Rabble rouser Ken Ham and his biased Facebook fans

Creationist bloggers can be infuriating. If one has infuriated you by persisting in nonsense even when corrected, or refusing to reply to your criiticsm, you may feel driven to recording the fact. If so, you may register your disapproval here and hope a response is forthcoming.

Moderator: Moderators

Rabble rouser Ken Ham and his biased Facebook fans

Postby a_haworthroberts » Thu Apr 19, 2012 12:39 am

Ken Ham is complaining about an atheist blog at Leo Weekly in his blog of 18 April (which he has conveniently flagged for his fans on Facebook):

The blog in question - which IS entitled 'Ken Ham advocates drowning atheists' - reads:
"On Facebook today, when commenting on the horror of an atheist rally in D.C. with tents for (gasp) children’s games and craft projects, Ken Ham dropped the following knowledge on us:
In recent times, various atheists have been blasting AiG (and myself) on the internet and in books for reaching children with the message of the truth of God’s Word beginning in Genesis through speaking programs and books and DVD’s etc. In fact, as I have documented, they accuse us of ‘child abuse’ because we teach children they are created and that God’s Word is true. You see, they want to reach children with their message–that there is no God–that life is meaningless and purposeless–that the universe and all life is the result of totally naturalistic processes. They want to brainwash children with their anti-God religion of millions of years and evolution.
I’m reminded of a verse of Scripture: “But whoever causes one of these little ones who believe in Me to stumble, it would be better for him if a millstone were hung around his neck, and he were thrown into the sea.”
(Mark 9:42)"
and
"Is Ken saying people who teach children that Adam and Eve didn’t really feed coconuts to vegetarian T-Rexes should be drowned to death, because that is such an unforgivable act of heresy? That would appear to be the case, but I’m admittedly not a big fiction reader.
If so, it remains unclear whether Ken Ham — the man who has made himself and his family a fortune by marketing insane myths about dinosaurs and dragons to impressionable kids and their slack-jawed parents who buy his products — wants them dead because that’s what Jesus would have wanted, or they’re starting to cut into his bottom line...".

Ham DID write on Facebook on 21 March:
"I wanted to bring to your attention the Rally's efforts to reach children with their atheist anti-God message: "Also, there will be a Camp Quest tent at the rally, so bring your kids! The tent will be geared toward children 5-15, with craft projects and games." (http://www.reasonrally.org/).
In recent times, various atheists have been blasting AiG (and myself) on the internet and in books for reaching children with the message of the truth of God's Word beginning in Genesis through speaking programs and books and DVD's etc. In fact, as I have documented, they accuse us of 'child abuse' because we teach children they are created and that God's Word is true. You see, they want to reach children with their message--that there is no God--that life is meaningless and purposeless--that the universe and all life is the result of totally naturalistic processes. They want to brainwash children with their anti-God religion of millions of years and evolution.
I'm reminded of a verse of Scripture: “But whoever causes one of these little ones who believe in Me to stumble, it would be better for him if a millstone were hung around his neck, and he were thrown into the sea.”
(Mark 9:42)".

Some atheists may, arguably, 'brainwash' kids. That is a problem for Ken Ham because he brainwashes kids in nonsense anti-scientific stories as a means to softening them up to the Christian gospel (I have no problem with anybody preaching the Christian gospel). In the 18 April blog he says:
"In this article posted on the LEO news blog, Fat Lip, Joe Sonka accused me of advocating that atheists be drowned, based on my quotation of this verse in Mark". ONLY the blog title, not its contents, did this.
The blog goes on to state: "If these atheists were to consider the context of these two verses, they would realize that I was not certainly advocating that atheists be drowned. Rather, I was indicating that those who teach our children that there is no God will be held accountable for it by God, and their punishment will be severe beyond this world. But here’s the key: these verses indicate that a fate of drowning would be better than experiencing that coming judgment". But Ken Ham failed to provide such context on Facebook.

The blog of 18 April also links to another recent atheist blog - Atheistic Thoughts. That blog DID say: "For those who don’t know, Ken Ham has made comments that atheists should have rocks tied around their necks and be drowned...". That blog statement is not correct. Rather Ham alluded to the fact that the Bible ie Jesus tells us that atheists (or those who cause little ones who believe in Jesus to stumble) should have rocks tied around their necks and be drowned instead of continuing to mislead children - and end up in hell as a consequence (was Jesus saying that if somebody threw them into the sea to drown they would NOT end up in hell eg they might repent before they lose consciousness?)

The problem for Mr Ham is that millions of years is reality, so teaching the evidence that shows this is NOT causing anybody to 'stumble'. Some atheists may also teach that there is no God, and that - arguably - may be a cause of 'stumbling'. But Ken Ham does not simply teach the Bible, he seeks to destroy scientific knowledge that threatens any literal reading of the book of Genesis.

The Ham blog also states: "Frequently, atheists wrongly apply what’s called a “wooden literalism” to the Bible, yet they don’t adhere to the same standard with their everyday language. For instance, an atheist (or anyone for that matter) might figuratively say, “It’s raining cats and dogs.” Now, we know it doesn’t mean that cats and dogs are literally falling from the sky; we know exactly what the phrase means. Also, we all use the words “sunrise” and “sunset” (even a newspaper will list the times of sunrise and sunset), but we know what those terms mean (from our visual perspective, the sun seems to rise and set). Yet when atheist mockers read the biblical description about the sun stopping in the sky (and from Joshua’s perspective, that is what happened), then they falsely accuse the Bible of being scientifically wrong".

Joshua 10:12-14 reads "On the day the LORD gave the Amorites over to Israel, Joshua said to the LORD in the presence of Israel:
“Sun, stand still over Gibeon, and you, moon, over the Valley of Aijalon.”
So the sun stood still, and the moon stopped, till the nation avenged itself on its enemies, as it is written in the Book of Jashar.
The sun stopped in the middle of the sky and delayed going down about a full day. There has never been a day like it before or since, a day when the LORD listened to a human being. Surely the LORD was fighting for Israel!".

Ken Ham appears to be arguing that the sun 'stopping' was just an optical illusion - "from Joshua's perspective".

How on EARTH could the sun appear to STOP in the sky? The man appears seriously confused. Answers on a postcard?

"This is a reminder to pray for these very lost people and also to be reminded of their lying tactics". Pot Kettle Black. Ham has previously lied about Stephen Hawking and (as far as I could gather after contacting them) the NCSE.

What about the Facebook fans?
"Oh my, I cannot believe they would mis-quote you like that. That is too bad. Well, it does show that you are getting to them. Still though, it is sad that they have to resort to such techniques". As I showed above, the Leo Weekly blog at least did NOT misquote Ham's previous words on Facebook, though they omitted his short opening preamble about the Reason Rally and the Camp Quest tent geared toward children 5-15 and providing craft projects and games (as I showed above Leo Weekly did provide the context of Ham's comments).

But Ham's blog implies that BOTH atheist blogs lied. NONE of his biased followers appear to have any problem with this.

Christians - unlike your average atheist - are meant follow closely a book that warns against 'bearing false witness'.
a_haworthroberts
 
Posts: 8047
Joined: Sun Jun 13, 2010 1:49 am
Location: United Kingdom

Re: Rabble rouser Ken Ham and his biased Facebook fans

Postby a_haworthroberts » Thu Apr 19, 2012 4:40 am

One almost wonders whether Ham rushed his original Facebook comments because he actually did not mind if some atheist misrepresented his real view (as one blogger did) because that would provide ammunition for him to remind his loyal fans that "This is a reminder to pray for these very lost people and also to be reminded of their lying tactics. Also, it’s a reminder that they will not hesitate to lie in order to defame someone because of their intolerance of those who are Christians" and "Now, the atheists’ accusation against us is obviously a ridiculous one. As we have seen many times, they certainly have no qualms about lying—after all, they hold to no absolute standards in a meaningless and purposeless universe".
a_haworthroberts
 
Posts: 8047
Joined: Sun Jun 13, 2010 1:49 am
Location: United Kingdom

Re: Rabble rouser Ken Ham and his biased Facebook fans

Postby cathy » Thu Apr 19, 2012 7:05 am

Frequently, atheists wrongly apply what’s called a “wooden literalism” to the Bible, yet they don’t adhere to the same standard with their everyday language.
As hypocrisy goes Ken has excelled himself here :evil: :evil: :evil:

As we have seen many times, they certainly have no qualms about lying—after all, they hold to no absolute standards in a meaningless and purposeless universe".
Oh sorry no he managed to surpass it here. The man has no conscience at all.

But whoever causes one of these little ones who believe in Me to stumble, it would be better for him if a millstone were hung around his neck, and he were thrown into the sea.”

Ken says genesis is literal - despite the language used suggesting a lot of confusion - but this bit isn't literal? Sorry I'm lost now - how is this comparable to raining cats and dogs but trees of life and knowledge aren't? So Ken is the ultimate authority on which bits of the bible are which is he?

He's lost me so how do the 'slack jawed' parents of the kids he brainwashes cope. Then again they don't need to think or attempt to understand cos Ken decides it for them. Which bits of the bible are literal, which are not, and if something is missing we can rely on Ken and his creationist pals to fill in what God forgot. Cos creationists know far more than any scholar, compromising christian or indeed even God does.

Why bother with the bible at all, why not just put our trust in Ken he'll lead us to salvation - if only by relieving us of sufficient money to get thru the eyes of needles with camels. After all if the poor are blessed Ken really is aiming to bless us all via his bank account.
cathy
 
Posts: 3662
Joined: Wed Apr 21, 2010 6:51 pm
Location: Redditch

Re: Rabble rouser Ken Ham and his biased Facebook fans

Postby Roger Stanyard » Thu Apr 19, 2012 4:27 pm

cathy wrote:
Frequently, atheists wrongly apply what’s called a “wooden literalism” to the Bible, yet they don’t adhere to the same standard with their everyday language.
As hypocrisy goes Ken has excelled himself here :evil: :evil: :evil:

As we have seen many times, they certainly have no qualms about lying—after all, they hold to no absolute standards in a meaningless and purposeless universe".
Oh sorry no he managed to surpass it here. The man has no conscience at all.

But whoever causes one of these little ones who believe in Me to stumble, it would be better for him if a millstone were hung around his neck, and he were thrown into the sea.”

Ken says genesis is literal - despite the language used suggesting a lot of confusion - but this bit isn't literal? Sorry I'm lost now - how is this comparable to raining cats and dogs but trees of life and knowledge aren't? So Ken is the ultimate authority on which bits of the bible are which is he?

He's lost me so how do the 'slack jawed' parents of the kids he brainwashes cope. Then again they don't need to think or attempt to understand cos Ken decides it for them. Which bits of the bible are literal, which are not, and if something is missing we can rely on Ken and his creationist pals to fill in what God forgot. Cos creationists know far more than any scholar, compromising christian or indeed even God does.

Why bother with the bible at all, why not just put our trust in Ken he'll lead us to salvation - if only by relieving us of sufficient money to get thru the eyes of needles with camels. After all if the poor are blessed Ken really is aiming to bless us all via his bank account.


Ham is a world class intollerant bigoted prick, self appointed priest and all round nasty piece of work. He seems to think that only he and his cronies should be teaching children about geology and biology. It's easy to pick such jerks out from the crowd. It's when they start claiming others who they disagree with have been "brainwashed" or are doing the "brainwashing". They are incapable of making their own minds up because they have been "brainwashed" by unknown persons, in an unknown manner and at an unknown time and place. All of them, and they have without exception never noticed and have no recollection of being "brainwashed" and have no knowledge of how to brainwash anyone.

Notice he believes that those who disagree with him are immoral liars.

Sooner or later we will see his downfall.
Those who believe absurdities will commit atrocities - Voltaire
User avatar
Roger Stanyard
Forum Admin
 
Posts: 6160
Joined: Sat Oct 07, 2006 4:59 pm

Re: Rabble rouser Ken Ham and his biased Facebook fans

Postby Peter Henderson » Thu Apr 19, 2012 4:43 pm

Like his mumerous followers on Premier, the man is totally bonkers.
Peter Henderson
 
Posts: 4338
Joined: Fri Dec 08, 2006 8:07 pm
Location: Jordanstown, Co. Antrim, Northern Ireland

Re: Rabble rouser Ken Ham and his biased Facebook fans

Postby cathy » Fri Apr 20, 2012 7:40 am

Like his mumerous followers on Premier, the man is totally bonkers.
Numerous followers bonkers clearly, Ken, just a dishonest businessman protecting his bank balance the only way he knows how. Lying! Conning! Bullying!
cathy
 
Posts: 3662
Joined: Wed Apr 21, 2010 6:51 pm
Location: Redditch

Re: Rabble rouser Ken Ham and his biased Facebook fans

Postby Dagsannr » Fri Apr 20, 2012 8:06 am

Peter Henderson wrote:Like his mumerous followers on Premier, the man is totally bonkers.


I've just got into Premier, it's a hoot. There's some amazingly uneducated and ignorant people on there. It's like shooting fish in a barrel. :-D
There are 2 types of people in the world:

Those who can extrapolate from incomplete data.
User avatar
Dagsannr
 
Posts: 830
Joined: Sat Jul 24, 2010 12:57 pm
Location: Carlisle

Re: Rabble rouser Ken Ham and his biased Facebook fans

Postby Roger Stanyard » Fri Apr 20, 2012 1:45 pm

Natman wrote:
Peter Henderson wrote:Like his mumerous followers on Premier, the man is totally bonkers.


I've just got into Premier, it's a hoot. There's some amazingly uneducated and ignorant people on there. It's like shooting fish in a barrel. :-D


It's a mixed bag Natman. There are some very astute anti-creationists there, including mainstream Christians. They've given the nutters a hard time.
Those who believe absurdities will commit atrocities - Voltaire
User avatar
Roger Stanyard
Forum Admin
 
Posts: 6160
Joined: Sat Oct 07, 2006 4:59 pm

Re: Rabble rouser Ken Ham and his biased Facebook fans

Postby Dagsannr » Fri Apr 20, 2012 7:45 pm

Roger Stanyard wrote:
Natman wrote:
Peter Henderson wrote:Like his mumerous followers on Premier, the man is totally bonkers.


I've just got into Premier, it's a hoot. There's some amazingly uneducated and ignorant people on there. It's like shooting fish in a barrel. :-D


It's a mixed bag Natman. There are some very astute anti-creationists there, including mainstream Christians. They've given the nutters a hard time.


Look me up, I'm the remarkably astute and very erudite Dagsannr, scourge of the christian apologist :wink:
There are 2 types of people in the world:

Those who can extrapolate from incomplete data.
User avatar
Dagsannr
 
Posts: 830
Joined: Sat Jul 24, 2010 12:57 pm
Location: Carlisle

Re: Rabble rouser Ken Ham and his biased Facebook fans

Postby Peter Henderson » Fri Apr 20, 2012 8:25 pm

Natman wrote:
Peter Henderson wrote:Like his mumerous followers on Premier, the man is totally bonkers.


I've just got into Premier, it's a hoot. There's some amazingly uneducated and ignorant people on there. It's like shooting fish in a barrel. :-D


Have a look at the "times they are a changin'" thread (under current affairs) about the nonsense in Tennessee, and the one on "the truth about creation science" (under Premier debate). None of them have any science qualifications whatsoever, i.e. ploughboy, Curlew, Lonodoner, Eddie Cairns, etc. yet, they argue as if they know everything about advanced biology and every other aspect of science.

No wonder there are Atheists.
Peter Henderson
 
Posts: 4338
Joined: Fri Dec 08, 2006 8:07 pm
Location: Jordanstown, Co. Antrim, Northern Ireland

Re: Rabble rouser Ken Ham and his biased Facebook fans

Postby Peter Henderson » Fri Apr 20, 2012 8:29 pm

Look me up, I'm the remarkably astute and very erudite Dagsannr, scourge of the christian apologist :wink:


Wondered who that was Natman.

Have fun, especially with poohboy.

I'm currently Hooh Flung Dung by the way, which some think is apparantly racist. Oh dear :roll: !
Peter Henderson
 
Posts: 4338
Joined: Fri Dec 08, 2006 8:07 pm
Location: Jordanstown, Co. Antrim, Northern Ireland

Re: Rabble rouser Ken Ham and his biased Facebook fans

Postby a_haworthroberts » Fri Apr 20, 2012 9:27 pm

A story about Premier on the BBC News website today: 'Christian radio station loses advert High Court bid'.
a_haworthroberts
 
Posts: 8047
Joined: Sun Jun 13, 2010 1:49 am
Location: United Kingdom

Re: Rabble rouser Ken Ham and his biased Facebook fans

Postby a_haworthroberts » Sun Apr 22, 2012 9:02 pm

OK, this is Ken Ham's facebook page, so I suppose he can say what he likes...

"Time is the secularists god! The Bible over and over links sin and death (eg Romans 5:12). However, the secularists link time and death. For example, the late Dr Carl Sagan stated "The secrets of evolution are time and death. Time for the slow accumulation of favorable mutations, and death to make room for new species."
Back in 1954 (when the earth was considered by secularists to be 2 billion years old--it has more than doubled in age since then!), George Wald who received the Nobel prize for Physiology or Medicine in 1964 stated:
"Time is in fact the hero of the plot. The time with which we have to deal is of the order of two billion years. What we regard as impossible on the basis of human experience is meaningless here. Given so much time, the “impossible” becomes possible, the possible probable, and the probable virtually certain. One has only to wait: time itself performs the miracles."
The secularists just can't allow a young earth/universe. They have to have time--without all that incomprehensible amount of time they can't postulate evolution--they just have to have billions of years. That is why they so intimidate Christians into believing their billions of years--and sadly most of our Christian academics have succumbed to their bullying. You see, if you believe in a young universe (thousands of years), the secularist will call you anti-science, anti-academic, anti-intellectual etc. And sadly, so many Christian leaders/academics have given into the world as they don't want to be scoffed at this way in such an educated society.
Really, TIME is the secularists god of this age. So sad that many Christians have compromised God's Word by also adopting the secularist's god of this age by being intimidated to believe man's fallible ideas of billions of years--instead of standing on the authority of God's Word. This is really no different than the Israelites who compromised God's Word by adopting the pagan Canaanite religion of their day. “...Indeed, let God be true but every man a liar”
(Romans 3:4)".

I shall resist any comment.
a_haworthroberts
 
Posts: 8047
Joined: Sun Jun 13, 2010 1:49 am
Location: United Kingdom

Re: Rabble rouser Ken Ham and his biased Facebook fans

Postby Dagsannr » Mon Apr 23, 2012 7:49 am

Ken Scam gives it all away in that Facebook posting - he just cannot comprehend time on a scale that universe functions on. His entire argument seems based upon his inability to accept that the Earth is 4.5 billion years old.

The whole creationist screed is one of incredulity - I can't believe x could happen, therefore god. Throw in some bible worshipping and a healthy dose of profiteering off the back of material sales and there you have it - creationist to the core.
There are 2 types of people in the world:

Those who can extrapolate from incomplete data.
User avatar
Dagsannr
 
Posts: 830
Joined: Sat Jul 24, 2010 12:57 pm
Location: Carlisle

Re: Rabble rouser Ken Ham and his biased Facebook fans

Postby Michael » Mon Apr 23, 2012 7:53 am

Natman wrote:Ken Scam gives it all away in that Facebook posting - he just cannot comprehend time on a scale that universe functions on. His entire argument seems based upon his inability to accept that the Earth is 4.5 billion years old.

The whole creationist screed is one of incredulity - I can't believe x could happen, therefore god. Throw in some bible worshipping and a healthy dose of profiteering off the back of material sales and there you have it - creationist to the core.


You are too charitable
Michael
 
Posts: 2786
Joined: Mon Oct 09, 2006 1:30 pm
Location: Lancaster

Next

Return to Conversations with Creationists

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest

cron