Ken Ham

From Wikiquote
Jump to: navigation, search
No one is ever going to convince me that the word of God is not true.

Ken Ham (born October 20, 1951) is a young-earth creationist and president of Answers in Genesis and the Creation Museum.

Sourced[edit]

Many Christians have been duped into accepting a false idea: that there is a 'neutral' position they can take in regard to social issues... God's Word, however, makes it clear that there is no neutral position.
  • Evolutionary Darwinists need to understand we are taking the dinosaurs back. This is a battle cry to recognize the science in the revealed truth of God.
    • Michael Powell, "In Evolution Debate, Creationists Are Breaking New Ground; Museum Dedicated to Biblical Interpretation Of the World Is Being Built Near Cincinnati", The Washington Post (September 25, 2005), p. A.03
  • Secularism, with its moral relativism, is in direct opposition to Christianity and its absolute morality. The battle is between these two worldviews—one that stands on God's Word and one that accepts man's opinions.
    • Carol Derby & Ken Ham, "The 'Evolutionizing' of a Culture", War of the World Views: Powerful Answers For An "Evolutionized" Culture (2006), p. 11
  • Did you know you can ask very simple questions to the scientists who claim that dinosaurs lived millions of years ago? You could say to them, in a very nice way of course, "Excuse me, were you there?" You are actually asking them, "Were you there to see the dinosaurs when they first came into existence? Were you there to see them alive? Were you there to see them die out?" Obviously, they weren't there, so how could they really know everything about them?
    • Dinosaurs for Kids (2009), p. 14
  • Many Christians have been duped into accepting a false idea: that there is a 'neutral' position they can take in regard to social issues. Some Christians even accept the myth that the U.S. Constitution declares that there should be a separation of church and state. They are hesitant to inject Christian beliefs into politics. God's Word, however, makes it clear that there is no neutral position.
  • Creationists and evolutionists, Christians and non-Christians, all have the same evidence—the same facts. Think about it: we all have the same earth, the same fossil layers, the same animals and plants, the same stars—the facts are all the same. The difference is in the way we all interpret the facts. And why do we interpret facts differently? Because we start with different presuppositions; these are things that are assumed to be true without being able to prove them. These then become the basis for other conclusions. All reasoning is based on presuppositions (also called axioms). This becomes especially relevant when dealing with past events.
  • When it comes to biblical authority, the question of the age of the earth is just as vital as the question of whether evolution is true or not. The chronologies in the Bible and the length of the days of the Creation Week (they were 24 hours each) show that the earth is young. Why try to reinterpret the very clear teaching of Scripture to accommodate the fallible ideas of man that say the earth is old? Such reinterpretations undermine the authority of the Word of God.
  • ... I'm a Christian, and as a Christian, I can't prove it to you, but God has definitely shown me very clearly through His word, and He has shown Himself in the person of Jesus Christ, that the Bible is the word of God. I admit that that is where I start from. I can challenge people that you can go and test that, you can make predictions based on that, you can check the prophecies in the Bible, you can check the statements in Genesis. I did a little bit of that tonight. I can't ultimately prove that to you, all I can do is to say to someone look, if the Bible really is what it claims to be, if it really is the word of God, (and that's what it claims), then, check it out, and the Bible says that if you come to God believing that He is, He will reveal Himself to you and you will know. As Christians we can say we know, and so, as far as the word of God is concerned... No, one is ever going to convince me that the word of God is not true.

Did Adam have a Bellybutton?: And other tough questions about the Bible (2000)[edit]

  • First, just because God took a rib from Adam to make Eve would not mean that all of Adam's male descendants would have one less rob. Remember, it's our genes that determine how many ribs a person will have... Second, remember from your biology that ribs "regenerate." In other words, Adam would've had his missing rib back quite quickly.
  • You see, Adam had a perfect brain. We don't, because our brain has suffered from thousands of years of sin and the curse. Frankly, we're nowhere near as intelligent as Adam was.
  • The answers from Genesis tell us that there was no death, bloodshed, disease, or suffering before sin. All these things are a consequence of sin. That's why Christians can't believe in millions of years for the fossil record - it's a horrible record of death, disease, and suffering, which couldn't have happened in the Garden before Adam fell.
  • ... dinosaur bones that are supposedly millions of years old have been found to show evidence of arthritis, abscesses, and osteoarthritis. Evidence of cancer and other diseases have also been found in fossil bones. So, if a Christian believes the fossil record was laid down millions of years before the first two people, then they've accepted that there were all sorts of horrible diseases in this world before sin. How could God have described such a world as VERY GOOD?... No - our answers in Genesis make it clear that there were NO diseases before sin. This is another reason why Christians cannot believe in millions of years to form the fossil record.
  • It's important for Christians to understand that if this event of the forbidden fruit was not history, then the Fall itself would not be literal. This would also mean that Christ's death on the cross would be meaningless.
  • When you read Genesis, you find that it was Adam who was given the specific instruction not to eat the fruit of the tree. You see, Adam was created first, and God had ordained that he was to be the head of his family. He then gave Adam instruction as to what was expected of him. Adam, of course, would've told Eve, because she was really under his headship. Therefore, when Eve took the fruit, Adam shouldn't have joined her. He should've gone directly to God and asked for a solution. Instead, he joined his wife and brought sin and death into the world. You know, this is a lesson we need to learn today about men taking the leadership role in their families.
  • Today, many men are not the heads of their homes, which has led to many family problems. If husbands would get their answers from Genesis, they'd know that theirs is to be a headship role, and they're responsible for the rules God has given families.
  • Because of the effects of sin, mistakes have added up in the genese of humans so that today, deformities could result from close relatives marrying. Adam and Eve's children would have had relatively few mistakes in the genes compared to today. So, provided it was one man for one woman for life - there would not have been a problem at all for Cain to marry his sister!
  • Now Noah didn't need to take all the SPECIES of land animals on board- just representatives of the KINDS. In other words, he didn't need all the varieties of dogs - just two dogs that would give rise to numerous species in the new world after the flood. Calculations show that probably only around 16,000 animals were needed on board the ark.
  • Really, it's because people have been influenced by evolution that they think dinosaurs weren't on the ark. We need to get our ANSWERS from the Bible - not evolutionists!
  • Personally, I don't believe insects had to be on board [Noah's ark]. You see, I don't believe they're classified in the Bible as having the "breath of life" as vertebrates are.
  • Most of us tend to think of Noah as much less advanced than we are. Actually, the opposite would be true. We've had 4,500 more years of the effects of sin and the Curse on our brains. I'm convinced Noah would have had the intelligence necessary to devise methods of feeding and caring [for the animals on the ark] that would put today's farmer's to shame. If farmers today have methods that could easily allow eight people to look after 16,000 animals - I've no doubt Noah could do much more!

Great Dinosaur Mystery Solved! (2000)[edit]

Since the Flood, many animals have died out from diseases, a lack of food, etc. The dinosaurs, like many other creatures, seem to have also died out. According to this view, there is no mystery about dinosaurs!
  • Dinosaurs first existed around 6,000 years ago. Because dinosaurs were land animals, and God made all the land animals on day six of the creation week, dinosaurs were created on day six. Dinosaurs could not have died out before this time because death, bloodshed, disease and suffering is a result of Adam's sin. Adam and Eve were also made on day six alongside the dinosaurs - so dinosaurs lived with people. Representatives of all the KINDS of land animals, including the dinosaur kinds went on board Noah's ark. All those that were left behind drowned in the cataclysmic circumstances of the Flood - many of their remains became fossils. After the Flood (around 4,500 years ago), the land animals (including dinosaurs) came off the ark and lived in the present world, beside people. Because of sin, the judgement of the curse and the effects of the Flood have greatly changed the earth. Since the Flood, many animals have died out from diseases, a lack of food, etc. The dinosaurs, like many other creatures, seem to have also died out. According to this view, there is no mystery about dinosaurs!
  • We've all heard of the word "dragon". Dragon legends are numerous around the world. Legends tell us that the Chinese bred dragons. Many of the descriptions of these "dragons" fit dinosaurs. Could the stories about dragons actually be accounts of encounters with what we now call dinosaurs?
  • Baryonyx is on display at the Natural History Museum in London. If you ever get the chance to view this wonderful specimen, remember that you just might be looking at the skeleton of one of the dragons from English history and legend (e.g., Sir George the Dragon Slayer) or one of the dragons spoken of in the Bible.
  • Since none of the creatures of the sea were taken on Noah's ark, there would be a strong possibility that some plesiosaurs and maybe even some ichtyosaurs survived the Flood. The violent and turbulent waters of the Flood would surely have killed and buried many of the sea creatures (over 90 percent of fossils found are of marine animals). However, if some had survived the Flood and lived on in the seas for years after, they could help account for many of the legends of sea monsters that have been gathered from all over the world. Remote as it may seem, there could even be the possibility that a few have survived till modern times. After all, it's much easier to believe that they could have survived for several thousand years rather than for nearly a hundred-million years.

Did Eve really have an Extra Rib?: And other tough questions about the Bible (2002)[edit]

The Bible teaches clearly that compromise destroys!
  • We can't always trust what we see in museums, but we can certainly ALWAYS trust what we read in the Bible.
  • There's NO life on Mars. There were NO feathers on the dinosaur. Cloning has absolutely nothing to do with evolution... NOTHING has been or ever will be found to contradict the Bible.
  • Christians should take a stand on six literal days, a young earth, and global flood even if it causes division. Either God means what He says, or we may as well not believe any of the Bible.
  • The Bible teaches clearly that compromise destroys! We need to return to the authority of God's Word and its answers.
  • When you look at nations today like England, in which great revivals occurred generations ago, there's very little vestige of Christianity left in public life. The Church, by and large, is dead, with only pockets of small Bible-believing churches struggling to make an impact on what's now a very pagan culture.
  • While in England, I came across Sunday school material produced by a major Christian organization. Many conservative evangelical churches use it. One series of lessons covered the topic of origins. I was dismayed when the text declared that people need to believe in billions of years and evolution. But I was even more shocked when I read that the apostle Paul didn't understand science back in his time as we understand it today. Therefore, they concluded, what Paul wrote was not meant to answer questions about man's origins for today's world! What a low view of Scripture! They're looking on Paul's writings as the writings of a fallible human. But every word in the Bible was written under the inspiration of the Holy Spirit - it's the Word of God who knows everything!
  • Evolution actually involves much more than life arising from non-life by natural means. Evolution really does away with God, and thus allows people to explain their existence without any supernatural being involved.

Raising Godly Children in an Ungodly World: Leaving a Lasting Legacy (2008)[edit]

[My father] was always very adamant about one thing - if you can't trust the Book of Genesis as literal history, then you can't trust the rest of the Bible.
  • Many times I recall my father, with my mother and us children in tow, going up to the pastor after a service. With Bible in hand he would challenge the pastor about some of the things he said in his sermon, quoting Scriptures that resounded with the words "Thus said the Lord," or "It is written..."... (To this day, when I quote verses that contain these phrases, an image of my father confronting the liberal pastors pops into my mind!)
  • Yes, Dad was considered a "boat rocker," and he was prepared to make waves when necessary. He felt that if you needed to create a tsunami to make things right, then so be it. Sure, he cared about what people thought of him, he cared about them very much... but he cared about the Bible more. The Word of God was the foundation of his life. It was the air in his lungs and the blood in his veins. He never ceased to read it, contemplate it, apply it, and defend it.
  • [My father] was always very adamant about one thing - if you can't trust the Book of Genesis as literal history, then you can't trust the rest of the Bible. After all, every single doctrine of biblical theology is founded in the history of Genesis 1-11. My father had not developed his thinking in this area as much as we have today at Answers in Genesis, but he clearly understood that if Adam wasn't created from dust, and that if he didn't fall into sin as Genesis states, then the gospel message of the New Testament can't be true either.
  • Dad, by example and through his teaching, had helped me understand something that has been with me since that time: When something we learn contradicts Scripture, we need to first of all go to the Bible and study the words in context very carefully. If, after doing this, we are sure the Bible still clearly means what we had previously gleaned, then we need to question the ideas that contradict the Bible's words. Then, even if we can't find an explanation that shows where the secular idea is in error, we need to continue to search and wait for the answer. Even if we don't find answers in our lifetime, we cannot reinterpret Scripture. To do so would be to make man's ideas infallible and God's Word fallible. This would put us on a course of compromise and unbelief through the rest of Scripture, and Dad often warned us of this "slippery slope."

"Bill Nye Debates Ken Ham" (February 4, 2014)[edit]

  • I believe there is a gross misrepresentation in our culture. We're seeing people being indoctrinated to believe that Creationists can't be scientists. I believe it's all a part of secularists hijacking the word 'science'.
  • There's different types of knowledge, and this is where I believe the confusion lies. There's experimental or observational science as we call it. That's using the scientific method: observation, measurement, experiment, testing. That's what produces our technology: computers, spacecraft, jet planes, smoke detectors, looking at DNA, antibiotics, medicines and vaccines. You see, all scientists, whether Creationist or Evolutionist, actually have the same observational or experimental science. It doesn't matter if you're a Creationist or an Evolutionist: you can be a great scientist... But I want us to also understand that molecules-to-man evolution belief has nothing to do with developing technology.
  • You see, when we're talking about origins, we're talking about the past, we're talking about our origins. We weren't there, you can't observe that, whether it's molecules-to-man evolution or the creation account. When you're talking about the past, we like to call that origins or historical science: knowledge concerning the past. Here at the Creation Museum, we make no apology about the fact that our origins or historical science is actually based upon the biblical account of origins. When you research science text books being used in public schools, what we found is this: by and large the origins or historical science is based on man's ideas about the past, for instance the ideas of Darwin.
  • Our research has found that public school textbooks are using the same word science for observational science and historical science. They arbitrarily define science as naturalism and outlaw the supernatural. They present molecules-to-man evolution as fact. They're imposing (I believe) the religion of naturalism or atheism on generations of students. You see, I assert that the word 'science' has been hijacked by secularists in teaching evolution to force the religion of naturalism on generations of kids.
  • Secular evolutionists teach that all life developed by natural processes from some primordial form, that man is just an evolved animal, which has great bearing on how we view life and death... But, you see, the Bible gives a totally different account of origins, of who we are, of where we came from, the meaning of life, and our future, that through one man sin entered the world, and death through sin, but that God so loved the world that He gave His only begotten Son, that whoever believes in Him should not perish but have everlasting life.
  • Creation is the only viable model of historical science confirmed by observational science in today's modern scientific era.
  • ... non-Christian scientists are really barring from the Christian worldview any way to carry out their experimental or observational science. Think about it: when they're doing observational science using the scientific method, they have to assume the laws of logic, they have to assume the laws of nature, they have to assume the uniformity of nature. I mean, think about it, if the universe came about through natural processes, where did the laws of logic come from? Did they just pop into existence? Are we in a stage now where we only have half of logic? So, you see, I have a question for Bill Nye: How do you account for the laws of logic and laws of nature from a naturalistic worldview that excludes the existence of God?
  • You don't observe the past directly, even when you think about the creation account. We can't observe God creating, we can't observe Adam and Eve: we admit that. We're willing to admit our beliefs about the past. But see, what you observe in the present is very different. Even some public school textbooks sort of acknowledge the difference between historical and observational science.
  • We observe things in the present and then, okay, we're assuming that that's always happened in the past, and we're going to figure out how this happened. You see? There is a difference between what you observed and what happened in the past.
  • You see, none of us saw the sandstone or the shale [of the Grand Canyon] being layed down. There's a supposed ten million year gap there, but I don't see a gap, but that might be different from what Bill Nye would see. But, you see, there's a difference between what you actually observe directly and then your interpretation in regard to the past.
  • ... I'm a Christian, and as a Christian, I can't prove it to you, but God has definitely shown me very clearly through His word, and He has shown Himself in the person of Jesus Christ, that the Bible is the word of God. I admit that that is where I start from. I can challenge people that you can go and test that, you can make predictions based on that, you can check the prophecies in the Bible, you can check the statements in Genesis. I did a little bit of that tonight. I can't ultimately prove that to you, all I can do is to say to someone look, if the Bible really is what it claims to be, if it really is the word of God, (and that's what it claims), then, check it out, and the Bible says that if you come to God believing that He is, He will reveal Himself to you and you will know. As Christians we can say we know, and so, as far as the word of God is concerned... No, one is ever going to convince me that the word of God is not true.

Around the World with Ken Ham (May 2005 - Ongoing)[edit]

The director of the movie, Darren Aronofsky, has been quoted in the media as saying that Noah is “the least biblical biblical film ever made,” and I agree wholeheartedly with him. I am disgusted. I am going to come right out and say it: this movie is disgusting and evil—paganism!
The chronologies in the Bible and the length of the days of the Creation Week (they were 24 hours each) show that the earth is young. Why try to reinterpret the very clear teaching of Scripture to accommodate the fallible ideas of man that say the earth is old? Such reinterpretations undermine the authority of the Word of God.
I have said for years that the devil has deliberately targeted the book of Genesis, the foundational book of the Bible, because, if he targeted the Cross, the church would quickly respond and defend the gospel of Jesus Christ. But due to the decreasing spiritual state of this nation and increasing intolerance of Christianity, the attacks are becoming more overt against Christianity, and are on the increase.
  • Friends, last night I watched the Hollywood (Paramount) movie Noah. It is much, much worse than I thought it would be—much worse. The director of the movie, Darren Aronofsky, has been quoted in the media as saying that Noah is “the least biblical biblical film ever made,” and I agree wholeheartedly with him. I am disgusted. I am going to come right out and say it: this movie is disgusting and evil—paganism! Do you really want your family to see a pagan movie that portrays Noah as a psychopath who says that if his daughter-in-law’s baby is a girl then he will kill her as soon as she’s born? And when two girls are born, bloodstained Noah (the man the Bible calls “righteous” in Genesis 7:1) brings a knife down to the head of one of the babies to kill her—and at the last minute doesn’t do it. And then a bit later, Noah says he failed because he didn’t kill the babies. How can we recommend this movie and then speak against abortion? Psychopathic Noah sees humans as a blight on the planet and wants to rid the world of people. I feel dirty—as if I have to somehow wash the evil off myself. I cannot believe there are Christian leaders who have recommended that people see this movie.
  • The question of origins can’t be proven through experimentation—indeed, there is no absolute proof for either evolution or creation! But a creation geologist looks at the layers of rock and the fossil record and finds that much of it fits in the biblical framework of a catastrophic global Flood, not in the evolutionary model of slow erosion over millions of years.
  • Bible-believing Christians who oppose same-sex marriage are not discriminating against homosexual people—they are taking a stand on the authority of God’s Word. They are applying God’s holy standards—as recorded in the Bible—to correctly identify sin as sin. Homosexual behavior is sin. All sin is evil. People need to understand what sin is, and not justify it and dress it up as something good and acceptable.
  • 1 Corinthians 6:9–10 lists homosexual behavior as a sin that will bring judgment by God on the unrighteous. The beautiful truth of Christ’s gospel is found in verse 11, “And such were some of you. But you were washed, but you were sanctified, but you were justified in the name of the Lord Jesus and by the Spirit of our God.” Yes we should be welcoming of practicing homosexuals with the love of Christ, but with a clear presentation of His death for their sinful perversion of God-ordained sexuality between one man and one woman in Genesis 2:24. Anything less misses the meaning of what the love of God really is, not an inclusive message but a saving gospel (John 3:16). The church shouldn’t encourage people who struggle with same-sex attraction to engage in sinful sexual practices. No, church leaders like those at Highland Baptist should be finding ways to share the gospel with unbelievers and encourage Christians to live in a way that’s pleasing to God.
  • Exposing the children to multiple views (except those of Christians) and training them to supposedly be open-minded so that they can decide for themselves seem to be a common theme these days. As Christians, however, we are to “train up a child in the way he should go, and when he is old he will not depart from it” (Proverbs 22:6). We must give our children a strong biblical foundation of truth and equip them with answers. Yes, we can show them the other views out there in the world, but we also must show them why they are false and why God’s Word is true. We need to teach them clearly the difference between truth and error—between good and evil. We are not doing our duty as Christians if we are not striving to train them up in the fear of the Lord (Psalm 34:11).
  • In recent times secularists are increasingly accusing biblical creationists of “child abuse” for teaching creation to children. Now they are going a step further to show their real intolerance is of Christianity in general. The secularists are directly targeting those who teach the gospel message, which includes telling children that they are sinners. I have said for years that the devil has deliberately targeted the book of Genesis, the foundational book of the Bible, because, if he targeted the Cross, the church would quickly respond and defend the gospel of Jesus Christ. But due to the decreasing spiritual state of this nation and increasing intolerance of Christianity, the attacks are becoming more overt against Christianity, and are on the increase.
  • You know, it used to be that American culture in general understood that we’re sinful, but not anymore. Which is why teaching the gospel, starting in Genesis, is important. Sin entered into the world through Adam, as described in Genesis. The problem is that we have Christian leaders compromising God’s clear Word in Genesis with evolution, millions of years, or both. If we cannot trust what God says in Genesis, we cannot trust the gospel. Sadly, years of such compromise has greatly weakened the church to now allow for increasing open attacks on those who teach the gospel. Those attacking the gospel are intent on imposing their religion of atheism on this generation of kids.
  • In this day and age, I consider Genesis, out of all the other books of the Bible, to be the most attacked, scoffed at, and ridiculed—from within parts of the church and outside. You see, because of the indoctrination in the belief evolution and millions of years through the education system and media, many people believe that Genesis 1-11 cannot be taken as literal history. As a result, such evolutionary teaching is a stumbling block to many non-Christians even listening to the gospel from the Word of God—and many people in the church are put on a slippery slide of unbelief in the Scriptures as the infallible Word of God.
  • I’m shocked at the countless hundreds of millions of dollars that have been spent over the years in the desperate and fruitless search for extraterrestrial life... Of course, secularists are desperate to find life in outer space, as they believe that would provide evidence that life can evolve in different locations and given the supposed right conditions! The search for extraterrestrial life is really driven by man’s rebellion against God in a desperate attempt to supposedly prove evolution!... And I do believe there can’t be other intelligent beings in outer space because of the meaning of the gospel. You see, the Bible makes it clear that Adam’s sin affected the whole universe. This means that any aliens would also be affected by Adam’s sin, but because they are not Adam’s descendants, they can’t have salvation. One day, the whole universe will be judged by fire, and there will be a new heavens and earth. God’s Son stepped into history to be Jesus Christ, the “Godman,” to be our relative, and to be the perfect sacrifice for sin—the Savior of mankind. Jesus did not become the “GodKlingon” or the “GodMartian”! Only descendants of Adam can be saved. God’s Son remains the “Godman” as our Savior. In fact, the Bible makes it clear that we see the Father through the Son (and we see the Son through His Word). To suggest that aliens could respond to the gospel is just totally wrong. An understanding of the gospel makes it clear that salvation through Christ is only for the Adamic race—human beings who are all descendants of Adam.


Misattributed[edit]

  • For centuries, 'scientists' have tried to present the dinosaurs as violent monsters because they wanted to scare children. It's no coincidence that most of these men have been atheists or even homosexuals who are possessed by an intense hatred of young boys and girls.
    • parody of Dinosaurs of Eden: Tracing the Mystery Through History in Stephenson Billings, "Why Are Liberals Stealing Our Children's Dinosaur Lemonade?", Daily Bleach (August 8, 2012)
    • actual page text: "At this stage you may have two questions: Why did animals like T. rex have fierce-looking sharp teeth if they were vegetarians? And why is the world today one in which there is death, disease, suffering and bloodshed everywhere?"

Quotes about Ken Ham[edit]

I didn't think he'd haul off and punch me if I told him that I was a humanist. But his grim affect and coldly irrational imitation of rationality struck me as borderline sociopathic. ~ Daniel Radosh
  • Ham doubts that aliens exist, because they are not mentioned in the Bible, but goes on to say that even if they did exist, they would totally not be worth discovering, because they would not be direct descendants of Adam, and thus would go straight to hell. Ham believes that only hard-left secularists care about finding life on other planets, and that their motivation is to create an illusion that evolution is real and disprove the Biblical accounts of creation.
  • Ham and other creationists attribute the extinction of the dinosaurs post-Flood to a "much more difficult world in which to survive" and that to survive, the "once easily obtained plant nutrition would now have to be supplemented by animal sources." This would assume that of all the animals on the Ark, dinosaurs were one of the least able to survive and would likely be preyed upon or unable to find food once they got of the Ark... Based on the number, sheer size, and varied types of dinosaur fossils that we have today, one has to question Mr. Ham on the merits of that hypothesis. By what evidence is there to suggest that the adaptability and superior place on the food chain in which dinosaurs existed would render them less likely to survive than the common cow or pig?
    • J. J. Dyken (2013), The Divine Default: Why Faith is Not the Answer, Algora Publishing
  • Ham’s greatest strength is his skepticism; his refusal to accept that Christianity is obligated to fit neatly into the mainstream cultural narrative. As an evangelical, that sort of contrarianism is in my lifeblood. But it’s on this point that Ham defeats himself. He rails endlessly against the dogmatism of scientific naturalism, while peddling an ideology that reduces the Bible into a giant jigsaw puzzle of scientific numbers and formulas, all easily arranged and understood. The only way that Ham gets away with this massive act of oversimplification is with an elaborate sleight of hand known as selective literalism—in other words, interpreting the Bible literally only when convenient.
  • Once again, creation science advocate Ken Ham of Answers in Genesis is showing his willful ignorance of old earth belief... A global flood, as proposed by Ham, would have mixed up the fossils, giving them no recognizable pattern with which to formulate an evolutionary theory. The fact that they show increasingly complex organisms, and are stratigraphically separated, is indication that millions of years is correct. For instance, the young earth creation science model says the layers of the Grand Canyon are Flood deposited, but they contain no dinosaurs. Dinosaur fossils are all located in the Mesozoic rocks, which are stratigraphically above the Grand Canyon layers. How did the dinosaurs survive to this point? At a minimum, over a mile of sediment was deposited by the floodwaters, yet the dinosaurs lived through it all!
  • I do believe that people who adhere to young earth creationism do in fact demonstrate many traits found in cults, and the leaders of the young earth movement, such as Ken Ham of Answers in Genesis, use the same tactics used by cult leaders, in order to keep young earth followers in line with young earth teaching.
  • I understand that you take the Bible, as written in English, translated many many times over the last three millennia as to be a more accurate, more reasonable assessment of the natural laws we see around us than what I and everybody in here can observe. That, to me, is unsettling.
  • I realized with some surprise that Ken Ham scared me. I wasn't physically afraid. I didn't think he'd haul off and punch me if I told him that I was a humanist. But his grim affect and coldly irrational imitation of rationality struck me as borderline sociopathic... Later I read an essay Ham wrote for Creation magazine on the second anniversary of September 11: "After the 9/11 attack, I had someone say to me: 'I'm glad I wasn't in the World Trade Center - I would have died.' I replied, 'Well, don't worry, your turn is coming.'" Who thinks that way? Who thinks Jesus wants them to think that way?
    • Daniel Radosh (2008), Rapture Ready!: Adventures in the Parallel Universe of Christian Pop Culture, Simon and Schuster
  • The Jesus I worship doesn’t offer me scientific explanations about the world around me. The Jesus I worship is the being through which all things were created, seen and unseen. He is the Lord of the sciences. He is the creator of the Evolutionary process. My Jesus doesn’t demand that I believe one theory or another about the origins of life. My Jesus is more concerned with the content of our characters and how we love each other than with our position on any scientific, political, or even theological issue. (as Steve Mattson so beautifully points out here) My faith is one that embraces doubt, questioning, exploration, discovery, and science. My faith is not rooted in any doctrine or idea but in a relationship with the God of love. And so when Ken Ham and those of his ilk stand up and proclaim that Evolution and modern science is “opposed to God”, I am left to wonder which God he’s talking about. Because the God I know and worship has always been able to withstand my questions. He is the God who I believe is behind all scientific discovery. But apparently, Ken’s God is not. Instead, the God Ken seems to represent has apparently given us all of the answers to the mysteries of the universe in the Bible and expects us to cease thinking, exploring, and learning.
  • As we argued it became painfully clear that he simply did not understand the topics he was discussing. Eventually he told me I was very arrogant and needed to learn more about the subject. I replied that arrogance was standing on a stage pretending to know something about science. For some reason that ended the conversation.
    • Jason Rosenhouse (2012), Among the Creationists: Dispatches from the Anti-Evolutionist Front Line, Oxford University Press
  • I admit I was dismayed by what I saw at the Ken Ham museum. It was alarming to see so much time, money and effort being spent on making a mockery of hard won scientific knowledge. And the fact that it was being done with such obvious sincerity, somehow made it all the worse.
    • Robert Winston, "The God of the Gaps", The Story of God (Documentary), BBC One, (December 18, 2005)

See also[edit]

External links[edit]

Wikipedia
Wikipedia has an article about: