The NEW Timebenders Books are coming!

Battle Before Time

For the past few weeks, I have been working closely with my new publisher, Greenbrier Book Company of North Carolina, to bring back my Timebenders science-fiction adventure series for young readers. I am revising and updating each book, and my friends at Greenbrier are repackaging these tales as ebooks with stunning new covers. They will be available in all popular ebook formats.

After more than a decade, I finally feel these books are exactly as I want them. I am extremely grateful to my Greenbrier publishers, Ron and Janet Benrey, for producing these new and improved editions of my Timebenders series. Very soon, I’ll be announcing the release of the first two books in the series, Timebenders Book 1: Battle before Time and Timebenders Book 2: Doorway to Doom. And just look at these incredible covers!

Doorway to Doom

Within a few weeks, I’ll also be announcing the release of the next two books in the series, Timebenders Book 3: Invasion of the Time Troopers and Timebenders Book 4: Lost in Cydonia. And after that, who knows? I have a lot of ideas for future Timebenders books on the drawing board.

Please help me spread the word through word of mouth, Facebook, and Twitter. Tell other young readers and parents about the thrilling new Timebenders books from Greenbrier Book Company.

And please write to me. Post your comments right here at my Timebenders blog. Tell me what you think of the Timebenders books. If you’re interested in writing books and stories, send me your questions. Let’s get acquainted.

I’m looking forward to hearing from you.

Leave a comment


  1. My kids love your books! Thanks for writing books I enjoyed reading to them. I am of the opinion that we live in a young earth and that the speed of time has changed since creation, (“Starlight and Time” Dr Russell Humphreys), but in so many other ways I found your books engaging and meaty. If you have the time, I’d appreciate you looking at my book blog ( as I would value your opinion.

    • Many thanks, MDL, for your kind words about the Timebenders series!

      I certainly respect your views regarding a young earth creation. Personally, I have a long believed that the universe had to be much older than 6,000 years old, or we could not see any stars that are more than 6,000 light-years distant. Our own Milky Way galaxy is 100,000 light-years across, and all other galaxies we see in our telescopes are vastly more distant than that. Most of the universe would be completely invisible if it were as young as 6,000 years old.

      I do understand that Russell Humphreys offers an alternative cosmological model in his book Starlight and Time. He suggests that time passed at different rates in different parts of the universe, so that events that took place over billions of years at the edge of the cosmos occurred within a timeframe of six days on earth. I’m not an expert on relativity and cosmology, but Dr. Hugh Ross is, and he has written a respectful and well-reasoned critique of Humphreys’ views.

      I believe an omnipotent God could have easily created the universe in six literal 24-hour days. I also believe the words of Psalm 19:1-4:

      “The heavens declare the glory of God;
      the skies proclaim the work of his hands.
      Day after day they pour forth speech;
      night after night they reveal knowledge.
      They have no speech, they use no words;
      no sound is heard from them.
      Yet their voice goes out into all the earth,
      their words to the ends of the world.”

      The universe silently pours forth speech and reveals knowledge about God and his ways. So if the universe gives every appearance of being approximately 13.5 billion years old, I have to give that silent “speech” thoughtful consideration. I’ve come to the conclusion that, in all probability, the universe and our earth are very old, and I don’t consider an old earth cosmology to be a contradiction of God’s Word.

      The Bible never actually tells us how old the world is. The idea that the world is 6,000 years old comes to us from Archbishop James Ussher (1581-1656), who was Archbishop of the Church of Ireland. In 1650 and 1654, Archbishop Ussher published two works that contained his calculations of the date of Creation, which he said had occurred on October 23, 4004 B.C. His conclusions involve a number of assumptions. They constitute one interpretation of Scripture, but not the only possible interpretation.

      Let me give just one example of an alternate interpretation. Consider the first two verses of the Bible, Genesis 1:1-2:

      “In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth. Now the earth was formless and empty, darkness was over the surface of the deep, and the Spirit of God was hovering over the waters.”

      The original Hebrew word translated “was” in the phrase “the earth was formless and empty” could just as legitimately be translated “the earth became formless and empty.” (You can check this word in a Strong’s Concordance; it’s the Hebrew word hayah, Strong’s H1961; here is a link to webpage for that word.)

      So the earth could have existed for billions of years, then it could have become formless and empty, and then it might have been refashioned—and this scenario is perfectly consistent with a literal reading of Genesis 1:1-2. In fact, this might help to explain where we should chronologically place the fall of Satan. After all, Satan was already a fallen, evil enemy when Adam and Eve encountered him in the garden.

      When did the fall of Satan take place—before or after the Genesis Creation? Satan’s rebellion might have taken place sometime during the years before the earth became formless and empty. In fact, the satanic rebellion might have actually been the catastrophic event that caused the Earth to become formless and empty. The war between God’s angels and the satanic hosts might have destroyed the Earth. Then God might have refashioned the Earth to heal it of the damage Satan’s rebellion had caused.

      This is all speculation, of course. But it’s not at all inconsistent with a literal reading of Genesis 1:1-2. And that means that it is easily possible for the universe to be 13.5 billion years old, for the earth to be 4.5 billion years old, for the passage of time and the speed of light to be uniform throughout the universe, and for the Bible to be literally true.

      That’s my view. And of course, I fully respect your view, and all other views that treat God’s Word with reverence and respect.

      Thank you again for your kind words on the Timebenders series. God bless you as you serve Him and share His good news.

      • P.S. I just took a quick glance at your work on the Samuel’s Quest project, and it looks fascinating. Your father’s paintings are amazing. I’m on deadline at the moment, and time is tight, but I will be back for a closer look soon. Here’s the link for anyone else who would like to read this beautifully illustrated story: (I tried to find the opening section, “The Great Storm,” but couldn’t locate it on the site; could you please post a link to that section? Thanks again!)

      • Hi Jim
        Thanks so much for looking at my blog, it helps to have a “real” author comment. Not sure why the link to the Great Storm wasn’t working, but here it is:

      • I’ve never had a problem being an “old earth” Christian. I tend to agree with the reasoning that Genesis 1:1-2 could happen some significant amount of time before the rest of the chapter. I also have no problem believing in an old earth because Genesis 1 is one of only two portions of the pentateuch that are specifically written in poetic form in the original Hebrew. The second place is the victory song after the Israelites leave Egypt (Exodus 15). We have no trouble understanding that the other poem is figurative (with God “throwing” or “casting” pharaoh and his army into the sea in Ex 15:4 instead of them following Israel there), so why should we have a problem with Genesis chapter one being figurative?

      • Thanks, Scott. Those are excellent points, and I appreciate you taking the time to add those insights to the conversation.

      • Where I went to school, all of the “science” majors (Biology, Chemistry, Physics, Math) were required to take a course entitled “A Christian’s View of Science and Scripture” the spring before they graduated. It was taught by a combination of teachers from all of those departments plus the Bible department (every full time student there is required to take a Bible class every semester they are in school). The guys who taught Hebrew and Greek for a living and whose PhD’s were in the subject of Old Testament Studies and Biblical Languages pointed out that Genesis 1 is a beautiful poem, and that its purpose was not to state how, but who: the one true God versus the polytheistic gods that the surrounding cultures worshiped.

      • Wow, I like that focus on Science and Scripture at your alma mater. Too often, we see battle lines drawn between science and faith, which I have always seen as a false dichotomy. I love both science and the Bible, and when both are well understood, they harmonize beautifully. And your insight about the poetic nature of Genesis 1 is profound and thought-provoking. Thanks again for your thoughts, Scott!

        (By the way, the first two books in the new revised and updated Timebenders series were just released today, and the announcement is at:

      • I’ve always been fascinated by the fact that science conclusively tells us that there is one woman from whom all woman are matrilineally descended via mitochondrial DNA and also tells us that there is one man from whom all men are patrilineally descended through Y chromosome analysis. Science furthermore tells us that an analysis of genetic drift indicates that the one man lived significantly later than the one woman. It fascinated me that if you match that up to the first ten chapters of Genesis the Bible told us the same thing thousands of years ago (all women being matrilineally descended from Eve while all men are patrilineally descended from Noah much later on). Science and Scripture are not enemies, as much as some folks on both sides of the debate would like to argue that this is the case.

        My birthday is next month and a copy of your eBooks is on my wish list. I bet my wife will get them for me.

  2. I think it’s great that you’ve been able to resurrect some of your old work. That’s quite heartening for me because although I’ve never been published, I’ve got quite a lot of old stories I’ve written, many of which I never finished. It makes me think I may be able to resurrect and finish some of them and maybe even have them published some day. So thank you!

    • Thanks for those encouraging words, Elaine! Yes, this is a good time to be a writer. There are many options available for getting your stories out to the public. My new publisher, Greenbrier Books, has given me the opportunity to go back and improve the books from their original editions of a decade ago. I am looking forward to hearing from a whole new generation of readers!
      I wish you joy and great success in your writing journey, Elaine. All the best!

  3. Hi Jim, I wonder if you’ve had the chance to tune in to the CMI conference. They are live streaming at :

  4. Hope you had a chance to tune in to the CMI conference…I found much of the science over my head, but still interesting to listen to. More details about arguments on the age of the earth are at:


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: