Menu
Jump to content

What's with the ads?

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

AvasMom

Ham strikes again...this time he goes after SWB in earnest

Recommended Posts

I really think he's in over his head "taking on" the likes of SWB and Dr. Enns. He pulled quotes out of context of her review, and is running with his interpretations (funny, that!).

 

I found the opening paragraph of SWB's review of Dr. Enn's book (about reading Sumerian poetry and how that relates to Paul's new heaven and new earth description) compelling and quite interesting, and he doesn't include it in his "review" of her book review on his blog.

 

The simple fact that Ham and his ilk are ignoring HUGE chunks of human culture and history in order to fit their very small view of God's creation doesn't do God's creation justice. argh!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think he should change his conclusion from

 

Bottom line—this book strikes at the very heart of the Christian faith!

 

to

 

 

Bottom line—this book strikes at the very heart of Ken Hamm's interpretation of Christian faith!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Do you think he realizes that SWB and Enns have REAL PhDs? Er, duhhh. Yeah, I'd say he's in over his head. I'll take your BA and raise you a couple of PhDs Mr. Ham.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
This guy is really going to make my head explode one of these days. What a nasty, vicious man. Does he ever stop? Ever?

http://blogs.answersingenesis.org/blogs/ken-ham/2011/04/02/susan-wise-bauer-%e2%80%9cwhy-paul-would-have-flunked-hermeneutics%e2%80%9d/

 

 

Wow! :001_huh::confused::001_huh:

 

I guess one could say the bright side is that the more he spews, the more he reveals his true nature.

 

But still... wow! :001_huh:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
:glare:

 

 

It's times like these that make me very proud to be an atheist.

 

Ouch. FWIW, atheists are ugly to each other too sometimes.

 

Although, I must say as much as I appreciate healthy debate and think it has incredible value (iron sharpens iron and whatnot) among Christians, the nastiness and lemming type attitude I've seen lately is embarrassing. People on FB who have used SOTW and WTM all this time are like "Oh Mr. Ham now I'm starting to question whether we should use WTM and SOTW!! What should we do??? Think for me pleeeeeeease!!" Makes me want to run red hot pokers in my eyes.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I really want to post a comment saying that if he has a criticism of PHP's ministry that he should email them privately instead of attempting to post for all the world to see. You know that comment would last all of about 10 seconds though.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Is this a sudden thing for these attacks? Why is he doing it now? What happened that this is the issue right now? Is it driving people to him?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Is this a sudden thing for these attacks? Why is he doing it now? What happened that this is the issue right now? Is it driving people to him?

 

I think the trigger was that he had to be at a conference with Enns. That lit the match. I think when he got canceled is when the dynamite exploded. Now he is just out for revenge on anyone he sees as party to his public humiliation.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Here is his big problem. He blundered. He did something he should not have done. He slandered speakers at a conference instead of debating ideologies and then he went on to break his contract by telling people not to buy X from X. He can defend his own products; he is welcome to debate ideas. He was never welcome, as stated in the speaking contract, to attack the faith of others or to slander other presenters. He was expected to be professional, gracious, and to let his ideas stand on their own merit.

 

What he should have done was acknowledge that what he did was wrong and ask Dr. Enns and Susan for forgiveness. He should be a grown up and step up to the plate. Then, if he wants to debate the inherrancy of the scriptures, or the principles of hermeneutics, then by all means do so. One does not have to do that in the inappropriate manner that he did.

 

Instead, what he is doing is handing out more invective. Unfortunately, this is all happening at about the same time that AIG is beginning to advertise a Bible curriculum that they will put out for young children, K/1st. It now leaves his arguments subject to the criticism of having a monetary gain motivation. So even if there is no ulterior motive, it is too late to remove that suspicion from the equation.

 

All in all, a serious tactical error on his part. While many in the Christian world will agree with his stance, many more are alienated and disallusioned with their brother in Christ for continuing on in this manner. It does more harm than good and from what I can tell, it is causing former AIG supporters (at least in our neck of the woods) to distance themselves from him.

 

It's all very, very sad. The whole thing is distasteful. Though Dr. Enns and SWB disagree with aspects of Mr. Ham's ideology, they have not chosen to make personal attacks, nor attempt to influence other homeschoolers to not buy his products. They have not chosen to alienate other Christians through invective. I wish Mr. Ham had chosen the higher ground. The "fleeing the appearance of evil". The upright path.

 

As of last week, I would not have said that I would absolutely refrain from purchasing something from AIG. But, this is the straw that broke the camel's back. I have no patience for this any longer. He's let this go on for too long.

 

Susan, keep fighting the good fight in the way that you do. You have Christian love, perseverance, forebearance, grace, and mercy. In short, you remind me very much of the Fruits of the Spirit! I am grateful for you!

 

Faith

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Ouch. FWIW, atheists are ugly to each other too sometimes.

 

Although, I must say as much as I appreciate healthy debate and think it has incredible value (iron sharpens iron and whatnot) among Christians, the nastiness and lemming type attitude I've seen lately is embarrassing. People on FB who have used SOTW and WTM all this time are like "Oh Mr. Ham now I'm starting to question whether we should use WTM and SOTW!! What should we do??? Think for me pleeeeeeease!!" Makes me want to run red hot pokers in my eyes.

 

Could not agree more on the lemmings and pokers. In that vein, Thursday night at Cincy, I saw a big sign on an attendee's backpack: "When Kem Ham is back, I'll be back." Wanted to go up to the lemming and say, "Dude, do you not know where you are?"

 

Moreover, I refused to buy a Bible curriculum because of its 6-day stance. Someone please tell Enns to get busy on the higher grades!

 

Terri

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It's funny to me because I do agree with inerrancy of the Scriptures but I also agree that as far as modern hermeneutics goes, the writers of Scripture took great liberties! In fact, that was one of our first classes in Hermeneutics class at a very conservative evangelical seminary.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I fail to see what he's attacking. I completely agree with Susan Wise Bauer's writing in the review, at least the pieces Ham quotes.

What's the problem?

She's saying that we shouldn't see Scripture as just a divine message that doesn't use the cultural context of the time. I agree with that.

She's saying the Bible has some contradictions and is messy, and can be harsh. Ok, so what? Ken Ham is going to disagree with that? Well, yeah, the Bible hangs together really well, but there are difficult passages. There are harsh parts, there are things we don't understand--SO WHAT? To not acknowledge that is just dumb.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Here is his big problem. He blundered. He did something he should not have done. He slandered speakers at a conference instead of debating ideologies and then he went on to break his contract by telling people not to buy X from X. He can defend his own products; he is welcome to debate ideas. He was never welcome, as stated in the speaking contract, to attack the faith of others or to slander other presenters. He was expected to be professional, gracious, and to let his ideas stand on their own merit.

 

What he should have done was acknowledge that what he did was wrong and ask Dr. Enns and Susan for forgiveness. He should be a grown up and step up to the plate. Then, if he wants to debate the inherrancy of the scriptures, or the principles of hermeneutics, then by all means do so. One does not have to do that in the inappropriate manner that he did.

 

Instead, what he is doing is handing out more invective. Unfortunately, this is all happening at about the same time that AIG is beginning to advertise a Bible curriculum that they will put out for young children, K/1st. It now leaves his arguments subject to the criticism of having a monetary gain motivation. So even if there is no ulterior motive, it is too late to remove that suspicion from the equation.

 

All in all, a serious tactical error on his part. While many in the Christian world will agree with his stance, many more are alienated and disallusioned with their brother in Christ for continuing on in this manner. It does more harm than good and from what I can tell, it is causing former AIG supporters (at least in our neck of the woods) to distance themselves from him.

 

It's all very, very sad. The whole thing is distasteful. Though Dr. Enns and SWB disagree with aspects of Mr. Ham's ideology, they have not chosen to make personal attacks, nor attempt to influence other homeschoolers to not buy his products. They have not chosen to alienate other Christians through invective. I wish Mr. Ham had chosen the higher ground. The "fleeing the appearance of evil". The upright path.

 

As of last week, I would not have said that I would absolutely refrain from purchasing something from AIG. But, this is the straw that broke the camel's back. I have no patience for this any longer. He's let this go on for too long.

 

Susan, keep fighting the good fight in the way that you do. You have Christian love, perseverance, forebearance, grace, and mercy. In short, you remind me very much of the Fruits of the Spirit! I am grateful for you!

 

Faith

 

Very well said!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Could not agree more on the lemmings and pokers. In that vein, Thursday night at Cincy, I saw a big sign on an attendee's backpack: "When Kem Ham is back, I'll be back." Wanted to go up to the lemming and say, "Dude, do you not know where you are?"

 

Moreover, I refused to buy a Bible curriculum because of its 6-day stance. Someone please tell Enns to get busy on the higher grades!

 

Terri

 

Forget Enns doing higher grades, I've decided to wing it and make my own bible curriculum for my kids. Our beliefs differ in a major major area of Christianity and I'm tired of sifting all the time. My new pastor's wife just finished her PhD and is a professor of theology so I'm going to buy her coffee one day soon and hold her hostage for a brain picking session and then go for it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
It's funny to me because I do agree with inerrancy of the Scriptures but I also agree that as far as modern hermeneutics goes, the writers of Scripture took great liberties! In fact, that was one of our first classes in Hermeneutics class at a very conservative evangelical seminary.

 

 

Jean, you are so right. Most conservative seminaries I know teach this as well.

 

The interesting thing here is that, at this point, Mr. Ham has bitten off more than he can chew. His background is secondary education science, not Divinity. He would do well to take a few classes in formal logic and rhetoric.

 

Faith

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
This guy is really going to make my head explode one of these days. What a nasty, vicious man. Does he ever stop? Ever?

http://blogs.answersingenesis.org/blogs/ken-ham/2011/04/02/susan-wise-bauer-%e2%80%9cwhy-paul-would-have-flunked-hermeneutics%e2%80%9d/

 

 

Why stop if it is bringing him fame and fortune. Go to google images. He has his face plastered all over. (I can just hear my mother's sotto voce comment: "Seems he has the right last name." :D)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Here is his big problem. He blundered. He did something he should not have done. He slandered speakers at a conference instead of debating ideologies and then he went on to break his contract by telling people not to buy X from X. He can defend his own products; he is welcome to debate ideas. He was never welcome, as stated in the speaking contract, to attack the faith of others or to slander other presenters. He was expected to be professional, gracious, and to let his ideas stand on their own merit.

 

What he should have done was acknowledge that what he did was wrong and ask Dr. Enns and Susan for forgiveness. He should be a grown up and step up to the plate. Then, if he wants to debate the inherrancy of the scriptures, or the principles of hermeneutics, then by all means do so. One does not have to do that in the inappropriate manner that he did.

 

Instead, what he is doing is handing out more invective. Unfortunately, this is all happening at about the same time that AIG is beginning to advertise a Bible curriculum that they will put out for young children, K/1st. It now leaves his arguments subject to the criticism of having a monetary gain motivation. So even if there is no ulterior motive, it is too late to remove that suspicion from the equation.

 

All in all, a serious tactical error on his part. While many in the Christian world will agree with his stance, many more are alienated and disallusioned with their brother in Christ for continuing on in this manner. It does more harm than good and from what I can tell, it is causing former AIG supporters (at least in our neck of the woods) to distance themselves from him.

 

It's all very, very sad. The whole thing is distasteful. Though Dr. Enns and SWB disagree with aspects of Mr. Ham's ideology, they have not chosen to make personal attacks, nor attempt to influence other homeschoolers to not buy his products. They have not chosen to alienate other Christians through invective. I wish Mr. Ham had chosen the higher ground. The "fleeing the appearance of evil". The upright path.

 

As of last week, I would not have said that I would absolutely refrain from purchasing something from AIG. But, this is the straw that broke the camel's back. I have no patience for this any longer. He's let this go on for too long.

 

Susan, keep fighting the good fight in the way that you do. You have Christian love, perseverance, forebearance, grace, and mercy. In short, you remind me very much of the Fruits of the Spirit! I am grateful for you!

 

Faith

 

Dear Faith,

This is exactly, exactly, how my husband and I feel.

I am truly so disheartened in the behavior seen.

 

And also the out of context quotes, etc.

 

By the way- was Dr. Enns truly "fired" from Westminster Theological Seminary due to his book?

 

Rebecca

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I know I'll be flamed for this, but I'll go ahead. I've seen just as much hatred, anger, and lack of tolerance from the SWB side (not her personally, but on this forum). Just like some people have said they don't want to use WTM or SOTW, there have been plenty of other people that say they'll never use AIG because of this public fiasco. I guess I'm just saying that everything the "other side" is being accused of is something I've seen in some form on "this side" of the fence. At least as far as people commenting and blogging, not the actual people involved. Personally, I didn't see anything ANGRY in Hamm's blog post. I like a lot of Hamm's things. I like and use a lot of SWB's curriculum. I've heard bad things about both people, and honestly, it's just not that big of a deal to me. If everyone would stop complaining about what the other one said or did, the subject would lose steam, and we could go back to agreeing to disagree. Hamm disagrees with Enns and SWB. So what? Really, is anyone surprised that two people disagree on creation? Obviously most people disagree about creation! As for trumping higher degrees over lower degrees, I don't think degrees are the end all, be all. Someone can be an expert on a particular subject without earning a degree (as classical educators have themselves claimed). I'm just kind of over judgemental homeschoolers. Sorry, flame away.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Dear Faith,

This is exactly, exactly, how my husband and I feel.

I am truly so disheartened in the behavior seen.

 

And also the out of context quotes, etc.

 

By the way- was Dr. Enns truly "fired" from Westminster Theological Seminary due to his book?

 

Rebecca

 

this is what Peter Enns' wikipedia page says about that:

"On March 26, 2008, the Board of Trustees at Westminster Theological Seminary voted 18–9 to suspend Enns from his position effective May 23, 2008.[15] Though the faculty voted 12–8 that the work falls within the parameters of the Westminster Confession of Faith,[15] the chairman of the Board said that a majority of the members on the Board at that time felt the book was incompatible with the Confession.[14] As of August 1, 2008, Enns and the seminary agreed to part ways.[16] Following the Board's vote, nine trustees resigned from the board."

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Here is his big problem. He blundered. He did something he should not have done. He slandered speakers at a conference instead of debating ideologies and then he went on to break his contract by telling people not to buy X from X. He can defend his own products; he is welcome to debate ideas. He was never welcome, as stated in the speaking contract, to attack the faith of others or to slander other presenters. He was expected to be professional, gracious, and to let his ideas stand on their own merit.

 

What he should have done was acknowledge that what he did was wrong and ask Dr. Enns and Susan for forgiveness. He should be a grown up and step up to the plate. Then, if he wants to debate the inherrancy of the scriptures, or the principles of hermeneutics, then by all means do so. One does not have to do that in the inappropriate manner that he did.

 

Instead, what he is doing is handing out more invective. Unfortunately, this is all happening at about the same time that AIG is beginning to advertise a Bible curriculum that they will put out for young children, K/1st. It now leaves his arguments subject to the criticism of having a monetary gain motivation. So even if there is no ulterior motive, it is too late to remove that suspicion from the equation.

 

All in all, a serious tactical error on his part. While many in the Christian world will agree with his stance, many more are alienated and disallusioned with their brother in Christ for continuing on in this manner. It does more harm than good and from what I can tell, it is causing former AIG supporters (at least in our neck of the woods) to distance themselves from him.

 

It's all very, very sad. The whole thing is distasteful. Though Dr. Enns and SWB disagree with aspects of Mr. Ham's ideology, they have not chosen to make personal attacks, nor attempt to influence other homeschoolers to not buy his products. They have not chosen to alienate other Christians through invective. I wish Mr. Ham had chosen the higher ground. The "fleeing the appearance of evil". The upright path.

 

As of last week, I would not have said that I would absolutely refrain from purchasing something from AIG. But, this is the straw that broke the camel's back. I have no patience for this any longer. He's let this go on for too long.

 

Susan, keep fighting the good fight in the way that you do. You have Christian love, perseverance, forebearance, grace, and mercy. In short, you remind me very much of the Fruits of the Spirit! I am grateful for you!

 

Faith

 

This post was very well said...I just have a couple of questions...Did the highlighted occur at one of the conferences this year?...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
This post was very well said...I just have a couple of questions...Did the highlighted occur at one of the conferences this year?...

 

Yes, recently.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I know I'll be flamed for this, but I'll go ahead. I've seen just as much hatred, anger, and lack of tolerance from the SWB side (not her personally, but on this forum). Just like some people have said they don't want to use WTM or SOTW, there have been plenty of other people that say they'll never use AIG because of this public fiasco. I guess I'm just saying that everything the "other side" is being accused of is something I've seen in some form on "this side" of the fence. At least as far as people commenting and blogging, not the actual people involved. Personally, I didn't see anything ANGRY in Hamm's blog post. I like a lot of Hamm's things. I like and use a lot of SWB's curriculum. I've heard bad things about both people, and honestly, it's just not that big of a deal to me. If everyone would stop complaining about what the other one said or did, the subject would lose steam, and we could go back to agreeing to disagree. Hamm disagrees with Enns and SWB. So what? Really, is anyone surprised that two people disagree on creation? Obviously most people disagree about creation! As for trumping higher degrees over lower degrees, I don't think degrees are the end all, be all. Someone can be an expert on a particular subject without earning a degree (as classical educators have themselves claimed). I'm just kind of over judgemental homeschoolers. Sorry, flame away.

 

I am actually agreeing with you, other than the fact that it is a big deal. No, we shouldn't be judging Mr Ham, but publicly attacking, or writing blogs about people and then going make sure you read my blog about SWB to me is wrong. I'm more concerned that this is actually giving non-Christians a message that judging others is ok, when it is not. Everyone will be judged by God and we should really be concerned what we are doing, saying and thinking.

 

I'm over judgemental people. It actually just makes my heart hurt when this sort of stuff happens.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes, it did. The Great Homeschool Conference organizers have it on tape as the sessions were being recorded. So, they do not just have the impressions or personal takes of those that attended the seminar, but his actual words. That is why he was disinvited from Cinncinnati. The people who sit on the board of the Great Homeschool Conference organizers are mostly conservative Christians. He was not disinvited because of what he believes, or for defending his beliefs. He was asked not to come based on how he defended what he believes and for personal attacks against other speakers. They do have him on tape calling Dr. Enns "an attacker of the Word - of Christ" and then extending that to SWB. That was not the only comment.

 

So, this is not a grudge being renewed from slights of years past. This is a fresh wound. Dr. Jay Wile ended up on the receiving end of some unpleasantries as well.

 

Faith

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well... recently we had an episode in extended family where one person confronted and verbally attacked another, without others hearing... then went online, lied multiple times and caused quite a fiasco. These two people represent VERY different walks of life. Most of the family would tend to side on the attackers "walk of life" side... BUT she had to go on and on (fb) flaming, insulting, speaking rude... and those of us who would normally side with her position were appalled by her incredible lack of manners and self control and judgements.

 

What does this have to do with it? Well... if he continues displaying his true colors, people who are actively and critically thinking are going to call it like it is... no matter WHO they would normally side with. Whatever side I would say that I agree more with would matter less to me when a person slips so low that they disregard manners, tact and respect for another. I have a lot of respect for people that I disagree with so long as they are not hurting anyone and they have basic decency. He has lost that, imo.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I really want to post a comment saying that if he has a criticism of PHP's ministry that he should email them privately instead of attempting to post for all the world to see. You know that comment would last all of about 10 seconds though.

 

You could like the site, comment, and leave so they can't ban you and then lather rinse repeat until it drives them insane.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I know I'll be flamed for this, but I'll go ahead. I've seen just as much hatred, anger, and lack of tolerance from the SWB side (not her personally, but on this forum). Just like some people have said they don't want to use WTM or SOTW, there have been plenty of other people that say they'll never use AIG because of this public fiasco. I guess I'm just saying that everything the "other side" is being accused of is something I've seen in some form on "this side" of the fence. At least as far as people commenting and blogging, not the actual people involved. Personally, I didn't see anything ANGRY in Hamm's blog post. I like a lot of Hamm's things. I like and use a lot of SWB's curriculum. I've heard bad things about both people, and honestly, it's just not that big of a deal to me. If everyone would stop complaining about what the other one said or did, the subject would lose steam, and we could go back to agreeing to disagree. Hamm disagrees with Enns and SWB. So what? Really, is anyone surprised that two people disagree on creation? Obviously most people disagree about creation! As for trumping higher degrees over lower degrees, I don't think degrees are the end all, be all. Someone can be an expert on a particular subject without earning a degree (as classical educators have themselves claimed). I'm just kind of over judgemental homeschoolers. Sorry, flame away.

 

Not flaming, but as a long time AIG follower here are some of my problems with what he is saying

 

!1The recent blog about SWB is on a book review whe did. It just seems to be added fire to a fuel. What is his purpose behind bringiing up a book review. He wants to tie Dr. Bauer in with the author, implying that everything he says she believes.

 

2) I am a young earth creationist. I think it is good to debate the issue. Where it crosses the line is when the person debating pulls out the " if you don't agree with me you're not a Christian" line Disagreeing is fine, judging one's Christianity is not.

 

If he were to write his own book review, showing where he differs on the author's views that would be great! But attacking the author (or anyone who thinks he may have valid points) is where he is crossing into a judgemental attittude.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Yes, it did. The Great Homeschool Conference organizers have it on tape as the sessions were being recorded. So, they do not just have the impressions or personal takes of those that attended the seminar, but his actual words. That is why he was disinvited from Cinncinnati. The people who sit on the board of the Great Homeschool Conference organizers are mostly conservative Christians. He was not disinvited because of what he believes, or for defending his beliefs. He was asked not to come based on how he defended what he believes and for personal attacks against other speakers. They do have him on tape calling Dr. Enns "an attacker of the Word - of Christ" and then extending that to SWB. That was not the only comment.

 

So, this is not a grudge being renewed from slights of years past. This is a fresh wound. Dr. Jay Wile ended up on the receiving end of some unpleasantries as well.

 

Faith

 

Wow...I now understand why people feel this may be affecting our conference in PA...I really hope it is just relocated (to somewhere I can actually get to), and not cancelled...

Thanks for explaining this...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

He makes my head explode. There's just so much bull pucky you don't even bother because it's such a waste of air.

 

Wow! :001_huh::confused::001_huh:

 

I guess one could say the bright side is that the more he spews, the more he reveals his true nature.

 

But still... wow! :001_huh:

 

 

Yes, and you know who he now is ranking right up there with? Those Westboro Baptist Church people.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Originally Posted by MindyD viewpost.gif

I know I'll be flamed for this, but I'll go ahead. I've seen just as much hatred, anger, and lack of tolerance from the SWB side (not her personally, but on this forum). Just like some people have said they don't want to use WTM or SOTW, there have been plenty of other people that say they'll never use AIG because of this public fiasco. I guess I'm just saying that everything the "other side" is being accused of is something I've seen in some form on "this side" of the fence. At least as far as people commenting and blogging, not the actual people involved. Personally, I didn't see anything ANGRY in Hamm's blog post. I like a lot of Hamm's things. I like and use a lot of SWB's curriculum. I've heard bad things about both people, and honestly, it's just not that big of a deal to me. If everyone would stop complaining about what the other one said or did, the subject would lose steam, and we could go back to agreeing to disagree. Hamm disagrees with Enns and SWB. So what? Really, is anyone surprised that two people disagree on creation? Obviously most people disagree about creation! As for trumping higher degrees over lower degrees, I don't think degrees are the end all, be all. Someone can be an expert on a particular subject without earning a degree (as classical educators have themselves claimed). I'm just kind of over judgemental homeschoolers. Sorry, flame away.

 

 

:iagree:

 

 

You could like the site, comment, and leave so they can't ban you and then lather rinse repeat until it drives them insane.

 

Do you think doing this would help put an end to the controversy?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The whole thing comes across as a bully in play yard, telling other people you shouldn't play with THESE people. Then when they stand up to you and turn away, he yells after them some silly insult to save face.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Do you think doing this would help put an end to the controversy?

 

Not really but this quote is part of it

 

The whole thing comes across as a bully in play yard, telling other people you shouldn't play with THESE people. Then when they stand up to you and turn away, he yells after them some silly insult to save face.

 

He is being a bully by not allowing the other side to be seen or heard and most people will notice that the post keep getting deleted and it makes him look like a fool because he can't defend his argument or that he can't answer the questions in a post so he just deletes it. THe leaving the group part is because if you aren't a member when they remove the post they can't block you.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
This is all about money.

 

Money and power and .....

This is starting to sound like a history book. :lol:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I wonder if people would really continue to devote time and exert energy (mental AND obviously emotional) if it were not SWB and we were not on this particular forum.

 

 

Some people are like mama bears on this issue.

 

Like he said something offensive about somebody's mama.

 

(Oh no, he didn't!!)

 

 

 

 

SWB can hold her own.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Not flaming, but as a long time AIG follower here are some of my problems with what he is saying

 

!1The recent blog about SWB is on a book review whe did. It just seems to be added fire to a fuel. What is his purpose behind bringiing up a book review. He wants to tie Dr. Bauer in with the author, implying that everything he says she believes.

 

2) I am a young earth creationist. I think it is good to debate the issue. Where it crosses the line is when the person debating pulls out the " if you don't agree with me you're not a Christian" line Disagreeing is fine, judging one's Christianity is not.

 

If he were to write his own book review, showing where he differs on the author's views that would be great! But attacking the author (or anyone who thinks he may have valid points) is where he is crossing into a judgemental attittude.

 

The impression I got was that one should not trust SWB's view of the scriptures...That she agrees with Enns views, which he feels is contradictory to what the Bible says...That would lead one to conclude that one couldn't trust SWB's curriculum writings either...

 

Remember, I am not saying this is how I feel...But this is the impression I think he wanted to give by writing about this book review...

 

I will continue to use Well Trained Mind and can't wait to hear SWB speak :001_smile:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

As a fundamentalist myself, I am amazed by this. So, Ken Ham wants us to know that some people who label themselves as Christians (whether we agree with their use of label or not) don't have the same literal translation of Scripture that we do.......So.....what next? He's going to tell us that the sky is blue? That water is wet? Is he going to tell us there are denominations based on differing views of Scriptural interpretation?

 

We are all very well aware of this. For thousands of years now people calling themselves Christians have had various views, opinions, and convictions about very doctrinal, theological, and religious topic out there. THIS IS NOT NEWS!

 

I am so annoyed by the paternalist and condescending attitude he and his followers have toward the rest of us. We don't need help. We are perfectly capable of deciding for ourselves if the book is in keeping with our views or not. We are perfectly capable of discerning which of SWB (or anyone else's) recommendations are appropriate for our homeschool based on their content, philosophical/religious views, price, etc. I don't need my hand held in a curriculum hall, at amazon.com, or the bookstore. I'm an adult and if anyone starts treating me differently, my opinion of them will be diminished.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
As a fundamentalist myself, I am amazed by this. So, Ken Ham wants us to know that some people who label themselves as Christians (whether we agree with their use of label or not) don't have the same literal translation of Scripture that we do.......So.....what next? He's going to tell us that the sky is blue? That water is wet? Is he going to tell us there are denominations based on differing views of Scriptural interpretation?

 

We are all very well aware of this. For thousands of years now people calling themselves Christians have had various views, opinions, and convictions about very doctrinal, theological, and religious topic out there. THIS IS NOT NEWS!

 

I am so annoyed by the paternalist and condescending attitude he and his followers have toward the rest of us. We don't need help. We are perfectly capable of deciding for ourselves if the book is in keeping with our views or not. We are perfectly capable of discerning which of SWB (or anyone else's) recommendations are appropriate for our homeschool based on their content, philosophical/religious views, price, etc. I don't need my hand held in a curriculum hall, at amazon.com, or the bookstore. I'm an adult and if anyone starts treating me differently, my opinion of them will be diminished.

 

Try and post that on his face book. :D

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...