Dinosaur quiz — part 3

Yesterday on the Answers in Genesis website, Ken Ham encouraged people to take “the dinosaur quiz” and to let him know on his Facebook page how we have used this quiz to help “rescue our kids.” I guess I took him seriously, so I posted a comment on his Facebook page:


This morning, my comment was gone.

I am sure Answers in Genesis has to delete many comments from their Facebook page — obscenity, mocking, false accusations, and so forth. My comment was certainly in none of those categories. Nor was it self-promotion; there are plenty of other comments pointing people to YEC websites.

I guess AiG does not want respectful dialog. Perhaps they do not want their flock to see alternative biblical answers in Genesis from someone else who believes the Bible from the very first verse.

Grace and Peace (especially to all my young-Earth creationist brothers and sisters in Christ)


P.S. I previously wrote about the dinosaur quiz here: More on the Answers in Genesis 4th grade dinosaur quiz.

17 thoughts on “Dinosaur quiz — part 3

  1. Martin Lack

    Kevin, your patience with – and graciousness towards – YECs is amazing. I do hope it bears some fruit soon because I think humanity is rapidly running out of time to avert an environmental catastrophe. To this end, I also believe that dismantlng the credibility of YEC-ism is necessary in order to make the climate change denial of people like Dr Roy Spencer and Senator James Inhoffe completely untenable. I really do not understand why God puts up with such schizophrenia amongst his followers but I will pray for you to be emboldened in your quest for people not to surrender their brains to theological research when they become Christians…


  2. geochristian

    Martin — I would like to spend more time exploring the connections between young-Earth creationism and anti-environmentalism in the Evangelical church. I actually have to work harder on my patience towards bad ecology in the church than bad geology in the church, but I do believe the two are connected, and that the root is questionable theology.


  3. Kevin,
    Last summer I read a book entitled “The Anointed: Evangelical Truth in a Secular Age” by Randall J. Stephens & Karl W. Giberson that might shed some light on the YEC-anti-environement connection. It highlights how evangelicals have flocked to unquestioningly follow the teachings of non-credentialed “experts” in the areas of origins (e.g. Ken Ham), psychology (e.g. James Dobson), history (e.g. David Barton), and eschatology (e.g. Tim LaHaye) while ignoring or even vilifiying more qualified evangelicals in those areas (e.g. Francis Collins, Mark Noll, etc.). It does not touch on anti-environmentalism but I imagine some of the same factors probably apply. Some of those factors include an anti-intellectualism within evangelicalism, an us/them mentality towards the secular world, and charismatic leaders who use media and marketing to effectively spread their message. I do not know the faith background of the authors, but they treated the topic respectfully.


  4. Jacob

    If Ken Ham can call Hank Hanegraff a Baal worshiper because Hanegraff is Old Earth, I don’t see how meaningful dialog is possible. One can only hope that some YEC leaders and followers understand that such talk is counterproductive. But some people have gone from, “the Bible is infallible” to “my reading of the Bible is infallible” and they don’t know the difference. Then you know exactly what sort of creature a Leviathan is or was, and you know this because your interpretation is infallible and anyone who disagrees is a heretic.

    Anti-intellectualism, as Carol mentioned, is a problem. Some self-professed intellectuals want to see science guided by a narrow utilitarianism as the only standard of value. This is basically what our cultural leaders want. Some rightly see a problem in that but they see science in particular and the life of the mind in general as the problem, when really the only way we will be able to save people from bad ideas is to present better ideas.


  5. Jacob

    I think the anti-environmentalism comes from the idea that “real Christians” are to be “raptured” out of here any day now, so a concern with how the earth will be for future generations shows a lack of faith in the imminent rapture and it might therefore even be heresy. If you know all about creation from the exact time of the day the earth was created 4000 years ago to almost the day when you will be rescued out of this profane world, then you don’t need a bunch of intellectuals telling you about the dangers of pollution because you know God is about to desrtoy the earth and wipe the slate clean anyways. If you have such certitude about God,s timeline, you might have no long term concers about anything and any such concerns might be actually sinful.


  6. WebMonk

    A sad side note to your observation Jacob is that for the last couple thousand years, some Christians have been just as convinced that the world is about to see Christ’s return as some of the most fervent Christians today.

    A few people had cautioned my parents about having me because it would be so hard taking care of a baby during the tribulations which were just around the corner. :-P


  7. Jacob

    I probably should not tell this story but here goes: A few years ago I was at a flea market and I overheard a vendor chatting with a customer. The vendor said, “the anti-Christ is [and he named a politician]” and he rattled off a Bible chapter and verse “and New York City is Babylon” and he rattled off another Bible chapter and verse, “and New York will be destroyed in a nuclear explosion and it will happen THIS YEAR!” I glanced in his direction and the vendor seemed overjoyed talking about the nuclear destruction of New York City. He was grinning from ear to ear. And the way he said “this year!” with such enthusiasm. Like a normal person would say, “I know my team will win this year!” The guy seemed to be parroting what he heard from some radio or T.V. preacher. Not everyone is this unbalanced but there are millions who are and they are not thinking about how to make their country or their planet a better place for their grandchildren.


  8. geochristian

    Jacob — I agree that “rapture theology” is part of the reason for anti-environmentalism among Evangelicals, and many YECs also are pre-tribulation rapture dispensationalists. (And many YECs are not).


  9. klasiekraalogies

    Webmonk – well, knowing you, it probably was difficult taking care of you regardless… :)

    But the anti-intellectualism charge hits home. In fact, much of evangelical / conservative Christianity now resembles the readers of some of those irritating tabloids at the check-out counter at Safeway. Things have really regressed.


  10. Jacob

    I applaud those of you who are busy fighting the anti-intellectuals on the one extreme and the New Atheist dogmatists on the other extreme. The church is surrendering the life of the mind and this is a crisis.


  11. Robert Byers

    I love AIG and ken Ham has done a fantastic job of raising the intellectual standard for origin issues. A true mover of ideas in our times. thats why he is famous.
    i hope Geochristian comment being censored came from some low level person too trigger happy. its dumb to censor anything other then malice or unrelated comments.
    As a YEC i get censored ALLLLL the time from evolutionists and oec people and so on and so on.
    Everyone needs to become more manly and not be defending the empire from overthrow.
    Freedom of thought and speech people!!! Try it out.
    Especially the guys on the right side.


  12. Lisa Keith-Lucas

    Robert Byers, at Pandas Thumb you don’t get censored. You get moved to the bathroom wall, since you have shown time and again that you are unwilling to learn anything and you repeat the same falsehoods over and over. And yes, Ken Ham is dishonest. Have you noticed that his blogs don’t allow comments at all? The Discovery Institute is even worse.


  13. geochristian

    Lisa — In what sense would you say that Ken Ham is “dishonest.” It is one thing to be wrong (and Ken Ham is wrong about both his science and his biblical interpretation), another thing altogether to be guilty of lying. If Ken Ham knows that his science is bad and teaches it anyways, then he is guilty of dishonesty, but I don’t think that is the case.


  14. geochristian

    Lisa — I have deleted a few comments over the years, and there are a few people whose comments I have set up to automatically go to my moderation queue. Am I being dishonest?


  15. Lisa Keith-Lucas

    No, because you answer to challenges to your view points. If a poster is obviously a troll (repeats the same stuff over ad over) you have the right to remove their posts. Do you consider your behavior at AIG facebook page trollish? I don’t. The regular AIG site doesn’t allow any comments at all, and the facebook pages remove those that offer legitimate, evidence based refutation of their posts. That is dishonest. I have a hard time believing that Ham is unaware of this. I have seen over the years dozens on posters banned from Uncommon Descent as well, for nothing more than presenting evidence refuting claims. Again, dishonesty.


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s