From Hambo: The Drooler’s Guide to Creationism

This is just what you’ve been looking for, dear reader. You know it’s good because it’s from Ken Ham (ol’ Hambo), the ayatollah of Appalachia, the world’s holiest man who knows more about religion and science than everyone else.

Hambo’s announcement is Get Quick Answers to Tough Questions on Science and the Bible. Here are some excerpts, with bold font added by us for emphasis:

Attacks against God’s Word and the Christian faith seem to come from everywhere — from friends, family members, teachers, classmates, and those on social media. Not sure what to say to your skeptical friend or how to answer your child who may have heard a trusted teacher say something that contradicts God’s Word?

Don’t you just hate it when that happens? It’s so frustrating! But Hambo’s got the solution! He says:

Get equipped with answers to tough questions with Quick Answers to Tough Questions, a brand-new, powerful resource from AiG’s Bryan Osborne and Bodie Hodge.

[*Begin Drool Mode*] Ooooooooooooh! [*End Drool Mode*] How wonderful! Hambo tells us:

This exciting resource gives you quick and concise answers to tough questions about topics such as

• Creation and evolution
• Age of the earth
• Noah’s Ark
• Death and suffering
• Origin of life
• Missing links
• And more!

This book has everything! You’ll be able to refute all that godless science people are teaching your children! Hambo continues:

These answers will help you think biblically about a variety of topics and to stand boldly on biblical authority as you defend the inerrancy and truth of God’s Word from the very first verse.

[*Begin Drool Mode*] Ooooooooooooh! [*End Drool Mode*] Let’s read on:

You don’t need to be an expert to respond to the questions that believers, unbelievers, and even your own children ask! When we start with God’s Word, there are solid answers to these questions. I encourage you to add Quick Answers to Tough Questions to your home, church, or school library.

You don’t need to be an expert! This is fantastic!

Hambo’s post has a video and a link that gives you some previews of the actual book. Best of all, it’s only $9.99. What are you waiting for, dear reader? Get it now!

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

21 responses to “From Hambo: The Drooler’s Guide to Creationism

  1. Bodie Hodge? He’s not a scientist, just a mechanical engineer!

    (You’re welcome again Bill Nye)

  2. Mark Germano

    “These answers will help you think biblically about a variety of topics….”

    Let’s start with taxes! “And Jesus answering said unto them, Render to Caesar the things that are Caesar’s, and to God the things that are God’s. And they marvelled at him.”

    Mark 12:17. KJV, of course.

  3. Mark Germano

    Yikes! Let’s *start* with taxes. I wonder if the Bible says anything about autocorrect?

  4. Charles Deetz ;)

    Well, lookie, the Curmudgeon left a link to the book, not his usual style. And I clicked to take a peek, not my usual style either. I’m hoping for a whole chapter on the answer to the starlight problem. At 80 pages, okay, how about 8 pages?

    Well, there IS a sample 2-page spread from the book on the age of the earth. Its shlocky writing at third grade level, without a lick of science or attempt at science. Bible Bible Bible. And a lame graphic that takes up most of the second page. Fleecing the flock at $9.99. Sheesh!

  5. Charles Deetz ;)

    Lookie, I need to ask the CS to add a closing tag to my hyperlink. Never had to do that before. I think. Gracias in advance.

    [*Voice from above*] These things happen. Don’t be embarrassed.

  6. They have an interview with one of the authors (not Boatie Hajj though) The reason for the book is quick answers for “the parent who has been homeschooling all day and is exhausted”.

  7. “You don’t need to be an expert…” In fact, it probably helps to accept this tripe if you’re not an expert!

  8. Michael Fugate

    Right – if one were an expert, then they wouldn’t provide any of the “answers” found in the book.

  9. @mark germano

    Kudos for the imagery of Ham getting grilled by a tax lawyer on Neil DeGrasse Tysons talk show!

  10. Dave Luckett

    Reading those hundred and fifty words of text from this, er, book, I was again struck with the insouciant dereliction of all evidence from any other source than Genesis, and the assumption that nobody would consider anything but what literal interpretation of the terms should apply.

    For instance, scripture doesn’t say exactly how many years ago this all happened, because if it did, it would be wrong! So it tells us the generations and ages of the Patriarchs, and then we can calculate the figure. As if the only objection to the 6000 years implied in Genesis was that it doesn’t say that”s the age of the Earth.

    The assumption that this will satisfy any conceivable objection is simply breathtaking. Surely not even the faithful are completely immune to considerations of reality.

  11. @David Luckett
    Consider the reaction of a reasonably bright kid to this kind of nonsense.

  12. You don’t mention Ham’s most powerful argument: different OT chronologists, whether Jewish or christian, come up with the same answer, so it must be true.

    Except that if you go by the Septuagint, you get an answer about 1500 years older. Were the Septuagint compilers, working in Alexandria, trying to avoid such absurdities as Noah’s flood coinciding with the height of Egypt’s pyramid building?

  13. Dave Luckett, it was exposure to books like Ham’s, along with the help of some good friends, that caused me to realize how deeply flawed creationism is – Ken Ham and others like him are responsible for the downfall of the Christianity they’ve created in their own image and I have to say, I don’t mind that because it is an ugly religion.

  14. I don’t need to read the Hamster’s “Get Quack Answers to Tough Questions on Science and the Bible” (spelling change intentional) to know it’s bogus. I’ve had enough exposure to his ravings and those of other creationists (I’ve even fought my way through Duane Gish’s Evolution? The Fossils Say No!) to be quite certain. (Gish’s book is hard going; I had to stop at about every other sentence for a silent rebuttal. Read it and groan.)

  15. The honest answer when they interviewer asked, “why did you write this book” would be “Ah well, I need a pay check and AIG needs to make a new book once in awhile for self promotion, even if it just rehashes the same old clunkers.”

  16. From the excerpt: “…the Bible was written roughly 2,000 – 3500 years ago, and if it had stated then that the earth was 6,000 years old it would have been wrong! Nor did Moses, or any other author, state the age of the earth at the time of their writings…if they did, what they wrote would be wrong the very next day…What the Bible does give us is so much better.”

    WTHFGDH** is that even supposed to mean? She sheer magnitude of clueless misunderstanding in that statement is awe inspiring.

    It clearly implies that when Ham wrote earlier this month that the Ark park was a year old, he was wrong – the very next day! Trying to figure out how old the park is *now* is clearly impossible when we’re told that it was a year old two weeks ago. The math is just too complicated for human understanding that way. If he were truly Godly, what he should have done is recount a story of all the things he has done since the park opened, and leave it to us to calculate how many days that would take. The man clearly can’t be trusted.

    ** – fill in obscenities of your choice.

  17. “I don’t need to read …..”
    No sane mind does. A few visits to AIG and other creacrap sites (including that IDiot one from Seattle) suffice.

  18. Mike McCants

    You can go to the Amazon web page and use “Look Inside” to see some of this nonsense. Page 10:

    “Imposing secular ideas like evolution, the presupposition that the Earth is millions of years old, uniformitarianism, and naturalism (all tenets of the pagan religion of humanism) …”

    Riiiight. Science is just a pagan religion. 🙂

    Page 11:

    “The division of creation vs. evolution is actually a division between the Word of God and the word of man. Either God’s Word is true or man’s word becomes the final authority.”

    Quite correct of course. So that’s a really good reason to reject the “Word of God”.

  19. Michael Fugate

    or this classic:
    “If you took a stethoscope and listened to the heartbeat of our ministry, what would you hear?”

    That it is time for a transplant?

  20. Dave Luckett

    “Either God’s Word is true or man’s word becomes the final authority.”

    See the squib? For this writer, “true” can only mean “literal”.

    There is something wrong with a human mind that cannot follow the concept that truth may be communicated by metaphor and composed narrative, when these have been used in all human cultures for at least the thousands of years that they have been recorded, for the purpose of giving form and power to ideas that the writers held to be profoundly true.

    But for Ham and that tribe, it’s as if metaphor didn’t exist; as if myth, parable, allegory and fable were never found as metaphors for truths, ever; as if such a thing were inconceivable. There’s a cultural disconnect in that, something aberrant. Can Ham form the concept “fiction” at all? Or does he think “fiction” is a merely a synonym for “telling lies”?

    There’s also his obsession with authority. What concerns him is not only that the text is “true”, in the peculiar sense that he uses the word, but also that it has authority. But the authority to interpret it in such an extraordinary way is not found in the text itself. It doesn’t say that it must be interpreted literally. No, the “authority” here is Ham’s own. And what is worse, he has apparently simply assumed it, and doesn’t even appear to be aware of the transaction.

    He surely must know that most Christians, most Christian leaders, and most Christian churches do not accept his interpretation. Is he utterly incapable of reflecting on why that is? Does Ham really think that he is infallible, or, as SC ironically describes him, “the world’s holiest man who knows more about religion and science than everyone else”? Or does he think himself uniquely inspired?

    The answers to those questions are various, of course. Possibly Ham is entirely bereft of critical faculties. Possibly his arrogance has indeed swollen to such monstrous proportions. But I think it more likely that reflection and consideration are simply unrewarding, and if pursued, become painful. And unrewarding in the strictly worldly sense, too. In fact, I think the last is the most likely explanation for the truly extraordinary denial of reality that constitutes Ken Ham’s entire life and body of work. He denies reality because there’s money to be made from it.

  21. I don’t recall anything in the Bible which stresses the importance of reading the Bible literally. There are plenty of places where it says that such-and-such needs understanding.
    On the other hand, there are plenty of things which every preacher adds to the text of the Bible, accepts from modern culture as if providing something needed to the proper understanding.
    A difficulty for me to understand is how people choose to accept one preacher as the first true Christian in history. Which Scripture is the one inerrant – one particular edition of the KJV, or the inaccessible (if they ever existed) original manuscripts, or whatever. (And, by the way, if the Hebrew, Amamaic and Gree, why so few spend the effort in learning those languages – and I don’t mean using the glossaries in Strong’s Condordance.)