Tag Archives: Ken Ham

Ken Ham, idolator and mythicist

Words (Photo credit: sirwiseowl)

He begins by quoting John 1.1 in the NKJV. Not the Greek, but a translation. As such, he writes,

In this verse, the Greek word logos is translated “word.” There is much that could be said about the word’s deep meaning in regard to Jesus being the Word, the Creator who spoke the universe and life into existence (Colossians 1).

via Should BioLogos Be Called “ContraLogos” Instead? | Around the World with Ken Ham.

From there, he only gets worse. His argument, all of his arguments really, are based on a translation and not on what the theological emphasis behind what the word/sentence/linguistic image may mean. For instance, is John pulling the Logos imagery from Wisdom of Solomon 18 or from Philo who pulled it from Heraclitus? Not that Wisdom may be different from Philo, if you interpret Proverbs 8 (and Wisdom 7) in light of the Alexandrian Logos.


He then goes on to associate Jesus Christ with Scripture. This is a common doctrinal idolization found in fundamentalist sects. They do not understand Scripture except as a form of Jesus. Rather, as one minister once told me, Jesus is Scripture in the flesh.


Such compromise, however, undermines the authority of the Word and is dangerous to the health of the church. In reality, an attack on the Word of God is an attack on Jesus Christ, who is the Word.

Scripture is not the word of God. It does not claim to be. It contains prophecies and message from God, but the only thing writers called other writings now included in our canon is something along the lines of “holy writings.” Note, not only all of their holy writings made it into our canon.


As discussed on Facebook with someone over this past week, Ham has a nasty habit of reading everything the same way – woodenly, which is why when he says evolutionists call Genesis 1-11 “incorrect” he is committing a grave error, almost a lie. He can see no difference in nuance. Rather, I would maintain Genesis 1-11 is classic ANE myth, a theologized account. Ham shows himself to be the theological liberal that he is, taking only his experience (what scripture says to him) as the validator of what Scripture is. He is his own authority.


In one blog post, Ham as revealed himself to be an 1.) idolator who worships the creature (a book) more than the Creator, 2.) a liberal who proclaims his own authority, and possibly 3.) a mythicist who doesn’t believe Jesus is anything more than a story.


Enhanced by Zemanta

If for no other reason, watch Noah because of @AiGKenHam’s freakout

This is the trailer:

Ham is characteristically freaking out - almost as much as the Dagon worshipers in one of those books of Daniel. Oddly enough he calls out the Jews for his support, although he doesn’t really understand much about Second Temple interpretation of Noah from the Jewish perspective nor even modern rabbinical commentary. This is apparent because he like wise misses the material, at least in the trailer in his preview (of a movie he hasn’t seen), present from the pseudepigrapha.

Reading Ham makes this movie that much more seeable.

Quote of the Day – Bryan Bibb

If people really knew the Bible, con-men like Joel Osteen and Ken Ham would be out of business. – Bryan Bibb

Read the post…

Not a single statement, Ken? Surely you jest @AiG

David and Bathsheba by Jan Matsys, 1562, Louvre
David and Bathsheba by Jan Matsys, 1562, Louvre (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

Yesterday, in a rant against scholastic investigation into Scripture, Ken Ham makes the startling statement:

Now, there is not a single statement in Scripture affirming polygamy…

Hold up there, Kenny. I don’t think you know what you’re talking about. Unless, of course, you are going to redefine words.

Are statements affirming polygamy found in Scripture?

I mean, we have 2 Samuel 12.1-11 where God chastises David through the Prophet Nathan about the incident with Bathsheba. Several statements affirm polygamy is God’s gift to David (2 Samuel 12.8) and that the removal of polygamy from David is a sign of God’s anger (2 Samuel 12.11).

Then, you have the book of Hosea wherein God commands the prophet to marry two women with no mention of divorce.

Finally, God is pictured in Jeremiah 3.8 as married to Israel (the Northern Tribes) and Judah (the Southern Tribes).

Of course, maybe Ken is right. There is no single statement affirming polygamy, only a few.

(Also, by the time you get to the New Testament, polygamy was more than frowned upon, but the point of the post is to slightly mock the guy who doesn’t read Scripture, phd or not. In a previous offering, N.T. Wright shows how we understand polygamy as a biblical practice but how monogamy is the ideal — Scripture and the Authority of God: How to Read the Bible Today)

Enhanced by Zemanta

So, I guess I’ve been outed as an Atheist

Atheism (Photo credit: atheism)

I and other bloggers have written posts on the school tests demanding that the correct answer to the age of the earth is 6000 years. The school in question has been named as the Blue Ridge Christian Academy. Several bloggers have since responded to this news as well.

Ken Ham has likewise responded with his usual calm, measured demeanor:

It seems that since the last presidential election, atheists have grown more confident about having something of a license to go after Christians. These secularists want to impose their anti-God religion on the culture. They are simply not content using legislatures and courts to protect the dogmatic teaching of their atheistic religion of evolution and millions of years in public schools. There is something else on their agenda: they are increasingly going after Christians and Christian institutions that teach God’s Word beginning in Genesis.

His response is simply put: You are an atheist if you do not believe in Young Earth Creationism. He pits himself and his cult of followers against all others in the classic us.v.them mentality where anyone who opposes him is an atheist, a secularist, and a holder to non-biblical Christianity. So, I guess that means I am one of those. I mean, I don’t believe in the deity known as Ken Ham, nor his Christianity, his science, or his martyrdom fantasies.

Read the words carefully… watch as the complex develops… Note the sidebar on Ham’s page as well. There are plenty of Christians who are doing the same thing he accuses atheists of doing. But, because he has the magical holy spirit he’s right, I guess. No matter many others who do not believe in Young Earth Creationism claim to be guided by the Spirit as well…

Also, what is “a biblical approach to dinosaurs?”

So many things wrong in this approach… but does it matter? He doesn’t listen – he simply denounces those who does not follow his cult and therefore is able to dismiss facts and evidences. Further, when you continue to talk to him, he’ll just claim persecution.

And because some of you won’t get the ironic intention of the title, I am not an atheist — well, I don’t believe in Ken Ham or the angry Loki he worships as god — but a Christian who holds to the orthodox Christian tradition, the same tradition Ham rejects in favor of himself. So, I guess if anyone is an atheist, it would be Ham. Happy Friday!

Also, check out this post by the venerable Dr. James McGrath about the origins of Young Earth Creationism, along with other recent posts on the topic.

Enhanced by Zemanta

What is it about James McGrath that gets to @AIGKenHam

Coat of arms of James McGrath.
Coat of arms of James McGrath. (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

Any casual student of human behavior will recognize that straw man arguments and other logical fallacies usually indicate the presence of either an untempered or irrational mind. Such is the case with the latest assault posted by Ken Ham on his Facebook wall (of persecution). James and others have responded to the clear indication that Ham has some sort of unhealthy fascination with the good (and real) Doctor McGrath. As the latter has shown, Ham has a demonstrated in a very unstable response revealing it is not AIG who is getting to McGrath, but the other way around.

What I found odd with people like Ham, Hambone, and 범죄자, is the constant refrain of “I’m winning” and “You are so deluded you’ll never hear the truth.” And yet, it is quite possible to use the same mindset on them, the same verses on them. Why? Because any such misuse of Scripture to prove the other person too deluded to understand anything, Gospel truth or otherwise, is subjective nonsense — because it amounts to little more than the childish taunt of “I know you are, but what am I”. So, when I read a statement from Ham stating he is clearly getting to someone, all I can think of is R. Girard and mimetic desire – and how such statements betray a certain hidden facet of Ham’s desire. He desires nothing more to be what McGrath is, to be a Christian like him.

I pity Ham.

I read James McGrath.

Enhanced by Zemanta

船 is not Noah @AiG

Someone brought this up in the blogosphere, and considering that I love to dabble in various things, such as linguistics (I am stuck on the aurality of fanny and fancy in U.K. English at the moment), I figured I’d show case some of the silliness here.

If you don’t want to watch it, click here to see a demonstration of the above insanity.

Way back when, when I was but a young lad, I heard this from a young earth creationist guild. Watching this video brought that rumor back.

Anyway, before you get all hizzy-pizzy, I want to call attention to a few things. First, the language used here is modern Chinese, and not ancient, before Jesus, Chinese. Part of this smut comes from a book by E. Nelson, who published a follow up book when this one was shown to be inaccurate and who would later go on to refute the claims. Nelson, by the way, is still touted as a scholar of repute by Ken Ham’s adult website. Ironically enough (ironic, because I have pointed out that Ken Ham is really preaching Seventh Day Adventist Doctrine), she is a Seventh Day Adventist. I hate to generalize groups, but by in large, “scientists” who hold fundamental SDA doctrines often fudge the facts.

If you take a gander at the reviews of those books, and do just a tad bit of a search on ye olde google, you’ll find enough holes to walk a dinosaur through or at the very least, not post stuff like this on blogs where people may think you are endorsing it.