The Lie: Evolution

Rating:
Summary: Superb expl'n of the importance of Genesis to Christianity
Review: I think all Christians would benefit from reading this book. If they don't believe that Genesis is historical fact they will realise the theological problems with their stance. If they do, then they will be better prepared to stand their ground.

The back cover says that this book is for you: if you believe that Genesis is not important to presenting the Gospel. If you believe that what you think about Genesis does not affect you personally. If you believe that evolution can be made to fit the Bible. If you are a witnessing Christian seeking to bring the Gospel to this spiritually drifting world.

This is certainly not (nor intended to be) a science book. It does however have some interesting things to say about the scientific method. Everyone is biased - the current scientific method is biased towards evolutionary thinking. It is entirely proper and scientific to question evolutionary assumtpions and thought processes.

Ham demonstrates that many of the social ills around us today are really a result of the rejection of Genesis, which is truly the foundation of Christianity. When you read it you think - of course, it's obvious.

Ham's description of the three strands of the Gospel was particularly powerful: Foundation: Creation, Fall, origin of sin. Power: the cross and resurrection. Hope: all things will be restored.

When Paul preached to the Jews he preached the cross since they already knew about Creation. When he preached to the Greeks, he started at the foundation and preached the Creator God. Today's Western society is more Greek than Jewish.

Ham's arguments are of course supported by Scriptural references throughout.

Rating:
Summary: Christians - Must Read
Review: This is a must read for all Christians. The "Theory of Evolution" has been given such credibility in our society that it has convinced not only non-Christians that it is true, but also Christians, and even the leadership of many Christian churches. Unfortunately, since most of us are not scientists, we tend to believe the false claims that evolution has withstood the scrutiny of science, and we erroneously attempt to integrate evolution into the history of God's creation. We attempt to rationalize that God must have created "through" evolution, which is not possible.

Reading this book will help the reader to understand that there is an overwhelming amount of scientific evidence that supports the account of creation as given to us in the Bible. The result will be a much stronger Christian faith, as the record of Creation is the foundation of our faith. Without it, the rest begins to crumble.

The reason we wear clothes, the reason marriage is only between a man and a woman, the reason Christ had to die for us to be reconciled to God, is all contained in Genesis. We can learn how to look to the whole Bible as a source for our decision making in life, without questioning the foundation of it, which is creation.

This book has had as much effect on me as any book I have read.

Rating:
Summary: Take your stinking paws off me, you damn dirty ape!
Review: A triumph! Not since the Scopes monkey trial has there been such a definitive victory against the wickedness of evolution. This book is a one-two punch which clearly explains one: why the theory of evolution is junk science and two: how everything you ever wanted to know about the origin of species is in the Book of Genesis.

What makes this book unique is that it exposes the theory of evolution for what it really is: a plot of Satan. I wish Ken Ham would write more books exposing modern-day Satanic works, like fluroridated water, the smallpox vaccine, and heavier-than-air aircraft. If the Creator had intended us to fly, we would have been born winged. To attempt to circumvent His design is to go against divine will. Sin of pride!

The one thing I don't get is why biologists can't figure this stuff out. If I - with no formal biology training whatsoever - can understand this book, why can't the scientists who dedicate their lives to studying this subject?

Rating:
Summary: Arguments of First Resort
Review: The Lie: Evolution was written by a conservative Christian for conservative Christians. It is neither a tract nor a science book; it is an apologetics manual. Christians seeking a scientific critique of evolution should look elsewhere. Nonetheless, The Lie should be read by anyone interested in the creation/evolution debate (C/E), because Ken Ham is one of the most active evangelists in the field, and The Lie illumines his motivating philosophy and arguments of first resort.

The Lie is a forceful polemic that will invigorate readers who already agree with Ham's views. These qualities, and the dearth of science in The Lie, ought to alert evolutionists to the true nature of the debate, as conceived by conservative Christians. If Ham can pack this much conviction into 185 pages without deigning to evaluate the science, then it ought to be clear that C/E involves more than weighing evidence and vetting theories.

Ham argues that Genesis is foundational to Christianity. Genesis explains that God created the universe in six days, that creation was perfect at its inception, and that imperfection, sin and death entered the world through Adam. This establishes the need for a Savior, whose atoning work will restore perfection. Evolution, in contrast, implies gradual, ongoing "creation," and that from the beginning life has evolved by mutations (imperfection), coupled with natural selection (death). Evolution dispenses with sin, redemption and restoration as metaphysical clutter. Thus, evolution is incompatible with creation and should be rejected by those who believe the Bible is the infallible word of God.

Ham scrupulously rejects the "evidentialist" approach in favor of a "presuppositionalist" approach: The Bible is a priori true; evolution is ipso facto false. If you accept the truth of the Bible, then evidence is irrelevant. "Faith is . . . the evidence of things not seen . . . Through faith we understand that the worlds were framed by the word of God" (Hebrews 11:1, 3). Liberal theologians and Christians who incorporate evolution into their worldview are seen as equivocal in their faith. What Ham overlooks is that creation "scientists," by accumulating and interpreting evidence in favor of creation, are engaged in a superfluous endeavor that might be inimical to faith.

The Lie contains weaknesses that may not be apparent to Ham's target audience. First, Ham should have provided a summary of Neo-Darwinism, as currently accepted by a virtual consensus of scientists practicing in relevant fields. Instead, Ham makes passing references throughout the book to mutations, natural selection, and evolutionary "progress," assuming that his readers are familiar with these mechanisms. In many instances he confounds popular misconceptions or outdated concepts with current consensus, when in fact the public is largely ignorant of Neo-Darwinism, and much that scientists once accepted has been superceded or modified. Americans in general and Christians in particular are woefully undereducated when it comes to evolution. And while this book is not a critique of evolutionary theory per se, any discussion that fails to account for the basics is inadequate.

Second, Ham elicits an extremely narrow definition of "science" that allows him to summarily dismiss evolutionary theory as non-science. His definition is consonant with the popular image of scientists performing repeatable experiments in a controlled lab setting. While this is indeed how some scientists work, Ham's definition disqualifies the well-established fields of astronomy, archaeology, paleontology, geology, epidemiology, climatology, linguistics, forensics, and a host of other historical sciences, including history itself. In short, Ham believes that any statement about the past is no better than a guess. He makes no allowance for methodological or evidentiary considerations that might render one "guess" better than another.

Ham's disdain for historical science is matched by his misrepresentation of scientific method. Implicit throughout The Lie is the creationist mantra that evolution is "just a theory." This dismissive attitude might be apt if evolution was "just a hypothesis," but in fact a theory is much stronger than a hypothesis, and requires more in the way of "disproof." One wonders why conservative Christians do not also protest the theory of gravitation, the germ theory of disease, the heliocentric theory of the solar system and the atomic theory of matter.

As a consequence of the points just made, Ham erroneously identifies evolution as a religion. Because evolution is non-science, and because a theory is no better than a guess, belief in the theory of evolution must be based on faith. But if evolution is a religion, then so are archaeology, epidemiology and forensics! In fact, Neo-Darwinism, like any scientific theory, is tentative and subject to disproof. Evidentiary interpretations and evolutionary hypotheses are modified or discarded every year; that's a hallmark of science, but not of religion. The dogmatism of some scientists is beside the point, as is the fact that many laypersons accept evolution on faith. Moreover, to equate science and religion is to rob both of their meaning. If Ham's purpose is obfuscation, he has succeeded. If his purpose is clarity, then he should respect meaningful distinctions.

Finally and integrally, Ham sees a causal relation between public acceptance of evolutionary theory and the acceleration of cultural decay: abortion, homosexuality, feminism, pornography, drugs, racism, even oppressive business practices! Darwinism, via moral relativism, is now the ultimate justification for an ungodly way of life. As Ham tells it, evolution has been the midwife of misery and suck-nurse of sin for the last 150 years. In some cases he draws valid connections: viz. Spencer's social Darwinism. What Ham fatally fails to explain, however, is that the worth of an idea cannot be measured solely by its misuse. If it could, then Christianity should be rejected because nominally Christian individuals and institutions have instigated wars, genocide, slavery, racism, infanticide, torture, psychological and sexual abuse, theft, fraud, deceit, environmental degradation, tax evasion, and yes, even oppressive business practices in the name of Christ. Christianity's association with these crimes is a matter of historical fact. But to conflate the ideal of Christianity with Christianity's blood-spattered past and ethically compromised present would be fundamentally unfair.

Rating:
Summary: Answers the question why Christians cannot accept evolution.
Review: Evolution can be torn down from biblical and scientific angles. This book basically takes the former approach. It gives many simple, clear and convincing truths (with lots of biblical support and some scientific support) as to why Christians cannot accept evolution. It is easy to read and shows beyond a shadow of doubt that evolution and its followers directly oppose and condemn anything that has to do with a God, creator or creation. The book is compulsory reading for all Christians who are interested in origins and who are caught in a dilemma because what man and science say about how we came about contradicts directly what God/the bible says. Read this book and you will no longer have to make compromises about what Genesis says about creation in "light" of evolution "facts". Another interesting thing about the book is that it shows how the teachings and belief in evolution have brought about many of the social ills we see today, such as abortion, suicide and hopelessness. To destroy evolution from a scientific perspective (ie no scriptural support, just plain scientific facts) I recommend the book What is Creation Science? by Morris and Parker.

Rating:
Summary: I want to truth. Not lies.
Review: This is the truth that evolution is a lie. God's Word is the truth.

Heb 4:12, 13
For the word of God (Bible) is living and active. Sharper than any double-edged sword, it penetrates even to dividing soul and spirit, joints and marrow; it judges the thoughts and attitudes of the heart. Nothing in all creation is hidden from God's sight.

Rom 1:25
They exchanged the truth of God for a lie, and worshiped and served created things rather than the Creator-who is forever praised. Amen.

Rating:
Summary: Redrawing the battle lines in the "origins" debate.
Review: Having perused some of the earlier reviews of this book, I am struck by the intensity of the polarization it causes. The reviewers either love it or they hate it -- there is not much middle ground. It seems to me that those who criticize it the loudest and hate it the most are missing its main point. Thus their blistering critiques are aimed at something that the book was never intended to be. Once these things are understood, it should be easier to offer a more objective evaluation in light of the book's intended purpose.

Within the last week I had the firsthand opportunity to hear the author speak at my church, and have read this book. Having heard his unfiltered message "straight from the horse's mouth," I have (I believe) the benefit of additional insights into his thinking that may not be apparent to some readers.

First of all it is important to note that this is NOT intended to be a science book. That means it is NOT intended to tackle all of the physical evidence for or against creationism in this brief text. Second, the reader must consider the target audience, to wit, those who approach the "origins" debate already convinced from other sources that the Bible is true and authoritative -- what Ham calls his "presuppositionist" approach. Third, the reader must consider that the naysayers are approaching this debate already convinced from other sources that the Bible is false and lacking in any authority. Both sides have the same evidence to work with. The only difference is which "presuppositions" will be your filter as you examine that evidence.

With that groundwork laid, it is much easier to identify this book for what it is -- a challenge and a wake-up call to believers both real and nominal to consider the incredibly important implications of trying to take "millions of years" (Ham's shorthand term for the evolutionist position) and make it fit with biblical teachings. Not only it is impossible to do so without doing violence to Scripture, but in trying to do this believers are handing a pick and shovel to those whose desire it is to undermine (and ultimately to destroy) biblical Christianity. In other words, the purpose of the book is to clearly delineate between two mutually exclusive positions, and to issue a challenge those who foolishly try to straddle the fence. This is Ham's essential message, whether in print or in person, and personally I thought he did a yeoman's job of getting this message across to those who care to listen. Unfortunately, too many of the critics automatically assume the author's position is flawed, and thus fail to comprehend even the basic gist of what he's trying to say because their minds are firmly closed as they read.

Aside from challenging the church and the compromisers about the crucial nature of this debate, Ham made one other very important observation which bears repeating. In fact, it's one of the most important points in the whole book, and I felt like he didn't say nearly enough about it -- thus only four stars instead of five. That is the fact that this is not a battle of "science vs. religion." Rather, it's one of "religion vs. religion." Each religion has the same evidence at its disposal to bring to bear on the "origins" debate. The only difference is that your religion will determine how you choose to evaluate the evidence. Ham makes no bones about the fact that he approaches this issue as a religious person, and he challenges evolutionists to make the same admission.

Evolutionism is a religion, make no mistake. Evolutionists criticize Christians for believing in supernatural occurences which cannot be proved by the scientific method, but in so doing they condemn themselves by the same logic -- hoisting themselves on their own petard, so to speak. To believe in evolution is to believe in supernatural occurences which cannot be proved by the scientific method. Both religions have a God. For Christians it's the God of the Bible, revealed to humanity in his Word and in Jesus Christ. For evolutionists, crass humanism is the order of the day and man is his own god. Such humanists cannot admit to the existence of an eternal, omnipotent Creator, because it would force them to confront their moral accountability to that Creator. Thus they decide it's easier to believe that the universe spontaneously created itself rather than give in to the "blind faith" of Christianity. If that characterizes you, I hope you're intellectually honest enough to see the irony in that statement.

What the debate boils down to is this -- Christians believe that the God of the Bible is real, and that his Word accurately recounts the creation of the universe. Evolutionists hang all their hope on a logical impossibility, that matter can create itself without an external cause. This violates at least two of the fundamental laws of logic -- the law of noncontradiction and the law against the uncaused effect.

For example, if I were to insist that the coffee cup on my table simply sprang into uncaused existence, i.e. created itself, and that the water in it bubbled and evolved over time to a palate-pleasing Kona blend, you would rightly call me a illogical madman. Yet that is exactly the position that evolutionists are forced to defend in their own exercise of blind faith. And so the battle lines are drawn just as the author plainly spells out. In this the author accomplished the intended purpose of his book. I just wish he hadn't been so soft-spoken about it.

Just a final point to consider, from Romans 1:18-20: "The wrath of God is being revealed from heaven against all the godlessness and wickedness of men who suppress the truth by their wickedness, since what may be known about God is plain to them, because God has made it plain to them. For since the creation of the world, God's invisible qualities -- his eternal power and divine nature -- have been clearly seen, being understood from what has been made, so that men are without excuse." You think about that as you read this book.

Rating:
Summary: The Lie: Scientific Creationism
Review: I read this book several years ago while going through a "seeker" experience. I honestly wanted to find out if there was anything to scientific creationism: this book convinced me that there was not. Like Benjamin Franklin, who became convinced that the Bible was not inerrant through the bizarre explanations of a preacher trying to prove that obvious discrepencies weren't really discrepencies, I lost faith in creationism when I read this collection of baroque theories and empty rhetoric. The last straw for me was Ham's theory that Satan created evolutionary theory because he didn't want to believe that he was created by God. How can people take this guy seriously?

Creation science does violence both to science and the Bible. I became a Christian in spite of foolishness like this, but I hate to think how many people are driven away from Christinaity by "scientists" like Ham. To look at the authors of Genesis as authorities on natural history is like looking at Jesus as a lecturer on botany when he siad that the mustard seed is the "least of all seeds" He was incorrect from a scientific standpoint, but that wasn't the point he was making.

If you are truly interested in the relationship between science and religion read books by John Polkinghorne or Howard Van Til. Brian McLaren's "The Story We Find Ourselves In" is also a good resource for Evangelicals who want to free themselves of pseudoscience and dishonesty.

Rating:
Summary: Review
Review: I thought this book was very good. However, I was offended and amused by Mark H. Drought's review. Firstly, he states:

'If you ever wondered at what the state of creation science is, take a look here.'

I also suggest you take a look at a scientifically-minded creationist website such as Answers In Genesis (www.answersingenesis.org). This site has many articles written by PhD. scientists about creation/evolution. He also says:

'Is it any wonder that the only places in the world where creationism is discussed are primitive fundamentalist Christian institutions...'

In answer, creationism is taught mainly within Christian institutions because it has been excluded from scientific discussion in schools etc. in many countries, not because it has nothing valuable to say. He then says:

'...where they've recently conceded the earth goes around the sun?'

Even if this was recently conceded (was it? I don't know), careful analysis of Biblical passages (Job 26:7, Isaiah 40:21,22) shows that the human Bible writers always knew that the earth orbits around the sun, although perhaps these conceders did not know this. Then he says the book:

'could pass for progressive scholarship...where they still believe Noah once put two of every animal on earth aboard his boat...'

As explained on many creatinist webites (AiG for one), 'every animal' did not include land invertebrates, sea dwellers, plants etc. and so it was possible to fit every animal needed onto the ark. Also, saying people 'still' believe it makes it sound like a primitive story, however, many scientists believe it to be a possible and actual event. Then:

'...couldn't possibly view the subject objectively, since he's a total religious fanatic who believes that any knowledge that contradicts his beliefs must, of necessity, be false.'

As no evolutionist or creationist can view the subject objectively, because every one has a commitment of some sort - to the Bible (like me), to materialism (as indicated by scientist Richard Lewontin when he basically said he would stick with materialism no matter what the evidence), it is unfair to attack Ken Ham for having a commitment. I also object to the 'science v wacky religion' statement, because, as the Answers In Genesis website shows, it is science v science because there are definitely scientific arguments (put forward properly by scientists) for disbelieving Darwinism.

In conclusion, I often wonder about the state of modern evolution "science" since criticism of it (let alone alternatives) is not allowed in many situations and since it seems to have failed to provide a single example of a mutation that adds new information or to provide a framework that allowed the first cell to appear spontaneously.

Oh, and as they like to say at AiG, it's always amusing to see a critic make bald assertions without any examples or evidence ('Ham doesn't understand how science works, he misrepresents evolution at every turn,' 'total religious fanatic' etc.)

Rating:
Summary: A must Read!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Review: Ken Ham is leading the Christians out of the Dark Ages along with many other Christian writers/thologians/and scientists.
This book shows how Creationism is important to Christianity.
No longer can Christians believe in the age old evolution.

I also suggest Refuting Evolution which grasps a footstool on the science field