Hambo Says the Flood Really Was Global

There is no greater expert on the Flood than Ken Ham (ol’ Hambo) — the ayatollah of Appalachia, the world’s holiest man who knows more about religion and science than everyone else. He just posted this at the website of Answers in Genesis (AIG), his creationist ministry: Local Flood Theory: Why It Doesn’t Work. Here are some excerpts, with bold font added by us for emphasis, and occasional Curmudgeonly interjections that look [like this]:

Some people don’t believe in a global flood. [Because they’re fools!] Since the geological revolution of the 1800 — when deistic, agnostic, and atheistic scientists working from the assumptions of naturalism [Gasp!] began to suggest long ages for the earth and its fossil record — some Christians have been attempting to fit the long ages into Scripture.

Phooey on long ages! Then he says:

That idea has many of its own problems (such as putting death before sin), but it necessarily entails another belief: Noah’s flood was local, not global. After all, a global flood would wash away the millions of years. So, if you don’t have a young earth, you also don’t have a global flood of Noah’s time. But does this hold up with what Scripture teaches?

Why would a global flood “wash away the millions of years”? Anyway, Hambo’s gotta have a global flood. He tells us:

Dr. Hugh Ross of Reasons to Believe has long been a proponent of the big bang, old earth creation, soulless humans before Adam and Eve, and a local flood. Because his belief in millions of years demands a local flood [Huh?], he must try and explain away what the Bible clearly states about the extent of the flood. [Skipping a quote from a recent Ross article.] Ross neglects to mention that 2 Peter 2:5 states that only eight people survived the flood. How could eight — and only eight — people survive the flood if it was just local? People outside that geographical area could have survived, or as the floodwaters rose, they could have fled to a different region.

Wow — what a powerful rebuttal! Skipping a lot, Hambo quotes scripture:

Immediately after describing the waters covering the mountains to 15 cubits, Genesis 7 says,

And all flesh died that moved on the earth, birds, livestock, beasts, all swarming creatures that swarm on the earth, and all mankind. Everything on the dry land in whose nostrils was the breath of life died. He blotted out every living thing that was on the face of the ground, man and animals and creeping things and birds of the heavens. They were blotted out from the earth. Only Noah was left, and those who were with him in the ark. (Genesis 7:21–23)

Sounds like a global flood to us! Hambo continues:

The text couldn’t be clearer — it says it three times for emphasis: everything that lived on land that had the breath of life in it died. Everything. Only Noah and those on the ark were left. [Yup, that’s what it says!]

He’s still rebutting Ross:

Now, Ross may, in some way, believe that the events in Genesis 1–11 are “history,” but he doesn’t mean “history” and “actual events” in the same way we do. It’s what I would call Newspeak! What he means is that we can’t read Genesis 1–11, take it literally as written, and understand it. Instead, we have to take something from outside the Bible — the idea of millions of years — and add it into the Bible. Then, we have to reinterpret Genesis 1-11 to make it somehow fit with these ideas from outside Scripture. This reinterpretation is nothing but compromising God’s Word with the religion of naturalism.

Egad — the religion of naturalism! Now he starts to seriously pound away at Ross:

Really, Scripture is not Ross’ final authority — man is. [Oh no!] God’s clear Word is being reinterpreted by Ross in light of man’s ideas about the past. But, as Christians, we must allow God to be our authority in all areas! He’s the only one who was there, knows all things, never makes mistakes, and cannot lie. We should never take ideas from outside the Bible and try and somehow fit them into the text. That’s a compromise on the truth and authority of God’s Word!

Hambo is so wise! Another excerpt:

Ross, and others like him, are actually doing much harm to the church, as seen in the continuing exodus of the younger generations. They are encouraging others to follow their path of compromise — and once you open the door to compromise, where do you shut it?

Hambo’s right. You can’t let anything disrupt your pure reading of scripture. He finishes with this:

If God’s Word isn’t clear in Genesis (the foundation for all our doctrine!), then where else can we take man’s ideas and make it say something it doesn’t say? We’re seeing a generation of Christians do this with the meaning of marriage, gender, the abortion issue, and more. No, let’s let God be true and every man a liar (Romans 3:4).

Let that be your guide through life, dear reader. You should believe the bible, the whole bible, and nothing but the bible. Or suffer the eternal consequences.

Copyright © 2019. 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

16 responses to “Hambo Says the Flood Really Was Global

  1. Theodore Lawry

    Was Ham there?

  2. Theodore Lawry

    Actually Kan Ham is wrong, the existence of a miraculous global Flood, would prove the existence of God, but not a young earth. Since God could do anything the world could be old and evolution correct, but then God made a global Flood, 4,500 years ago. Who is Ham to say otherwise? Blasphemer!

  3. Ol’Hambo is not wise enough yet:

    “as Christians, we must allow God to be our authority in all areas!”
    Unfortunately (for unbelievers like me) Ol’Hambo fails in respect to the questions of the classification of bats, the exact value of pi and of course the shape of Earth.

    “once you open the door to compromise, where do you shut it?”
    Exactly! And why does Ol’Hambo accept devilish pi = 3,1415 …..? Because he’s a sinner and wants to reinterprete “God’s clear Word”. Why does he reject Flat Earth? Because he “compromises on the truth and authority of God’s Word”.

    @TheoL thinks he’s smart, but isn’t, because Ol’Hambo already has answered his question “Was Ham there?”

    “He’s [Ol’Hambo’s god – FrankB] the only one who was there, knows all things, never makes mistakes, and cannot lie.”

    TheoL also asks: “Who is Ham to say otherwise?”
    Fourth in line, immediately after the Son and the Holy Spirit.

  4. Hey, Ham – a question for ya. Who created the universe and all the laws of physics that govern it? Your answer is God, right?

    All right, then. Next question – Whose hand transcribed the words in the Bible? Not Who inspired the words, but who actually wrote them down?
    We can both agree it was the hand of man, correct?

    In your estimation, Mr. Ham, who is more prone to error? And yet, you persist in believing scripture over what you know as God’s direct creation, and that you can see with your own eyes – if you were only able to open them.

    But then, that would be against your religion, wouldn’t it? Can’t let provable fact get in the way of a good story, can we?

  5. Eddie Janssen

    Which original script of the Bible does Ham use as his source of God’s word?
    Because, as mentioned earlier by retiredscienceguy, it may be God’s word but written down, copied, translated and authorized by fallible humans (especially the authorizing bit!).

  6. chris schilling

    “A global flood would wash away the millions of years.”

    Ken’s faith in the transforming powers of his cherished flood remains perplexing. Yahweh’s spectacular hissy fit didn’t even manage to wash away human “sin” once- and-for-all.

  7. Millions of years would wash away Ken’s faith. Weak foundation.

  8. Of course Ol’Hambo doesn’t even try to explain where all the necessary water came from and went. It’s quite funny to ask YECers, because invariably they turn back to the same naturalism they despise so much.

  9. Dave Luckett

    One of the few consolations about being confronted with the output of Ken Ham is the reflection that about ten seconds after being installed as Grand Moff and Poohbah of all Ayatollahs, Ken would be consigning his own fellow-holy rollers to the stake, for not believing exactly what he believes. That’s what he’s doing here. The day-agers and the old-Earth creationists and the local flood types – Splitters! Traitors to the cause! Heretics! Worse than Darwinists, they are. Secret friends of naturalism, closet humanists, clandestine agnostics, ptui!.

    Which means that the more Ken puts out stuff like this, the more wedges get driven into Creationist Clown Camp. It becomes unnecessary to oppose these idiots – they oppose each other with sufficient fervour. And it’s such fun to watch.

  10. Of course Hugh Ross is equally mad as a hat. Convince yourself:

    https://www.reasons.org/about/hugh-ross

    If you like a dive into the YEC vs. OEC controversy you can do a search for Young Earth at that site.

  11. Of mythological note, by using the text of 2 Peter as historical fact, and presumably the rest of the epistles, Ken Ham is stating that he believes that the raven and the dove that Noah used to determine that the Earth was now dry came from gemstones where Noah’s nipples ought to be.

    I can explain that further, but I think that ruins the fun.

  12. Chris Schilling opines:

    “Ken’s faith in the transforming powers of his cherished flood remains perplexing”

    Oh, that’s easy, Chris: FOLLOW THE MONEY.

  13. “…How could eight — and only eight — people survive the flood if it was just local?…” … Easy! The buyBull is a big book o’Lies!! And since ‘ALL that had the breath of life died’ name the plants that Noah had on the ark? Because ALL plants died too! And what fish di Noah have as the fresh/salt mix of the flood would kill them as well!!!

  14. Michael Fugate

    One wonders why Noah didn’t stand up to God like Abraham did over Sodom and Gomorrah; there must have been good people killed in the flood.

  15. I have always wondered why they don’t make it a miraculous flood, a global flood that left no trace of itself.

  16. KeithB, at several points in the Bible, it says that the world indicates that the Bible is right. Now, in every single one of those cases, the writers is talking about comparing, “Love everyone as I, the dude who died on your behalf, loved you. Yes, everyone, even those people,” to the brutish cruelty of Rome.

    Of course, Christianity managed to be loving for a decade or so until it BECAME the brutish cruelty of Rome, so that’s somewhat lost in translation.

Make a comment

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s