mighty men” (technically “mighty ones”) and “men of renown” in Genesis 6:4. Later, in Numbers 13, they are referred to as people and “men of [great] measure.” We don’t know if the “sons of God” (bene ‘elohim) had wings, but even if they did, there is no reason to think that this trait was passed on to their offspring.
      Regarding the Remnant Trilogy – yes, I believe they are appropriate for teens. It was a little tricky portraying the most wicked world in history in a family friendly way, but I think we accomplished it. For example, when we had to portray violence, it was usually viewed from a bit of distance so that we don’t give the gory details. Also, there is a scene that is reminiscent of Joseph and Potiphar’s wife, but to avoid describing the female’s appearance, we have the other point of view character shutting his eyes the entire time (the reader can only “see” what the pov character sees). I hope this helps.
      God bless!

  7. Dear Mr Chaffey,
    I’m a big fan of your books, especially the Remnant trilogy. I am fifteen and have been having a hard time finding quality Christian fiction for my age. The world doesn’t have much good reading to offer for kids my age, so thank you for filling that gap.
    I wanted to tell you that I have just published a book, after two years of trying to get it published. Insurrection, the first book in my Legends of Ralladin series, is an allegory of the Bible from Genesis to Revelation. The book is clean and is geared to young adult readers for a good book with action and suspense, set in a medieval world, that honors the Creator through allegory.
    I’m reaching out today to ask, if you would be willing to read my book and leave a review? I would really appreciate it, and it would mean so much. If you’re interested, you can find my book at my website, which I’ll include at the bottom of this email.
    I await your reply, and thanks again for what you do.

    Gunner Long

    • Hi Gunner,
      Thanks for the kind words. I’m glad to hear that you enjoyed the Remnant Trilogy.
      Also, congratulations on publishing your own book at your age. That’s a big accomplishment. It sounds interesting, but I really don’t have the time to read it right now. I’m in the middle of a very busy travel season, and I have my own writing deadlines to meet. I checked out your website and left the link to it in your comment so others can find it as well. I wish you all the best, and if I get an opportunity to read it someday, I’ll be sure to leave a review. I know how much that can help authors.
      God bless!

  8. Dr Chaffey,
    I am reading your book Fallen, and find it answering a lot of my questions. I find your writing style, and supporting references quite beneficial and enlightening. Your segment on the Divine Council has peaked my further interest, and has left me with a related set of questions. Have you written anything on the aspect of Lucifer/Satan and his fall, suggested timing etc? Did he wage war in the heavens before his Garden presence? Why did he pick that particular time and place etc to attack Eve? Perhaps you would be kind enough to direct me to a credible writing/reference covering this general topic. Thank you in advance.

    • Hi Chris,

      Thanks for reading Fallen and for the kind words. I really appreciate it. I included a few details about Satan in Fallen, but I don’t believe I went into as much detail about him as you are asking about. Here are just a few thoughts in response to your questions:
      Contrary to popular belief, the Bible does not call him Lucifer or claim that this was his pre-fallen name. That name comes from Isaiah 14 and is based on the Latin (light bringer), which is a sort of a mistranslation of the Hebrew for “morning star” (Hebrew – Helel ben-Shakhar), perhaps alluding to Venus (the first “star” in the morning). But even if Lucifer is a proper translation, it is very unlikely that the passage is about Satan. Yes, Christian pop theology generally teaches that Isaiah 14 is about the fall of Satan, however, it is talking about a lesser Canaanite deity who sought to take over the Canaanite pantheon of gods that met on Mt. Zaphon (notice the wording about the mount of assembly in the far reaches of the north or something like that in v. 13 — that is talking about the Canaanite assembly of gods on Mt. Zaphon). If you want to go deeper on this, check out this paper by Dr. Michael Heiser: https://digitalcommons.liberty.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1279&context=lts_fac_pubs
      I do not believe that the war in heaven described in Revelation 12 has already taken place. That passage ends by talking about Satan no longer having access to heaven and having a short time. He still had access to heaven in Job, and perhaps in Zechariah. So, I don’t think the 1/3 of angels have already been thrown out. Those who sinned with women have been locked away until judgment.
      It’s hard to say why he picked that time to attack Eve. I don’t believe he had fallen until after day six, and probably not until after day seven, since God looked at everything he had made and it was “very good” (Gen. 1:31). I’m going to speculate here — I suspect that Satan grew envious of Adam. He’s more powerful than Adam and has been around a few more days, and yet Adam is given a wife and told to rule over an entire planet. Of course, envy is rooted in pride, and I think that may be why he went after Eve when he did. I think he had either fallen just before than or it could be that we are reading about his fall in Genesis 3.
      I hope this helps.

  9. I keep seeing these claims that Jesus is fake and never existed and I was wondering if you could please answer these 21 objections and help me strengthen my faith:
    [edited by Tim, see response for details]

    • Hi Nick,
      Thanks for your message. I copied your 21 points into a document and will occasionally refer back to it and respond as I am able. It would take a book to address every point in detail, and I don’t have time to do that at this point. Part of the reason for cutting it is that it was so long that very few would ever it. Also, it included several links to sites/channels that I’d rather not promote on my blog.
      That being said, all 21 points have been addressed by Christian scholars for many years. I’ve even addressed many of these elsewhere on my blog or in articles and/or talks for Answers in Genesis. Here’s a link to one of my presentations that addresses several of these points [Note: I’m not sure who gave it this title – It should be called Refuting Modern Myths about Jesus.]
      Here’s an article I wrote about whether Jesus existed: https://answersingenesis.org/jesus/incarnation/jesus-did-not-exist/
      If you want to see an outstanding critique of the Christ Myth claims of certain atheists, check out the series on Jesus Mythicism by Tim O’Neill at History for Atheists. The writer is an atheist who takes his fellow atheists to task for using so many absurd arguments. Here’s a link to an excellent article he wrote critiquing the claim that if Jesus really existed then there would have been dozens or even hundreds of historians from the time who wrote about him. https://historyforatheists.com/2018/05/jesus-mythicism-3-no-contemporary-references-to-jesus/
      Whenever a skeptic brings up this argument, I simply ask for the name of anyone from that time (whose writings have survived) who should have written about Jesus and didn’t. They can’t give a single name. I addressed some of the Christ Myth stuff in my book, In Defense of Easter, available at my online store and Amazon.
      For a very humorous critique of the Christ Myth, see this video by Lutheran Satire: https://youtu.be/s0-EgjUhRqA?si=OQgNWNrwWCVTujki. Check out some of their other videos to see funny critiques of skeptical claims (especially Donnal and Connal talking to Richard Dawkins).
      If you want to check out some other books that address these claims, you can check out The Historical Jesus by Gary Habermas / for details about the dates for the writing of the NT books, check out Introduction to the New Testament by Carson and Moo.
      I would also recommend that you start looking for answers to these questions on Christian apologetic websites such as GotQuestions.org. Instead of spending so much time checking out what the skeptics say, I’d recommend spending time reading Scripture and some good resources by biblical scholars who have addressed these and many other objections.
      Hope this helps.

  10. Hi from Canada! I am a pastor in Winnipeg and recently watched your video on Remnant Radio regarding your book “Fallen”. Although I am not able to spend a lot of time researching and reading on the topic of the Nephilim and Sons of God from Genesis 6, I have kept my ear open for answers to questions that have come up in my own mind when I hear the position of fallen angels mating with human women. Questions like, how would that work? If spirit beings don’t have physical bodies, how could they procreate? If evil spirit beings are purported to be able to take on human flesh, doesn’t that challenge God’s unique role as “creator”? AND, doesn’t this challenge the uniqueness of the incarnation of Christ? If spirit beings can take on flesh, doesn’t this in some way diminish Christ taking on flesh and dwelling among us? Forgive me if you have written about this already. If you have, or are aware of other sources, could you direct me to where I can find some answers to these questions?

    • Hi Brad,

      Thanks for listening to that episode on Remnant Radio. Those are legitimate questions that supporters of the fallen angel position should be willing to address to the best of our abilities. I devoted five chapters (over 50 pages) to addressing these and many other objections to the fallen angel view. I won’t rehash everything here since I’ve already answered them in my book, but I’ll just give a couple of brief comments. We know that angels can manifest in human form — we see that in Genesis 18 and Daniel 9. Hebrews 13:2 strongly implies this as well. Why would fallen angels not have this ability as well? If they can eat, drink, grab someone by the hand, and perform normal human activities, why should we think it is impossible for them to procreate with women while in human form? Some have asked whether this violates the principle of bringing forth after one’s kind as seen repeatedly in Genesis 1. It’s interesting that Genesis never states this about humans (just plants and animals). Nevertheless, if angels are made in God’s image as well, as discussed in the show, and if they can appear in human form, as shown above, then we shouldn’t object to the possibility of this sort of cohabitation — we should object to the immorality of it but not the reality of it.
      At the end of the day, I don’t need to know all the details about how they did it since they Bible tells us that they did. Similarly, I don’t fully understand how God is triune or how the divine and human nature work within the single person of Jesus, but I don’t need to understand it all to affirm the truth of these things. I don’t see the manifestation of angelic beings as a threat to the incarnation (some have even claimed that it undermines the resurrection of Jesus, too). But these objections fail to account for the fact that even rebellious angels cannot go beyond what God permits, so if God planned to send His Son at an appointed time and planned to raise Him from the dead at an appointed time (both are true), then He can keep any sort of attempted counterfeit of these things from occurring. Furthermore, I don’t think the rulers of this age (whether human or demonic) understood this part of God’s plan, otherwise they wouldn’t have crucified Jesus (1 Corinthians 2:8).
      Anyway, there’s much more to these answers in the book, but I hope this quick response gives a bit of guidance.
      Thanks for reaching out. Blessings!

  11. Hi, I am reading your book, Fallen. It’s interesting, but so much of what you write, I have known already because of my KJV Bible. Why don’t you quote from the KJV?

    Thanks for your time!

    • Hi Jaime,
      Thanks for reading the book and for your kind words about it. There are several reasons why the KJV is not my default version for the book. I wrote a series about the KJV a while back. You can find the first article here: http://midwestapologetics.org/blog/?p=1680
      The KJV does a good job in Genesis 6:4 by translating Nephilim as “giants.” That’s what the word means. However, there are certainly things that you’ll learn from the book that you wouldn’t get from the KJV. For example, the KJV, like most other English Bibles, does a less than great job later in Genesis 6:4 by rendering asher as “when” instead of “whenever.” Also, in Deuteronomy 32:8, the KJV (like many other English translations before recent discoveries) follows the Masoretic Text by having “sons of Israel.” However, the oldest Hebrew texts from the Dead Sea Scrolls, as well as the Greek text (Septuagint), and the context of the passage shows that “sons of God” is accurate. There is much more about both of these topics in the book.

  12. Hey Dr. Chaffey. I’ve kept up with your work here and on Answers in Genesis and was wondering if you could help clarify the inspiration of Scripture for me. When it comes to inspiration, my understanding is that the Holy Spirit did not dictate word-for-word everything to the writers, but He did superintend their writing. Of course, the writers personalities shine through, as evident in Scripture, but ultimately the very words they use are exactly what God wanted. From my understanding, that would be verbal plenary inspiration, not through dictation, but through the Holy Spirit’s superintending of the writing. Would you agree with that? Is that a correct understanding?

    • Hi Rob,
      Yes, that is my understanding as well. It might be splitting hairs to add this, but I think it is likely even more precise to speak of the writing as being inspired rather than the writer. The writer was guided by the Holy Spirit, but it was his writing that was inspired. Some speak of the writers as being inspired, but that can definitely give the wrong impression as though it means everything they wrote was Scripture.
      Thanks for the kind words,
      God bless!

  13. Thank you very much for your work at the Creation Museum, the Ark Encounter, etc. Also your video talking about young earth creationism single-handedly changed my mind on the subject a while back. My wife and I were at the Ark and the Creation Museum last week, and it was one of the best experiences we’ve had. I can’t thank you enough!

    The only critique I have were that there were several second commandment violations at the Creation Museum (and maybe the Ark too, but I can’t quite remember any there). Maybe I’m a bit more firm on the subject coming from a Reformed perspective, but the images of Christ (and especially the video loop of a depiction of Jesus in the walkthrough biblical figures section) seems to me to be a second commandment violation. The 4D theater also had a brief depiction of heaven in one of the videos (a golden city in the clouds) which is also a gray area, possibly a 2CV. While I do sympathize with trying to teach about Jesus and how that can be difficult without imagery, I also have seen it done in a way that doesn’t violate the 2nd Commandment. It’d be great to see the Creation Museum tweak some of these things (even teaching why there aren’t depictions), because I’m sure I’m not the only one walking through who has had issue with this. I know there are some differing opinions on the 2CV, but I try to be cautious.

    Thank you for your work, it’s very much appreciated!

    With love,


    • Hi Derek,

      Thanks for the kind words about the Ark, Museum, and the video you referenced. I’m glad to hear that these things have been very helpful for you.
      Regarding the second commandment…I don’t see how any of the things you mentioned are violations of that. Here is what it states:

      “You shall not make for yourself a carved image—any likeness of anything that is in heaven above, or that is in the earth beneath, or that is in the water under the earth; you shall not bow down to them nor serve them…” (Exodus 20:4–5a, cf. Deuteronomy 5:8–9).

      This law given to the Israelites through Moses had to do with the creation and worship of idols. None of the things you mentioned are idols. The illustrations and “living portrait” depicting Jesus are not graven images (i.e. idols).
      I know some people believe this law forbids the depiction of any type of any type of creature in heaven or on earth, but that is not the case. Just five chapters later, God instructed Moses to make the ark of the covenant, complete with two cherubim on the mercy seat. If they were not allowed to craft any images of something on earth or heaven, why did God tell them to make two heavenly beings for the ark of the covenant?
      I understand that there can be concerns about having an actor play Jesus (e.g. if people think of Jim Caviezel from The Passion instead of Jesus, then there’s a problem). However, it is very obvious that Jim Caviezel wasn’t under any delusion that he was actually Jesus, and no sane person would believe that he was Jesus — he’s an actor playing the role of Jesus.
      I appreciate the gentle way in which you approached me on this. I hope my response is understood in the same spirit of gentleness. I also appreciate that you are cautious on how you approach this issue. Better safe than sorry, right? However, I hope you can see why these items mentioned are not violations of the second commandment since they are not graven images/idols made to be worshiped.


  14. Hi Dr. Chaffey! I have been following your work and it has been very helpful. Regarding the Resurrection, I know Habermas’ approach is a little different than yours, but would you say that the minimal facts are also evidence or proof for the Resurrection since those facts themselves are strongly evidenced? To my knowledge, the facts he uses are the same evidences you use. I just wanted to see what you thought because I value your work and insight. Also, would you recommend Dr. Habermas’ work/videos for apologetics and the Resurrection? I agree that because the Bible says Jesus rose, we can have full confidence in that, and God has provided a wealth of Biblical and extra-Biblical evidence. Thank you for your help, I really appreciate it! God bless!

    • Hi Dylan,
      I’m glad to hear that my work has been helpful for you. Yes, I wholeheartedly recommend Dr. Habermas’ work on the Resurrection — his videos and books. I would say that the minimal facts are evidence of the Resurrection, but they are not necessarily proof of the event. They are definitely helpful in understanding what the experts in various fields and from different backgrounds accept as historically accurate.

      • Thank you so much! Would you also recommend Mike Licona’s work on the Resurrection? He seems to do a great work and I know he builds off of Dr. Habermas’ method, but I ask because it appears there was some controversy regarding his view of the inerrancy and inspiration of Scripture because of his interpretation of a passage. I just want to make sure I am using information from sources that have a proper, Biblical view of Scripture, in the same way you do, which I highly admire. Thanks again for your help!

        • Hi Dylan,
          Yes, I would recommend Licona’s work on the Resurrection. Here’s a link to my review of his most thorough treatment of the subject: http://midwestapologetics.org/blog/?p=1006.
          I don’t use the same approach as Licona, but I think this book provides an abundance of extremely useful material. I have some concerns about his approach on other topics, particularly how he understands inerrancy. In his book on the differences between the Gospels, I think he too quickly dismisses reasonable and plausible solutions to some of the dilemmas that he describes. Instead, he argues that the NT authors weren’t really concerned with historical accuracy/precision in the same way we are today (that’s probably a poor paraphrasing of what he wrote, but it conveys my concern with how he addressed these). In other words, it doesn’t matter if some of the minor details seem to contradict each other, the authors were in agreement on key issues about Jesus’ life and ministry.
          Hope this helps.

      • Thank you for your help! In addition to your work and Dr. Habermas’, are there any other apologists you would recommend? I know some popular ones are Sean McDowell, William Lane Craig, and Mike Licona. However, it seems as if some of their views regarding certain Biblical topics are different than yours, so I was wondering if you would still recommend their work on the Resurrection? Thanks again!

        • Hi Dylan,

          When it comes to the Resurrection, yes, I would recommend these guys. When it comes to some other matters like the age of the earth, I would not. Now, these guys don’t really focus on that issue, but I believe they are all old-earth creationists (Sean may not officially hold this view — I’m not as familiar with his stuff). I certainly cannot recommend Craig’s book on the quest for the historical Adam. It’s straight up theistic evolution. I found it to be exceedingly biased and dismissive. He repeatedly mocks the first 11 chapters of Genesis and I could not find a single quote of any young-earth creationist. I found four citations (not quotations) and in each case he immediately ridiculed the position as maverick or alarmist. Yeah, not very scholarly on these counts. But I have to say that I really like his earlier work on the Resurrection.


          • Thank you so much for taking the time to answer my questions and give me some guidance! It has been very helpful and I’m grateful for your work and insight. God is doing awesome things through you, and I’m excited to keep up with your future work. God bless!

  15. Hi Dr. Chaffey! I came across your website and saw a previous comment about the day of the Crucifixion. I noticed you mentioned Wednesday is the least likely, but nothing about Thursday or Friday. I saw on Answers In Genesis that they lean towards Friday, and was wondering if you agreed? Thanks! God bless!

    • Hi Dylan,
      I go back and forth between Thursday and Friday. I probably lean slightly toward Thursday over Friday, because it seems to solve some issues raised in John’s Gospel and fits the Passover imagery better, but I’m open to either one. Too many people get hung up on Jesus’ statement about being in the grave for “three days and three nights,” but they seem to forget that He also talked about rising on “the third day,” “in three days,” and “after three days.” These are not contradictory. It seems to simply be like us saying something will take place in a few days. The fact is that Jesus died for our sins and rose again, and Christians can celebrate those facts every day.
      Hope this helps!

      • Yes it does, thank you! I have another question. First, let me say, I take my Faith very seriously and I have benefitted from your articles, so thank you for your work! I just wanted some help understanding the principle of embarrassment regarding further testament to the authenticity of the Gospels. I wholeheartedly believe that all 66 books of the Bible are inspired and inerrant, as made clear in Scripture. I know in the Gospels there are numerous instances where “embarrassing” material is presented, so I just wanted to confirm that that does add further testament to their authenticity. Along with the fact that in Luke, he mentions his care for accuracy in his writing. Thank you for your help and for this opportunity to defend the Faith! God Bless!

        • Hi Dylan,
          Thanks for the kind words. I’m glad my articles have been helpful. Yes, the principle of embarrassment lends credibility to the reporting. It shows that the writers are likely telling it like it was rather than inventing some story years later. For example, if the disciples invented the resurrection narratives, why would they tell everyone about Peter denying Jesus three times? After all, Peter was one of the leaders of the movement and they needed people to trust him. And why would they select Mary Magdalene as the first witness of the resurrected Savior? After all, this was a woman from whom Jesus cast seven demons. If they were making this up, then they surely wouldn’t include these details.

  16. Hello Tim, i read your Noah trilogy and would love to listen to them on audiobook. Can you suggest that they be recorded and released thru Audible? If Voddie Baucham would read them that would be an extraordinary listening experience. The Genesis Paradise Lost movie w VB narrating is so thrilling and his voice is a big part of that.

    Loving answers.tv!

    • Hi Joy,
      That would be interesting. He has a great voice. We’ve tried to get them recorded before, but nothing has ever come of it.
      I’m glad you enjoyed the books.

  17. Just got do know you from a nice online text over Romans 9:13. Nicely done.

    Over the topic of the “Sons of God and the Nephilim”, could you give me just a glimpse of your position. Are you “Sethist”? Did you have the chance to read “Unseen realm”, from Dr. Michael Heiser, and if yes, what is your review on it ?

    thanks, Glod bless you.. Cheers from Brazil.

    • Hi Renan,

      Thanks for the kind words about my article on Romans 9:13.
      Regarding the “Sons of God and the Nephilim,” I do not hold the Sethite interpretation. The Bible simply does not support the view, and the Sethite interpretation has multiple fatal flaws, ruling it out as the proper interpretation. Here’s a link to an introduction to my own book on the topic (Fallen), along with some comments about Heiser’s Unseen Realm http://midwestapologetics.org/blog/?p=1863. That will tell you more about my own position as well.

  18. b”h

    Hello Tim,

    Thank you for your work.

    I happened to see a video of yours, The Most Convincing Evidence for a Young Earth, and if I am not mistaken, in that video you stated that Jacques Cousteau said that the average depth of all ocean water over a completely flat earth without mountains or valleys would be 10,000 feet. (Maybe I am misremembering the quotation.) I am wondering if you could post the reference to that, as it is something I would find very helpful in talking about the Flood of Noah. I used to watch “The Undersea World of Jacques Cousteau” on t.v. as a kid in the 1960’s.

    Thanks again and God bless.

    • Hi Hanoch,

      I really don’t know what video you are referring to. I don’t remember ever citing Jacques Cousteau for anything. Are you able to reply to this comment and share the link?


  19. Hi Tim loved reading your commentary on Jephthah’s vow. I wanted to to ask you what you believed according to the word about baptism being and essential part of God’s plan for our salvation

  20. Dear Tim,
    I appreciate your efforts for the believers around the world. Thank you.
    I have a question regarding Genesis 1 and 2. I read your article that explains the creation events in Genesis 2 using the pluperfect form. There is still one part that gives me difficulty which is chapter 2 verse 4-6 which says,

    4This is the account of the heavens and the earth when they were created. When the LORD God made the earth and the heavens-

    5and no shrub of the field had yet appeared on the earth and no plant of the field had yet sprung up, for the LORD God had not sent rain on the earth and there was no man to work the ground,

    6but streams came up from the earth and watered the whole surface of the ground-

    This suggests to me that the formation of men was prior to the formation of vegetation or animals. I am looking for ways to prove that my thoughts are wrong. Would you give a thought and shed light on this matter?

    Thank you in advance,

    • Hi Stephen,
      The initial creation account is described in Genesis 1:1-2:3. This is sort of the big picture overview of what God made on each of the six days of creation before resting on the seventh day. Beginning at 2:4, the narrative zooms in on what happened on day six. It begins by talking about the conditions that existed on the earth before God made man in 2:7. We are told that it had not rained yet and two types of plants had not grown yet. If you look closely at the two types of plants mentioned, you’ll notice they are different than the three God made in the third day, which is described in Genesis 1:11–13. On day three, God made the grass, herb that yields seed, and the fruit trees. That’s how it’s worded in the NKJV. Other translations might have different wording. But in 2:5 we see that no “plant of the field” or “herb of the field” (again, this is NKJV) had grown because “God had not caused it to rain on the earth, and there was no man to till the ground” (Gen. 2:5). Hebrew scholar Mark Futato states that these two specific types of plants refer to “wild shrubs of the steppe” and “cultivated grain.” These few verses (2:4-6) are setting us up for what’s about to happen. God makes man in v. 7, puts him in the garden, creates his wife, and then man is going to rebel. These actions will bring about two specific types of plants: cultivated plants or grains (because there will be a man to till the ground) and the thorny plants (“wild shrubs of the steppe”) that came about once man sinned.
      Thus, there is no contradiction here. We just need to recognize the difference between the types of plants being mentioned in the two passages.
      I hope this helps.

  21. Dear Tim Chaffey,

    I love your article on Nephilim!!!

    I just wrote my own 30+ page commentary on it which will be in my next book, not yet published. I would love to run it by you. But it is a PDF file I need to attach.
    Can you email me and I will send it to you!



    James Sundquist

  22. Hello I just received your book from prophecy watchers and about to start on chapter 2. For a long time I I wanted to know Genesis 6 and who were these beings and why the world then was destroyed by flood. Two books I have already reaD by Ryan Pitterson. Like yourself I just enjoy this stuff but I wanted to find out more on subjects. Anyway I am a born again Christian looking for ours blessed Hope (rapture) while waiting I read your book to the end it’s gonna take me awhile. I’m a black American from Louisiana. Thanks brother

    • Hello Carl,

      Genesis 6 provides the context for why God purged the world with a global Flood. Mankind was exceedingly evil, so much so that the entire world (besides Noah) was living in rebellion against God. He is patient in giving people time to repent from their sin but after hundreds upon hundreds of years of continued rebellion, God judged the world with the great Deluge (another word for ‘flood’). I hoped this helped!

  23. Hi Tim, concerning the nephilim, you state that they were just human beings who were giants. Why were they so wicked if they were just human,for example why were they cannabals? One of the arguments against the sethite view is that why would humans mating produce the nephilim but if the nephilim are just giant humans why the wickedness where God destroyed the world?

    • Hi Steve,
      I apologize for the delayed response. You sent it while I was on my way to Israel, so it looks like I lost track of it until now.
      I don’t think I state anywhere that they were “just human beings who were giants.” They were called “mighty men” and “men of renown.” So they are considered to be men. However, if my position is correct, they were also the offspring of rebellious angels and women. That activity was exceedingly wicked, and it is not hard to imagine that the offspring of these illicit unions would likely be steeped in wickedness, which may have included cannibalism. The Bible doesn’t necessarily give us direct answers to some of the questions we have about the Nephilim, so we are left to draw inferences from the scant information we do have.

  24. Jesus bless you brother. I saw your baldy pic. I live up in that area. I found you on VCY America. So wanted to comment. I dont believe in good friday i do believe in Good Wednesday. For it needs to be 3 full days for someone to be confirmed dead. Fri evening and Jesus rising Sun morning its not 3 days. Have you ever thought about this?

    • Hi Daniel,
      Thanks for reaching out. I’ve considered Wednesday, Thursday, and Friday for the day of Christ’s crucifixion. Out of the three, I find Wednesday to be the least likely. One doesn’t need three days to confirm that someone is dead. The centurion at the cross confirmed that Jesus was dead when they pierced him with a spear. Some who hold to the Wednesday view focus on Jesus’ statement that he would be in the grave for three days and three nights. However, Jesus also said that He would be raised “on the third day,” “the third day,” and “after three days.” If we take all of these as strictly literal, then they are contradictory, since on the third day cannot be the same as after three days. If each of these is a phrase that just means something like “in a few days,” then there is no problem and no need to demand a full 72 hours in the grave.

  25. While reading Genesis, I started to search commentaries and the web with regard to questions on Genesis 2:5. I found your answer and explanation to a concerned reader on answeringenesis.org to be “spot on”. Not only did you address the commenter’s concerns, your answer helped me focus on the original manuscripts, hebrew and God’s Word. Before posting, which I never do, I researched your background and was even more impressed. You helped me and I look forward to reading Genesis and using your website as one of my references. Thank you.

  26. I would really love to teary your book about the Sons of God and the Nephilim. It says it’s not available. Do you know where I could get a copy?

    • Hi Heide,

      Thanks for contacting me about this. I sold my last copy of the booklet a couple days ago, and I’m not sure if/when I’ll be ordering more. The reason I may not order more is because I have expanded and updated that booklet and published it as Fallen: The Sons of God and the Nephilim. The booklet that is out of stock was basically my Th.M. thesis with an additional chapter. The updated book is nearly four times longer for only twice the cost. As you can imagine, it goes into much more detail and gets into a wider range of related topics. I believe it is the most detailed book you will find on this subject. I hope this helps.

  27. Hi! I just finished reading the Truth Chronicles series, and I loved it so much. It’s so wonderful to read a fiction book series that points to creation, and I actually learned a lot from it and I hope to be given opportunities to use that knowledge to defend my faith. Thank you so much for your amazing writing! Also I have to ask, is Jonas Ellis an intentional anagram of Jason Lisle, because I made that connection and it’s been driving me crazy LOL

    • Hi Kimberly,
      Thank you for the very kind words about the series. It’s very encouraging and I’m thrilled you learned a lot from the books. Yes, Jonas Ellis is an intentional anagram of Jason Lisle. He’s the coauthor of my first book (Old-Earth Creationism on Trial), and he was excited for the opportunity for his character to time travel. 🙂 There are three other characters in the series that are anagrams for friends and colleagues of mine. One of them appears in book 6, one appears in book 7 and is mentioned in 8 and 9, and the other is mentioned in 7. They aren’t as well known, but it was fun to write their characters into the story.
      Just a heads up. Book 10, The Extras, will be available very soon. It includes an updated study guide covering all 9 books, a short story (The Meeting shows how the teens met in 7th grade and includes some apologetics), concept art, initial character bios, description and examples of the illustration process, a history of the series, some fun facts, and some answers to questions I’ve been asked about the series.

      • Thank you so much for your quick reply, and for confirming my theory about the anagram! I will definitely have to try and figure out the other ones, and I’m super excited for book 10! I’m assuming Troy Claey is the book 6 one, and possibly Kate Chiler for book 7, but I’ll need to do a little digging to figure out what (or rather, who) they’re anagrams of. (I spent my childhood reading A Series of Unfortunate Events, so if you know anything about those books you’ll know why I’m always on the lookout for anagrams and secret codes in stories haha) Thank you so much for all your work in spreading the gospel through your writing and your talks; I always enjoy seeing you on Answers News as well! God bless 🙂

        • Hi Kimberly,
          Thanks again for the kind words. I’m glad to know you watch Answers News. I haven’t read or watched Unfortunate Events.
          You guessed two of them correctly (Tory Claey and Kate Chiler <--- she mentions the other one who is an animal expert and my assistant). Of the real people behind the four anagrammed names, only Dr. Lisle has a PhD, which is kind of funny because Ellis doesn't have his yet in the books. I boosted the academic levels of the others so they could be experts for the teens. If you get an opportunity, would you mind leaving a positive review on Amazon for the books, particularly 7–9 since they just came out and I don't think they have any yet. Thanks and God bless!

          • I actually think I figured out the first two- Tory Claey is Troy Lacey, and Kate Chiler is (I think, I’m less sure of this one) Rachel Kite. I know the third one is Blake Pinkem but I cannot figure out who he is for the life of me, I tried for hours yesterday morning. The best I could come up with was my own anagrammed version of the name (Kaleb Kempin) but I don’t think that’s a real person. I would be happy to leave reviews; I actually planned to a few days ago but then I must’ve forgot, so thanks for the reminder!! And yes, I love Answers News; it’s honestly the only news worth watching these days.

            Also that’s funny how the only character based on a person with a PhD is also the only one to not have a PhD (yet). But I mean, he gets to time travel, so I’d say it balances out haha; plus Micky thinks he’s cute which is so much funnier for some reason knowing he’s based off of Jason Lisle 😆

            • Hi Kimberly,
              Thanks for your willingness to write the reviews.
              I added the keyboard shortcut for the laughing face. It’s a colon followed by lol and then another colon. I wasn’t aware of that until now.
              You’ve figured out the first two and identified the right character for the third. Very good. I’ll give you a hint on the third — his first name is Mike.
              I wasn’t sure if people would be able to recognize them because they aren’t usually in the public eye, although Troy writes a lot of our articles. I chose him because at the time I wrote the sixth book his son was a big fan of the series. So the person that answers the door when the teens visit him is his son.
              God bless!

              • Well, you sent me down the anagram rabbit hole again haha, but this time I think I cracked it… is it Mike Belknap? I solved this one solely by using the leftover letters and scrambling them over and over until it made something that resembled a surname, then checked to see if he was actually connected to AIG, which he was, so I count that as a victory 😆 He was a tricky one, but I finally discovered his identity lol

                Thanks for all your responses and for the hint; it’s been lots of fun deciphering your anagrams and talking with you! I did write the reviews and gave each book five stars, but it said it could be several days before amazon posts them. Hopefully they get put up soon so the last trilogy can finally have reviews 🙂 God Bless!

                • Ding, ding, ding! You got the last one. 🙂 Mike does know a ton about animals. He handled most of the animal-related content at the Ark Encounter.
                  Thanks so much for the excellent reviews on Amazon. I really appreciate it, and I’m very pleased that you enjoyed the series so much. I had a lot of fun writing it.
                  If you haven’t read it yet, you might be interested in The Remnant Trilogy (my historical fiction series about Noah that is essentially the backstory for Noah and his family at the Ark Encounter).
                  God bless!

  28. Tim,
    I have been following the KJV only thread with some interest. I was wondering if you could help me understand the hill-to-die-on attitude that some people hold towards the KJV Bible. I have been accused of being unwilling to listen when I raised (what I feel are) honest questions. I hold no animosity towards those who believe that the KJV is the only “true” Bible, and I’m trying to understand the condemnation that was directed towards me for not believing the same way.
    Thanks for your insight,

    • Hi Jennifer,
      Thanks for following along and for your comments. You certainly are not alone in being on the receiving end of condemnation for disagreeing with the KJV-only position. Of course, there are plenty of people within this movement who do not act this way toward others, but there certainly are plenty who do. I think there are probably many reasons why some of them have that attitude, so let me cite a few.
      First, some of the people within that movement have personalities that are very much “my way or the highway” about many things. The world is often black and white to them, with very little room for gray. They may not think they are acting this way, but they believe they’ve discovered the truth and it’s difficult for those personality types to comprehend how someone can sincerely disagree with them and still be interested in seeking the truth. After all, if the other person really sought the truth, then they would believe the same way as the KJV-only person, right?
      Second, similar to the first point, is that they believe the King James Version is the very Word of God…that it is 100% perfect. So if a person questions that or disagrees with the view, then they are denying the Word of God. Therefore, since they reject God’s Word, they must not really be saved or they are in danger of losing their reward. Of course, they have never established that the KJV is the only viable Bible translation, so ultimately it just comes back to their preference, but they’ve been convinced that it is the only Bible a person should use, and those who don’t are guilty of sinning.
      Third, I think some of them feel threatened by any questioning of their position. For some reason, they’ve placed all their eggs in the KJV-only basket, as if Christianity would be falsified if the KJV was in error. But the truth of Christianity does not depend on whether the KJV is perfect. Ultimately, the truth of Christianity is based on the historical reality that the Son of God dies on the Cross for our sins, rose from the dead, and offers salvation freely to all who believe in Him.
      In each of these scenarios, I think the person truly believes they are honoring God and defending the faith against those who would seek to undermine God’s Word. It’s sad that it often leads some people to behave so poorly toward fellow believers. So it’s quite refreshing to have a civil conversation with someone, as you probably saw in the comments of the article you mentioned. Although, you probably noticed that the person would not really engage with the actual points I was making. And I think the reason is that I chose specific questions that really cannot be answered by a KJV only person without them undermining their own view.
      I hope this helps. Keep speaking the truth in love and asking honest questions without any animosity.
      God bless!

  29. Hi Tim,

    Long time, no see, as the saying goes!

    My name is Brent Skinner, I was the first Customer Service Manager for the Ark Encounter, which I sorely miss. A very long story as to why I am no longer with Answers In Genesis (moved back to the west coat March of 2017), but that is truly beside the point. By the way, I had no idea you were a cancer survivor. You never met my wife, as she passed away from ovarian cancer 30 days after we arrived in Kentucky. I am happy you are still with this world — we SERIOUSLY need the knowledge God has bestowed upon you and the wisdom that comes with it. I always enjoyed picking your brain when I ran into you during strolls around the Ark.

    With the above in mind, I just finished watching this fascinating video on YouTube, which you probably have seen. If not, you have, no doubt, commented on this subject.

    I spoke with George Coutouzis (I’m sure you know George) concerning this video and he suggested I speak with you.

    Trust me, I am very weary of such videos and almost turned this one off when the gentlemen presenting this video referred to secular documentation concerning the Exodus (he referenced the Bible, as well. Again, though, he did refer to secular docs (secular docs only give me pause when they are considered the final source of one’s opinion — that is not the case here)). At first, I thought is was all about debunking the Flood; HOWEVER, it’s nothing of the sort. In fact (I am happy to say), it supports the Flood. So, clearly, the issue is not one of not supporting the Flood account, the issue deals with his research and how he reconciles the facts behind the Flood account. I am referring to genealogies and timelines. From what I gleaned, this video logically supports the Flood and debunks a number of claims that Jews and Atheists like to espouse.

    This video appears to answer a few questions I had concerning the timeline and the genealogies.

    Please note that all the information appears (I use the term “appear” because I am definitely not a Biblical scholar — I am not an expert) to be Biblically supported.

    As I watched the video, the nagging concern that kept running through my mind was…”This is why arguments against the Bible being the inerrant Word of God exist!” Well, the video points out the words of Paul, which support otherwise (as you’ll see). But the big answer to my nagging concern is answered at the very end (at least I think it is). Actually, the answer seems to be made clear throughout the video (the support of three to one, as indicated in the Bible).

    Now, I hope I am not allowing myself to be duped, as I do my best to put my trust in God (I believe His words are true. If something does not seem correct, then I know you do not turn your trust to man or secular documents for the final say — surely, the words and documents of man will be flawed).

    I like the final statement in this video. It’s such a simple concept, really, but like so many simple concepts…you sometimes need a slap in the face for the light bulb to go on. Of course, I ask you…is the final reflection on why there are copies of Biblical documents sound?

    I appreciate your time, as I know, without a doubt, you are a very busy and sought after man.

    Here is the video link:


    God bless and may 2021 be a wonderful year — all for His glory!

    Brent Skinner

    • Hi Brent,
      It’s great to hear from you. Sorry about the loss of your wife. I can’t imagine what that would be like. Even though it was difficult, I was always thankful that I was the one going through leukemia rather than my wife or kids. I think it’s almost always harder on the spouse.
      Regarding the video, I’m quite familiar with it, and I’ve chatted many times with the individual who made it. He was kind enough to send me a copy of it on blu-ray. I think there are some strengths to the video. It’s a very creative and impactful way of getting a point across. Unfortunately, that creativity that helps make the arguments seem so compelling (particularly to non-scholars) tends to turn off scholars because they tend to not take it seriously. I do agree with the final sentiment in the video expressed by Dr. Turek, although that doesn’t necessarily apply to the debate over the Masoretic or the others. Each discrepancy between them needs to be examined on a case-by-case basis.
      I think this debate over the genealogies needs to be seriously considered. On one “extreme” end (not calling them extremists — just using the term to define one end of the spectrum) are those that uncritically accept the Masoretic figures, either because they are part of a Hebrew text or because that’s just what they’ve always gone with. On the other extreme end are those who uncritically accept the LXX because they are more comfortable with another 1250–1380 years for earth’s age or for other reasons. Then there are people who fall somewhere in between and might be open to either view. It’s hard to find a serious discussion of all details involved here. In the past few years, Henry Smith from Associates for Biblical Research has put together a series of articles favoring the LXX figures. You can find his articles on their website. There was an attempt to respond to Smith’s article(s) by folks at CMI, but their responses were rather disappointing. They rightly questioned one of his sources, which he acknowledged and corrected in a later article, but I don’t think they really offered strong arguments against his view or for their own. It would be nice to see some very scholarly interaction between Christians who happen to disagree on this and are equally committed to biblical authority (after all, this isn’t a question of whether one is compromising with billions of years; it’s a text critical issue where one is trying to figure out what the original said — this happens all the time in other areas).
      Back to the video. I think he puts too much emphasis on the argument that parents shouldn’t outlive their kids, grandkids, etc. While that’s typically the case, if someone lived 600 years, it is possible for them to do that, even if it doesn’t seem plausible. So it’s worth bringing up, but it seems to be one of his major arguments. Again, this is where Smith has done a better job in building the case for the LXX. Also, there are some poor arguments in there, including a roughly five-minute stretch in the middle when he starts discussing the timing of Babel. It’s based on some popular arguments, but I believe those are mistaken. Also, the three-to-one argument isn’t always a strong argument, because it depends on the reliability of the three and whether they are three independent sources. Nevertheless, the info shouldn’t simply be dismissed.
      Overall, if the video can lead someone to study this issue in more detail, examining the serious arguments on both sides, then I think it can be helpful in getting people to learn more as they develop their understanding. They might eventually change their mind or they might decide they held the right view all along and now have a better understanding of the issues.

  30. Tim, So glad to hear of all your good studies and books in the area of Biblical creation and apologetics. We met you at Luther Rice Seminary graduation in 2005. God has really blessed you. Glad to hear you are involved with our good friend Ken Ham and Joe Boone and doing well.
    David and Marjorie Ramseur, MA in Biblical Studies, Lay teachers at First Baptist Church, Jacksonville, Florida
    God’s Blessings.

    • Hi David,
      It’s great to hear from you. Thanks for the kind words. I’ve definitely been blessed. The Lord has given me so many opportunities to share the gospel and teach His Word. What a privilege! I hope all is going well for you. God bless!

  31. Tim, I sent this note to Eric Hovind, since I have his email address, addressed also especially to you since you were the main speaker on the Christmas “OK” webinar:

    Eric and Tim,

    Now you are Christian authorities.

    Christ, the Holy One, is our one true Teacher, King, and Judge. As His servants we are bound to love Him and to love each other. “This love of which I speak is slow to lose patience—it looks for a way of being constructive” (1 Corinthians 13:4, Phillips).

    Peace is agreement with the Holy One. Surely the most reliable witness of where He stands is the scriptures.

    Answers-in-Genesis and Creation Today finds much compromising with the scriptures has taken place through Christian authorities with the truthfulness of Genesis 1-11 — and other scriptures — in the last century, and especially over the last two centuries. “Pressure” from the worldly, influenced by the powers of darkness, ever drives compromises – spread by authorities.

    In the first and second centuries was satanic attack somehow less severe or human nature somehow less fallible? Did Christian authorities manage to hold to the Truth more faithfully in those centuries than in these centuries?

    Before sin, “God blessed the seventh day and declared it holy” (Genesis 2:3) “to meet the needs of people” (Mark 2:27)  (TLV wording).

    Does the Holy One now teach that holding to the LORD’s holy days (Leviticus 23:4) is no longer the Way? 

    In my short time here below, I saw a Sabbath-keeping church turned away from keeping the Sabbath—mostly on the weight of interpretations of the hard-to-understand writings of Paul. Samuele Bacchiocchi addresses their theology in The Sabbath under Crossfire: a biblical analysis of recent Sabbath/Sunday developments. I commend reading it to your consideration.

    How does “OK-ing” the keeping of Christmas while concurrently claiming all His holy days are no longer relevant – bring glory to the Holy One? Please ask yourselves that, in the eyes of our merciful and wise King, as we all are.

    May the Holy One give us all more grace to agree with Him! May all those called to be holy come to KNOW that they are in agreement with the Holy One!

    May the Holy One bless you!

    • Hi Jeffrey,
      Let me begin with a point of clarification…my appearance on Creation Today’s webinar and my writings on this blog represent my own views and not necessarily those of Answers in Genesis (as the main page of this blog expresses).
      I’ll quickly address your questions here. The primary response to most of them is very straightforward. The holy days that you reference (Leviticus 23) are part of the Mosaic Covenant (the covenant God made with Israel through Moses), which is often called the old covenant. The Lord instituted a new covenant and believers in Jesus Christ are under the new covenant, and the ~613 laws of the old covenant are not binding on believers under the new covenant. There are so many passages about this in the New Testament (Acts 15, Romans 14, Colossians 2, parts of 1 Corinthians 8–10, all of Galatians, etc.). So, the simple answer as to why I do not insist on keeping the Levitical feasts is because I am not an Israelite under the old covenant. I am a Gentile believer in Jesus, the Jewish Messiah, and He instituted a new and better covenant, and I am under the law of Christ. That old covenant has become obsolete because we have a new and better one, as Hebrews explains. Yes, there are some laws that are part of both covenants. For example, prior to the giving of the law to Moses, it was wrong to murder people (Genesis 9:6). Under the law of Moses, it was wrong to murder (Exodus 20:13). And under the new covenant, it is wrong to murder (Romans 13:9–10). It doesn’t mean that Noah (Genesis 9:6) and Christians today (Romans 13:9–10) are under the law of Moses. It just means that certain laws have been enforced in multiple covenants.
      The only times where Sabbath-keeping is prescribed in the Bible is in the context of people under the old covenant. The fact that God rested on the seventh day from His work is a description — not a prescription. It is prescribed in Exodus 20 for the people of Israel, but it is never prescribed in the new covenant. In Mark 2, Jesus is speaking to Jewish people who were under the old covenant, just as He was while on earth (Galatians 4:4 says He was “born under the law…”).
      I’m not quite sure what your question about the first two centuries of church history has to do with the discussion. My position is not derived from the writings of the church fathers. It is based on the Scriptures. We know that false teaching infiltrated the early church just like it does today. In Revelation 2-3, Jesus described some of the errors that already existed in Asia Minor churches near the end of the first century. Paul warned the Ephesian elders that savage wolves would come into the church within that generation.
      I have addressed some of these points in more detail here: http://midwestapologetics.org/blog/?p=1805
      Thanks for the cordial discussion on a topic that often generates a lot of heat. Have a blessed day.

  32. Hello Tim Chaffey,
    I was watching your video “Noah’s Ark and the Flood with Tim Chaffey” and you asked where the idea of people gathering at the ark begging to be let in. I got your answer. I don’t know if this is the origin of the idea, but it’s been around since 1966. I even went back to watch it again. Okay here it is: “The Bible: In the Beginning…” At 36:30 we switch from Cain to Noah. Ark building and mocking of Noah begins at 41:32. At 47:05 enters what I call “The Pied Piper of Noah”. The flood starts at 51:20. The begging people transitions in at 54:00. The many flashes in and out of the ark(no outside people scene). Then at 57:30-58:10 you hear the last cries of the people. Rainbow and end of Noah’s story comes in at 1:19:40. Overall 43:10 spent on Noah’s story in a 2:47:32 movie. You can view it on Internet Archive: https://archive.org/details/The_Bible_In_The_Beginning
    When you made the statement where did people beg to get on the ark get started this popped into my head. I watched this as a kid in the early to mid 70’s. So I did a search and found it(and watched it). Overall a wonderful movie. It’s not a line by line biblical story. Misses or incompletes the stories. A bit graphic would consider it a PG-13 as some nudity Adam and Eve and a sexual innuendo with a goat at Sodom and Gomorrah. Great interaction on the ark with the animals. They also tried to make the ark look bigger than the set was with angle shots. But the amount of animals clearly shows it not as big as they are trying to make it look. And lastly I think you would be impressed with the ark overall.

    Anyways thanks for bringing back some childhood memories. And this is the first time I ever gave a movie review. Something I never thought I would do.

    God Bless you,
    In Christ,

    P.S. Maybe you could get rights(?Might be public domain since it’s in the archives?) and show some clips at the ark.

  33. Hello Mr. Chaffey! I just finished reading the Remnant Trilogy and it was so excellent!!! Thank you for putting out such good, God glorifying books! Do you plan to write more books like it? I would love it and I know of many others who would too!! Thank you and God bless!

    • Hi Anna,
      Thank you for the very kind and encouraging words about the books. I’m glad to hear that you enjoyed them. I recently started working on the final three books in the Truth Chronicles series (books 7-9). If you aren’t familiar with them, the are a time traveling adventure series that I wrote before the Noah series. They are written as youth fiction (targeting the junior high age), but the students in the books are in high school, so older readers enjoy them too. They are part of what I call apologetics fiction. The stories are intended to teach biblical truth and the defense of the Christian faith over the course of the adventures. You can find out more about them at my shop (http://midwestapologetics.org/shop/index.php?rt=product/category&path=65) or check out some Amazon reviews. Speaking of Amazon reviews, would you be willing to leave some positive reviews of the Noah books? That’s a great way to help spread the word.
      I don’t have any definitive plans to write another series like the Remnant Trilogy, although I’ve got some fun ideas for a series that I’d love to write at some point in the future. I’m just not sure if I’ll ever get to it.

  34. Mr. Chaffey:

    I would like your thoughts on a matter I have recently wondered about: could there, in theory, be righteous Nephilim? Whether or not there were righteous Nephilim in practice is something we shall not know until we enter the kingdom of heaven. However, it seems to me that there is no theological reason why there could not be righteous Nephilim. One could argue that the Bible never records any righteous Nephilim. While this is true, arguments from silence hold very little weight. If indeed possible, God in His infinite knowledge just did not think it was necessary for us to know. One could also argue that Nephilim are by nature and breeding fallen, so they cannot be righteous. Though I agree that they are by nature fallen, I disagree with the conclusion for two reasons. First, to reference a biblical principle, the sins of the father do not necessarily transmit to the offspring, and God certainly does not hold the children accountable for the sins of the father. So, in theory, if there was a Nephilim who for whatever reason followed God, his/her breeding should not weigh in. Also, we as humans are by nature fallen. By this argument, no one who’s parents are not Christian can ever be saved. These are my thoughts on the matter. I would love to hear yours. There is a definite possibility that I am missing something. I am not trying to argue that there were any righteous Nephilim, only that there could have been. This is just an interesting idea rather than something that weighs into theological doctrine. God bless you in all that you do!


    • Hi Kane,
      Thanks for sharing your thoughts on this. In my book, Fallen, I address this possibility, and I would agree with what you’ve written. Certainly, the Bible does not speak of any of the Nephilim as being redeemed, and the only ones we do read about were pretty bad. Nevertheless, since I believe that they were descendants of Adam, then I think it is quite likely that salvation would have been available to them. Whether any of them ever believed is beyond me.
      For several years, I wanted to explore that possibility in a novel about Noah. But then that horrible Noah movie came out and the rock monster Nephilim helped Noah build the Ark, and I scrapped that idea, because I didn’t want anyone to think that I got any of my ideas from that pile of garbage film.
      God bless!

  35. Hi,

    My name is Liam and I just finished reading your Truth Chronicles Series. I am 11 years old and I loved the books. I wanted to know if you were planning to write any more books for this series? Please do!

    • Hi Liam,
      Thank you for the encouraging words. It’s great to hear that you enjoyed the books and would like to see more of them.
      Well, I think I have good news for you. I am really hoping to write books 7–9 over the course of the next year. I figured that the first three books covered the teens’ sophomore year, the next three covered their junior year, so I’d like to do three more to cover their last year of high school. I’m still in the planning stages and have a few more issues to work through, but I should be able to start working on them soon. And here’s some more good news. My awesome illustrator has agreed to work on three more for me. You can check back on my blog for updates.
      Thanks again for contacting me. God bless!

    • Hi Liam,

      I wanted to follow up and let you know that books 7-9 of the Truth Chronicles are now available. Book 7 is called The Accident, book 8 is The Attack, and book 9 is The Tower.


  36. Interesting biography. I commend you for your achievements Tim. I am keen to ask, what do you know about Nimrod’s dynasty ?

    • Hi Damien,
      Thanks. I wasn’t avoiding your comment (a reference to another comment submitted by Damien 12 hours later before I had a chance to respond). My blog is not at the top of my to-do list, so sometimes it takes several days before I can approve and/or respond to comment.
      Regarding Nimrod’s dynasty, I would say that I don’t really know about it because I don’t think we can know with certainty which historical figure Nimrod was. There have been many suggestions. I address two of these in my book: Gilgamesh and Sargon of Akkad. And I spend some time talking about the possibility that he was the first giant on the earth after the flood (which is what the Septuagint says about him). But I don’t think we can be confident of any of the suggestions about his identity. Thus, I can’t say that I know much about Nimrod’s dynasty. I know there is a lot of speculation out there, but these need to be backed up with original sources. Unfortunately, most of the theories are highly speculative built upon even more speculations.

  37. Greetings Mr Chaffey,  may I call you Tim please? We Australians are a little on the casual side. As you have already enjoyed in your blog 🙂 and you have worked with an Australian, Ken Ham. I was most delighted to find your personal blog, via AiG coming from yet another blog (Bible Illustrators) who referenced your article”Born in a Barn”. I had been searching all day yesterday to find the artist of 2 paintings of “The Road to Emmaus” so that I could reference the artists in a message I have prepared for our church (in Germany). I had looked through both Tineye and Google images and in every case, for every ‘hit’ or reference, I could not find a credit to the artists. One of the images was also published on a book cover but unknown by the book’s author as to whom the artist is/was.  I have also previously used Eugène Burnand’s ” The disciples Peter and John running to the tomb on the morning of the Resurrection”. Bible artists, who really investigate the event and are not given restrictions on what to paint, can reveal many wonderful truths and insights.Anyway the two paintings of the “The Road to Emmaus” reveal that Cleopas’ companion could be a woman and naturally his wife who was at the crucifixion. My message is on inviting Jesus into our lives. But that’s another story. So, I was most excited to find your article, “Bornin a Barn” I wish I had found it last July. I spent 3 months researching for a message for the First Sunday in Lent. The message was essentially that Jesus was born in a house not a stable. My heart believes strongly that the message “God with us” is still alive and of course relevant. This, as one reason, among other cultural reasons, being that Jesus was born inside among people and not in a lonely stable. Even the Catholic Bible says now ‘Living space” and not stable. There has been much pressure on Bible Translators through the centuries as well for political and other reasons.  There are some other amazing researchers who also have wonderful texts that Jesus was not born in a stable. I am very sure that you also discovered exciting substantial evidence like this in your preparations. It is a project this year that I would like to further investigate and progress that Jesus was born inside a house, among people. Regardless that Christmas cards and Sunday School nativity plays are erroneous, the greater truth is that God wanted to be and still does, to dwell, WITH us, right from His birth……I also consider this a possibility for Jesus’ walk along the road to Emmaus, to be with His supporters after His resurrection and encourage them since their hearts were slow to believe the truth. I’m not out to change the world, Jesus has already done that 🙂 I simply want people to recognise the importance of God’s desperate desire to be among us and not feel sorry for Jesus birthplace or misinformed that there was an Innkeeper etc.  It would be tremendous to have the Bible translations updated that are currently in error suggesting the birthplace involved a commercial inn/motel/public lodging and subsequent stable. Many US and UK translations continue to use ‘inn’ rather than “upper room” or”guest room” or “living space”.How does one go about influencing such a change? My husband and I lived in the Middle East recently for 10 years, so now have a little more cultural understanding. Now we are volunteers with Wycliffe Bible Translators based in Germany doing admin and training in soft skills.  We occasionally do messages in our local church and I particularity try to include culture and setting in my messages to bridge build the Bible accounts so that we can understand more what God is saying through the precious words that we DO have and not build theories around the Bible words we do not have.  How would it look for people to understand Jesus’ real birth circumstances and God’s desire to be/dwell with us? For people to understand how clear God can direct us? E.g. That the Manger/feed box was also a sign/confirmation that the shepherds found the right house to bring their lamb gift and worship? All the other Jewish babies were also wrapped in swaddling bands at the time 🙂 There are so many wonderful treasures to discover as your work/ministry also demonstrates. My purpose in writing, is:1. To say how much I enjoyed your article and your own site(not that I’ve read much as yet on the site)2. In all honesty, how can these traditional Bible translations and Strong’s Concordance, be amended? The pride of tradition and reputation for these works is possibly the stumbling block? What would it take? A group of reputable theologians? Would AiG want to be involved? Their focus and research is more towards Creation. But I don’t know the organisation. I thought that since you wrote the article, “Born in a Barn (Stable)?” you may have come across other groups/theologians interested to amend Jesus’ birth story such that it reveals the heart of God to connect with people, not be lonely, separated, isolated from the people He came to save. Understanding that your schedule is full, I am appreciative if you have time to consider my question and the possibility of creating such a project. Thank you. Blessings Ceejay Haymen
    p.s. I am inspired that you also have a passion for the Resurrection. I just love how God tore that 7 inch thick curtain.

    • Hi Ceejay,
      Yes, please call me Tim. Mr. Chaffey is my dad. 🙂 Actually, I work with several Aussies, and some of them are good friends of mine. I love the accent, the sense of humor, and the Pineapple Lumps they bring me, but I’m not a big fan of Vegemite. 🙂
      It is very difficult to change extra-biblical traditions that have become part of church culture, especially something as ingrained as the traditional nativity story. Think of all the Christmas hymns that would have to change too. But as difficult as that may be, getting the Bibles updated will be even more difficult. Remember, the companies that produce Bible translations are still businesses and they would like to at least break even on their sizable investment. Translating a Bible isn’t cheap. They hire a team of translators who work for years on the project. Then there’s the editing, formatting, promotion, etc. And since they want to sell their Bible translation, they are very reluctant to rock the boat when it comes to favorite passages. When someone looks at a new Bible version one of the first things they do is turn to one of their favorite verses, and if that passage looks like what they are familiar with, then they conclude that the translation is a good one. So you can see what it would be so difficult to make needed changes in popular passages.
      The internet has been both a blessing and a curse when it comes to biblical interpretation. It gives people a better opportunity to discover the correct background and interpretation of a passage, such as the one you’ve asked about. But it also allows erroneous ideas to propagate like never before.
      I can think of a few more passages that need to be slightly tweaked or at least reexamined in light of manuscript discoveries and better understanding of the language and culture. Similarly, I can think of many passages that are frequently misunderstood, but bad ideas die hard. I think the solution is to continue teaching the truth and impacting those within your sphere of influence, particularly the next generation. But as you do that, please help the youth understand what you are and are not doing. What you are doing is offering a very minor correction to help people properly understand the passage. You aren’t calling for the whole thing to be torn down. Far too many of them have been led to believe that the church just wants to control your life and is hiding the truth from its people. So when you let them know that a certain verse isn’t translated well, it’s easy for them to jump to the conclusion that the church has been covering up the truth and then they walk away and often turn against the church. In reality, most of the church never even knows about the issue. Also, that conspiracy sure is a pretty lousy one since most study Bibles will include notes alerting people to variant wordings.
      Finally, you may be right that the circumstances about His birth are related to His desire to be among His people. I think that’s a reasonable concept, but I would be careful about teaching it as Gospel truth, since the Bible doesn’t claim that this is why He was born in humble circumstances.
      I hope this helps. Thanks for reading and taking the time for the response.

  38. Oh – You are the unscientific idiot that writes the lying garbage at the Ark Encounter. Why do Christians lie so much. We are descended from fish – FACT.

    • Hi “John,”
      I sincerely doubt this is your real name or that you left a real email address when leaving this comment. But I decided to approve your post so that readers can see how immature some people are. If you really disagree with me on matters, why wouldn’t you seek to engage me on those points instead of just leaving what amounts to an emotional outburst with no substance? I’m not a scientist, so if I wrote things that are unscientific, it should be quite easy to point to something specific instead of accusing me and others of lying so much.
      In the spirit of Resurrection day, I’ll just leave you with this: Christ is risen! Believe on the Lord Jesus Christ and you will be saved.

  39. Hi Tim,
    I have just finished ‘Fallen:The Sons of God and the Nephilim’ and thought it was excellent.The thought that angelic beings had mated with human women is repugnant, and as a woman it made me shudder, but I found your reasoning compelling and thoroughly scriptural. As a young woman I had several ‘experiences’ at night which were frightening and which woke me up. Nothing for a long time, so perhaps they only fancy young women!! Your book brought to mind several accounts I have read of women being groomed as ‘Brides of Satan’, and that these women claimed they had had sex with Satan. What do you think? Every blessing.

  40. Hi Mr. Chaffey, I don’t have a lot of time to read actual books but I am an avid audiobook listener at work. I just discovered your Remnant Trilogy and am dying to read it, but I only see it in ebook form. Is there any chance that it will become an audiobook…? Oh please?! Also, pass it on to the rest of the folks at AIG, that Audiobooks would be GOBBLED up if they would convert many of the wonderful resources into audio.

  41. Hello Mr. Chaffey,
    I am considering doing a line of apologetics / theological speeches at some point in the future. One of the installment would feature the Nephilim, sons of God, etc. I have recently read your book and really enjoyed it. Would it be fine for me to pull heavily from your book in my speech? I would cite you and your book in my speech, but would just like to confirm that I can use the material contained within.

    • Hi Kane,
      Thank you for the kind words about Fallen: The Sons of God and the Nephilim. I’m glad to hear that you really enjoyed it.
      Feel free to cite content from the book as much as you’d like. You can probably just give a statement near the beginning of your talk that much of what you’re planning to cover is found in my book. Then, if you are using PowerPoint or Keynote and you happen to do some direct quotes from the book, just be sure to document it somewhere on the slide (book title and page number is fine). Also, if most of your talk is based on the book, but then you add some things that might be at odds with what I’ve written, just let them know so that they don’t think those ideas are from the book.
      Also, since you enjoyed the book, would you mind taking a few minutes to leave a positive review on Amazon? Thanks! Happy Thanksgiving!

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *