The latest post from Ken Ham (ol’ Hambo), the Australian entrepreneur who has become the ayatollah of Appalachia, is a furious rant. He’s red in the face, sputtering mad, and foaming at the mouth. This time his fury is justified, because the whole world seems to be against him.
His new post is Responding to Atheist Propaganda. It’s his attempt to redefine well-understood words so that his own version of reality — i.e., unreality — will be easier to promote. Here are some excerpts, with bold font added by us:
Christians need to understand that many secularists have put together a very effective propaganda machine as a part of their effort to impose their atheistic religion on the Western culture, intimidate Christians, and influence the government to limit freedom of religion (particularly in regard to Christianity). To help counteract this aggressive effort, Christians — wherever they are in the West — need to be aware of the terms being used in the secularist campaign and what Christians need to be doing to help counter their campaign.
Hambo then discusses four words which are well-understood, but which seem to bother him, so he wants to change them. He begins with science. You already know how he tries to distort that one, so we won’t bother with it. If you’re new to this topic, see Creationism and Science and also Ken Ham’s Historical vs. Observational Science.
Next he deals with religion. Everyone knows what it is, but Hambo wants to change things around. He says:
The word religion has a variety of definitions. But one of the main definitions (as given by the Merriam-Webster Dictionary) is “an interest, a belief, or an activity that is very important to a person or group.”
[*Groan*] We’ve seen other creationists pull the same trick. That dictionary has three definitions of “religion” and Hambo uses the third. The first two, that is, the most commonly understood meanings, are:
1. the belief in a god or in a group of gods
2. an organized system of beliefs, ceremonies, and rules used to worship a god or a group of gods
Hambo indulges in “dictionary mining” to find the least-used definition and claim that it’s the only one that matters. Having done that, he tells us:
Atheists have effectively propagandized the culture to indoctrinate people to think that if you believe in God as Christians do, then that is religion — however, if you don’t believe in God and believe the universe and all life arose by natural processes, then supposedly that is not a religion! But as we constantly point out, atheism and humanism are religions — it’s a belief meant to explain life by natural processes, without the supernatural involved.
According to Hambo, your belief that the Earth is a sphere (instead of being flat) is a religious belief. After all, it’s a belief that’s very important to you, and Hambo’s dictionary says that’s religion. Let’s read on:
Atheists go ballistic when I say in many articles that they are trying to impose their religion of naturalism on the culture. But the point is, they are! …. Furthermore, in the US and other western countries, the government is imposing a religion on millions of children when they insist that schools only teach evolution in science classes and not biblical creation. Officials insist that evolution is deemed to be “science” and creation is “religion.” Evolutionists have been indoctrinating people with a false view of the words science and religion.
We’ll skip the rest of that one, because there’s nothing new in what he says. The next word Hambo doesn’t like is intolerance. He says:
Intolerance is defined in the Merriam-Webster Dictionary this way: Unwilling to grant equal freedom of expression especially in religious matters unwilling to grant or share social, political, or professional rights.
We don’t see that definition in the online Merriam-Webster Dictionary. Ignoring the medical definition, it says intolerance is “the quality or state of being intolerant.” But if we then look for the meaning of intolerant we find two definitions:
1. not willing to allow or accept something
2. not willing to allow some people to have equality, freedom, or other social rights
Hambo ignores the most common definition, and goes for the really nasty one, which is suitable for describing the attitudes of the Klan. Where is he going with his preferred definition? Get this:
Secularists often accuse Christians who, for example, take a stand on marriage being one man for one woman based on the Bible, as being intolerant. But in fact, Christians are the ones who are tolerant of others.
Huh? This has nothing to do with science, so it’s not important to this blog, but out of curiosity, let’s see what Hambo says:
You see, Christians who stand on God’s Word will authoritatively speak against gay marriage, but they should not be intolerant of the people who disagree with them. But I find that those who call Christians “intolerant” are really the ones who are intolerant! So when a fire chief in Atlanta, Georgia, is fired by a city council because his personal beliefs concerning marriage are based on the Bible, Christians need to be vocal about the city council’s being intolerant!
Yeah, okay. Then he gets to the fourth word he wants to re-define. That one is proselytize. Lordy, lordy, Hambo is going to the dictionary again. He tells us:
The Merriam-Webster Dictionary has this definition of proselytize: To try to persuade people to join a religion, cause, or group.
That sounds right. What can he do with that? Let’s watch him:
In reality, it’s the secularists who are trying to force their religion on others as they intimidate people to accept the basic tenets of their religion, such as evolutionary naturalism. Many atheists don’t necessarily use the word proselytize, but they claim that a Christian working in a government institution or a government-funded place cannot bring their Christianity into the workplace. Yet many professors at government-subsidized universities will openly proclaim their atheism (and even attack the Bible and the Christian faith) in their classes. But if a professor were to admit he was a Christian and make statements about his religious beliefs to the students, he would likely be disciplined or fired.
Uh, Hambo, there’s a reason for that. Here in the US we have this thing called the Constitution. It forbids the government from trying to impose religious views on the citizenry. The government can’t proselytize. But you can proselytize all you want — and you do. It’s not terribly difficult to understand. If you want the government to be able to proselytize the way you do, you’ll have to amend the Constitution. Good luck with that!
Having given us his preferred meaning of words, he then uses those words in his own way in the conclusion of his essay:
As secularists are successful in getting the governments to teach evolution as fact to millions of students in Western nations and will not allow biblical creation to be taught in science classes, we should be pointing out their deceptive use of terms. Indeed, the secularists continually misuse the word science as they indoctrinate people into a false worldview of naturalism so they can impose that religion on young people. At the same time, they exhibit their intolerance of Christianity and Christians in the culture.
This is from his final paragraph:
I challenge Christians, especially Christian leaders, to be more vocal in this battle, boldly proclaiming the gospel to unbelievers and calling Christians back to the authority of the Bible. As we stand firmly and boldly on the truths of Jesus Christ as the Creator and Savior in our apologetic arguments, we must also use correct terms like historical science, observational science, religion, and intolerance when engaging the secularists in the ongoing war against Christianity in Western nations.
So there you are. Hambo is not only at war against science, he’s also at war with the English language and the American Constitution. Good luck, Hambo!
Copyright © 2015. The Sensuous Curmudgeon. All rights reserved.