.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)
Here, Mr. Ham presents a modified version of Proverbs 13:22 by omitting part of the original text and introducing the term "legacy" alongside the Hebrew word yan·ḥîl (יַנְחִ֥יל), which means inheritance or possessions. He has shared this interpretation across several platforms, including the Answers in Genesis website (A Father's Legacy), on (Facebook) and in a prominent plaque displayed above his father’s Bible at the Creation Museum’s Ham Family Legacy exhibit (refer to the associated photo montage in the article).
It is interesting to note that there are several other passages—such as Deuteronomy 6:6-7, Proverbs 22:6, Psalm 78:1-4 and 2 Timothy 1:5—that could also support the idea of raising children in a way that leaves a legacy of faith. This naturally raises the question of why Proverbs 13:22 was chosen to emphasize this message over other texts that might seem to address the concept even more directly.
Initially, this instance appeared to be isolated, but further exploration has revealed additional examples in which Mr. Ham and Answers in Genesis present Scripture in a way that aligns with their interpretative approach.
"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 encourage people, you need to go back and make sure you're trying to impact your church and your leaders to get them to see this [AiG's interpretation of Genesis 1-11] and use guerilla warfare if you need. Invite people to your home and show videos and do studies there, because a lot of people tell us their pastors don't want this material in their churches because they're worried about division, right?
"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, Mr. Ham once again adjusts the presentation of Scripture by adding his own commentary—indicated by brackets—to direct the passage toward a particular interpretation. This approach results in a reading that some might feel deviates from the meaning emphasized by the verse’s full, contextual setting.
"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. 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, for there must be factions among you in order that those who are genuine among you may be recognized. When you come together, it is not the Lord's supper that you eat. For in eating, each one goes ahead with his own meal. One goes hungry, another gets drunk. 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) [emphasis added]
Paul does not indicate that divisions are necessary to demonstrate genuine approval by God. In the preceding verse, he even criticizes the Corinthians for such divisions (schismata [σχίσματα]). It appears that Mr. Ham has introduced the term "division(s)" in the English translation to emphasize a particular perspective.
The Greek word translated as "factions" in the ESV—haireseis (αἱρέσεις)—carries meanings that include a self-chosen opinion, a religious or philosophical sect (sometimes implying heresy), discord, or contention.
Rather than praising the Corinthians for having divisions in their church, Paul addresses this topic directly in 1 Corinthians 1:10-14, where he clearly instructs that the church should not be split into different camps over secondary matters (in this case, allegiance to various teachers), but should remain united in Christ. Additionally, Paul uses the common eschatological term dokimoi (δόκιμοι)– translated as "approved" – to describe those who are genuine in their faith, implying that 1 Corinthians 11:19 can be understood as an example of both Pauline sarcasm and eschatological commentary. Regardless, the context does not imply that divisions within the church are beneficial; rather, it seems to convey a note of caution regarding the Corinthians' behavior in this instance.
A key aspect of understanding these verses is focusing on the phrase "in the church." There is a natural distinction between the church—which represents the Kingdom of God—and the world. As Jesus remarks in Luke 12:51-53, such distinctions exist, but it is important to recognize that the church and the world are not the same. Likewise, just as sheep differ from goats (Matthew 25:31-46) and bad trees cannot bear good fruit (Matthew 7:15-20), the spiritual quality of believers cannot be measured by divisions over secondary issues.
Furthermore, while some within the congregation may not be fully united with Christ, it is ultimately God who will differentiate between genuine believers and those who are not, as seen in passages like Revelation 20:11-15 and 1 Corinthians 3:10-17). The true measure of faith rests on one’s response to the Gospel—being known by Christ and having one's name written in the Book of Life—rather than on personal preferences or interpretations regarding secondary matters.
Mr. Ham, and by extension Answers in Genesis, also interprets 1 Corinthians 11:19 in a way that suggests promoting division over what are seen as "the right things." In this context, he often refers specifically to his interpretation of Genesis 1–11 along with a few other selected prooftexts from Scripture.
While I agree with Mr. Ham and Answers in Genesis that the church should neither celebrate nor tolerate sin within the Church (as clearly stated in 1 Corinthians 5) and that unity in Christ excludes those who deny or undermine essential Christian doctrines, I take a different view on the creation versus evolution debate. I do not believe that generating divisions over this topic is truly reflective of a division made for "the right reasons." In fact, several passages (such as Proverbs 6:16-19, Titus 3:9 and Romans 16:17-18) seem to caution against causing separations over secondary or tertiary issues.
In a more recent instance, Mr. Ham cited 1 Corinthians 14:8 on social media (Facebook, February 26th, 2025, February 27th, 2025) to advocate for unity in his interpretation and presentation of Genesis 1–11, urging his followers to meditate on the meaning of the verse. However, this verse primarily addresses the use of the gift of tongues rather than issues related to Genesis 1–11. Additionally, verse 12 of the same chapter emphasizes the importance of building up the church, which appears to contrast with the idea of creating divisions over interpretative differences.
"Pursue love and desire spiritual gifts, and especially that you may prophesy. For the person who speaks in a tongue is not speaking to people but to God, since no one understands him; he speaks mysteries in the Spirit. On the other hand, the person who prophesies speaks to people for their strengthening, encouragement, and consolation. The person who speaks in a tongue builds himself up, but the one who prophesies builds up the church. I wish all of you spoke in tongues, but even more that you prophesied. The person who prophesies is greater than the person who speaks in tongues, unless he interprets so that the church may be built up.
"So now, brothers and sisters, if I come to you speaking in tongues, how will I benefit you unless I speak to you with a revelation or knowledge or prophecy or teaching? Even lifeless instruments that produce sounds—whether flute or harp—if they don’t make a distinction in the notes, how will what is played on the flute or harp be recognized? In fact, if the bugle makes an unclear sound, who will prepare for battle? In the same way, unless you use your tongue for intelligible speech, how will what is spoken be known? For you will be speaking into the air. There are doubtless many different kinds of languages in the world, none is without meaning. Therefore, if I do not know the meaning of the language, I will be a foreigner to the speaker, and the speaker will be a foreigner to me. So also you—since you are zealous for spiritual gifts, seek to excel in building up the church."
~ 1 Corinthians 14:1-12 (CSB) [emphasis added]
But perhaps the most striking statements from Answers in Genesis are found in the article How Do I Stay Humble When I Know I'm Right?. Here, they claim that the "real difference" between a young earth creationist and someone like Stephen Hawking or Neil deGrasse Tyson is the Holy Spirit and that young earth creationists know the earth is young because the Holy Spirit has revealed this truth to them. This language can be interpreted as suggesting that young earh creationists have access to a distinct form of spiritual insight that is otherwise withheld from the uninitiated.
There is also an implication that those who do not support the young earh view might not have the Holy Spirit—a point that, if one follows the logic of Romans 8:9, could be seen as indicating that non-YECs are not saved. Additionally, the article cites 1 Corinthians 2:14 to support the idea that those who disagree with the young earh interpretation might be less capable of understanding the world without the guidance of the Holy Spirit. Many readers may find this interpretation to be a stretch or a perspective that warrants further discussion.
First of all, it's important to note that Paul could have chosen any number of words when explaining that the natural man (those without the Holy Spirit) does not receive the things of God. Rather than using the more general term lambanó (λαμβάνω), which can mean "to take" in many senses, Paul deliberately opts for dechomai (δέχομαι). This term suggests the acceptance of a specifically requested offering, indicating not that the natural man is incapable of understanding Scripture or engaging with science, but that he consciously chooses not to accept the message of God's Word.
Similarly, when Paul uses the term rendered as "foolishness" (mória [μωρία]) in 1 Corinthians 3:19 ("For the wisdom of this world is foolishness with God…"), he is not implying that God cannot comprehend worldly wisdom. Rather, Paul is emphasizing that God rejects the wisdom of the world because it does not reflect the truth. This again is a matter of intentional acceptance rather than a question of intellectual ability, and it does not directly relate to our capacity to understand the natural world through science.
With this understanding of the Greek in mind, consider 1 Corinthians 2:14. When Paul explains that "the person without the Spirit does not receive (or is unable to know) what comes from God" because it is "evaluated (appraised) spiritually," he is highlighting that an unbeliever may well understand Scripture intellectually or grasp empirical truths about the natural world, but they may struggle to internalize and live out its spiritual teachings. In other words, the natural man needs the Holy Spirit to fully appreciate and embrace the value of God’s Word; the role of the Spirit is not to enlighten us about scientific mysteries but to help us accept and apply the truth of Scripture.
In summary, if a teacher must remove Scripture from its context or add interpretive commentary in order to direct the meaning toward a specific conclusion, it might be worthwhile to reconsider that approach in light of a balanced and contextually rooted interpretation of God’s Word.
That said, it is concerning that many have observed instances of selective interpretation in the teachings of Ken Ham and Answers in Genesis. Equally notable is the suggestion that their followers may tend to accept these interpretations without critically examining the scriptural basis behind them.
Such trends underscore the importance of ensuring that leaders remain open to scrutiny and accountability. When spiritual teaching becomes too closely tied to personal convictions without room for open discussion, there is a risk that the broader message of Scripture can be narrowed or even distorted. Accountability in leadership helps protect the integrity of the Gospel and ensures that believers are guided by a comprehensive understanding of God’s Word rather than by individual preferences.
While Ken Ham and Answers in Genesis present themselves as committed to upholding the authority of Scripture, the selective use of passages and the emphasis on certain interpretations may give the impression of a narrowly defined message. In light of their public stance and the high regard in which they are held by many, it is crucial for supporters and the wider community to thoughtfully engage with their teachings and hold them accountable. This approach not only fosters a more balanced study of the Bible but also safeguards against the risk of any teaching being elevated beyond constructive critique.
No comments:
Post a Comment