Ken Ham: Once again spouting on about how crap our churches are
Ken Ham is once again spouting on about how crap our churches are, and why does he believe that they are in this ‘unbelievable’ condition? This is why:
How can we witness to the world when much of the church and even many Christian schools have adopted the world’s anti-God religion of evolutionary beliefs, including the idea of millions of years?
Yep, because many Christians fully accept the facts revealed by science. Evolution is a scientific theory and fact, not a belief system, as Ham would postulate.
Here is the Catholic Church position on science:
The contribution made by the physical sciences to examining these questions is stressed by the Catechism, which states, “The question about the origins of the world and of man has been the object of many scientific studies which have splendidly enriched our knowledge of the age and dimensions of the cosmos, the development of life-forms and the appearance of man. These discoveries invite us to even greater admiration for the greatness of the Creator, prompting us to give him thanks for all his works and for the understanding and wisdom he gives to scholars and researchers” (CCC 283).
I give thanks for our scientists and their work, which really does increase my admiration for the greatness of our Creator.
Anyway, I honestly don’t know why Ham’s so worried with news such as this:
Some 45 percent of voters accept the Biblical account of creation as the explanation for the origin of human life on Earth, while 21 percent say the theory of evolution as outlined by Darwin and other scientists is correct. Another 27 percent say both explanations are true.
Tags: Church Life, Science & Medical
September 8th, 2011 at 3:08 pm
I suspect (actually I know having worked with him) that Ken would not consider you to be a Christian. In fact he would not consider many people to be!
September 8th, 2011 at 3:15 pm
That’s exactly right Gordon.
I come across Christians on a forum that have no compunction in informing me that as I do not heed to their literal interpretation of Genesis, I’m not really Christian at all.
They believe that they are reading without interpretation, which to me is an impossibility anyway.
But as you allude to, what really gets me, is when they make this an salvific issue, which is to add to the work of Christ!
September 8th, 2011 at 5:20 pm
They believe that they are reading without interpretation, which to me is an impossibility anyway.
Spot on. By reading the Bible in English they already have an interpretation of a translator. Even if a formal equivalence is used, the problem is reading it with 21t century lens.
September 8th, 2011 at 5:39 pm
Similar to C.S. Lewis’ comment then really with regards reading and understanding ancient texts – “They claim to spot fern-seed yet can’t spot an elephant in broad daylight at ten paces.”
September 8th, 2011 at 7:33 pm
Em… I don’t think Kenny and I would hit it off.
http://faithisnotthesameasreligion1.blogspot.com/2011/06/cheap-moral-stands.html
As I responded on my own blog to a comment concerning the Nadine Dorris vote: ‘Personally I think a good portion of the ‘abortion debate’ has become tribal. Moreover it is – not unlike homosexuality, euthanasia and, to a lesser degree, evolution – quite a ‘cheap’ moral stance in that for the vast majority of people it is not a personal issue, and like much that has the comfortable distance of abstract objectivity, there is little personal cost in taking a conservative line. It is what I like to call a ‘low investment/high return’ moral stance.’
I would be more impressed if the likes of Ken – and many other Fundamentalist or conservative Christians – give a bit more weight to the more personally costly passages of Scripture instead of pointing accusatory fingers here, there and everywhere. At the end of the day, the main reasons the churches are emptying is probably more related to what goes on inside them rather than the beliefs and practices of the outside world (the early Church grew in a far more hostile world!!). But I don’t think accepting or rejecting ‘Evolution’ is the real issue – the problems are probably a little nearer to home and personally challenging!
P
September 8th, 2011 at 8:44 pm
Interestingly Peter there is an article which provides some interesting ideas, re your last paragraph, on Christian Today called:
Why men hate going to church
Personally speaking, one of the reasons I don’t like going to church is because it seems to be populated by elderly women that seem to do nothing except talk about their latest operation. It gets very depressing
September 8th, 2011 at 8:59 pm
Poor you Tim,
Perhaps time to check out a Catholic Church. In our church, if you’re not early, it standing room only for the 2nd and 3rd services, although the 1st and 5th services are packed, but we can normally squeeze in somewhere.
September 8th, 2011 at 9:19 pm
Whilst I am on a moaning roll here there’s a few others:
1. Members of the congregation that coat their mouths in lipstick before coming to church and having holy communion. The chalice is supposed to be wiped before the next person uses it but they don’t always do a satisfactory job of it and the lipstick shades don’t always suit me. (It also tastes foul)
2. A female vicar that had never ever heard of The Golden Rule until one of the congregation mentioned it to her.
3. Sidesmen wearing Freemasonry rings (That really annoys me!)
4. The sign of peace…shaking each others hands! Eh? What? So I go to church with my daughter and I’m supposed to turn to her and … shake her hand??? It is absolutely bloody flaming pathetic! Either do the proper sign of peace or don’t do it at all!!! What the hell is it with this namby-pamby nonsense?
*And breeeeaaaathe*
OK and now I have calmed down, thanks for the offer Phoebs, but not sure about that, lol. Although I did check out an Orthodox Church several years ago where the congregation was thriving. I was absolutely fascinated by all the beautiful icons too. Unfortunately it is miles and miles away from me.
September 9th, 2011 at 1:28 am
Poor Tim!
I REALLY miss my old church in north London which I left when we moved a little further out of London (Herts) so we could afford a house rather than a flat. It was a middle of the road Anglican church – neither high nor low. A good mixed congregation (age, gender and race – about a quarter of the congregation being African), a choir with a healthy number of children, a vicar who had dedicated his life to the church (being vicar for almost 30 years) and a good social life.
I think one of the worst things about some churches is insincerity or glibness. A telling example occurred at the large, Anglican Evangelical church I attended in Leeds in the 80s (and was a member of staff for two years). At the end of an evening service one Sunday – when I had been a member of the church for over two years – a guy turn round to me, warming shook my hand and asked if I was new to the church. I told him I wasn’t, that I had only recently stopped working for the church and we had a little laugh about this. He told me his name was Oliver and it turned out I knew his girlfriend quite well as she sometimes attended my housegroup. Six months later, at the end of an evening service a young man turned round, smiled an Evangelical smile and told me his name was Oliver and asked if it was my first time at the church… His welcome was warm – until I explained we’d been through this rigmarole before.
Churches are odd places…
P.
September 9th, 2011 at 7:14 pm
Ah, Peter:
At the end of an evening service one Sunday – when I had been a member of the church for over two years – a guy turn round to me, warming shook my hand and asked if I was new to the church. I told him I wasn’t, that I had only recently stopped working for the church and we had a little laugh about this. He told me his name was Oliver and it turned out I knew his girlfriend quite well as she sometimes attended my housegroup. Six months later, at the end of an evening service a young man turned round, smiled an Evangelical smile and told me his name was Oliver and asked if it was my first time at the church… His welcome was warm – until I explained we’d been through this rigmarole before.
Oh, that rings a bell! It’s the glib facile smile that gets me. Instant best mates – and they won’t remember you next month.
A friend of mine got baptised as an adult, with a number of meetings and deep meaningful chats beforehand with the vicar. A year later he hadn’t the faintest idea who she was. It really upset her.
And I sympathise with Tim too. That sign of peace thing is so awkward – maybe it’s because we’re all so damn British. Whatever the reason, it’s not a helpful addition. Best abandoned.
Now me – my pet hate is worship music. I can’t tell you how much I despise it. Slush. Dregs. I’m doing a Tim now – as he says:
*And breeeeaaaathe*
As for Ken Ham – I try not to think about him too much when his name comes up in discussion. My blood pressure has never been a problem, but that doesn’t mean it might not be one day, given the right provocation!
September 9th, 2011 at 10:57 pm
In view of Peter and Isobels comments then I have to tell you this. When I was a very young man I thought I’d pop in to the local Baptist Church just to see how I felt about it.
I arrived in time for the service and seated myself right at the very back pew, otherwise unoccupied, so I could simply sit quietly and observe.
Then a member of the congregation walked in the door and sat down next to me, all the while looking at me and smiling. So I shifted along the pew a bit. Then another arrived who sat down next to the other person, so I shifted up a bit more, and now they were both looking at me and smiling. Then several more members turned up, sat in the same pew which entailed me shifting along even more, and they all sat there looking at me and smiling…and then more turned up…I was completely puzzled and was sat there wondering why everyone was trying to cram on to the same pew when there was plenty of room in the rest of the church, all the while all of them sat there staring at me and smiling. It was extremely off-putting. As I said I was very young, and these days I understand that kind of behaviour, LOL!
September 10th, 2011 at 8:26 am
How cringy Tim – although quite funny – It’s more than enough to send you fleeing.
September 10th, 2011 at 12:16 pm
Hi Tim,
I am intrigued about the proper sign of the peace. What is the proper sign? I know of kisses for family and friends, bowing to strangers and handshakes for acquaintances.
P.S. A shame the EO church was so far away.
September 10th, 2011 at 12:22 pm
It’s the kiss of peace Phoebs, a little kiss on each cheek.
And yes Stuart, very funny but extremely creepy, lol. I have avoided Baptist Churches ever since.