.jpg)
"Obviously what I’m saying to you is, what the church is doing is taking outside ideas [i.e., man’s word], adding to Scriptures.... It’s undermining biblical authority." ~Ken Ham "Stop Trusting Man's Word: Genesis and Compromise" [DVD] (1:12:59)
Also Ken Ham (emphasis mine):
"I’ve told people that really the ministry of Answers in Genesis, the Ark Encounter, and Creation Museum—that impacts tens of millions of people directly and tens of millions more indirectly each year—is a legacy of parents who taught their children to stand boldly and uncompromisingly on the authority of the Word of God.
What legacy will you leave for your children?
'A good man leaves an inheritance [legacy] to his children’s children' (Proverbs 13:22 ESV)."
~Ken Ham
October 26, 2023
God's Word:
"A good man leaves an inheritance to his children's children, but the sinner's wealth is laid up for the righteous." ~Proverbs 13:22 (ESV)
Not only does Mr. Ham take Proverbs 13:22 out of context, cut off the second half of the passage and insert "legacy" (along with all of the interpretive connotations he associates with the word) into the text alongside the Hebrew word yan·ḥîl (יַנְחִ֥יל) (i.e., inheritance/possessions) he then proceeded to publish this adulterated passage on Answers in Genesis (https://answersingenesis.org/.../06/18/a-fathers-legacy/), his social media feeds (https://www.facebook.com/share/p/zD4GzLdhAj3gb1di/) and also features it prominently in a large plaque above his father's bible in the Ham Family Legacy exhibit at the Creation Museum (see photo montage in the article: "A Father's Legacy").
At first, I thought this was a one-off occurrence. But then I did some more digging and found more examples where Ken and AiG are blatantly twisting Scripture to make God’s Word align with their teachings.
"As soon as you allow the world’s interpretations, beliefs, fads, and philosophies to be your standard, true biblical unity is impossible. And those who still start with and believe God’s Word must leave for the health of their congregations.
'For there must be factions [divisions] among you in order that those who are genuine among you may be recognized.' (1 Corinthians 11:19)"
~Ken Ham
"Can Division in the Church Be a Good Thing?"
Feb. 12, 2024
"I've had conservative pastors tell me I don't want to teach Genesis 1 to11 like you do and that's because it'll create division and I just don't want to create division, you know? Does the Bible say division is bad? It doesn't, actually.
"I know it talks about unity, but also Paul talks about division and that there has to be division to show who's approved of God, he says in Corinthians [1 Corinthians 11:19]. And so, as I say to people, when you shine light in darkness, if you're not creating division for the right reasons, the right sort of division, you need to ask yourself, 'What are you doing?' If pastors are not creating the right sort of division for the right reasons, then what are you doing? Right? Because light is going to create division and it should.”
~Ken Ham
My Faith Votes Interview
Aug. 16, 2022
Here again Ken removes Scripture from its proper context and adds his own interpretive commentary to the text (indicated by brackets) in order to make the passage say what he wants it to say–which in this case is the exact opposite of what this verse actually says in context.
"17 But in the following instructions I do not commend you, because when you come together it is not for the better but for the worse. 18 For, in the first place, when you come together as a church, I hear that there are divisions among you. And I believe it in part,19 for there must be factions among you in order that those who are genuine among you may be recognized. 20 When you come together, it is not the Lord's supper that you eat. 21 For in eating, each one goes ahead with his own meal. One goes hungry, another gets drunk. 22 What! Do you not have houses to eat and drink in? Or do you despise the church of God and humiliate those who have nothing? What shall I say to you? Shall I commend you in this? No, I will not."
~1 Corinthians 11:17-22 (ESV)
Paul does not say it is necessary for there to be divisions to show who is genuine/approved of God. In fact, he criticizes the Corinthians for having divisions (schismata [σχίσματα]) in the preceding verse. Ken has to insert "division(s)" into the English translation of the text in order to make it say what he wants it to say.
The Greek word translated to mean "factions" in the ESV is "haireseis" (αἱρέσεις). Properly: "a self-chosen opinion, a religious or philosophical sect (i.e., heresy), discord or contention."
Paul is not lauding the Corinthians for having divisions in their church. In fact, in 1 Corinthians 1:10-14, he addresses this very issue, stating quite plainly that we should not be divided (schismata [σχίσματα]) into different camps over secondary matters (in the specific case of 1 Corinthians 10-14, it was different teachers) but that we should all be united in Christ.
1 Corinthians 11:19 is a dual case of Pauline irony and eschatological commentary (as evidenced by Paul’s usage of (dokimoi [δόκιμοι]) [approved] to denote those who are genuine in their faith). Nothing in the surrounding verses indicates that it is good to have divisions in the church. In fact, Paul literally has nothing good to say about the Corinthians’ behavior in this passage!
The key to understanding this passage is the term "in the church." There will naturally be division between the church (i.e., The Kingdom of God/ Body/ Bride of Christ) and the world. Jesus himself stated as much in Luke 12:51-53. But the world is not the church. Sheep are not goats (Matthew 25:31-46). Bad trees cannot bear good fruit (Matthew 7:15-20).
While there will be those within the congregation of believers who are not truly united to Christ, we must remember that it is God, not us, who will ultimately separate the genuine believers from the counterfeit and test the quality of the believers’ works (Revelation 20:11-15, 1 Corinthians 3:10-17). Furthermore, the distinction between those whose faith is genuine and those who are counterfeit is not based on a person’s stance on some secondary issue, but rather their response to the Gospel–whether or not they are known by Christ and have their names written in the Book of Life. We cannot rightly use our personal preferences, interpretations or convictions regarding secondary matters which are not clearly addressed in Scripture as a litmus test to determine who among our brothers and sisters in Christ are truly "approved of God." Yet Ken Ham, and by extension Answers in Genesis, wants to spin 1 Corinthians 11:19 to imply that we should have–and indeed actively seek to cause–division over "the right things.” By which he most often means his interpretation of Genesis 1-11 and a few other select prooftexts scattered throughout Scripture.
Yes, I agree with Ken and Answers in Genesis that we should not celebrate or tolerate sin within the church (something which is plainly stated in 1 Corinthians 5) and that we cannot be united in Christ with individuals who deny or subvert essential Christian doctrines. But I strongly disagree with AiG's position that the creation vs. evolution debate is a "division [made] for the right reasons." Contrary to Mr. Ham, stirring up divisions over secondary and tertiary issues is not a mark of God's approval–it actually contradicts God's Word on several counts (Proverbs 6:16-19, Titus 3:9, Romans 16:17-18, etc.).
All that to say, if a teacher has to remove Scripture from its proper context or add their own interpretation or ideas to the text in order to make it say what they want it to say, they are not a teacher of God's Word. That Ken Ham and AiG's hypocrisy here is so public and so well attested is alarming, to say the least. But what is more worrisome is the fact that Ken has seemingly conditioned "tens of millions" of his followers to accept whatever he says about Scripture without question.
This is very alarming and very dangerous. We should never allow our leaders to rise so high in our eyes that they are above reproach or correction. There must always be accountability for those who claim to teach God's Word. This is how we safeguard both the Gospel and the church (i.e., the individual people) from those who would abuse them for personal gain.
As troubling as this may be to hear, Ken Ham and Answers in Genesis, by and large, are not teaching God’s Word. They are teaching Ken Ham’s personal interpretation (i.e., "man-made ideas") as if it is God’s Word, and are selectively citing passages that can be spun to fit his narrative. This is not good. And people who support Ken and AiG should hold him and his organization–which lauds itself as "teaching people to stand boldly and uncompromisingly on the authority of God’s infallible Word from the very first verse"–accountable for their public mistreatment of God’s Word.
