Ken Ham's Blog, page 389

What Does “Evangelical” Really Mean?

Can we trust the word evangelical anymore? It doesn’t look like it. In a recent article from The Independent, a UK newspaper and news website, Reverend Steve Chalke was heralded as a “prominent evangelical pastor” who has said that he now supports “monogamous same-sex relationships.” (You can read the full article at this link.)

Now, often when we read the word evangelical in reference to believers, we think of theologically conservative Christians who uphold the authority of God’s Word. But Steve Chalke is not upholding the authority of God’s Word, at least not in reference to homosexual behavior.

In fact, Chalke also denies the doctrine of Christ’s penal substitutionary atonement. You see, this doctrine teaches that because of Adam’s disobedience in the Garden of Eden, all were made sinners (Romans 5:19). Furthermore, Romans 3:23 tells us that “all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God.” Since God is holy and just, He must punish sin, but instead of punishing us, He punished His Son, who served as our perfect substitute.

So, how can we be spared God’s judgment for sin? Well, that’s the key to substitutionary atonement. Scripture tells us that Christ was “wounded for our transgressions” and was “bruised for our iniquities” (Isaiah 53:5). God came to earth in the form of the God-man Jesus Christ, lived a perfect life, died, and rose again three days later … to save all those who would believe! Romans 1:16 tells us that the gospel of Christ “is the power of God to salvation for everyone who believes.”

But Chalke denies this doctrine. In fact, a number of years ago, he became quite well known in the UK and among theologians worldwide for referring to penal substitutionary atonement—Christ’s death on the Cross to satisfy God’s judgment—as “cosmic child abuse” in his book The Lost Message of Jesus:

John’s Gospel famously declares, “God loved the people of this world so much that he gave his only Son” (John 3:16). How then, have we come to believe that at the cross this God of love suddenly decides to vent his anger and wrath on his own Son? The fact is that the cross isn’t a form of cosmic child abuse—a vengeful Father, punishing his Son for an offence he has not even committed. . . . If the cross is a personal act of violence perpetuated by God towards humankind but borne by his Son, then it makes a mockery of Jesus’ own teaching to love your enemies and to refuse to repay evil with evil. (p. 182–183)

In Chalke’s view, it seems that Christ was not punished for our transgressions, as the Scriptures clearly state. Rather, according to a review by a prominent UK church leader and blogger, Chalke believes that it is simply Christ’s victory over death and sin that is the key to our salvation—without any kind of atonement for our sin. But, how does a victory over sin and death without payment for man’s sin justify us before a holy God? The fact is, it doesn’t.

Not only has Chalke abandoned the basic model of atonement laid out in the Bible, he has also abandoned a literal reading of Genesis. He is the founding director of a UK charity that is raising money to open a school in England. When asked whether creation would be taught, he stated that it would not:

“My personal belief is that… those who wish to read into Genesis chapter one that God made the world in six days… are not being honest and scholarly. It won’t be taught in the school because I think it’s rubbish. It’s a bizarre thing to claim the Bible suggests that. Genesis is saying that behind creation is a good God.” (http://www.guardian.co.uk/education/2004/jul/13/schools.uk4)

The most unfortunate part of Chalke’s statements about biblical creation is not just that he disbelieves it, but that he thinks the plain meaning of Scripture in Genesis is “rubbish.” Based on Chalke’s compromise on Genesis and the atonement, it’s not surprising that he is compromising on homosexual behavior as well.

He argues in favor of same-sex relationships based on supposedly “faithful gay relationships.” He blames Christians who stand on the authority of Scripture in regard to homosexual behavior for the high rate of suicide among homosexuals:

“When we refuse to make room for gay people to live in loving, stable relationships, we consign them to lives of loneness, secrecy, and fear.” …

“People’s lives are at stake,” he says. “Numerous studies show that suicide rates among gay people, especially young people, are comparatively high. Church leaders sometimes use this data to argue that homosexuality is unhealthy when tragically it’s anti-gay stigma, propped up by church attitudes, which, all too often, drives these statistics.” (http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/prominent-evangelical-pastor-reverend-steve-chalke-declares-support-for-monogamous-same-sex-relationships-8452572.html)

Scripture makes clear that homosexual behavior is sin in a number of passages (Genesis 18:20, 19:5; Leviticus 18:22, 20:13; Romans 1:26–27; 1 Corinthians 6:9–10; 1 Timothy 1:10). What is sad about Chalke’s belief is that he is willing to condone behavior that is sinful in the eyes of God because he believes that message is “focused on the person of Christ.” You know, this is a very deceptive idea of love—really, it’s hate, because Chalke refuses to speak the truth that people so desperately need to hear.

I encourage you to read our lead article for today, Pro-Gay Theology: Does the Bible Approve of Homosexuality? by Steve Golden (AiG–U.S.), to better understand how to respond to the claims of church leaders who support same-sex relationships.

As believers, we can learn a lesson from this. That is, we can’t trust the word evangelical when we see it attached to church leaders. We must be diligent to scrutinize their beliefs against Scripture. Furthermore, we can do the truly loving thing when we encounter those who engage in homosexual behavior or any other sin—we can share the gospel of Jesus Christ with them and call them to repentance. That message is one that is truly focused on the person of Jesus Christ.

Thanks for stopping by and thanks for praying,

Ken

An Atheist Agrees with Churches?

Over the years I have given you several examples of atheists who have actually been complimenting church leaders for their compromise with evolution/millions of years.

In fact, I need to address this very frankly: those church leaders (and sadly it is the majority now) who compromise man’s religion of evolution and millions of years with God’s Word are doing two tragic things.

Undermining the authority of God’s Word and teaching people a very low view of Scripture.  This puts people on a slippery slide of doubt and eventually unbelief concerning the entire Word of God. It’s a major reason why at least two-thirds of young people are leaving the church by the time they are college age—see our book Already Gone for details.
Helping the atheists promote their anti-God religion—yes, they are assisting the enemies of God and His Word.

Recently, atheist Michael Zimmerman, in response to an article I wrote about a college student who was vehemently opposing creationists, stated the following:

But wait, his secularist agenda has been fully endorsed by mainstream religions around the world. For example, the Roman Catholic Church and the United Methodist Church are fully in favor of the teaching of evolution, as are a host of other Christian denominations. And the organization that I founded, The Clergy Letter Project, has collected signatures from more than 13,600 American clergy promoting the teaching of evolution, recognizing that such teaching poses no threat to either their religious freedom or beliefs. (http://www.huffingtonpost.com/michael-zimmerman/creationists-say-the-darndest-things-and-their-true-colors-are-made-clear_b_2513813.html)

I want to remind you of what I wrote back in 2012:

Last year, a professed atheist, Dr. Eugenie Scott, mailed a fundraising letter on behalf of her organization called NCSE (National Center for Science Education).

… in her letter, designed to cause alarm and raise funds for her anti-Christian organization and “motivate the secular troops” to oppose creationist organizations like AiG, Dr. Scott made a statement similar to the one she has made before on her website about how she seeks to recruit religious people to help her atheist group:

“Find common ground with religious communities and ally with them to promote the understanding of evolution.”

And back in 2008, Dr. Scott’s NCSE website made these statements in an article entitled “How You Can Support Evolution Education?”

One section listed these ideas:

“Suggest adult religious education projects focusing on evolution with your religious leaders.”
“Encourage your religious leaders to endorse the Clergy Letter Project and to participate in Evolution Weekend.”
“Encourage your religious leaders to produce educational resources about evolution and religion, and to take a formal stand in support of evolution education.” …

[The “Evolution Weekend” was founded by atheist Michael Zimmerman—I mentioned him above.]

Now, Dr. Scott, back in September 2000, in her opening statement at the American Association for the Advancement of Science Conference entitled “The Teaching of Evolution in U.S. Schools: Where Politics, Religion, and Science Converge,” said:

“You can’t win this by scientific arguments . . . our best allies were members of the mainstream clergy . . . . The clergy went to school board meetings and said, evolution is okay with us . . . they didn’t want the kids getting biblical literalism five days a week either, which meant they’d have to straighten them out on the weekends.”

In 2005, in an article on this website, I wrote about a supporter of AiG who attended a seminar conducted by Dr. Scott on how to teach evolution in public schools. When dealing with the issue of what to do with Christian students, she offered this sad advice. Our supporter reported:

“I attended the ‘Teaching Evolution’ seminar yesterday led by Eugenie Scott. The teachers were advised to suggest to the Bible believers to consult their clergy who would usually assure them that belief in evolution is OK!!”

Sadly, so many church leaders are now helping atheists like Michael Zimmerman and Eugenie Scott to undermine God’s Word and lead generations of young people down a path of doubt and unbelief concerning God’s infallible Word.

Think about it! Many church leaders are actually helping Zimmerman promote his anti-God religion of atheism:

In fact, I too am an atheist. And I’ve been one for 40-years but what I think is important is that we recognize that people can believe what they want, that there are lots of different kinds of worldviews, there are lots of questions that are asked. Science, as powerful as it is, can only answer a subset of the questions that are of critical importance to humans. (Conversations with Christian and Atheist Activists: Michael Zimmerman)

We need to stand unashamedly and boldly against compromise in the church and “contend earnestly for the faith which was once for all delivered to the saints” (Jude 1:3).

As Martin Luther once said, “Whenever we observe that the opinions of the fathers disagree with Scripture, we reverently bear with them and acknowledge them to be our elders.  Nevertheless, we do not depart from authority of Scripture for their sake” (What Martin Luther Says – A Practical In-Home Anthology for the Active Christian, p. 1523).

Thanks for stopping by and thanks for praying,

Ken

Are You Coming?

Dr. Georgia Purdom, an excellent speaker on our staff, writes about the upcoming AiG women’s conference that she is cohosting at our Creation Museum:

Since coming to Answers in Genesis, I have been deeply burdened to teach and equip women to defend God’s Word effectively. I knew all too well the problems with many Christian women’s conferences and resources. What they serve is kind of like cotton candy—it looks pretty and tastes sweet but is ultimately nothing more than puffed-up sugar that is short-lived in its effect and not ultimately filling or satisfying. The reason is that many times the speaking is not grounded in the Word of God; it’s just a bunch of personal “stories” and motivational speaking.

Further evidence of this is seen in an article titled “Why We Don’t Need Women’s Ministry.” The author, Sarah Bessey, commented as follows:

We’re choking on cutesy things and crafty bits, safe lady topics . . . We are hungry for authenticity and vulnerability . . . Some of us are drowning, suffocating, dying of thirst for want of the cold water of real community.

I would love to wrestle with some questions that don’t have a one-paragraph answer in your study guide. I would like to do a Bible study that does not have pink or flowers on the cover.

We want to give and serve and make a difference. We want to be challenged. We want to read books and talk politics, theology, and current events. We want to wrestle through our theology.[1]

I concur! Many times I have had women come up to me—after I have given my women’s presentations—and say, “I almost didn’t come today.” They then explain how they are sick and tired of going to women’s conferences that only present a superficial treatment of God’s Word, if the Bible is discussed at all.

Don’t despair—Answers for Women conferences are here! I think an appropriate byline for the conference should be “not your typical Christian women’s conference.” We will be delving deeply into God’s Word! Last year it was thrilling to host the first-ever Answers for Women conference at the Creation Museum. I was very encouraged by the feedback we received from this attendee:

So much new information that gives me more confidence in Scripture and make me love Jesus more! Please, please do this conference again. The quality of the conference is far better than any conference I’ve ever attended—very theologically sound and saturated in the proper understanding of Scripture. This is greatly needed for women in the church today. THANK YOU for helping me grow in Christ and the defense of His Word. You’ve better equipped me to homeschool and disciple my children and love my husband! I’ll be back next year with more women from my church, Lord willing.

We’ve changed the format a bit this year to make the conference accessible to more women. The conference will begin on a Friday evening (there will also be a special preconference session) and end by 3:00 on Saturday. This will also give you time to visit the Creation Museum. As we did with last year’s conference, the registration cost includes free admission to the Creation Museum for you and your immediate family. This allows you to enjoy the conference knowing the rest of the family is being educated and entertained nearby.

In the coming weeks I will share more details about the speakers and their topics. You won’t want to miss out!

Be sure to visit AnswersForWomen.org for more details.

Who: You!

What: Answers for Women Conference

When: May 3–4, 2013

Where: Creation Museum (near Cincinnati, Ohio)

Why: You love God and His Word!

How: Any way you can

Keep fighting the good fight of the faith!

[1]  Sarah Bessey, “Why We Don’t Need “Women’s” Ministry,” http://www.churchleaders.com/pastors/pastor-articles/155219-sarah-bessey-why-women-s-ministry-needs-jesus.html.

You can follow Georgia on her blog.

Thanks for stopping by and thanks for praying,

Ken

Was Ham Cursed?

Recently, some atheists have accused me and the Creation Museum of teaching the so-called “curse of Ham”—which we don’t and isn’t even in the Bible!

Now, I often jokingly say that I’m pretty sensitive about this issue, since my last name is “Ham.” Seriously, I think it’s  important that people understand that we don’t teach the “curse of Ham”—or that dark-skinned peoples are “cursed.”

“Then he said: ‘Cursed be Canaan; A servant of servants He shall be to his brethren.’” (Genesis 9:25)

Some of these atheists then use the statement (made to Canaan) about “servants” to claim we teach that dark-skinned people would be slaves.  All this is so, so wrong.

Ham had four sons. Canaan was the youngest of the four. While Scripture is unclear about why exactly Noah cursed Canaan for Ham’s sin, what we can be clear about is that Noah’s curse had nothing to do with skin tone. Noah’s curse had to do with a rebellious son, not skin color.  One only has to look at Canaan’s descendants to see some of the most-wicked rebellious people who ever lived and who were judged for their godlessness and immorality.  (For more information on the possible reasons for the curse on Canaan, see Troy Lacey’s article “The Curse of Canaan.”)

Part of the anti-racism exhibit in the Creation Museum that repudiates the so-called “curse of Ham.”

What is frustrating as I read these totally false charges against the museum is that we have an anti-racism exhibit inside the museum, and it very specifically teaches against a supposed “curse of Ham.” In a museum display, we declare that it is wrong to argue “that dark skin color was a curse upon Noah’s son Ham.” Yet opponents of the museum say it teaches a “curse of Ham.” Incredible.

Of course, many atheist bloggers simply don’t do proper research (even though some of them possess PhDs, and so you’d think they would do their research) or simply want to propagate lies about the Creation Museum even though they know better.  For example, one atheist blogger (I won’t give the link to his blog because his language is so vile and crude) claims that I’m entirely “ignorant of actual history,” and yet he shows great ignorance of biblical history as it relates to Noah and Ham:

You see Ham was punished to be a servant to his brothers because . . . Ham was the one who tried to cover [Noah] up and give him some “decency”. So he was cursed to be an effective Slave. The descendants of Ham go to Africa. The entire notion that Africa is nothing but savages is born out of this culture (Bear in mind during the 2nd millenia BC was the rise of the Nubian Pharaohs of Egypt when Egypt picked a fight with Nubia and lost) and the western practice of ignoring African history was entrenched in this notion that nothing good can come from the “Descendants of Ham”. When black people were kept as slaves the argument put forward from Christians was precisely what Ken is flogging. That the descendants of Ham are divinely ordained to be slaves.

Another atheist blogger wrote that we push “racist propaganda”—like the “curse of Ham”—at the Creation Museum:

Despite all of this, which can be written off as pure stupidity and fodder for jokes, on a more serious side the museum pushes racist propaganda, by promoting the Curse of Ham.  Basically, the story is based on the mythical Noah placing a curse on Noah’s mythical grandson, Canaan, for some biblical insanity of some sort. . . . So, biblical scholars (how hard is it to study the Bronze Age Goatherder’s Book of Fairytales, Myths, and Hallucinations) have stated that Canaan was made black, and exiled to Africa.  Why is this racist?  Well, it was used for many years to justify slavery, and, more recently, why blacks are somehow inferior to white people. (www.skepticalraptor.com)

A few years ago, Secular News Daily’s editor, Mike Daniels, posted an article titled “Creation Museum Says Black People Are Cursed by Noah,” also claiming that the Creation Museum teaches racism:

So . . . Noah cursed Ham’s son, Canaan, to be “a servant of servants”. According to the Creation Museum, Canaan and his descendants populated Africa. They were called [the nation of] Canaan, or Canaanites. Populated Africa . . . That’d make them black folks, huh? The argument that Noah cursed all of Canaan’s descendants has been used for centuries to justify the enslavement of black people. And Ken Ham of Answers in Genesis and the Creation Museum continues to promote this belief (www.secularnewsdaily.com).

Well, unfortunately for these and other terribly wrong bloggers, the idea that racism originated with the Bible is unfounded.

Some bloggers claim we blame racism on evolution—which is simply not true. It originated with sin.  On the contrary, it was evolutionary ideas that really fueled many racist attitudes over the past 150 years. For example, one famous evolutionist, Ernst Haeckel, once wrote, “At the lowest stage of human mental development are the Australians, some tribes of the Polynesians, and the Bushmen, Hottentots, and some of the Negro tribes” (from The History of Creation, pp. 362–363). Incredible. Haeckel placed dark-skinned peoples “at the lowest stage of human mental development”! One thing is clear—he didn’t get that belief from the Bible!

In fact, Charles Darwin himself had some very racist views, which he expressed in The Descent of Man:

At some future period, not very distant as measured by centuries, the civilized races of man will almost certainly exterminate and replace the savage races throughout the world.  At the same time the anthropomorphous apes. . . will no doubt be exterminated.  The break between man and his nearest allies will then be wider, for it will intervene between man in a more civilized state, as we may hope, even than the Caucasian, and some ape as low as a baboon, instead of as now between the negro or Australian [aborigine] and the gorilla. (p. 336)

You see, Darwin even believed that dark-skinned peoples were closer to gorillas than humans. That’s not certainly what the Bible teaches!

Even a decorated scientist and evolutionist James Watson, who co-discovered DNA,  commented that the intelligence of dark-skinned Africans is supposedly sub par, which caused a media frenzy about his racist evolutionary views. (Read the full article here: www.independent.co.uk.)

The creation account in Genesis tells us that man was made in God’s image. All of mankind ultimately descended from the original pair, Adam and Eve. The first couple would have had all the genetic material in them to have all the various skin tones and variations we see today. And when God judged the sinful world of Noah’s day with the global Flood, it was Noah’s family that repopulated the earth, who shared that genetic material. In other words, we are all one race, the human race, with variations and mixings that have occurred many times over.

Some of these atheist bloggers claim we are racist because we discuss that certain people in Africa are descended from Noah’s son Ham.  But they fail to explain that we teach that many different people groups descended from Ham, including the Chinese.

Below is a summary of the people groups that we teach descended from each of Noah’s sons—though keep in mind there has been considerable mixing (for the full chart, visit www.answersingenesis.org/assets/pdf/2013/chart-of-people-groups.pdf):

Japheth: Germanic tribes (e.g., Angles and Saxons), French, Welsh, Spain, Greece, Portugal, Poland, Turkey, Russia (four major ones: Meshech, Magog, Tubal and Togarmah), Ukraine, Mongolia, Medes, Northern India, some in Southwestern China (Maio peoples), some American tribes

Shem: Jews, Arabs, Assyrians, many North Africans, Much of India, Indonesia, Armenia, Turkey, some to the Orient, Iran

Ham: Chinese, Egypt, Libya, West Africa (Phut), Middle East (Canaan), Sinai, Hindu Kush in Asia and Mizoram in Asia, many island nations of Asia, Ethiopia and lower Africa, Babylonia, some of the American tribes (e.g., Athabascans), Portugal, and Spain (due to the Moors mixing)

I’m now to the stage of assuming that the reason the secularists continue to lie about what AiG and the Creation Museum teach is because it is a deliberate attempt to malign us.  And why?  Because they can’t use scientific facts to discredit us, so they misquote, misrepresent, and construct untruths so they can falsely accuse us—and name call—in their attempts to undermine our integrity.

Let’s stop  talking about the supposed curse of Ham. There was NO curse of Ham!  This false idea, together with the false belief that a supposed (non-existent) curse is connected to people with dark skin, have sadly been used by some people as a basis for racism and prejudice.  But we need to stand against such anti-biblical, false ideas that are used to cause harm!

Yes, I have to admit that I am quite frustrated by these false claims.  You see, we have a large section of our museum that is devoted to combating racism (and it offers a biblical solution), and yet some of our museum opponents—without a shred of evidence but with an intent to harm—say our displays promote racism! Incredible. It would be like claiming that certain exhibits in civil rights museums in the South promote racism towards dark-skinned people! Of course they don’t, and our museum doesn’t either.

In today’s News to Note column on our home page, Dr. Elizabeth Mitchell looks more at the false charge that biblical creationists teach the so-called (and non-existent) “curse of Ham.”

Thanks for stopping by and thanks for praying,

Ken

An Eleven-year-old Who Gets It!

Kayla is 11 years old. She sent me the wonderful poem below. How we need a whole generation of young people like Kayla! What a refreshing change to see a young girl write about the truth of God’s Word instead of the anti-biblical beliefs permeating this nation from the White House down.

“Seven Days of Creation”

By KH, 11 years old

Oh, what a sight

When God created light.

He called the light day

And the darkness night.

He separated darkness

From light as you know.

God saw that it was good.

And this is not just a show.

What did God do

On day number two?

I’ll give you a hint,

I’ll give you a clue.

Sometimes it’s black

And sometimes it’s blue.

It’s heaven or sky,

Remember the clue?

What would it be like

Without fruit, trees, or plants?

Just try to imagine it.

I bet you can’t.

If God hadn’t created

Land on the third day

You’d always be floating

Or swimming. No way!

Three days have passed

And there still are more.

And right now it is

Day number four.

When God creates

Very wonderful lights.

Like stars, sun, and moon

For thousands of nights.

This is what

The fifth day features:

Sea animals and Flying creatures.

He made all those

Creatures on that day.

And that is all

I have to say.

Now the sixth day

Is very neat.

So how about

We have a seat.

He made animals of land

And formed man by His hand.

Out of dust man came

And soon you will find out his name.

It’s day number seven

And our week is done.

Watching God create

Was really fun.

Now it’s time for

God to rest.

Which day did

You like the best?

Thanks Kayla—may God richly bless you as you stand for Him.

Thanks for stopping by and thanks for praying,

Ken

Will Congress Endorse the Religion of Evolution?

It’s coming near that time of year again—Darwin’s birthday! He was born February 12, 1809, and 200 years later, more and more people want to celebrate the man and his beliefs—beliefs that have had horrible consequences. See our article Darwin’s Sad Legacy.

There is even a movement that promotes Charles Darwin’s birthday as “Darwin Day.” For instance, from the International Darwin Day Foundation website we read the following:

Darwin Day is a global celebration of science and reason held on or around Feb. 12, the birthday anniversary of evolutionary biologist Charles Darwin.

On this website you can find all sorts of information about Charles Darwin and the International Darwin Day Fundation. If you are hosting a Darwin Day event, you can post information about it on our events listing. You can also locate Darwin Day programs near you by searching our events section. (http://darwinday.org/)

Secularists—in the last couple of years in particular—have really been promoting events on Darwin Day as a celebration of Darwin. But more important to them, it’s their opportunity to push the teaching of molecules-to-man evolution around the world.

Well, you may not be aware that a resolution in the U.S. House of Representatives was submitted on Tuesday, asking Congress to officially recognize February 12 as Darwin Day in America.

Here’s what we received from the American Humanist Association:

Dear Friends,

In honor of this year’s Darwin Day, the American Humanist Association proudly worked with Representative Rush Holt (NJ) to introduce a resolution in the U.S. House of Representatives “expressing support for designation of February 12, 2013, as Darwin Day and recognizing the importance of science in the betterment of humanity.”

This Darwin Day resolution signifies that there are some members of Congress dedicated to promoting science and committed to scientific literacy among our youth.

The resolution:

States that evolution “provides humanity with a logical and intellectually compelling explanation for the diversity of life on Earth”
Demands that the “advancement of science be protected from those unconcerned with the adverse impacts of global warming and climate change”
Confirms that the “teaching of creationism in some public schools compromises the scientific and academic integrity of the United States’ education systems

We have 20 days left before Darwin Day. Will you take a moment to contact your Representative and ask her or him to co-sponsor H. Res. 41 and support Darwin Day?

As you may already know, some members of Congress have been infamous as of late for making anti-science statements. We need humanists like you to stand up for science education and the increased funding of scientific research.

The Darwin Day resolution is a step toward combating anti-science advocates committed to removing scientific values from public policy. I need your help in getting as many co-sponsors as we can for this important bill if we are to see Congress standing strong on science.

Please take action now. Show Congress that voters care about science by contacting your Representative today and asking her or him to co-sponsor the Darwin Day resolution.

In the meantime, I hope you will visit www.darwinday.org to learn more about the Darwin Day resolution and join a Darwin Day event in your community. Thank you for standing up for science.

Sincerely,

[Signature]

(http://www.americanhumanist.org/news/details/2013-01-support-the-darwin-day-resolution-contact-your-repre)

Note how they arbitrarily and falsely define “science” as evolution and anything pertaining to technology. Surely members of Congress wouldn’t be that uneducated and ignorant that they would be sucked in by this anti-Christian atheistic propaganda—but then again …

If Congress passes this resolution, it is endorsing the religion of atheistic evolution and rejecting Christianity.

You can read Resolution 41 at this link: http://www.govtrack.us/congress/bills/113/hres41/text

Here is what it states:

113th CONGRESS

1st Session

H. RES. 41Expressing support for designation of February 12, 2013, as Darwin Day and recognizing the importance of science in the betterment of humanity.

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

January 22, 2013Mr. HOLT submitted the following resolution; which was referred to the Committee on Science, Space, and Technology

RESOLUTIONExpressing support for designation of February 12, 2013, as Darwin Day and recognizing the importance of science in the betterment of humanity.

Whereas Charles Darwin’s theory of evolution by the mechanism of natural selection, together with the monumental amount of scientific evidence he compiled to support it, provides humanity with a logical and intellectually compelling explanation for the diversity of life on Earth;

Whereas the validity of Darwin’s theory of evolution by natural selection is further strongly supported by the modern understanding of the science of genetics;

Whereas it has been the human curiosity and ingenuity exemplified by Darwin that has promoted new scientific discoveries that have helped humanity solve many problems and improve living conditions;

Whereas the advancement of science must be protected from those unconcerned with the adverse impacts of global warming and climate change;

Whereas the teaching of creationism in some public schools compromises the scientific and academic integrity of the United States education systems;

Whereas Charles Darwin is a worthy symbol of scientific advancement on which to focus and around which to build a global celebration of science and humanity intended to promote a common bond among all of Earth’s peoples; and

Whereas February 12, 2013, is the anniversary of the birth of Charles Darwin in 1809 and would be an appropriate date to designate as Darwin Day: Now, therefore, be it

Resolved, That the House of Representatives–

(1) supports the designation of Darwin Day; and

(2) recognizes Charles Darwin as a worthy symbol on which to celebrate the achievements of reason, science, and the advancement of human knowledge.

Now, a resolution voted on by Congress does not have the force of law. It does, however, give us a sense of what elected representatives believe about worldview issues, which will help determine how they vote on bills that affect all Americans. In essence if this resolution is passed, then Congress would essentially be endorsing a secular worldview.

Maybe Christians should be letting their representative in Congress know how they feel about this proposed resolution!  I expect the minority of atheists in America will make their voices heard loud and clear!

Thanks for stopping by and thanks for praying—and consider your actions in regard to this resolution.

Ken

How “Evangelical” Are the Youth?

Well, I’ve said many times before that the secular world is out to win the hearts and minds of this generation of youth—and here’s just another example of it. In December of last year, the National Association of Evangelicals (NAE) released the results of a survey examining the trends of sexual activity among 18–29-year-old professing Christians (i.e., “evangelical Millennials”).

Now, I know that many of these surveys use a broad definition of “evangelical” or “Christian.” So below are the criteria that the NAE used in choosing participants for the survey:

This study for the NAE represents the attitudes and opinions of Millennials who attend a Protestant church once a month, believe they will go to heaven when they die, because they have accepted Jesus Christ as their Savior, and strongly hold these statements:

The Bible is the written word of God and is accurate in all that it teaches
You have made a personal commitment to Jesus Christ that is still important in your life today
Eternal salvation is possible only through Jesus Christ
You, personally, have a responsibility to tell other people about your religious beliefs

One of the sad things about the results of the survey is the inconsistency this generation lives with. The survey found that 77 percent of evangelical Millennials surveyed believe that sex outside of marriage is wrong. But do their actions reflect this? Sadly, they don’t.

You see, the report states that “44 percent of unmarried evangelicals ages 18–29 have had sex, including 25 percent who have had sex in the last three months.” The survey reported that the evangelical Millennials explained their actions in the following way:

Respondents said that the sexualized society is the top reason why some young, unmarried Christian adults have sex even though they believe it is morally wrong. Lacking a strong foundation in the Bible and “living for the moment” closely followed.

You know, we do indeed live in a world that is permeated with sex. It’s on TV, on the Internet, in video games, and books—sex is hard to avoid in our culture. However, I believe these respondents have the reasons for their behavior backwards. You see, what’s really at issue here is their foundation—is it man’s fallible word or God’s unchanging Word?

Biblically, we are responsible for our own actions, so these respondents cannot simply blame the “sexualized society” for the participation of professing Christians in premarital sex. For example, in 1 Corinthians 6:15–20, Paul instructs the Corinthians, and all Christians by extension, to “flee sexual immorality.” These young people believe that the Bible “is accurate in all that it teaches,” but they are not willing to submit to its authority when it comes to matters that impact them personally.

And in the school system, evolutionists are teaching our children that they supposedly came from ape-like creatures and that they’re basically just animals. Even some churches have embraced evolutionary ideas! So it’s no surprise when this generation just follows its impulses without taking seriously what God says about it. Biblical authority has been eroded at every turn.

Also, when so many church leaders take man’s ideas of evolution and/or millions of years and add it to the Bible, I believe that this opens the door for those people (e.g., these young adults) they influence to take man’s ideas regarding sex and reinterpret the Bible. Really, compromised teaching actually opens the door to those being taught not to regard the Bible as the absolute authority as they should.

Two-thirds of this generation are walking away from the church. We reveal the reasons why they are leaving in droves in the research we have summarized in our book Already Gone. The moral inconsistency of a large percentage of young professing Christians is evident in these survey results. I urge you to read Already Gone and to begin equipping your children with answers from God’s Word so that they will know what it means to live a consistent life. We have to stand our ground and rescue our kids, which is our main theme this year as a ministry.

Thanks for stopping by and thanks for praying,

Ken

Note: I thank Steve Golden for his work is composing this blog post.

In the Most Unusual of Places …

What possible tie could there be between a Hollywood magazine for makeup artists and our Creation Museum?

Well, one of our talented artists, who helped in so many creative areas of the Creation Museum and now with the Ark Encounter, is Doug Henderson. He joined us many years before the museum opened in 2007 to lend his talents. Doug is a well-known makeup artist, among his other abilities. For several years Doug taught at the well-known Art Institute of Pittsburgh in many areas related to moviemaking, from special effects to makeup. Well, Doug’s talents are acknowledged in the 100th issue of the magazine Make-Up Artist. A cover of the magazine is below:

And on the following page (below), you can see a short bio of Doug, which mentioned his work at the Creation Museum:

Doug’s two-page article can be seen below (though an editor removed a reference to Doug’s work on the Ark Encounter):

In the following one-minute video that we recently created to promote the Ark Encounter (a production that shows some of the aspects of the design and construction of a full-size Noah’s Ark), you can see some of Doug’s makeup artistry in the Noah character:

Click here to view the embedded video.

Doug’s recognition in this specialized magazine is yet another tribute to the wonderfully talented staff God has brought to us, not only for the Creation Museum, but also the future evangelistic Noah’s Ark.

Thanks for stopping by and thanks for praying,

Ken

The Legacy of Brainwashing

Because of a number of news items that have reported on the efforts of a 19-year-old student to stop other students from learning to think critically about evolution and to see them be brainwashed in evolutionary belief, AiG research assistant Steve Golden and I have decided to respond. We have written a commentary about this student’s mission, and it has been posted to the AiG website as today’s lead article.

The article begins as follows:

Students are being brainwashed with evolutionary ideas in almost all public schools and museums, and they are expected to accept it uncritically. We’ve made this point many times over the years, but a recent news story has made the brainwashing even more obvious.1 In 2008, Louisiana passed a bill that would allow teachers in the public school system to “use supplemental materials . . . to help students critique and review scientific theories.” Such critical thinking skills should be a part of an education process and are part of many state education standards.

Well, a 19-year-old student at Rice University, Zack Kopplin, is on a mission to repeal that law. He is being praised by the secular world for his ambition, as evidenced in a recent article about him.2

Atheistic evolutionists do not want any talk of “critiquing” or “thinking critically” about evolutionary ideas, because evolution is their way of explaining life without God, which is why we call evolution a religion. Despite their claims to the contrary, atheists use evolution as their religion to replace God. Evolution is a foundation for their set of beliefs about life and how it arose, just as creation, as described in Genesis, is our set of beliefs about how life arose. Atheists blindly hold to evolution because of their rejection of Christ. Zack Kopplin has seemingly declined to talk about his personal beliefs about God, but many atheists have basically claimed him as one of their own, including the Friendly Atheist, a well-known blogger, who published a post the other day calling Kopplin an atheist.3

I urge you to read the rest of this article.

Thanks for stopping by and thanks for praying,

Ken

Gary Parker Keynotes Homeschool Conference

Gary Parker to Keynote Homeschool Conference in Florida

Over the past 19 years of AiG ministry, I have had the opportunity—dozens of times—to speak alongside Dr. Gary Parker at AiG conferences across America (and even abroad). When I learn that he has a special opportunity to speak at a major conference, I like to bring it to your attention—even though it may not be an AiG event. Also, Gary is still one of our adjunct presenters, and one of the most effective speakers on the book of Genesis I have ever heard. The Lord has given him a great gift of communication. This, together with his vast knowledge and experience, makes him a very powerful creation apologetics speaker.

Here is a photo taken of the two of us when Gary, who lives in Florida, visited the Creation Museum:

In early March, Gary will be the keynote speaker at a homeschool seminar called “The Finish Well Conference.” This event in central Florida (in Sanford, north of Orlando) is primarily geared to helping homeschool families that are educating highschoolers. If you live in Florida or one of the nearby states, and you are homeschooling a teen, I think it will worth looking into—check out the conference website of www.finishwellcon.com.  The dates are March 1–2.

This year, our AiG ministry theme is “Standing Our Ground, Rescuing Our Kids.” We are making more of an effort to reach out to young people who are increasingly becoming “evolutionized” in schools, museums, through the media, and elsewhere. You may already be aware that two thirds of our young people who grow up in the church will leave the church when they become young adults. Dr. Parker shares our passion to rescue our young people, and homeschool conferences can be great outreaches to equip teens and their parents. Dr. Parker will also mention our Ark Encounter to the attendees so that they are aware of this project being built in northern Kentucky, up I-75 from Florida.

As a part of this conference, a hands-on science workshop will be conducted for children ages 7–12.

Go to www.finishwellcon.com

Also, I encourage all readers to explore God’s world “up close and personal” through the special field trips and hands-on programs that Gary and his wife Mary offer in the southeast part of the country. As Gary often says, we need “to relate God’s world to God’s Word.” Find out more at www.CreationAdventuresMuseum.org.

Thanks for stopping by and thanks for praying.

Ken