Ken Ham: Everybody’s Leaving His Church!

We actually have some good news from Ken Ham (ol’ Hambo), the creationist Australian entrepreneur who has become the ayatollah of Appalachia. He runs the online creationist ministry, Answers in Genesis (AIG), and he also created the infamous, mind-boggling Creation Museum.

At ol’ Hambo’s personal blog we read No Wonder Two Thirds of Young People Are Leaving the Church. The “church” he’s talking about is his sect. We know, because Hambo complained about this almost two years ago; that’s when we wrote Does Creationism Have a Future? Back then, Hambo said:

[S]tatistics that show two-thirds of young people in evangelical churches will leave when they move into their 20s.

Many of those churches teach that Genesis is literally, word-for-word true — that is, they’re creationists. That’s the customer base for ol’ Hambo’s creationist “museum,” so he has good reason to worry. The situation apparently isn’t getting any better, because today he’s wailing about the same thing. Here are some excerpts, with bold font added by us:

In 2009, the book Britt Beemer from America’s Research Group and I co-authored) Already Gone, was published. This book detailed results of nationwide research into why two thirds of young people will leave the church by the time they reach college age.

That means ol’ Hambo can expect a serious drop in ticket and trinket sales. This is serious! Let’s read on:

It was found that the teaching of evolution and millions of years had a lot to do with creating doubt in their trust in Scripture.

Aha! There’s the problem. Oh wait — maybe the real problem is running a church that insists on denying reality. No, it can’t be that. Hambo continues:

The research also showed that those young people (the two thirds group) who went to Sunday school were — surprisingly — more likely to have heard a Christian leader (pastor, Sunday school teacher, and so on) tell them they could believe in evolution and millions of years.

How horrible! Here’s more:

The research also showed that churches and Christian homes were by and large not teaching children and young people how to defend the Christian faith. … Most were being given the supposed evidence and reasons that evolution and millions of years are true (evidence there supposedly never was a global Noah’s Flood and evidence against the Bible being true).

No Flood? Something must be done about this!

Hambo then goes on and on about preachers who are doing it all wrong — according to him. We’ll spare you that, but you can read it for yourself if you like. His essay ends with this final lament:

Sadly, this sort of compromise is rife in our church; it reflects the state of the church and the state of so many Christian colleges as well.

Why — oh why! — don’t they all listen to Hambo? He alone knows the truth! And if things keep going on like this, no one will buy tickets for Hambo’s museum. Is there any hope? Well, there’s some. At the end there are helpful links where you can buy a couple of Hambo’s books. Go ahead, help the guy out. He’s desperate!

Copyright © 2011. The Sensuous Curmudgeon. All rights reserved.

add to del.icio.usAdd to Blinkslistadd to furlDigg itadd to ma.gnoliaStumble It!add to simpyseed the vineTailRankpost to facebook

. AddThis Social Bookmark Button . Permalink for this article

12 responses to “Ken Ham: Everybody’s Leaving His Church!

  1. retiredsciguy

    “At the end there are helpful links where you can buy a couple of Hambo’s books. Go ahead, help the guy out. He’s desperate!”

    Not…. on…. your…. life! Seems as though the brighter ones of the maturing teens are figuring things out.

  2. QUOTE: “In 2009, the book Britt Beemer from America’s Research Group and I co-authored) Already Gone, was published. ”

    That is also the “research group” that supplied the imported Ham with
    the feasibility study on the Noah’s Ark Replica that Kentucky’s governor
    relied on to prop up his support of the Ark park. That if I remember
    correctly no one ever saw. Wasn’t released for public scrutiny.

  3. I for one am glad to hear this. Creationism is so downright stupid a belief system that people should get hit on the head with a ball peen hammer every time they walk into a hospital, library, bookstore, or they use a computer… And that’s me being as charitable as I can to these theitards…

  4. My money is that ‘Ol Ham’s approach is going to backfire. I was raised in a slightly more liberal church, and still vividly remember the visible displeasure that followed from starting to question the belief structure — and that was in a denomination where threats of hellfire and brimstone were definitely not part of the daily spiritual diet. Having some harpy screeching about disbelief may not bring the doubter back to the fold, but it sure doesn’t make life easier for those who are trying to figure things out for themselves.

  5. Ham burning yet another bridge with yet another thoughtful clergyman. His arrogance knows no bounds.

    It’s the irrational dogma of people like Ham that drive thinking people away from evangelical churches. Yet, in response, he advocates pushing the irrational biblical literalism even stronger, stating that if Genesis isn’t absolutely true, then the Christian faith itself has no basis.

    Those who reject religious belief could have no greater ally than Ken Ham.

  6. I’ve heard that two-thirds number for decades. I wonder how that study got its data. At any rate, I’m one of the two-thirds and proud of it. Obviously, we’ve got work to do, since there’s still one-third languishing in silliness.

  7. Abandonment of fundamentalism is always a good thing.

  8. You people crack me up, fools who think themselves wise because they go with a majority. What will you do when the tide turns and the majorty is wrong…?

  9. Gabriel Hanna

    @Frank: Truth isn’t determined by majority vote. If every human being declares evolution false tomorrow, I will still maintain that it is true–because a thing is true no matter how many or how few people believe so. The earth was never unrounded when most people believed it flat.

  10. @Gabriel: Thankyou for making my point. Jesus said “I am the way, the TRUTH, and the life” So just as you said “I will still maintain that it is true–because a thing is true no matter how many or how few people believe so.”

  11. Gabriel Hanna

    @Frank:Thankyou for making my point.

    Actually, thank YOU for contradicting yourself. First you said that people need to be on the side of the majority, now you say they don’t? Which is it? I suspect it’s whichever is convenient for you at the moment…

    Impassioned declarations of willingness to defend the truth don’t establish truth any more than majority vote does. A true thing is true whether or not anyone defends it and no matter how many people do or don’t.

  12. @Frank: Specifically, an unknown person living sometime in the late 1st century or early 2nd century wrote an account which was copied, and possibly translated, by other unknown persons (we do not have the original manuscript), and these later copies were eventually incorporated with other manuscripts into a bible, and given the title of “The Gospel According to John”. That account was subsequently copied many times and translated, sometimes differently in both copies and translation, to the version we have today, and from which you quote. Not only do we not have any independent evidence that Jesus existed or made that particular statement, but the Jesus in the story does not provide any verifiable evidence to back up his claim.

    You have the right to believe whatever you want concerning salvation or an afterlife. However, science is based on objective data, not religious assertions. Your quote from John is a religious assertion. Likewise, creationism is a religious concept, despite attempts by Ham and others to wrap it in a cloak of scientific jargon and rationalizations. There is no actual evidence to support it. Accepting creationism is therefore a rejection of science.

    As Gabe noted, scientific truth is not settle by majority vote. It is not determined by rhetorical skill in a debate, or philosophical rationalizations, or one’s emotional attachment to a belief. Scientists discover truths that exist independent of the scientists themselves, and that requires a method which is independent of the scientists’ individual biases and preferences and wishful thinking (and religious beliefs).

    Conversely, religion is all about majority beliefs, biases, preferences, wishful thinking, and the like. The basic tenets of christianity, for example, we set by meetings of religious elders starting with the first Nicene council – they were not based on independent facts concerning the divine, since there were none, and everyone had an opinion. This is an entirely different approach to knowledge, and until the enlightenment and the rise of science, it was basically the only approach.

    So, Frank, when you and Gabe debate “truth”, understand that you are debating two completely different concepts.