RSS

Ken Ham — God’s gift to atheism

29 May

Elohim said
We will make a groundling (Adam) in our image, after our likeness
Let them govern the fish of the sea the fowl of the skies, the cattle, all the earth every creeper that creeps on the earth
Elohim created the groundling in his image created it in the image of Elohim male and female created them
Elohim blessed them
Elohim said to them
Be fruitful, increase, fill the earth, subject it
Govern the fish of the sea, the fowl of the skies every beast that creeps on the earth
Elohim said,
Here I give you all plants seeding seed upon the face of all the earth and every tree with tree-fruit in it seeding seed
It shall be for you for eating
And for every beast of the earth for every fowl of the skies for all that creeps on the earth with living soul in it all green of plants for eating
It was so
Elohim saw all he had made
Here! it was very good
It was evening, it was morning
The sixth day (Gen. 1:26-31).

See Spiritual Classics… Radio National on my Big Archive. So ends one of the creation stories — there are several — in the Jewish Bible, and a great poem it is. But I do not believe that Elohim created the universe in six days around 6,000 years ago, and neither does anyone else in the church I go to. Neither do I believe the moon is made of green cheese, though the Bible is silent on that. Nor do I actually believe in the Rainbow Serpent, while respecting that belief as poetry and cultural expression. The Bible is silent on the Rainbow Serpent too, which is just as well because Aboriginal Australians predate Aussie expat Ken Ham’s version of Genesis by around 30 to 40 millennia.

And now we hear, even on Radio National this morning, that The Creation Museum opened yesterday. “Ham believes the Theory of Evolution indirectly caused or heavily contributed to the rise of humanism, racism, eugenics, euthanasia, pornography, homosexuality, family breakup, abortion, and more by increasing the influence of atheism.” Not to mention the alarming rise in food poisoning brought on by sushi manufacture in Sydney — but that of course is the fault of multiculturalism, isn’t it?

Please note that the Creation Museum is a smoke-free facility. Firearms and pets (other than service animals) are not permitted in the museum. Strollers and wheelchairs are available on a limited, first-come, first-serve basis. A minimal fee is required. Due to limited space in the museum only single seat and in-line double strollers (not the side-by-side type) are allowed.

So leave your guns and moggies at home, people…

See Ron run. See Ron having his say. See Ron on spending 27 million dollars. See Ron on gullible scientists. See Ron explain that Noah’s Ark was really the Tardis. See Ron wonder if Noah was a pygmy. You have a good day too, Ron.

Later

You may like to explore the world of weird museums — USA only — and here too, but more international. Ken isn’t there — yet. His is much weirder than many on those lists.

Is that a good reason to go to Iceland? 😉 I have to say Dr. Bindeshwar Pathak’s Toilet Museum is really quite interesting and, indeed, laudable.

Site Meter

Advertisements
 

Tags: ,

8 responses to “Ken Ham — God’s gift to atheism

  1. Michael Patrick Leahy

    May 29, 2007 at 12:06 pm

    You’ll find that the feature article in this month’s edition of Christian Faith and Reason agrees with your assessment that Ken Ham is God’s Gift to Atheism:
    http://www.christianfaithandreason.com

     
  2. ninglun

    May 29, 2007 at 12:36 pm

    Thanks for the link, Michael, and good luck with your new magazine.
    Oh, and for a moment there you seemed to think I was Ron! I’ve fixed that bit of your comment. No, Ron’s the guy on YouTube, not me, and I have let him have his say, even if he ties himself in more knots than a boy scout could ever know…

     
  3. AV

    May 29, 2007 at 12:40 pm

    And now we hear, even on Radio National this morning, that The Creation Museum opened yesterday.

    Blogged this in March.

    A physicist’s view of the museum, via Dispatches from the Culture Wars.

     
  4. ninglun

    May 29, 2007 at 12:44 pm

    Thanks, Arthur. Readers might also look back to my April 23 post.

     
  5. Legal Eagle

    May 29, 2007 at 6:21 pm

    I’m sure I’ve read that there’s two different versions of the creation story which are conflated in Genesis. So in Genesis 1:1 – 2:4, God creates the world in 7 days. In that account (see Genesis 1:11 – 1:13) God produces plants on the third day. But then in the Garden of Eden story, God creates plants again (Genesis 2:4 – 2:6) and humankind (Adam and Eve) are created to help tend the plants and the animals.

    And if you go to the Talmud, there’s even more confusion – including an account of man and woman originally being one person – and once they “fell” they became separate genders…

    So how can you say what happened when the account you are working from is not clear?

     
  6. ninglun

    May 29, 2007 at 7:36 pm

    Yes there are quite clearly two creation stories in Genesis, as you say. Most scholars accept the dual author solution, though there are other views, most of them dodgy in my view, although one, the literary frame hypothesis, makes considerable sense to me. There are traces of other quite different creation stories in the Book of Job and Psalm 74 echoes the Babylonian Epic of Creation. Don’t expect Ken Ham to tell you any of this.

    I agree with “History” and “Writing” by Charles David Isbell, Director of Jewish Studies at Louisiana State University:

    If the Bible is read only as a search for “facts,” then most of its message will be lost, for the authors of the Bible were not interested in “just the facts.” They looked at the ways in which “facts” which they assumed true influenced people to live. That is why the Bible is so difficult to read and understand. We want to know facts of a kind that the Bible most often does not give. But it does not follow that because their interest in “history” was different from ours we may pronounce them at fault, even less that we may accuse them of twisting the truth to create out of whole cloth a piece of writing they themselves knew to be false and did not believe. We may be so arrogant as to assume that we know better than they did what they should have put in their “Bible.” But I doubt that they were so arrogant as to presume readers would be so gullible that both their present and all later generations [including us] could be fooled by ideas they themselves knew fully well to be mere fiction.

    How the Bible Became a Book by William M. Schniedewind is also interesting.

     
  7. Legal Eagle

    May 29, 2007 at 8:28 pm

    I saw an interesting comparison of many different creation myths – perhaps it was Joseph Campbell’s Hero with a Thousand Faces?

    I’ll have to check out Psalm 74 again.

    I was looking at the Psalms the other day for some good quotes on the concept of “judgment”. I’ve been to the Jewish opening of the legal year ceremony, and they had an awesome quote from a Psalm, but no idea which one it was.

    Ooh, those look like interesting books. Must restrain self from buying more books. The spare room is already overflowing.

     
  8. Michael Patrick Leahy

    May 30, 2007 at 2:12 am

    Ninglun,

    A troubling aspect of this particular group of Young Earth Creationists is their self righteous intellectual dishonesty. To see how that manifested itself in their business ethics, check out the attached article:

    “Fellow Christians Aggrieved by Business Practices of Ken Ham and Answers in Genesis”

    http://www.christianfaithandreason.com/june_creationmag.html

     
 
%d bloggers like this: