Creation Museum CEO and President Ken Ham recently criticized a Christian academic who believes in theistic evolution—the belief that evolution and millions of years can be mixed with Scripture.
Ham, founder of Answers in Genesis, wrote in a blog post Saturday, “The biggest problem with ideas that compromise God’s Word in Genesis … is that they make the Bible untrustworthy—so it’s an authority issue.”
The Christian apologist points to BioLogos and its content manager, Jim Stump, who has a Ph.D. in philosophy and wrote an article explaining how the organization deals with the long life spans of people mentioned in Genesis 5 and 11.
Stump wrote, “People living for more than 900 years stands in conflict with BioLogos’ acceptance of contemporary science. On this latter point, I should note that our acceptance of science does not at all imply that we think God never performs miracles. If God wanted to make Methuselah live to be 969 years old, we certainly believe that God could intervene in the natural order of things and make that happen. The question rather … is whether that is really the message of the text.”
Ham argues that Stump confuses the word science with evolutionary ideas and says Stump “makes it sound like anyone who believes in a literal Genesis has rejected ‘contemporary science.’” Ham explains that people who have accepted a literal Genesis have rejected evolutionary ideas, which are historical science.
“While historical science is not testable or observable,” Ham writes, “observational science is. If it were true that biblical creationists had rejected all of science, there would be no creation scientists!”
Ham also criticizes Stump for claiming “that the overall message of Genesis 5 and 11 overrides the need to understand the genealogies as literal history.”
Stump writes in his article, “We don’t really know what it meant to the ancients to attribute these numbers to the lives of the patriarchs.”
But, Ham says, we do know what these numbers meant: “They mean exactly what the text says. The patriarchs lived for hundreds of years, because the lifespan of humans was longer shortly after the Fall (Genesis 3).”
Ham then points out that Stump doesn’t explain how other life spans play into his theory.
“For example, what about the lifespans of people like Noah or Moses?” he asks. “Moses was 120 years old when he died. Now, is that just a symbolic number? When do the genealogies become trustworthy again?”
Ham urges his readers not to be taken in by such elaborate ideas, “which are nothing more than fallible sinful man’s attempts not to take God at His Word.”
Ham will participate in a debate against Bill Nye “The Science Guy” Tuesday at the Creation Museum’s 900-seat Legacy Hall in Petersburg, Ky. The agreed-upon topic for the debate is: “Is creation a viable model of origins?” The sold-out event will stream live for free.
See an error in this article?
To contact us or to submit an article
