John Glenn (hero) Verses Ken Ham (idiot)

Share

Screen Shot 2015-06-06 at 10.14.59 PM     “…”I don’t see that I’m any less religious by the fact that I can appreciate the fact that science just records that we change with evolution and time, and that’s a fact. It doesn’t mean it’s less wondrous and it doesn’t mean that there can’t be some power greater than any of us that has been behind and is behind whatever is going on.“…” John H. Glenn, Jr.

I remember, back in the mid-1980s, having the discussion with one of the Skylab astronauts.  Like he told me, anyone who has truly accepted Christ as their Savior should have absolutely no problem dealing with the science of evolution.  When you truly believe in Christ, and understand the absolute awe of the Lord, He can do anything, including evolution.  Our discussion started what was for me, a very real quest to try to comprehend the awesomeness of God.  He also suggested we need to think about God in terms of the scientific.  Like he said, he had the advantage of orbiting the planet, and looking out at the heavens and the Glory of God.

Because I’m such a science and science fiction fan, I began looking at the night sky, this vast array of black velvet with glitter sprinkled haphazardly on it, and contemplating God the Creator. Frankly, I don’t know how anyone cannot look at the night sky in an unpolluted area and not feel a sense of the presence of the Creator.  Maybe that’s where a little dash of Gene Roddenberry ‘theology’ fits in with my view of the heavens.  God is the Creator of the Universe.  It is so vast, so great, so complicated, we cannot possibly even begin to comprehend His creation.  There is Up until the past few  years, reasonable people had no problem accepting the science of evolution and ChrisScreen Shot 2015-06-06 at 10.15.43 PMa very good reason one of the most important, and longest surviving bastion of astronomical research is the Vatican Observatory of the Catholic Church. The educated men of the church have long understood that, in order to understand God, one must understand the Universe.

We can’t.

This is where I have a very difficult time dealing with people like Ken Ham who refuse to acknowledge evolution, and turn their back on science.  I also have just as difficult a time with people like Neil Tyson who turn their back on God.  A person cannot begin to understand this universe in which we live without the recognition of a Creator, and without the assistance of science.  The denial of a science like evolution limits God.  The denial of a Creator limits science.  I can understand a person of science refusing to acknowledge a Creator.  I cannot even begin to comprehend a person who claims to be a Christian refusing to acknowledge science.  One of my very favorite writings of faith is the opening of the Episcopal Church’s Eucharistic Prayer C.

Lift up your hearts.
We lift them to the Lord.

Let us give thanks to the Lord our God.
It is right to give him thanks and praise.

God of all power, Ruler of the Universe, you are worthy of glory and praise.
Glory to you for ever and ever.

At your command all things came to be: the vast expanse of interstellar space, galaxies, suns, the planets in their courses, and this fragile earth, our island home.
By your will they were created and have their being.

From the primal elements you brought forth the human race, and blessed us with memory, reason, and skill. You made us the rulers of creation. But we turned against you, and betrayed your trust; and we turned against one another.
Have mercy, Lord, for we are sinners in your sight.

Again and again, you called us to return. Through prophets and sages you revealed your righteous Law. And in the fullness of time you sent you only Son, born of a woman, to fulfill your Law, to open for is the way of freedom and peace.
By his blood, he reconciled us. By his wounds, we are healed.

And therefore we praise you, joining with the heavenly chorus, with prophets, apostles, and martyrs, and with all those in every generation who have looked to you in hope, to proclaim with them your glory, in their unending hymn:

Holy, Holy, Holy Lord, God of power and might,
heaven and earth are full of your glory.
Hosanna in the highest.
Blessed is he who comes in the name of the Lord.
Hosanna in the highest.Screen Shot 2015-06-06 at 10.15.55 PM

Dr. Leslie Wickman, former astronaut, has the same belief as do I, and many of the star trekkers I had the honor of meeting, and hanging out with, once upon a time.  Unfortunately, Ken Ham, creationist, is quite upset about this.  He is so knowledgeable on the subject of science, God, Creationism, and astronauts that he wrote an editorial (with the assistance of researchers0 criticizing not only Wickman, but the venerable John H. Glenn, Jr., who, in my estimation, is this nation’s greatest living hero.  Ham wrote:

“…Astronauts like Wickman and Glenn who claim that ideas like an old universe and evolution are compatible with the Bible are ignoring many theological and scientific problems. Firstly, there is the problem of death before sin. Genesis 1:31 tells us that everything God made was “very good.” Scripture also tells us that death is the result of sin (Genesis 2:17), not an original part of God’s creation, “Therefore, just as through one man sin entered the world, and death through sin, and thus death spread to all men, because all sinned” (Romans 5:12). But if God used evolution to create, then He used a process of millions of years of death, disease, bloodshed and suffering to create life. He then looked over millions of years of death, bloodshed, suffering, disease, and animal carnivory and called it “very good.” The God who calls death “the last enemy” (1 Corinthians 15:26) and will eventually destroy it in the lake of fire (Revelation 20:14) would not call death and suffering “very good.” This is a major theological problem with evolution and millions of years—and it’s just one of many!…”

I think my first reaction is quite simple.  Just who is this genius to dareScreen Shot 2015-06-06 at 10.17.06 PM criticize John Glenn?  Well, Ham stated that he had recently spoken at the Bible Club at Goddard.  The problem with this is that the organization he hails as being a bastion of Creationism isn’t as into it as Ham claims.  Then again, over the years, Ham has claimed a few whoppers.  On the other hand, what is so exciting about all of this is that John Glenn, who is the last surviving member of the Mercury 7, is going strong!  He’s had some health problems, but his mind is just as active and as sharp is it ever was.  Having recently lost my father to Alzheimer’s Disease, to me, this is a treasure.

What we need to know about Ken Ham is that he’s tight with the now disgraced (we hope) Duggar family.  He’s tight with Bill Gothard.  He’s ATI all the way!  The reason this is important is because without the growing (and it still is) political power of Bill Gothard and his character brainwashing, there would be no success for Ken Ham.  He’s one of the individuals riding Gothard’s coatScreen Shot 2015-06-06 at 10.16.37 PM-tails. It’s a strange world with these people.  Don’t think for a minute it has anything to do with faith or Christ.  It is all about milking the situation for all it’s worth.  I was reading a stat that only18% of Americans believe the spew Ham is trying to sell.  It shocks me that 18% believe it.  Of course they do watch FOX and are highly plugged in to the networks.

Ken Ham is an idiot.  He makes God look small by denying that God has created the mind of man, and given us the ability to think for ourselves.  God gave us the ability to reason, to create, and to use rational logic.  He gave us the ability to evolve into something better.  People like Ham are almost an insult to God’s gift of intelligence.  On the other hand people like Neil Tyson, in their absolute denial of God are limiting themselves.  Neither group is correct.

Share

6 thoughts on “John Glenn (hero) Verses Ken Ham (idiot)

  1. I am not against science, but evolution is only a theory and will never be proven. They used to teach us that the Piltdown Man was the missing link and it was all in the science textbooks. It took the world’s top scientists over 40 years to discover that this was a fake, making them look like real idiots. After that, I just keep on enjoying whatever show they decide to throw at us. I take everything the scientists say with a grain of salt and a glass of wine. It also tastes better with a sense of humor. I like it that way.

  2. My understanding is that the principles of evolution are as well understood and as proven as the principles of gravity. The word “theory” has a different meaning in science. The phrase, “only a theory” is not the way science uses that word. “Theory” in scientific usage refers to basic principles – the theory of gravity, the theory of disease-transmission, the theory of evolution – that scientific understanding is centered around.

    It was science, after all, that exposed Piltdown Man. It was science that came to understand the theory of electro-magnetism that allows you to power your computer. It’s science that allows us to use basic geologic principles to find the rare-earths necessary for its manufacture.

    Evolution is proven, as much as anything can be proven in science. Is there anything other than the Piltdown fraud that convinces you otherwise?

  3. I have to disagree with you about Dr. Tyson. Unlike Mr. Ham, he’s not attempting to spread actual falsehoods. He disagrees with you about something that is, fundamentally, unprovable. You have your beliefs, he has his, and neither can present absolute proof. You can disagree with out being disagreeable to each other. I think he does.

    Mr. Ham, on the other hand, is engaging in actual lies. He misrepresents real facts, with real consequences for education, scientific funding and human progress. That’s truly disagreeable, in my mind.

  4. But – both are sincere. Ham believes what he believes. He doesn’t think it is false. I happen to believe what is written in the book of Genesis. I don’t think it’s a lie. I have no problem with Creation. Where I think Ham is just plain delusional is his Young Earth Theory. It defies basic science. He is unbending in it. Tyson is unbending in what he believes. He thinks he is right, to the point of absolute. I think his science is excellent. I happen to think that evolution is logical. I also think both men are so unbending that they eventually harm themselves. Even Sagan admitted that there could be a creator of the universe. He didn’t go farther than that, but he could see the possibilities.

  5. Did I not state that I have no problem with evolution. It is Darwin’s theory of evolution. It should be to the point where it was his idea. I think someone else would have come up with it, but he beat everyone else to the big fat book about it. Scientists had been theorizing about it for a century before Darwin. Science like that doesn’t happen in a vacuum. Does believing in Christ make me an idiot and incapable of comprehending science? If I did not have a serious problem with dyslexia and numbers to the point where it had and still does create a serious learning problem beyond basic calculations (numbers move around in front of me). It is not dyscalculia. I had to give up on science classes because I could not perform the actual calculations needed to pass the courses. When I have time to read, it isn’t history, which would surprise people, but science. But, I am a Christian. I don’t know if my belief in Christ disqualifies me as a rational individual, but it should not. I am very impatient with people who are Christians and refuse to comprehend what evolution is. Frankly, to me, you cannot completely comprehend the Glory of God unless you fully accept evolution as science. I mention the ‘Theory of Evolution’ because there seems to be this strange inability for many creationists even those who aren’t hard core to separate Darwin from the science. They have been taught to look at him like the devil. Take Darwin out of the equation and they have no problem with ‘evolution’ as long as that word is not used. Yes, it’s stupid, but I’ve seen it time and time again. Use natural selection, no problem. Just don’t use that evil word. Also, don’t ever make the mistake that it is done out of ignorance. That’s the first mistake people make. It isn’t. It is done out of being taught that Darwin himself was almost a tool of the devil. He ranks up there with Judas, Jezebel, Marx, Lenin, Stalin, and the Beatles (joke).

    The average person doesn’t spend a lot of time thinking about this. They have other things in their lives. The reason Sagan was so successful was that he was not combative. He was so charming (and the best flirt I ever encountered) that even people who had been taught evolution was evil were able to open their eyes. Tyson is combative and nasty about it. He lacks Sagan’s charm. Quite frankly, I was terribly disappointed with his remake of Cosmos. I think it was trite, supercilious, and insulting to anyone who had more than a second grade education. Tyson treated his viewers like they were stupid. Sagan treated them like they were intellectual equals. Sagan charmed people like Ken Ham.

Comments are closed.