AiG disinvited from homeschooling convention

[Mallon]

I thought this was interesting.

Apparently, Ken Ham and Answers in Genesis have been disinvited from a YEC homeschooling convention because of Ham's public and disrespective attitude toward some some fellow Christian scholars who were also invited but do not accept YECism.

 

[shernren]

It seems the disinvitation is aimed at Ken Ham personally; AiG will still have a slot but Jon Sarfati will be speaking instead: An Opportunity for Critical Thinking! | Proslogion

If that is true, then AiG's post here is all the more disturbing.

This in particular is an outright lie in any case:

Incidentally, have you ever noticed individuals at BioLogos and elsewhere cry the loudest for what they call tolerance and free speech, but tend to be the most intolerant and censorious of others? The position of Answers in Genesis is that when it comes to biblical truth, there is only one truth, and we are called to be intolerant of all other opposing claims of truth. AiG is, therefore, at least willing to admit our “intolerance” in this area. Those who have joined together in a harmony of accusations against AiG over this homeschool convention incident have one thing in common: a double standard. At the end of the day, they are censors. They claim to want open debate and discussion, but when we engage them in the battle of ideas, they launch invectives and ad hominem arguments, and then seek to exclude AiG from the debate. In our view, there is nothing “Christian” about that.
​

There is no indication anywhere that BioLogos itself had any problem with AiG being at these conferences (or they would have pulled out first, wouldn't they?), no indication that BioLogos instead of the homeschooling convention had raised an objection to Ken Ham's comments. As such, dragging them into the accusations of censorship is disingenuous at best and downright dirty lying at worst. If AiG is willing to do this to committed Christians working hard for the glory of God, can you really trust them to represent anyone fairly?

Then again, AiG probably doesn't see BioLogos people as committed Christians working hard for the glory of God. And therein lies the problem.
This exchange (on Wile's blog) was also really illuminating:

Commenter: Mr. Ham did not get “nasty” on his blog; I just re-read it. He says nothing at all about Mr. Enns’ character, intelligence or salvation — he simply calls a wolf a wolf. Mr. Enns’ compromises God’s Word, teaching a different gospel.

J. L. Wile: You claim that Mr. Ham does not get nasty, and then you proceed to call Dr. Enns a WOLF! You then go on to say he is teaching a different gospel! I can see why you didn’t think Ken Ham was nasty. You don’t seem to see when you are being nasty!
​

Spot on, and this is precisely the kind of commenting which gets me riled up against creationists here.

 

[Mallon]

It seems the disinvitation is aimed at Ken Ham personally; AiG will still have a slot but Jon Sarfati will be speaking instead: An Opportunity for Critical Thinking! | Proslogion

From the reading I've done, though, I get the impression that Sarfati is not representing AiG. He agrees with their position, yes, but he is not representing them. The official letter from the homeschooling convention reads: "Great Homeschool Convention’s Advisory Board has unanimously decided to disinvite Ken and AIG from all future conventions".

Spot on, and this is precisely the kind of commenting which gets me riled up against creationists here.

Agreed. But it's nice to see that there is a YEC contingent out there that recognizes that the Bible does not interpret itself and that Christians can have genuine disagreements about how it should best be read (rather than resorting to unilateral prosthelytizing). Dr. Wile has earned new respect from me and I think I'll start following his blog.

 

[shernren]

Ah, I see - so there's someone from AiG's "camp", but not representing AiG officially either. If I were a YECer I would find that a bit harsh but still fair.

 

[theFijian]

Agreed. But it's nice to see that there is a YEC contingent out there that recognizes that the Bible does not interpret itself and that Christians can have genuine disagreements about how it should best be read (rather than resorting to unilateral prosthelytizing). Dr. Wile has earned new respect from me and I think I'll start following his blog.

I wonder how it would go if the AiG bods ever got round the table to discuss baptism - paedo or credo? Or is it ok for there to be different 'truths' as long as it's not about Origins?

 

[sfs]

Ah, I see - so there's someone from AiG's "camp", but not representing AiG officially either. If I were a YECer I would find that a bit harsh but still fair.

Sarfati is not exactly an advocate (or a model) for Christian comity, so it's not clear to me that they have actually improved the situation.

 

[shernren]

They've answered here that modes of baptism, among other disagreements, are "in-house" and therefore not something for them to worry about:

Where Do We Draw the Line? - Answers in Genesis

 

[laconicstudent]

I like how Answers in Genesis isn't even pretending to be a scientific organization anymore.

 

[theFijian]

They've answered here that modes of baptism, among other disagreements, are "in-house" and therefore not something for them to worry about:

Where Do We Draw the Line? - Answers in Genesis

They do try hard don't they. Ironically we've had Creationists on here denying the Trinity and advocating racism yet both claiming to have the Bible as their authority.

 

[laconicstudent]

They do try hard don't they. Ironically we've had Creationists on here denying the Trinity and advocating racism yet both claiming to have the Bible as their authority.

I remember seeing one Creationist make a thread saying he had decided that 1st or 2nd Peter wasn't canonical because it didn't agree with YEC or something like that.

 

[Papias]

They do try hard don't they. Ironically we've had Creationists on here denying the Trinity and advocating racism yet both claiming to have the Bible as their authority.

I remember seeing one Creationist make a thread saying he had decided that 1st or 2nd Peter wasn't canonical because it didn't agree with YEC or something like that.

It's tempting to list creationist heresies, in addition to creationist tactics like quote-mining, outright falsehoods, ad homs, and so on. Perhaps one of the most common is deism, a denial that natural processes are acts of God, that God upholds and sustains all things.

Papias


​

 

[Mallon]

Here's an update on the story:

Todd's Blog: More on the AIG homeschool convention story

Seem's Ham's son is getting into the fray, comparing open-minded Christians to drug and sex-addicted hippies. Helpful!

 

[laconicstudent]

I'm confused. Is this a homeschooling conference or a Fundamentalist Christian rally? Why have none of the discussions about this so far mentioned (gasp!) actual biology education?

 

[shernren]

From the reading I've done, though, I get the impression that Sarfati is not representing AiG. He agrees with their position, yes, but he is not representing them. The official letter from the homeschooling convention reads: "Great Homeschool Convention’s Advisory Board has unanimously decided to disinvite Ken and AIG from all future conventions".

Ah - Todd Wood's further blog explains that Sarfati is CMI, not AiG. Reminds me of that split from three years back.

 

[Mallon]

More fallout in the form of a blog entry from the ICR comparing Ken Ham to Jesus:

A Time to Keep Silent, and a Time to Speak

 

[crawfish]

More fallout in the form of a blog entry from the ICR comparing Ken Ham to Jesus:

A Time to Keep Silent, and a Time to Speak

I have friends who reference ICR because AIG is "too liberal for them".

I'm glad to see the nastiness of some of the leaders of the YEC movement is coming back to bite them.

 

[Mallon]

I'm glad to see the nastiness of some of the leaders of the YEC movement is coming back to bite them.

Unfortunately, I don't think they see it that way. They're making themselves out to be martyrs. To them, the Bible is something to be preached, not discussed. They know The Truth (TM) and it isn't open to interpretation. If you disagree with them, you are disagreeing with God Himself!

 

[shernren]

I have friends who reference ICR because AIG is "too liberal for them".

I'm glad to see the nastiness of some of the leaders of the YEC movement is coming back to bite them.

I wonder how CMI will react, in all this kerfuffle. Or will AiG and ICR write them off as compromisers?

 

[Mallon]

Biologos' response to the matter:

Ken Ham, BioLogos, and Calvary’s Love | The BioLogos Forum

 

[JVPITER]

Biologos' response to the matter:

(see link in Mallon's post)

Ken Ham: In fact, what he [Enns] teaches about Genesis is not just compromising Genesis with evolution, it is outright liberal theology that totally undermines the authority of the Word of God. It is an attack on the Word—on Christ.

BioLogos: Please pray for Mr. Ham and his ministry during these days. Pray that on matters surrounding this highly divisive issue of how best to seek harmony between God’s two books we might all draw closer to God and to each other.

Compare and contrast:

Watch out for false prophets. They come to you in sheep’s clothing, but inwardly they are ferocious wolves. By their fruit you will recognize them. Do people pick grapes from thornbushes, or figs from thistles? Likewise, every good tree bears good fruit, but a bad tree bears bad fruit. A good tree cannot bear bad fruit, and a bad tree cannot bear good fruit. Every tree that does not bear good fruit is cut down and thrown into the fire. Thus, by their fruit you will recognize them.

The acts of the flesh are obvious: sexual immorality, impurity and debauchery; idolatry and witchcraft; hatred, discord, jealousy, fits of rage, selfish ambition, dissensions, factions and envy; drunkenness, orgies, and the like. I warn you, as I did before, that those who live like this will not inherit the kingdom of God.

But the fruit of the Spirit is love, joy, peace, forbearance, kindness, goodness, faithfulness, gentleness and self-control. Against such things there is no law. Those who belong to Christ Jesus have crucified the flesh with its passions and desires. Since we live by the Spirit, let us keep in step with the Spirit. Let us not become conceited, provoking and envying each other.

Peace.