Answers in Genesis Says Only the Bible Is True

We found some great Sunday reading from the creation scientists at Answers in Genesis (AIG) — the creationist ministry of Ken Ham (ol’ Hambo), the ayatollah of Appalachia. Their post titled Other Religious Writings — Can They Be from God, Too?, written by Bodie Hodge, Hambo’s son-in-law. Here are some excerpts, with bold font added by us for emphasis:

The answer [to the question in AIG’s title] seems too simple: other alleged divine writings are not from God because they are not among the 66 books of the Bible and, in fact, they contradict the Bible.

Yes, that does seem too simple. But Bodie says:

This is a “presuppositional” approach, which means to presuppose that God exists and that His Word, the Bible, is the truth. This is the starting point or axiom.

Ah, it’s an axiom! That means it’s okay. After that he tells us:

God never tried to prove His existence or prove that His Word is superior to other writings. God simply opens the Bible with a statement of His existence and says His Word is flawless [scripture references]. The Bible bluntly claims to be the truth [scripture reference], and Christ repeated this claim [scripture reference].

That looks pretty solid! Bodie continues:

In fact, if God had tried to prove that He existed or that His Word was flawless, then any evidence or proof would be greater than God and His Word. But God knows that nothing is greater than His Word, and therefore He doesn’t stoop to our carnal desires for such proofs. The Bible also teaches us to have faith that God exists and that having faith pleases Him [scripture reference]. Accordingly, we are on the right track if we start with God’s Word.

It’s difficult to argue with that! Let’s read on:

In the Bible, we read that God cannot lie [scripture references]. This is significant because it means that God’s Word will never have contradictions. Though skeptics have alleged that there are contradictions in the Bible, every such claim has been refuted. This is what we would expect if God’s Word were perfect.

Wikipedia has an article on Criticism of the Bible, and another on Internal consistency of the Bible, but you can be certain that it’s all nonsense. Here’s another excerpt from Bodie’s article:

Yet the world is filled with other “religious writings” that claim divine origin or that have been treated as equal to or higher than the Bible on matters of truth or guidelines for living. In other words, these writings are treated as a final authority over the Bible. Any religious writing that claims divine inspiration or authority equal to the Bible can’t be from God if it has any contradictions: contradictions with the Bible, contradictions within itself, or contradictions with reality.


Religious books, such as Islam’s Koran, Mormonism’s Book of Mormon, and Hinduism’s Vedas, contradict the Bible; and so they cannot be Scripture. For example, the Koran in two chapters [references] says God had no son, but the Bible is clear that Jesus is the only begotten Son of God [scripture reference]. The Book of Mormon says in [reference] that children are not sinners, but the Bible teaches that children are sinful, even from birth [scripture reference]. Few would dispute that the Vedas and other writings in Hinduism are starkly different from the Bible.

Powerful stuff, huh? Here’s more

Since such alleged holy books are not from the perfect God, who are they from? They are from deceived, imperfect mankind. Mankind’s fallible reason is not the absolute authority. God and His Word are.

Verily, none can deny it. And now we come to the end:

So there are two options: place our faith in the perfect, all-knowing God who has always been there, or trust in imperfect, fallible mankind and his philosophies. The Bible, God’s Holy Word, is superior to all other alleged holy books. God will never be wrong or contradict Himself. So start with the Bible and build your faith on its teachings so that you please Him.

You are now without excuse, dear reader. You must abandon your foolish faith in mankind’s fallible reason. Bodie has clearly shown you that only the bible is The Truth.

Copyright © 2017. 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

24 responses to “Answers in Genesis Says Only the Bible Is True

  1. Re “Though skeptics have alleged that there are contradictions in the Bible, every such claim has been refuted. This is what we would expect if God’s Word were perfect.” Doesn’t the gentleman know that lying is a sin?

    Isn’t the gentleman aware that God seems clueless in his own story (God asks Adam “What have you done?” … doesn’t he know? God tells Adam and Eve that if they eat from the Tree, surely they will die. They eat from the tree but do not die and instead of dying, God decrees that all of their descendants will roast in Hell.) Heck, the two creation stories in Genesis have the same things happening on different days. There is no mealy-mouth apologist that can rectify that contradiction.

  2. …the Bible teaches that children are sinful, even from birth

    This notion, “original sin,” is one of the most evil ideas ever to come from the fevered minds of our shaman class.

    Ayn Rand has a wonderful piece on the whole concept:

    The summary:

    “What is the nature of the guilt that your teachers call his Original Sin? What are the evils man acquired when he fell from a state they consider perfection? Their myth declares that he ate the fruit of the tree of knowledge—he acquired a mind and became a rational being. It was the knowledge of good and evil—he became a moral being. He was sentenced to earn his bread by his labor—he became a productive being. He was sentenced to experience desire—he acquired the capacity of sexual enjoyment. The evils for which they damn him are reason, morality, creativeness, joy—all the cardinal values of his existence. It is not his vices that their myth of man’s fall is designed to explain and condemn, it is not his errors that they hold as his guilt, but the essence of his nature as man. Whatever he was—that robot in the Garden of Eden, who existed without mind, without values, without labor, without love—he was not man.”

  3. Holding The Line In Florida

    Surely the man is divinely inspired! Truer words were never spoken by a mere Man!! Harken to his inspirational words and repent of your evil Darwinist ways! (Pass the collection plate around or click on the donate button! We have a car payment due)

  4. Eddie Janssen

    Theological question: If Adam would not have led Eve convince him to take a bite of the apple, would we still have original sin?

  5. Michael Fugate

    No circularity in these arguments, none.

  6. I do love when they admit that they start with a book of fiction.

  7. How remarkable. Dutch counterpart last few days claimed that science has to obey Scripture.

  8. The Bible does stoop to citing as authorities “Non-canonical books referenced in the Bible” (see Wikipedia article).

  9. “He doesn’t stoop to our carnal desires for such proofs”
    Putting the lie to that is right there in the book he holds so dear. Old Testament, god vs Baal. Baal’s stack did not burn, god’s did, in a test of which entity was real.

  10. So the later recordings of aural folk tales of desert dwellers, then many rejected at 300AD (cuz they were not likes) and compiles by a bunch of male aholes, is gawd’s word because…..?WHY?

  11. @Tom B:
    Remember “By their fruits you will know them”? The contest between Moses and Aaron against the Pharoah’s magicians?
    There are several places where the Bible stoops to reasoning. Such as the argument against idols being just human carvings, in Jeremiah 10.

  12. Why should we listen to Bodie Hodge? I mean, he’s not a REAL scientist, just a mechanical engineer!!!

    (yes Bill Nye, that hypocrisy call out was for you).

  13. Doctor Stochastic

    According to Pascal’s Wager, one must weight the probability that any of these competing religions are correct multiplied by the reward thereof. As there are infinitely many possible religions, each must have zero probability of being correct.

  14. Derek Freyberg

    Dear Bodie:
    I know you’ve said “The Bible, God’s Holy Word, is superior to all other alleged holy books.” But I’m worried: there are so many versions of the Bible, how will I know which is the right one? Tell me, please – I don’t want to burn for eternity.

  15. One of my favorite bible verses:

    “Happy shall he be, that taketh and dasheth thy little ones against the stones.” (Psalm 137:9)

    Talk about tough love. Bronze Age nonsense.

  16. Ross Cameron

    One hundred, two hundred years from now (if global warning doesn`t lead to a religious revival). people will ask themselves how the most educated generation in the history of the world (us) could still be falling for a fairytale centred in ancient Israel.

  17. One still wonders at how the civilization of Islam or China could collapse.

  18. Ross Cameron

    Following the Xian example (sort of), Tom, Islam may drag itself into the 21st century , while internal strife might affect China

  19. My apologies for not expressing myself clearly. I was thinking of the historical facts: the examples of the one-time great civilizations of Islam and of China and their throwing it all away.

  20. “God tells Adam and Eve that if they eat from the Tree, surely they will die. They eat from the tree but do not die.” Actually, that’s usually interpreted as saying that they will become mortal, whereas if they did not eat from the Tree they would never die.

    However, the Bible raises a much more troubling issue right after. God kicks the First Couple out of Eden not for their sin alone, but also so that they won’t also eat from the “tree of everlasting life” and “become as one of us.”

    One of us?

    Obviously this is a holdover from pre-Abrahamic times, when the ancestors of the Hebrews worshipped many gods like any other pious Chaldeans. But fundamentalists prefer to pretend this passage either doesn’t exist or (unlike every other word in the Bible, according to them) doesn’t mean what it plainly says.

  21. Dave Luckett

    I wonder what Ken makes of Genesis 6: 2-4. “The sons of the gods”, both plural, having intercourse with the “daughters of men”, also both plural, with children being born to them who were the nephilim, mighty men of renown.

    If the answers are in Genesis, and this is one of them, I wonder what the question is?

  22. As long as we are considering some difficulties in Genesis, how about the water and wind which were there before the beginning of God’s creation?

  23. Eric Lipps notes Yahweh’s choice of pronoun:

    One of us?

    I think that’s just an instance of the pluralis majestatis, popularly known as “The Royal ‘We'”, and of which the most famous–but apocryphal–instance is Queen Victoria’s “We are not amused.”

    A genuine instance may be found in Margaret Thatcher’s 1989 announcement, when her execrable son Mark produced a child, “We are a grandmother.”

    And of course, when Christianity later developed, what could be more natural than for one member of the inexplicably strange Holy Trinity to use a plural pronoun in self reference?

  24. And I suggest that this is an example where one should be careful in translating. A literal translation is not always best. See “False friend” in Wiipedia.