Ken Ham: Adam & Eve Must Be Real

This is one of the most important posts ever by Ken Ham (ol’ Hambo) — the ayatollah of Appalachia, the world’s holiest man who knows more about religion and science than everyone else. So pay attention, dear reader.

At the website of Answers in Genesis (AIG), Hambo’s creationist ministry, we find Adam and Eve: Real People or Representative Hominins? Here are some excerpts, with bold font added by us for emphasis, and occasional Curmudgeonly interjections that look [like this]:

It’s becoming increasingly common to meet Christians, especially leaders in Bible colleges and seminaries, who reject the historicity of Adam and Eve. [That’s outrageous!] One popular view, espoused by well-known scientist Dr. Francis Collins and others, is that Adam and Eve were just representatives of a collective of 10,000 hominins (that is, if they even existed at all). Yet this kind of thinking is far from the biblical view of the first humans.

Why is that important? Hambo explains:

Scripture hinges our current sin-bound state on the sin of the first man, Adam: [bible quote.] It also hinges our hope of the gospel on the literal fall of Adam and the consequence of death. It’s this that Jesus came to free us from. If there was no Adam and no original sin, why did Jesus need to come and die? Without a literal Genesis, the gospel falls apart.

Wow — the reality of Adam & Eve is essential! Without them, Hambo’s entire enterprise collapses. He tells us:

Why do so many Christians reject a literal Adam? Because, instead of trusting God’s infallible Word and allowing it to be the authority, they’ve allowed sinful man’s fallible interpretation of the evidence to be the authority.

Egad, that’s horrible! Is there any hope? Hambo continues:

But, rather than confirming evolutionary ideas about the past, new research in genetics actually confirms what we’d expect by starting with the Bible’s account of history.

That’s wonderful! How can we learn about this new research? Let’s read on:

This research on mitochondrial and nuclear DNA, and what it means for the question of the historicity of Adam, is discussed by various creation scientists and theologians in a brand-new DVD from Evidence Press, DNA Battles: Were Adam & Eve Historical?

Hambo graciously provides a link to where one can buy that DVD. Here it is: DNA Battles. There we learn that the DVD features not only Hambo himself, but also Dr. Georgia Purdom, Dr. Nathaniel T. Jeanson, and Dr. Terry Mortenson. Wowie — they’re all creation scientists employed by Hambo! It must be a great DVD, and it costs only $14.99.

Now we come to the end of Hambo’s post:

Theistic evolutiUn [sic] and the attack on a literal Adam and Eve are spreading through churches — maybe even your own! [Gasp!] Get equipped to encourage others to trust God’s Word with the answers you’ll find in DNA Battles.

Okay, dear reader, you know what you have to do. Buy Hambo’s video and learn The Truth™!

Copyright © 2018. The Sensuous Curmudgeon. All rights reserved.

• • • • • • • • • • •

. . Permalink for this article

Creationist Wisdom #884: Science Is Foolishness

Today’s letter-to-the-editor appears in The Mining Journal of Marquette, Michigan, the largest city of the state’s Upper Peninsula. Marquette is a major port on Lake Superior, known primarily for shipping iron ore. The letter is titled Seek the truth, and the newspaper doesn’t seem to have a comments feature.

Because the writer isn’t a politician, preacher, or other public figure, we won’t embarrass or promote him by using his full name. His first name is Richard. We think he’s a professional tax return preparer, but that doesn’t qualify for full name treatment. Excerpts from his letter will be enhanced with our Curmudgeonly commentary, some bold font for emphasis, and occasional Curmudgeonly interjections that look [like this]. Here we go!

The Bible is the infallible, inerrant, inspired Word of God. [Right!] There is a potential for evil in all of us. Choices are given to each of us. None of us are spared from this test. We are to love our neighbor, yet hate sin and abstain from committing sin. The only way to remove the stain of sin in our lives is through repentance and forgiveness.

Good beginning. Then he says:

Many people believe in evolution and evolution is taught in our schools. Teaching creation is forbidden. Evolution is unproven and it is basically groundless. [Right!] To think that through evolution one could “evolve” into a perfect baby is beyond my comprehension [Hee hee!] Man is not able to improve upon the body that the Lord gave us. The Bible in I Corinthians 3:19 states the wisdom of the world is foolishness with God. For it is written, “He catches the wise in their own craftiness.”

Are you one of those foolish people who believes in the wisdom of the world? Then pay attention to Richard. He tells us:

Scientists cannot explain gravity even though gravity has been around for over 6,000 years. [Hee hee!] Science cannot prove that the earth is young or old. [Right!] Man cannot create nor destroy matter. No fossils have been found that would prove evolution.

We weren’t going to spend any time rebutting Richard, but that last sentence is irresistible. Whenever it shows up, we always link to Wikipedia’s List of transitional fossils. He continues:

The thousands of fossils that have been found are the same as the living specimens of today (no evolution). [Right!] Most scientists don’t believe in the world-wide flood as recorded in the 7th chapter of Genesis. And yet the great flood explains the existence of sea fossils on mountain tops.

That one is in the TalkOrigins Index to Creationist Claims — see Seashells and other marine fossils have been found on mountaintops. Let’s read on:

We live on this planet that has been stocked with everything we need for our daily lives. We have not run out of anything we need. The only thing we lack is faith in God our creator and his only begotten son Jesus the Christ. Faith comes by hearing and hearing by the Word of God. [Scripture reference]. I encourage you to attend a Bible preaching church where you can hear the truth!

Good advice! Another excerpt:

To further strengthen your faith in a creator remember each of us has our own DNA. The creator knows every person he created since before we were born. (Psalm 139:16) Man did not discover DNA until 1954.

Maybe that’s because DNA isn’t mentioned in the bible. And now we come to the end:

Who would have known that our bodies are so unique that each of us are specifically identified by God our Father. We did not evolve!

Well, dear reader, if Richard didn’t convince you, then you are beyond help. The Lake of Fire will be your home for eternity.

Copyright © 2018. The Sensuous Curmudgeon. All rights reserved.

• • • • • • • • • • •

. . Permalink for this article

WND Praises William Jennings Bryan

The Drool-o-tron™ was frantically calling to us with its sirens and flashing lights. The blinking letters of its wall display said WorldNetDaily (WND). We’ve described them as a flamingly creationist, absolutely execrable, moronic, and incurably crazed journalistic organ that believes in and enthusiastically promotes every conspiracy theory that ever existed. WND was an early winner of the Curmudgeon’s Buffoon Award, thus the jolly logo displayed above this post.

The Drool-o-tron™ had locked our computer onto this headline at WND: The dangers of elevating science above God. That’s crazy enough, but their sub-title is worse: “Bill Federer recounts horrific atrocities committed in the name of biology.”

Bill Federer is a frequent writer for WND. He’s been posting a series of articles in which he quote-mines his way through history, picking out some issue or event, then quoting a President’s public mention of the Creator, or a general’s visit to church which coincided with a victory, and then claiming that everything good that has ever happened in American history was the caused by divine activity resulting from answered prayers. His “technique” goes far beyond mere quote-mining. It’s what we call reality mining. Here are some excerpts, with bold font added by us for emphasis, and occasional Curmudgeonly interjections that look [like this]:

The Scopes Monkey Trial in 1925 pitted evolution against creation. [The Scopes Trial ended on 21 July 1925, 93 years ago today.] Clarence Darrow defended evolution. Darrow had previously defended Leopold and Loeb, the homosexual teenage thrill killers who murdered 14-year-old Robert “Bobby” Franks in 1924 just for the excitement.

After listing some of Darrow’s other clients — criminal defense lawyers don’t represent saints — in a slimy effort to put Scopes in the same company, Federer says:

In 1925, Darrow unsuccessfully defended John Scopes, a Tennessee High school biology teacher who taught the theory of origins called “evolution.”

That’s true. Scopes was found guilty and fined $100. After that he tells us:

The attorney defending creation was the Democrat Party’s three-time candidate for President, William Jennings Bryan. Bryan objected to a tooth being presented as proof of humans evolving from apes. Later the tooth was found to be that of a peccary – an extinct pig. William Jennings Bryan won the Scopes case on July 21, 1925.

Brian was one of the most loathsome characters in American history — see Let’s Have William Jennings Bryan Day! As for the pig tooth, that’s a reference to Nebraska Man, a briefly mis-identified fossil. Brian objected to all of Darrow’s evidence.

Whoa — wait a minute! We just realized that Federer posted much of the same material three years ago, and we wrote about it back then — see WorldNetDaily — The Scopes Trial. There’s some new stuff in his latest post, but it’s not worth the effort to sort it all out.

What about all the “horrific atrocities committed in the name of biology” mentioned in the sub-title of the WND post? We scanned for those. Federer mentions the usual nonsense — eugenics, Hitler, racism, and a few other creationist clunkers. We’ve rebutted that nonsense several times, and we won’t bother doing it yet again.

And so, dear reader, all we really get out of this mess is that today is the day the Scopes Trial ended. Nothing like it has happened since — at least in the US — so that’s good news.

Copyright © 2018. The Sensuous Curmudgeon. All rights reserved.

• • • • • • • • • • •

. . Permalink for this article

A Link Between Secularism and Prosperity?

This article at PhysOrg is a bit off topic, but it’s worth discussing because it fits well with our admiration for the Enlightenment. Their headline is Secular countries can expect future economic growth, confirms new study. Here are some excerpts, with bold font added by us for emphasis, and occasional Curmudgeonly interjections that look [like this]:

New research measuring the importance of religion in 109 countries spanning the entire 20th century has reignited an age-old debate around the link between secularisation and economic growth. The study, published in Science Advances, has shown that a decline in religion influences a country’s future economic prosperity.

This is the paper they’re talking about: Religious change preceded economic change in the 20th century. You can read it online without a subscription. PhysOrg says:

While it is well documented that rich countries tend to be secular whilst poor countries tend to be religious, it is still unclear if secularisation causes wealth or the other way around? The subject has long been debated by classic scholars of social science including French sociologist Emile Durkheim, who claimed that religion fades away once economic development has satisfied our material needs, whereas German sociologist Max Weber, argued that changes in religion drive economic productivity. The debate continues to this day.

Good question. Does prosperity cause a society to become secular, or is there something about a secular society that makes it prosperous? They tell us:

Researchers from the Universities of Bristol (UK) and Tennessee (US) used data from birth cohorts from the World Values Survey to get a measure of the importance of religion spanning the entire 20th century (1900 to 2000). The findings revealed that secularisation precedes economic development and not the other way around. Although this does not demonstrate a causal pathway, it does rule out the reverse.

Interesting finding. Causes precede effects, so now it’s clear that prosperity doesn’t cause secularism. PhysOrg continues:

Furthermore, the findings show that secularisation only predicts future economic development when it is accompanied by a respect and tolerance for individual rights. Countries where abortion, divorce and homosexuality are tolerated have a greater chance of future economic prosperity.

Very interesting. That kind of tolerance is usually absent in religious societies. They quote Damian Ruck, the study’s lead researcher:

“Very often secularisation is indeed accompanied by a greater tolerance of homosexuality, abortion, divorce etc. But that isn’t to say that religious countries can’t become prosperous. Religious institutions need to find their own way of modernising and respecting the rights of individuals.”

Our last excerpt is from the end:

Alex Bentley from the University of Tennessee, added: “Over the course of the 20th century, changes in importance of religious practices appear to have predicted changes in GDP across the world. This doesn’t necessarily mean that secularization caused economic development, since both changes could have been caused by some third factor with different time lags, but at least we can rule out economic growth as the cause of secularization in the past.”

They’re being very cautious in the interpretation of their findings. That’s prudent, considering the expected reaction from deeply religious nations. This study has implications for the frequent claim we see from creationists, that all our problems are caused by secularism, especially science, and if only science were shut down, everything will be wonderful. We’ve always laughed at that, but now we have actual data that contradicts their claim.

Copyright © 2018. The Sensuous Curmudgeon. All rights reserved.

• • • • • • • • • • •

. . Permalink for this article