Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Museum group sued by fellow creationists
Lexington Herald-Leader ^ | June 17, 2007 | Andy Mead

Posted on 06/17/2007 12:56:37 PM PDT by DaveLoneRanger

There is trouble in paradise, with a fight of biblical proportions raging between a Kentucky-based creationist group and the Australian group from which it sprang.

Three days after the Memorial Day opening of Answers in Genesis' $27 million Creation Museum in Northern Kentucky, a group called Creation Ministries International filed suit in the Supreme Court of Queensland.

Among other things, the suit claims the Kentucky group stole subscribers for its Answers magazine by claiming that the Australians' Creation magazine was "no longer available."

The suit is the most public move in what has been a growing rift between groups that are spreading the same Garden of Eden creation message on opposite sides of the globe.

Both groups believe in a literal interpretation of the Bible, that the earth and everything else was created in six days around 6,000 years ago.

But in the last several years, they have increasingly feuded about finances and power.

Now each is accusing the other of acting in an "unbiblical" fashion -- a serious charge for people who believe that the Bible is God's infallible word.

"All I'll tell you is those allegations are totally preposterous and untrue," Ken Ham, the president of Answers in Genesis, said in a brief interview last week. "The Bible tells you not to have a lawsuit against your brother, so you can see who's obeying the Bible and who's not."

But a retired Australian judge who chaired a committee that investigated the dispute issued a 40-page report in April that laid all the blame on Ham and his organization.

Clarrie Briese, a former chief magistrate of New South Wales, wrote that the evidence was "overwhelmingly supportive" of CMI. He added that AiG and Ham "will doggedly continue to deny any wrongdoing on their part."

Ham, an Australian who came to the United States in 1987, has told an Australian newspaper that he considers the committee to be "a kangaroo court."

Although money is at the root of the lawsuit, personalities and power apparently play a large role in the rift.

Jim Lippard, an Arizona atheist and blogger who has been following various creation groups since the early 1990s, characterizes Ham as "a very charismatic and forceful person."

"My impression is that AiG is Ham's organization," Lippard said in an interview. "He wants to run it his way, and if anyone else wants to interfere with that ... he will do whatever he can to get that person out of the way."

Ham, 55, was born in Queensland and taught high school science there. He quit in the 1980s to establish a creationist organization that later became known as the Creation Science Foundation.

Twenty years ago, the foundation sent Ham to California, where he joined the Institute for Creation Research.

In 1994, Ham arrived in Northern Kentucky -- chosen for its proximity to the Cincinnati/Northern Kentucky International Airport and a sizable portion of the nation's population -- and started Answers in Genesis.

The name was adopted by the Australian organization, which later changed its name again to Creation Ministries International.

It is CMI that is suing AiG.

In Kentucky, Ham began planning for his Creation Museum. The first order of business: building a financial base.

He spoke at churches. He conducted seminars. He launched a popular Web site. He started a radio program that eventually would be carried on 860 stations across the country.

All this allowed him to create a mailing list of people who were willing to give money. When the museum opened, it was paid for. Mark Looy, another AiG leader, said the average contribution to the $27 million effort was a little more than $100.

The high-tech museum features dozens of professionally done videos and displays that depict animatronic people and dinosaurs living side-by-side.

It opened to large crowds of believers, a smaller group of scientists and atheists who were protesting, and worldwide publicity.

But trouble with CMI had already been brewing for some time.

Dr. Carl Wieland, 57, a physician who began Australia's first creationist group in 1977, runs the Australian group. He and Ham worked together in Australia and have co-authored books on creationism.

Their relationship, at least on the surface, continued to be good until 2004, the Briese report said.

Then Wieland and others sent a letter to the U.S. group, saying AiG seemed top-heavy in administrators, and was vulnerable because of a growing focus on Ham instead of the ministry's message.

The letter suggested reforms that would have reduced Ham's power.

The Briese report includes excerpts from a recording of Wieland's side of a telephone conversation with Ham around that time, in which Wieland warns his old friend that "the whole thing is heading in the direction of a Ken Ham ministries rather than Answers in Genesis."

The report also details a complex and confusing series of events in which the board of CMI came to Kentucky, signed an agreement that gave extraordinary powers to the U.S. group, then returned to Australia and fired Wieland.

Ham's organization got the right to change and edit any materials written by the Australian group, to switch authors' names, and to set prices on creationist literature it purchases from CMI.

"That really gave away the whole ball game," said Lippard, the blogger.

But the Briese report said it soon became clear to board members that they had not realized what they were signing. They resigned, turning the Australian group back over to Wieland.

Australia's only national daily newspaper, The Australian, has picked up on a sordid part of the Briese report: It says that Ham has questioned the timing of Wieland's second marriage -- to a woman who once was Ham's secretary -- only two weeks after divorcing his first wife. And it says that Ham is collaborating with an Australian who was excommunicated from his Baptist church because he once accused Wieland's wife of witchcraft and necrophilia.

"I think to some extent CMI is bringing that up just for the unseemly aspect of it," Lippard said.

Last week, Ham criticized Briese, noting that Briese is a member of CMI, and saying his conclusions were drawn up before his committee met.

In an interview, Wieland defended Briese, who is best known in Australia for exposing a high-level legal scandal in the mid-1980s.

"He is as well known as John Sirica of Watergate fame in terms of someone who was sort of thrust into their role, someone who made a public stand against the highest officials in the land," Wieland said.

CMI has been open about its disagreements with Ham's group, posting the Briese report and related documents on its Web site.

AiG has sent e-mails to supporters defending itself, but its Web site apparently ignores the Briese report and the whole CMI controversy.

The AiG Web site did, however, have two articles about an earlier Briese inquiry into charges that an atheist author had leveled against creationists. When a reporter asked Ham last week how he could criticize Briese for his recent report while touting his work on the earlier one, Ham said he thought articles about the earlier report had been removed from the site. The next day, they were gone.

Early Friday, AiG issued a statement saying the CMI accusations are "baseless and without merit."

"CMI's interest appears to be more about scoring points by publicizing the conflict, rather than taking a biblical approach to conflict resolution," the statement said.

Wieland said he still hoped for Christian arbitration with Ham. But, he said, CMI was left with no choice but to sue.

"At the end of the day ... there has to be right-doing," he said. "Things can't just be swept under the carpet."


TOPICS: Australia/New Zealand; Crime/Corruption; Front Page News; Philosophy
KEYWORDS: answersingenesis; creatards; creationist; creationmuseum; crevo; dlrcravescock; noahsark
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-100101-150151-163 next last
• For documents about this issue on the Creation Ministries International Web site, go to www.creationontheweb.com.

• For atheist Jim Lippard's blog, go to http://lippard.blogspot.com.

• For the Answers in Genesis site, go to www.answersingenesis.org.

1 posted on 06/17/2007 12:56:41 PM PDT by DaveLoneRanger
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: gobucks; mikeus_maximus; JudyB1938; isaiah55version11_0; Elsie; LiteKeeper; AndrewC; Havoc; ...


You have been pinged because of your interest regarding news, debate and editorials pertaining to the Creation vs. Evolution debate - from the young-earth creationist perspective.
To to get on or off this list (currently the premier list for creation/evolution news!), freep-mail me:
Add me / Remove me



This has been brewing for a while, and I read about the suit itself about a week ago. I'll sit back and let the two sides fix this, but alas, I must say I'm inclined to side with CMI. When AiG split from them, there was no announcement of any sort. They did indeed say that Creation Magazine was "no longer available" and they then advertised their new Answers magazine.

Ken Ham's approach has been top-heavy all the way. (He even has a reserved parking space at work, and a reserved chair for meetings.)

Further, Ken Ham states "The Bible tells you not to have a lawsuit against your brother, so you can see who's obeying the Bible and who's not." My point was that if you read what Paul wrote about lawsuits among believers (1 Corinthians 6), it was to maintain the integrity and reputation of Christian believers by avoiding public disputes and settling quarrels privately. This dispute has already gone public, and AiG has made it pretty clear they're not interested in resolving the matter privately.

But I was also discussing the matter with my pastor this morning. (Originally, he had intended to show my promotional Creation Museum video for the church, but I approached him this morning with this article, and we both agreed it might be best to hold off.) He pointed out that these directions were for Christian brothers -- not one corporation against another. The lawsuit is no less shameful for it, but one Christian ministry should not be permitted to get away with telling untruths about issues of such monetary significance as magazine subscription, and then use the warnings against lawsuits as a cover to avoid being accountable.

Again, like with Kent Hovind, innocent until proven guilty. But also like with Kent Hovind, my cynical side agrees with the prosecution.
2 posted on 06/17/2007 1:09:28 PM PDT by DaveLoneRanger (As He died to make men holy, let us die to make men free.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: DaveLoneRanger; wagglebee

That raises a question that perhaps many have. Are there any museums that promote and illustrate a Creationist version of science and archeology?


3 posted on 06/17/2007 1:09:28 PM PDT by Clintonfatigued (If the GOP were to stop worshiping Free Trade as if it were a religion, they'd win every election)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Clintonfatigued

Um...the Creationist Museum mentioned in the article?


4 posted on 06/17/2007 1:12:35 PM PDT by DaveLoneRanger (As He died to make men holy, let us die to make men free.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: DaveLoneRanger

Any others?


5 posted on 06/17/2007 1:16:44 PM PDT by Clintonfatigued (If the GOP were to stop worshiping Free Trade as if it were a religion, they'd win every election)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: Clintonfatigued
There’s one in Canada that opened recently. There’s a list of them here:

* 7 Wonders of Mount St. Helens Creation Museum — Silverlake, Washington
* A Key Encounter Nature Theatre and Planetarium — Key West, Florida
* Akron Fossils and Science Center Akron, Ohio
* Ark Museum & Dinosaur Park — Nashville, Tennessee
* Biblical Archeology and Anthropology Museum — Ridgecrest, Calfornia
* Big Valley Creation Science Museum — Alberta, Canada
* Creation Adventures Museum — Arcadia, Florida. Customized activities for small groups such as fossil digs and canoe trips.
* Creation Evidence Museum — Paluxy River, Glen Rose, Texas. It has a new building under construction.
* Creation Museum and Family Discovery Center — Cincinnati, Ohio. Currently under construction by the Answers in Genesis ministry
* Creation Studies Center — South Florida
* Creation Truth Foundation — Field Museum, Oklahoma
* Creation Truth Ministries Traveling Creation Museum — Alberta, Canada
* Genesis Expo on Portsmouth Hard of the UK by the Creation Science Movement
* Glendive Dinosaur and Fossil Museum
* Grand River Museum — Lemmon, South Dakota. September 2002 the Grand River Museum purchased a new building.
* IBSS Museum Project the Institute for Biblical and Scientific Studies
* Lost World Museum — Phoenix, New York
* Mt Blanco Fossil Museum — Lubbock, Texas
* Museum of Creation and Earth History — Santee, California by the Institute for Creation Research.
* Museum of Earth History — Eureka Springs, Arkansas
* Noah’s Ark Museum — Uzengeli Village, Turkey
* Wyatt Museum Wyatt Archeological Research Inc — Tennessee

The list is taken from CreationWiki - I don't know if Kent Hovind's "museum" is on there or not, and obviously some of their information is out of date. Were I not banned, I'd change it, but ah well.

6 posted on 06/17/2007 1:27:28 PM PDT by DaveLoneRanger (As He died to make men holy, let us die to make men free.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: DaveLoneRanger
"The lawsuit is no less shameful for it, but one Christian ministry should not be permitted to get away with telling untruths about issues of such monetary significance as magazine subscription, and then use the warnings against lawsuits as a cover to avoid being accountable."

Well Dave, as I'm sure you are aware I have no dog in this particular race but from what little I know, it sounds like CMI might be "guilty" of a lawsuit, but Ken is guilty of theft, maybe not leagaly but ethically. So like you I'm inclined to root for CMI.
7 posted on 06/17/2007 1:28:35 PM PDT by ndt
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: DaveLoneRanger
the latest outbreak, but it got personal before the AiG/CSF split

More at http://lippard.blogspot.com/2006/11/john-mackay-and-answers-in-genesis.html

8 posted on 06/17/2007 1:33:32 PM PDT by Oztrich Boy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: DaveLoneRanger
This reminds me of the Palestinians in Gaza.
9 posted on 06/17/2007 1:39:13 PM PDT by Jeff Gordon ("An appeaser is one who feeds a crocodile hoping it will eat him last." Churchill)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: DaveLoneRanger

Sound to me like this will be a case of survival of the fittest creationists.


10 posted on 06/17/2007 2:03:44 PM PDT by M. Dodge Thomas (Research by an eyewear firm, which surveyed 100 members of a speed dating club)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: DaveLoneRanger

If there was ever an illustration of a ‘tempest in a teacup,’ this is it! And a teacup that is just about ready to be rinsed out for the last time. :)


11 posted on 06/17/2007 2:06:35 PM PDT by Continental Soldier
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: DaveLoneRanger

Tragic.


12 posted on 06/17/2007 2:57:28 PM PDT by The Ghost of FReepers Past (Woe unto them that call evil good, and good evil; that put darkness for light..... Isaiah 5:20)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: DaveLoneRanger

I didn’t realize there were so many people in the world that believe this 6,000 year old earth nonsense.

“God, please save the fools and idiots of this earth who look on your creation and can see nothing more than a flat earth. Help them wake up to the fact that the Genesis account of the creation of earth was merely an allegorical story meant for a primitive man who could not understand the mechanisms by which you brought life into being. Please God shut these people up before they do more damage to the faith by driving more people into the arms of atheists who may not believe in you, but at least have eyes open to see the wonder of the science you created. Please open their eyes to the fact that the search for truth and knowledge are not against the will of God. Amen”


13 posted on 06/17/2007 3:22:18 PM PDT by sentis1
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: M. Dodge Thomas

“Sound to me like this will be a case of survival of the fittest creationists.”

LOL. Short......but oh so funny. Thanks.


14 posted on 06/17/2007 3:28:58 PM PDT by Bogtrotter52 (Reading DU daily so you won't hafta)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: DaveLoneRanger

I’ve met Ken Ham, only briefly; it is a shame, he did seem genuine.

I am not taking sides!


15 posted on 06/17/2007 3:47:25 PM PDT by RaceBannon (Innocent until proven guilty: The Pendleton 8...down to 3..GWB, we hardly knew ye...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: sentis1

I see you’re relatively new to Free Republic. Welcome.

If this story depresses you, I’m afraid the latest polls will only depress you further; a majority of Americans believe in creation and/or doubt evolution, and 90% claim a belief in God.

I find your philosophies on religion (your ‘prayer’ here, and other things you’ve written) to be rather...unorthodox.


16 posted on 06/17/2007 3:49:16 PM PDT by DaveLoneRanger (As He died to make men holy, let us die to make men free.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: sentis1

At least we have something more reliable to believe than evolutionary thought which cant make up it’s mind on just how old we are...


17 posted on 06/17/2007 3:49:29 PM PDT by RaceBannon (Innocent until proven guilty: The Pendleton 8...down to 3..GWB, we hardly knew ye...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: sentis1

Not only do we believe that God could have created the world in 6 days, He can destroy it in a matter of minutes. Good thing He’s giving us time to search for the truth. Ask Him, He’ll show you more than you can imagine.


18 posted on 06/17/2007 4:15:59 PM PDT by huldah1776 (Worthy is the Lamb.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: DaveLoneRanger

Oh, Gosh! Creative differences?


19 posted on 06/17/2007 4:23:28 PM PDT by NicknamedBob (My Bumper Sticker ==> "Hang on! My other cell phone is ringing.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: DaveLoneRanger
the suit claims the Kentucky group stole subscribers for its Answers magazine by claiming that the Australians' Creation magazine was "no longer available."

Not a good sign.

20 posted on 06/17/2007 5:27:13 PM PDT by editor-surveyor (Turning the general election into a second Democrat primary is not a winning strategy.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: sentis1; Aetius; Alamo-Girl; AndrewC; Asphalt; Aussie Dasher; AnalogReigns; banalblues; Baraonda; ..
" Please open their eyes to the fact that the search for truth and knowledge are not against the will of God."

But he has told us that the only place to do our search for truth is in the only source of truth on Earth: His Word.

The six thousand year old Earth is certainly not nonsense, since it is based on detailed facts given in the word, and it fits all valid observations on the earth.

21 posted on 06/17/2007 5:35:33 PM PDT by editor-surveyor (Turning the general election into a second Democrat primary is not a winning strategy.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: DaveLoneRanger

“If this story depresses you, I’m afraid the latest polls will only depress you further; a majority of Americans believe in creation and/or doubt evolution, and 90% claim a belief in God.”

But I think it’s pretty darn small percentage who believe the 6,000 year old nonsense.


22 posted on 06/17/2007 5:54:32 PM PDT by gracesdad
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: editor-surveyor
The six thousand year old Earth is certainly not nonsense, since it is based on detailed facts given in the word, and it fits all valid observations on the earth.

Sorry, that happens not to be the case.

The 6,000 year old Earth idea is based entirely on religious belief. Science gave up on that idea about 1830 and since then the evidence has continued to pile up -- against the YEC position.

The evidence supporting the 6,000 year old Earth idea has remained the same -- religious belief. Granted that religious belief can overpower reason in some individuals, but that does not make their beliefs real.

23 posted on 06/17/2007 6:02:29 PM PDT by Coyoteman (Religious belief does not constitute scientific evidence, nor does it convey scientific knowledge.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: Coyoteman

Your vacuous denial is tattooed on your forehead; no need to tell us.


24 posted on 06/17/2007 6:45:09 PM PDT by editor-surveyor (Turning the general election into a second Democrat primary is not a winning strategy.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: gracesdad
But I think it’s pretty darn small percentage who believe the 6,000 year old nonsense.
And what do you base your thinking on?
25 posted on 06/17/2007 6:49:47 PM PDT by DaveLoneRanger (As He died to make men holy, let us die to make men free.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: editor-surveyor
The six thousand year old Earth is certainly not nonsense, since it is based on detailed facts given in the word, and it fits all valid observations on the earth.

Sarcasm? You can't be serious.

26 posted on 06/17/2007 6:54:25 PM PDT by Michael A. Velli (Romney / Hunter '08!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: Coyoteman

“Granted that religious belief can overpower reason in some individuals, but that does not make their beliefs real.”

Funny thing is, the universe doesn’t care what any of us think or feel. Similarly, our belief isn’t required by God to make his word true. His word is true regardless of what we think or feel.

Science has become a religion for many people who then seek to persecute those who believe in a traditional religion. If we believe in God then we must be ignorant, foolish, or just plain dumb. At least that seems to be the message in todays universities and elitist circles.


27 posted on 06/17/2007 6:57:47 PM PDT by driftdiver
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: editor-surveyor
The six thousand year old Earth is certainly not nonsense, since it is based on detailed facts given in the word, and it fits all valid observations on the earth.

Your vacuous denial is tattooed on your forehead; no need to tell us.

You say it "fits all valid observations on the earth." Nice try. I can see it now; any scientific evidence presented to you will simply be declared "not valid" and waved away: creation "science" 101.


One man's "magic" is another man's engineering. "Supernatural" is a null word.

Robert A. Heinlein, Time Enough for Love, 1973


28 posted on 06/17/2007 7:01:09 PM PDT by Coyoteman (Religious belief does not constitute scientific evidence, nor does it convey scientific knowledge.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

To: DaveLoneRanger

Yes chalk one up for our education system, not understanding basic science is a problem with the liberalisation of education. Leaves people believing all sorts of nonsense, like the Earth is 6,000 years old, or that a global flood occurred somewhere in that time frame.
It also leaves people with very little mathematical knowledge so they believe literally in allegorical stories that say a man build a boat that held 2-7 of every animal on Earth. Which of course is impossible if we take the size of the ship literally from the bible. Oh well people will believe what they will even in the face of overwhelming evidence. Anyone that takes the Old testament as anything more than a quaint story is a little odd in my book anyway. The teachings of Jesus are all that matter we should throw out the old testament some of the attitudes and ideas in there keep people off the real path of following Christ and his teachings and get caught up in nonsense that was merely man doing the best he could to understand God and failing miserably.


29 posted on 06/17/2007 7:10:02 PM PDT by sentis1
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: editor-surveyor

That’s what they told everyone in the newsletter I received; that Creation Magazine was no longer available. They definitely did mislead their readers and supporters in this manner.


30 posted on 06/17/2007 7:10:35 PM PDT by DaveLoneRanger (As He died to make men holy, let us die to make men free.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: driftdiver
Science has become a religion for many people who then seek to persecute those who believe in a traditional religion. If we believe in God then we must be ignorant, foolish, or just plain dumb. At least that seems to be the message in todays universities and elitist circles.

I would put it differently. Science operates independent of, and without the constraints of, religion. It operates on the assumption that nature can be observed and figgered out.

As for persecution--here, in the US? That's a laugh, and that idea denigrates those who have truly been persecuted around the world and through the centuries. (Lions come to mind.)

Believing in god does not make one "ignorant, foolish, or just plain dumb." Denying things that are obvious, well-documented, and right in front of your face may make you one of those. This has been known for centuries: the words of St. Augustine come to mind:

Usually, even a non-Christian knows something about the heavens, and the other elements of the world, about the motion and orbit of the stars and even their size and relative positions, about the predictable eclipses of the sun and the moon, the cycles of the years and the seasons, about the kinds of animals, shrubs, stones, and so forth, and this knowledge he holds to be certain from reason and experience. Now it is a disgraceful and dangerous thing for an infidel to hear a Christian, presumably giving the meaning of Holy Scripture, talking nonsense on these topics; and we should take all means to prevent such an embarrassing situation, in which people show up vast ignorance in a Christian and laugh it to scorn. The shame is not so much that an ignorant individual is derided, but that people outside the household of faith think our sacred writers held such opinions and, to the great loss of those for whose salvation we toil, the writers of our Scripture are criticized and rejected as unlearned men. If they find a Christian mistaken in a field which they themselves know well and they hear him maintaining his foolish opinions about our books, how are they going to believe those books in matters concerning the resurrection of the dead, the hope of eternal life, and the kingdom of heaven, when they think their pages are full of falsehoods on facts which they themselves have learnt from experience and the light of reason? Reckless and incompetent expounders of Holy Scripture bring untold trouble and sorrow on their wiser brethren when they are caught in one of their mischievous false opinions and are taken to task by those who are not bound by the authority of our sacred books. For then, to defend their utterly foolish and obviously untrue statements, they will try to call upon Holy Scripture for proof and even recite from memory many passages which they think support their position, although they understand neither what they say nor the things about which they make confident assertions [quoting 1Ti. 1:7].

St. Augustine, The Literal Meaning of Genesis, 1:42-43.


31 posted on 06/17/2007 7:10:46 PM PDT by Coyoteman (Religious belief does not constitute scientific evidence, nor does it convey scientific knowledge.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]

To: sentis1

Nobody ever said the search for truth and knowledge was against the will of God.

Couching your lecture to those who don’t agree with you in the form of a prayer is pretty low. Insulting them and mocking them while doing so is lower still. Pretending to be pious doesn’t impress anyone.

What was your previous screen name?


32 posted on 06/17/2007 7:12:26 PM PDT by metmom (Welfare was never meant to be a career choice.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: Coyoteman

Wow, I was trying to say the same thing but St Augustine said it so much better than I.


33 posted on 06/17/2007 7:14:26 PM PDT by sentis1
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 31 | View Replies]

To: editor-surveyor

You got Heinleined. They say it’s not a religion and then you get evo-scripture quoted at you.


34 posted on 06/17/2007 7:14:38 PM PDT by metmom (Welfare was never meant to be a career choice.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

To: metmom

Hmm, it was a prayer and one I hope God answers for the sake of his church. In fact I view young Earth Creationists in about the same light as i view Muslims. Ignorant, lacking basic knowledge and living somewhere in the 7th century.

Two different religions same basic ignorance.

Wake up and smell the Truth God doesn’t want you to live in Ignorance, scientific or spiritual.


35 posted on 06/17/2007 7:17:01 PM PDT by sentis1
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 32 | View Replies]

To: metmom
You got Heinleined. They say it’s not a religion and then you get evo-scripture quoted at you.

Sorry, wrong again.

Heinlein was a pessimistic philosopher.

36 posted on 06/17/2007 7:17:56 PM PDT by Coyoteman (Religious belief does not constitute scientific evidence, nor does it convey scientific knowledge.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 34 | View Replies]

To: metmom

My previous Screen name was Sentis. And no, I didn’t get zotted I had a hacker take over the email account “Sentis” was based on and I forgot the password to FR after not being on FR for a month or two.


37 posted on 06/17/2007 7:19:08 PM PDT by sentis1
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 32 | View Replies]

bump


38 posted on 06/17/2007 7:19:24 PM PDT by Non-Sequitur (Save Fredericksburg. Support CVBT.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 34 | View Replies]

To: DaveLoneRanger
...he once accused Wieland's wife of witchcraft and necrophilia.

It's gettin ugly!

39 posted on 06/17/2007 7:23:23 PM PDT by JoeSixPack1 (Think not of today.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: DaveLoneRanger
I don’t see how any good can result from this.

And I agree, 1st Corinthians 6 seems to have been written for just such an occasion.

40 posted on 06/17/2007 7:31:57 PM PDT by labette
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: DaveLoneRanger
I've met Carl, I've known Ken for several years now. Not intimately-friends, but have worked for his ministry, had fellowship with his family... etc..
All I can say, is every Brother has the right to his fleshly weakness-but not for long, before the Lord holds him accountable to consequence.
No one said Br Ken or Br Carl was the example of Christianity-or-Perfection. Neither of them have ever claimed to be "Idols". I just hope the Family of God will still uphold their brothers in prayers and Christian love. Only the Lord knows the degree He will take a man through that mans very weakness...WHY? So that He-Jesus Christ- may be strong.
2 Corinthians 12:9 ... ..."My grace is sufficient for thee, for my > power is made perfect through your weakness."...
41 posted on 06/17/2007 8:05:04 PM PDT by CourtneyLeigh (Why can't all of America be Commonwealth?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: sentis1
Yes chalk one up for our education system, not understanding basic science is a problem with the liberalisation of education. Leaves people believing all sorts of nonsense, like the Earth is 6,000 years old, or that a global flood occurred somewhere in that time frame.
Evolution has had a monopoly on the public education since Scopes v. State. How do you figure that the schools are at fault for kids not knowing evolution, and how liberals (who accept evolution far more than conservatives do!) are responsible for this?
It also leaves people with very little mathematical knowledge so they believe literally in allegorical stories that say a man build a boat that held 2-7 of every animal on Earth. Which of course is impossible if we take the size of the ship literally from the bible.
I suggest you run the numbers again and see whose education is slighting whom.
Oh well people will believe what they will even in the face of overwhelming evidence.
Like, say, evolution for example?
The teachings of Jesus are all that matter we should throw out the old testament some of the attitudes and ideas in there keep people off the real path of following Christ and his teachings and get caught up in nonsense that was merely man doing the best he could to understand God and failing miserably.
You mean like the words of Jesus in Matthew 19:4, "Haven't you read," [Jesus] replied, "that at the beginning the Creator 'made them male and female?'" or Mark 10:6 "But at the beginning of creation God 'made them male and female.'"

Furthermore, in Matthew 5:17-18, Jesus states "Do not think that I have come to abolish the Law or the Prophets; I have not come to abolish them but to fulfill them. I tell you the truth, until heaven and earth disappear, not the smallest letter, not the least stroke of a pen, will by any means disappear from the Law until everything is accomplished."

So your idea of throwing out the Old Testament supposedly in favor of Christ's teachings is not at all in line with Christ's own teachings.

Now, any chance you'll tell us what your FR handle was prior to this new incarnation?
42 posted on 06/17/2007 8:09:50 PM PDT by DaveLoneRanger (As He died to make men holy, let us die to make men free.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies]

To: sentis1

Your prayer will of course go unanswered. As science is increasingly bearing out, the fools and idiots are squarely in the Darwinist camp.


43 posted on 06/17/2007 8:20:43 PM PDT by GodGunsGuts
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: Coyoteman

If he was writing today, I’d think he was talking about Christian Darwinists.


44 posted on 06/17/2007 8:27:27 PM PDT by GodGunsGuts
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 31 | View Replies]

To: DaveLoneRanger
If this story depresses you, I’m afraid the latest polls will only depress you further; a majority of Americans believe in creation and/or doubt evolution, and 90% claim a belief in God.

I'm not surprised: the majority of Americans also think that Budweiser is good beer and Paris Hilton is worth paying attention to.

45 posted on 06/17/2007 8:30:16 PM PDT by blowfish
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: blowfish

So now you are equating Christians with Budweiser and Paris Hilton? One thing is certain, you certainly live up to the blow in blowfish.


46 posted on 06/17/2007 8:36:39 PM PDT by GodGunsGuts
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 45 | View Replies]

To: editor-surveyor

Thanks for the ping!


47 posted on 06/17/2007 9:04:59 PM PDT by Alamo-Girl
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: DaveLoneRanger
Evolution has had a monopoly on the public education since Scopes v. State.

News flash Dave: Scopes lost.

The Butler Act remained in effect until it was repealed in 1967.

The next year, in Epperson v. Arkansas, the Supreme Court rejected such bans as Butler and permitted evolution to be taught in the schools.
Then in 1987, with Edwards v. Aguillard, the court ruled a law that required schools teaching 'creation science' was unconstitutional, because the law was specifically intended to advance a particular religion.

I suggest you run the numbers again and see whose education is slighting whom.

Indeed. 2007 - 1987 = 20 years.

Dave, for a someone with a college education (obviously incomplete), you lack knowledge on this subject.

48 posted on 06/17/2007 9:23:27 PM PDT by dread78645 (Evolution. A doomed theory since 1859.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 42 | View Replies]

To: DaveLoneRanger
Thanks for posting this article Dave. This is the first I've heard of the controversy. I have been looking forward to visiting the Answers in Genesis museum ever since I saw Mr. Ham's seminar.

What a shame that such a great work ends up being tarnished like this.

But shun foolish controversies and genealogies and strife and disputes about the Law;for they are unprofitable and worthless.
Reject a factious man after a first and second warning,
knowing that such a man is perverted and is sinning, being self-condemned.
Titus 3:9

49 posted on 06/17/2007 10:34:10 PM PDT by jan in Colorado ("we need to move away from the Kennedy Wing of the Republican Party” Duncan Hunter June 5,2007)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: sentis1
"...Help them wake up to the fact that the Genesis account of the creation of earth was merely an allegorical story meant for a primitive man who could not understand...

Understand what....great lengths of time? That all creatures are related to each other? How hard would that be to convey, especially metaphorically. In fact it would probably make much more sense to these so called "primitive peoples" than an invisible being poofing everything into existence for no apparent reason.

Look, the bottom line is, you either accept Genesis as the literal word of God, or you don't. It's that simple.

50 posted on 06/18/2007 1:50:53 AM PDT by csense
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-100101-150151-163 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson