People take part in a protest against police brutality and in support of Black Lives Matter during a march in New York City on July 9, 2016. Photo courtesy of Reuters/Eduardo Munoz

No, Ken Ham, whites are not colored people

People take part in a protest against police brutality and in support of Black Lives Matter during a march in New York, on July 9, 2016. Photo courtesy of Reuters/Eduardo Munoz/File Photo *Editors: This photo may only be republished with RNS-LUPFER-OPED, originally transmitted on October 6, 2016.

People take part in a protest against police brutality and in support of Black Lives Matter during a march in New York on July 9, 2016. Photo courtesy of Reuters/Eduardo Munoz/File Photo *Editors: This photo may only be republished with RNS-LUPFER-OPED, originally transmitted on Oct. 6, 2016.


 This image is available for web and print publication. For questions, contact Sally Morrow.

(RNS) In a provocative opinion piece, Ken Ham blames black leaders for fueling racial tension. The noted “young-Earth creationist” asserts that there is only one race and that we are all colored people, just various shades of brown.


READ: Science and the Bible can help ease racial tensions


Many will dismiss Mr. Ham’s politically incorrect and mistaken assessment of the racial tension in our current moment:

"I urge President Obama, Al Sharpton, Jesse Jackson and others to abandon the word 'races' and use 'people groups' instead — to emphasize we are all one race, one blood and one family, and get away from any racist connotations."

But I want to read him as charitably as possibly, validating some of his concerns even as I emphatically disagree with his diagnosis and recommendations.

Ham is something of a laughingstock to a wide swath of the public because of his prolific advocacy of young-Earth creationism, a view based on chronological lists in the Bible that God created the Earth in its present form only within the last 6,000 to 10,000 years. Most scientists believe the Earth is billions of years old.

Still, I can’t help but like Ham. When he  debated science educator Bill Nye in 2014, I was struck by Ham’s profound reverence for the wonder of creation. And though Ham lost the debate by any objective measure, Nye exemplifies a certain kind of elitist disdain for religious faith that ends up making me sympathetic to believers.

Bill Nye, known from his 1990s TV show as "The Science Guy," tours the exhibits aboard the full-scale replica of Noah's ark at the Ark Encounter theme park in Williamstown, Ky., with Ken Ham, president and CEO of Answers in Genesis. Photo courtesy of Answers in Genesis

Bill Nye, known from his 1990s TV show as "The Science Guy," tours the exhibits aboard the full-scale replica of Noah's Ark at the Ark Encounter theme park in Williamstown, Ky., with Ken Ham, president and CEO of Answers in Genesis. Photo courtesy of Answers in Genesis

Further, Ham has proved to be earnest and civil in his dealings with hostile opponents. He admits his beliefs are ultimately based in theology, not science. And he is upfront about the evangelistic aim of his $150 million Ark Encounter tourist attraction in Kentucky, an 800-acre monument to “the biblical worldview.”

Though born in Australia, Ham is thoroughly American: a layman, a generalist and an entrepreneur. He is not afraid to wade into issues on which he has no expert insight or qualifications. But as a writer who regularly opines about all matters of religion and politics, I can certainly relate. Where others may see ignorant bloviating, I see courage of conviction.

So I must concede that this Christian fundamentalist says things that are indisputably true, even as he errs in both his diagnosis and his prescriptions about racial disharmony in America.

An overconfident, scientistic extension of Charles Darwin’s theories tragically marred the 20th century, contributing to racism, colonialism and eugenics. Semantic imprecision about words such as ethnicity and race conflates categories and impedes dialogue.

And it may be more scientifically and theologically correct to regard humans as coequal fellows in one species than as members of different races, as Ham writes.

But even if well-intentioned, Ham’s conclusions are woefully inadequate.

Substituting the term “people groups” for “race” is not going to rectify the manifold injustices of a nation that was founded on the enslavement of millions of Africans and the near genocide of American Indians.

Even supposing Ham is right that we are all different shades of brown, his (and my) very light shade comes with considerable privileges and advantages that we absolutely must acknowledge. I'll forgive his tone-deafness in declaring himself a colored person if he commits to honestly grappling with the devastating and lasting injustices actual people of color have suffered.

Ham says he is grateful that “we have the Bible to guide us in healing these wounds.”

But perhaps Ham and other very light brown conservatives should step back from their literalist interpretive framework and attend to broad themes from Scripture that cannot be reduced to a proof-text.

The Bible teaches that God has a special concern for people who are outcast, vulnerable or oppressed. This belief underlies an ecumenical Christian concern for social justice from which light brown American conservatives are conspicuous dissenters.

This is the theology of liberation we usually attribute to figures such as Gustavo Gutierrez or Jim Cone, but which flows from the pages of the Bible itself.

You do not have to be a progressive to see realities that Ham will not acknowledge: Racial prejudice is still a deadly problem. The criminal justice system is not colorblind. Structural, economic and political racism restricts opportunities for nonwhites. Sometimes it kills them.

Black lives matter. They matter to God, and they must matter to white Christians who imagine themselves to be the most biblically faithful.

Ham gets the science right, this time at least. We are one human family. But in suggesting that systemic racism is nonexistent or at least not worth addressing, he commits a theological error of biblical proportions.

(Jacob Lupfer is a contributing editor at RNS and a doctoral candidate in political science at Georgetown University)

Comments

  1. Mr Ham is doing what everyone is doing these days, relabeling or should I say rebranding to use current jargon. Words and labels can be very powerful, but they are so ingrained in people, cultures, subgroups, etc that these attempts really do not do the issues at hand much justice. I can understand his position that race designations are historic terms used to keep people from obtaining true equality, thereby wanting to remove such classifications since we are all indeed part of the human race. The term white should be just as offensive as using brown, yellow, red, black, etc. However, there are instances when knowing heritage is of vital importance, such as medical issues that arise in one group with more prevalence than other groups.

    What I don’t think people want to address, and is the major cold hard fact about any social trends that we see today is that you cannot mandate people’s views, thoughts, prejudices away. The government can pass as many laws as they want, but people are who they are and devoid of any open discrimination you cannot make people believe in anything they choose not to believe. This unfortunately is a slow, generational process in abandoning past behaviors and beliefs. What I think social movements today lack is this awareness and no amount of protests, rioting, mandating, laws will begin to touch the deeply held personal ideologies people hold.

  2. Ironically, the Curse of Ham is the bible story christian racists use to justify their racism.

  3. I know. Although in fairness they may have misinterpreted that story for their own purposes, after all, it was written long before the type of race based chattel slavery that we once had in the South came into existence.

  4. Please, please stop assuming that Black Lives Matter speaks for all black Americans.

    It took a little while, but now some of us are no longer scared to call out BLM on the raw hatred, suspicion, taunting, bigotry and violence that some of their protesters have unleashed on police officers of all colors and both genders, as well as their disreputable heckling and shout-down tactics at some public and political forums.

    When BLM publicly confesses its track record as an enabler and even promoter of some of the strife, unrest and violent tragedies that we have seen in recent months (and if everybody is really honest about it, these incidents go back as far as the Ferguson protests), THEN further social-justice progress might be made.

    Until then, there is only one soundbite worth repeating, one which is fully supported by the Genesis creation account but absolutely NOT supported by the theory of evolution as explained in Darwin’s specific textbook “The Descent of Man.”

    That soundbite is, “ALL lives matter.” Including the blue lives.
    All people are **created** equal, NOT **evolved** equal. The difference is important for all of us.

  5. BLM is a simple plea to stop shooting to death unarmed black men.

    Right wingers always get upset if something is not about them …BLM …they didn’t mentioned white people therefore they hate white people.

    Feminism ……. they didn’t mentioned men therefore they hate men.

    Not everything can be about you …all the time.

    The descent of man only happens when you start believing in things with no evidence.

  6. Among the many problems with this rebuttal to Ken Ham is the bizarre claim that Ham will not acknowledge that racial prejudice is still a problem. How could the writer have missed Ham’s opening line where he acknowledged that “racial strife troubles this nation”? Also, Ham wrote of racial wounds that still need to be healed. Once again Ham has tackled racism, has already written two books against the sin of racism, has refuted the so-called Curse of Ham time and time again, but he gets slapped in the face by Lupfer for supposedly not seeing racism as a problem! Here is Ham, an Evangelical who wants to be part of the movement to combat racism, and a prejudicial Lupfer wants to exclude him. Sigh …

  7. “A simple plea”, eh? Sorry, but some of us have access to Google and therefore reject your attempt at spin-job.

    You see, we already **know** about BLM’s penchant for hatred, thuggery and mob violence, both past and present. Like in Charlotte, North Carolina, where a **black** police officer was recently forced to fire on a **black** suspect WHO HAD A GUN.

    Here’s how BLM responded to the situation (CNN report, Sept 21, 2016):
    “Black Lives Matter protesters and rioters blocked a highway and attacked police officers, injuring at least 12 of them last night.”

    So yeah, we got BLM’s thuggee number already. Some of them need fresh jail time. (And no, I’m not white.)

    If there’s any “Black Lives Matter” activists reading this post, you got a LOT to apologize for, because you don’t even respect BLACK POLICE lives, let alone white or hispanic or black civilian lives !!!

  8. Blither , blather.

    BLM do not encourage violence.

    Can we blame the black church and PP shootings on white Christians.

  9. “BLM is a simple plea to stop shooting to death unarmed black men.”

    Actually if you look on their website, no where does it state this or anything remotely related to this issue. I found that rather odd myself. I don’t know if the group has been hijacked, morphed into something else, or if a group is just using this national crisis to get attention. What is also concerning, is that BLM, as far as I am aware, has done little to nothing to dialogue effectively with police, push for better training/emphasis on deescalating situations with the goal of making sure no one is harmed. I suspect that BLM is using these situations as a platform for civil rights, addressing racism rather than making sure not another person is killed by police when communication/safety could have changed a tense dynamic.

  10. There is no real irony, for there is no story in the Bible about Ham and a curse. Unfortunately some Christians in the past have used that myth to defend their racism. But you won’t find a curse of Ham in Genesis. Look it up for yourself. And today I just don’t hear that Ham/curse myth any more. There was a Canaan who was cursed, but it had nothing to do with racism; see https://answersingenesis.org/blogs/ken-ham/2013/01/26/was-ham-cursed/

  11. “Most scientists believe the Earth is billions of years old.”

    No.

    Should be “Most scientists understand that the Earth is billions of years old.”

  12. Yep. One of the most obvious liars on the subject. Its a given. All Creationists lie about science. Its inherent to the professed belief.

  13. The timing does not really matter, we are all out of Africa. We are all one species. Genetically “racial” differences are dwarfed by the differences between individuals. In this much Ham is absolutely correct.

  14. it is not a lie if he believes what he says. Being wrong is not lying, and we are all wrong some of the time and right other parts of the time.

  15. Biologically, Ham is right that we are all shades of beige/brown on a very long spectrum. And if people were trained from infancy to see the world that way, we would all be much better off. But, sadly, we are taught (before we are six, or seven or eight) instead to see things from a perspective of psychological and political dichotomy: white vs. black, or worse yet, white vs. everyone else. It is this learned dichotomy that underlies racism in all its forms, from overt discrimination to subtle white privilege.

    To be “white” is in fact not just a matter of color. It is a matter of social acceptance. To illustrate, I once read a diary of an English woman traveling through Ireland in the 1820s. She pronounced the Irish to be of a dark color, and certainly not white. In the early 20th century as Italians migrated to the USA, they were called “swarthy”, meaning that they were not white. The subsequent migration of Eastern Europeans to America met with a similar set of epithets. Eventually, when each population was accepted into society, they were deemed “white”.

    What remains to be seen in America, is whether such acceptance will ever be extended to people of African or Asian or Native American (north and south) origins.

  16. Saying that all lives matter simply obliterates the message of the slogan “black lives matter”.
    Analogy. A group of people sit down to dinner. The man at the head of the table is served two portions, while the man at the foot of the table is served nothing. The man at the foot of the table says, “Hey, I deserve my equal share.” The man at the head of the table says, “We all deserve our equal share,” and finishes his plate. Those stating that black lives matter are saying that out of fear and anger because the police are killing black people at a far, far greater rate than they are killing white people, taken proportionally for all stops of black and white people. For a safe white person to respond that all lives matter fails to acknowledge the basic facts on which the original statement is based. It is denial and it is racist.

  17. Eventually, when each population was accepted into society, they were deemed “white”.
    That was dam’ white of them, don’cha think?

  18. If Creationists actually believed the nonsense they said, they would not have invented the Gish Gallop. A tactic of making as many ridiculous arguments as possible and claim victory when a few are not addressed. Creationism requires lying.

    A Creationist lies when they make the claim their religious belief can be supported by objective evidence and methods. First off they would never accept such evidence and methods if it disproved their religious belief. So their reliance on such things is a lie. Secondly, a Creationist lies by denying faith is the basis of their belief. Faith is the belief in absence of evidence.

    All people accept their religious belief on the basis of faith. Any claims that such things are based on rational methods and reasoning fall apart pretty quickly when held up to any kind of scrutiny.

  19. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Curse_of_Ham#Book_of_Jubilees

    The medieval commentary of Rashi (Rabbi Shlomo Yitzchaki 1040-1105), who cites older sources from Judaism’s Oral Torah,which is relied upon by traditional Judaic scholarship as the most basic commentary to the present time, provides an introductory explanation. (Genesis 9:22-27):

    Genesis 9:22: and Ham, the father of Canaan, saw:
    “There are those among our rabbis who say that Canaan saw and told his father [Ham] and this is why Canaan was mentioned with regard to the matter and was cursed.”

    (Tanhuma 15; Genesis Rabbah 36:7). And [Ham] saw his father’s nakedness.: “There are those of our rabbis who say he emasculated (סרסו castrated) him, and there are those who say he had (homosexual רבעו) relations with him.” Sanhedrin 70a. [The opinion that holds Ham had homosexual relations with him agrees that Ham also emasculated Noah.]

    Genesis 9:23: And Shem and Japheth…covered their father’s nakedness, their faces were turned backward…: “…as for Ham who disgraced his father it is said of his offspring ‘Thus will the king of Assyria lead the captives of Egypt and the exiles of Cush and the exiles of Ethiopia, young and old, naked and barefoot, and with buttocks uncovered, to the shame of Egypt.” (Isaiah 20:4). (Tanhuma 15; Genesis Rabbah 36:6).[25][26]

    Genesis 9:24: his small (הקטן) son:” הפסול The ‘defective’ one (Genesis Rabbah
    36:6) והבזוי and the ‘disgraceful’ one. [‘small’ does not mean ‘the
    youngest’ since Ham was older than Shem] similar to ‘Behold, I have made
    you the smallest (קטן) among the nations.'” (Jeremiah 49:15, Obadiah 1:2).[25][26]

    Genesis 9:25: Cursed (ארור) is Canaan: Noah said to Ham:
    “You caused me that I should not father a fourth son, another one to serve me. May your fourth son [Canaan was Ham’s fourth son, see Genesis 10:6] be cursed by serving the offspring of these greater ones [of Shem and Japheth]… What did Ham see that he emasculated him? He said to his brothers Adam the first man had only two sons (Cain and Abel) yet one killed the other because of the inheritance of the world [Cain
    killed Abel over a dispute how to divide the world between them according to Genesis Rabbah 22:7] and our father has three sons yet he seeks still a fourth son.”

    Genesis 9:26: …Blessed is יהוה the God of Shem: “Who is destined to keep His promise to [Shem’s] offspring to give them the Land of Canaan” and he shall be: “Canaan shall be to them as a servant to pay tribute.”

    Genesis 9:27: and Canaan shall be a slave to them.:
    “Even after the children of Shem will be exiled slaves will be sold to them from the Children of Canaan.” [Rashi explaining why the curse is repeated.]

  20. The BLM group here in Minneapolis, Minnesota has been eager and willing to work with police and city officials for change, but they’ve politely and patiently waited decades and decades for police murders* of unarmed brothers, fathers, sons, uncles and cousins to stop.

    *Killings of armed and lethally engaged black criminals are not included in my definition of “police murders.”

  21. What remains to be seen in America, is whether such acceptance will ever be extended to people of African or Asian…origins.

    Two Wongs don’t make a white.

  22. Yes, obviously.

    Creationism is nothing to do with the biblical story its just phony science that no christian is required to believe or accept.

  23. Its either extreme ignorance or lying … its nothing to do with religion or piety.

    He doesn’t just believe a lie he promotes and profits from it.

  24. The story was that Noah got drunk and went to his tent naked and Ham his son “saw” his nakedness (“saw” has been taken to mean had sex with and even castrated) ….on awakening Noah issued the following curse:

    Genesis 24 When Noah awoke from his wine and found out what his youngest son had done to him, 25 he said,
    “Cursed be Canaan!
    The lowest of slaves
    will he be to his brothers.”

    26 He also said,
    “Praise be to the Lord, the God of Shem!
    May Canaan be the slave of Shem.

    27 May God extend Japheth’s[b] territory;
    may Japheth live in the tents of Shem,
    and may Canaan be the slave of Japheth.”

    Its was used to justify serfdom in medieval Europe and European/American slavery, in 17th and 18th century. The idea that part of the curse was the blackening of skin grew slowly out of the middle ages and blossomed in 17th and 18th century.

    Its a testament to whole issue of interpreted morality. You can interpret dogma anyway you wish to serve you own purposes, so its morally relative. Secular morality will always be superior as you have to be able to say why something is moral and in what context.

  25. No, all SCIENTISTS do. Creationists are not scientists.

  26. Civil rights, racism and the shooting to death of unarmed black men are all related.

    Go to their website. Their platform included standing up for black LGBTQ people.

  27. Exactly. But that is where the wealth and the power have resided.

  28. You stole that from me gawd knows how many years ago! I’m suing.

  29. Do you know the expression “that’s white of you’ or ‘that’s damned whited of you”?

    It’s an old one. I only ask because it wasn’t clear from your reply that you did.

  30. Yes, I do. The point of my reply was to recognize that unfortunately for America established white (male) society has been in a position from wealth and power to dictate who gets accepted and who does not. That is beginning to change – Barack Obama and now Hillary Clinton – are exemplifying the breakdown of the white partiarchal structure. And we have seen enormous resistance to this. Think of it. If Hillary were male, she would be leading Trump in an absolute blowout.

  31. Absolutely.
    I didn’t intend the question as any kind of deprecation. you know that, right?

  32. I really don’t know much about Ken Ham, but he seems to be sincere in his beliefs, even though I think creationism is hogwash. So no, I don’t consider him a liar (which means you are consciously promulgating something you know not to be true). I also don’t buy some of the assertions made in this article, for instance. Liberation theology, for one, has more to do with warmed over Marxism than anything found in the Bible. Yes, we have a duty to help those less fortunate, but that doesn’t prescribe any particular social welfare program as the best way to do that. And, unfortunately, much of the Black Lives Matter movement is based on obvious falsehoods, such as “hands up, don’t shoot.”

  33. You do realize that in any given year more white men than black men are shot by police. In fact some studies indicate that over all bias is hard or impossible to detect in police shootings: https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/wonk/wp/2016/07/13/why-a-massive-new-study-on-police-shootings-of-whites-and-blacks-is-so-controversial/ Of course this will be hotly debated and to settle the issue more research is needed, but the question is not so settled as you imagine.
    As far as “Right wingers always get upset if something is not about them” an absurd charge you make with no evidence, that is something I could easily throw out about almost any political group. Feminists get upset if the “narrative” isn’t about them. BLM get’s upset if the narrative isn’t about police shooting black males. The Donald gets upset if the narrative isn’t about The Donald. Hillary gets upset if she can’t figure out a way to gain wealth or power from the situation. The list goes on.

  34. All irrelevant ….. an organisation is set up to cover what it covers ….the main motivation for BLM was police accountability over the shooting to deaths of unarmed black men.

    If you want to be about something else start your own version.

  35. Ham sets up for profit creationist fun parks …so why would you consider him sincere and not just plain mercenary.

    The unarmed black men that were shot to death were not imaginary either.

    This country has a huge issue with police accountability …. the shooting to death of unarmed black men is just one aspect.

  36. Christians invented the notion is justify serfdom and black slavery.

  37. Are you really that uninformed Nofun or are you just a troll?

  38. So Spud, you believe you descended from a rock. Your lack or understanding shows it is highly likely.

  39. Islam practiced much wider and far more punitive slavery. They were also the ones who originated wholesale black slavery.

  40. No. But your question denotes either a dishonest view of evolution or ignorance on the subject. Your insulting and dismissive manner does not refute nor temper my assessment of Creationists or their inherent veracity impairment.

    Every time Creationists try snarky responses it always seems to reveal how little they know about the WELL ESTABLISHED SCIENTIFIC THEORIES they allegedly oppose.

  41. So the documented truth is blither blather, you must be a graduate of the Trump University School of Logic.

  42. Not much of a response. Especially when Islam takes its cues from the same sources for its justification for mayhem as Christians do..

  43. From this article I was stating that Ham seems sincere. As I posted, I’m not really that familiar with him. “The unarmed black men that were shot to death were not imaginary either” I didn’t state that. Neither where the white men (and most people shot by police are men) imaginary. “This country has a huge issue with police accountability …. the shooting to death of unarmed black men is just one aspect”. Perhaps. But the evidence for racial bias in shooting is not as strong as you seem to believe. But many (not all, but many) of the supposedly unjustified shootings are not so clearly unjustified when you actually look at the facts.

  44. If my post is irrelevant so is “Right wingers always get upset if something is not about them” and, for that matter, most of the rest of your post.

  45. Are really going to have a “their slavery is worse than my slavery” contest.

    Doesn’t say much for any religion does it.

  46. What documented truth? No BLM official has incited violence.

    By your logic we should blame Christianity for the black church and PP mass shootings.

  47. No, no one thinks that, but Christianity says you came from dirt.

  48. The problem of police accountability is bigger than these incidents.

    The longer this issue remains untouched the more unrest it will cause by those it impacts the most.

  49. Not someone who disagrees with you … what makes you think you are informed and not a troll?

  50. you just hate Ham because you like picking at the scabs of our past—signs of a political leftist.

  51. Legitimate concerns about social justice are definitely a part of the biblical package regarding human concerns and activity, but let us not forget the principle of personal accountability, because all too often people (including academicians) will use the spotty history of social justice as a justification for behavior that segues from protest to criminality.

  52. Yes as two California police officers were shot to death today, and a Chicago policewoman was nearly beaten to death by someone high on drugs because she hesitated to draw her weapon for fear of the media blitz that would affect her, her family, and her department.

  53. A profoundly balanced statement. Cheers.

  54. That is a complete mischaracterization not based in fact.

  55. An excellent pun, but certainly not politically correct; it might be viewed as offensive in some communities.

  56. Any exchange with Spuddie will be difficult at best, though I have to admit he has upvoted my comments at times, often to my surprise.

  57. That is speculation.

    So you are saying we should have no police accountability otherwise they won’t do their jobs?

    The whole issue is police accountability. If you want no cop deaths or unarmed black men deaths that is what you address.

  58. You can’t have apriori beliefs in things without evidence when doing science.

    If you do then you start cherry picking evidence it fit a narrative.

    A scientific theory has to explain all of the evidence and not invent evidence or pay homage to authorities that don’t exist.

    Creationism is not a little bit right here and there …its is lies from start to finish.

  59. Right wingers started this silly tangent …… how else do you explain the hysteria over BLM aims?

  60. Creationism has “nothing to do with the biblical story?? Really? Do you not have access to the book of Genesis?

    Meanwhile, Jesus said,
    4 “Haven’t you read,” he replied, “that at the beginning the Creator ‘made them male and female,’ (a direct quote from Gen 1:27)

    5 “and said, ‘For this reason a man will leave his father and mother and be united to his wife, and the two will become one flesh’? (a direct quote from Gen 2:24)

    So there’s Jesus directly quoting from Biblical Creationism, directly appealing to it as a historical fact. And notice that his enemies, the Pharisees, DID accept the Genesis references as historical fact, they gave Christ no opposition on it at all.)

    So are Christians “required to believe or accept” the words of Jesus, or is it okay for Christians to disbelieve and reject His words?

  61. Not speculation, that was the direct statement of the officer to the police Superintendent. How about some accountability on the part of citizens as well.

  62. Few scientific theories address all the evidence, no scientist is entirely objective, and you cannot deny the scientific credentials of men and women from accredited academic institutions who have reasoned from the evidence that a Creator exists.

  63. If I were President, I’d stick Black Lives Matter in jail until they paid full financial compensation to the Fraternal Order of Police to cover medical, compensation and survivor costs of injured, maimed and murdered police and their families/survivors.
    Pants up, and don’t loot. There’s your accountability.

  64. Evolution is a religion. You obviously have lots of faith in it.

    But evolution utterly fails to explain your own existence and characteristics (for example, your ability to post paragraphs that are chock-full of grammar and syntax conventions), plus your ability to understand INFINITE concepts like “eternity” or (with sufficient classroom training) various useful math disciplines like “Complex Analysis”.

    So Evolution has NO explanation for Spuddie’s abilities. And since Evolution ONLY works on material objects, (“natural selection”, remember?), evolution has NO explanation — And By Definition Never WILL Have — any explanation for that part of Spuddie which is immaterial (viz., the human mind, the human soul).

    So you current religion Spuds, (the theory of evolution), is necessarily a BUM religion. You need an Upgrade !!

  65. LOL. When you get your PhD in biology, I will take your opinions on the subject seriously.

    “(But evolution utterly fails to explain your existence. You have a bum religion.)”

    I would hope it makes for a lousy religion. People accept religion based on irrational feelings and faith. Evolution is accepted based on evidence and supported rational proof.

  66. None of that is creationism ……dinosaurs with saddles and ID are creationism.

    Creationism pretends its science. The bible does not.

  67. Top way to place the blame for your incompetence on to others too.

    Police in this country are barely accountable for anything they do. Grand juries won’t indict them, bad ones are pushed to other precincts to continue to offend, and people like yourself complain if a cop is disciplined.

    If you want less dead people, cops or unarmed black men, police accountability is the answer. That is not being on a side on one the issue. Its is the issue.

  68. Well, no one would allow you to do that.

    Justice is the answer and justice cuts both ways.

  69. Evolution is the scientific theory on speciation ….that is it.

    Its not there to answer every question about universe and its a ridiculous lie to call it a religion.

    There are no souls, again no evidence, and your mind is in that thing on your shoulders. None of this has anything to do with Evolution.

    A soul is just a description of a bunch of human attributes …its not a thing itself.

  70. Wrong. If any theory can’t explain all the evidence it isn’t a scientific theory.

    Many scientists are religious ….none put their religion into their science.

    Magical creators have no evidence.

  71. Your narrow perspective is really a shame, and non-scholastic besides, not only on issues of science but on that of public policy as well. I’m done bandying words with you.

  72. I accept your surrender.

    This narrow perspective is only slightly less narrow than mine. You believe in a god without evidence but still don’t believe in men with 50 heads or flying dogs with Phds with lasers for eyes.

    We both disbelieve the last 2 because there is no evidence of such things. We only differ on the first which for some reason you believe despite your reason for disbelieving the rest.

  73. It is only a lie if he doesn’t believe it. He profits from what he thinks is the truth. I know several ministers that do the same thing.

  74. If you posit and all powerful all knowing God that exists outside of space time, no evidence can refute “because that is the way he made it”. Furthermore, I know of not a single Creationist that would say that faith was not the basis of their belief. If faith were not the basis, they would not be a creationist. They then look for evidence to support their faith. I am a chemist. I have faith in the laws of Thermodynamics. I look for evidence to support that faith all the time.

  75. “If you posit and all powerful all knowing God that exists outside of space time, no evidence can refute “because that is the way he made it”.”

    Meaning they are lazy. It is a catchall argument that never gets support.

    “Furthermore, I know of not a single Creationist that would say that faith was not the basis of their belief”

    Making them dishonest. Creationism posits that their belief in literal biblical creation can be proven by scientific methods, not based on faith.

  76. Hardly a surrender, something more like a tactical retreat, as it is unwise to waste resources on a battle that has become fruitless to continue…a surrender would require that I accede to your position. I do not.

  77. Is the real concern color or is it becoming middle class in life style, choices and internalizing middle income norms that takes one from being looked on as something less to being accepted? In my travels, I see a lot of mixing and acceptance if individuals of different background who are perceived as being from the middle class. Once white really meant those of English origins and later expanded to the British Isles, then northern Europe, and then all of Europe. I see greater acceptance of those whose aspirations are middle class regardless of background. This is not to deny the social injustices of the past, but when we dig a little deeper nearly every group has had its obstacles in this or another country in ethnic history.

  78. There are context within what Jesus was referencing. When he was referring to the beginning making them male and female, it was in the context of marriage, not with reference to age of the Earth.

  79. Ken Ham needs to do his research a bit more profound. His take that Leaders of color are responsible for the term differ races being used today, has to be the most irresponsible statement a so called christian can make. If he had taken time to studied up on Johann Friedrich Blumenbach, he never would have made that claim, or wrote/quoted this article. If there’s a culture that constantly differentiate themselves as a superior “RACE” or use the term different race of people, all he has to do is look in the mirror.

Leave a Comment