Tough Questions Answered

A Christian Apologetics Blog

Update on Well-Known Young Earth Creationist – Post #10 of 2009

Post Author: Bill Pratt

GeoChristian posted an update on Kent Hovind (Dr. Dino), a well-known young earth creationist who is serving jail time for tax evasion.  I once saw Hovind on the John Ankerberg Show and thought he was extremely rude to Hugh Ross, whom he was debating.  If you are interested in Hovind and what he teaches, don’t be.  His credibility as a leader and teacher are gone.  I will pray for him as a person whom God loves, but I quit listening to his arguments a long time ago.


About The Author

Comments

  • W. C. Totherow

    I challenge you to refute what Kent Hovind teaches. He believes the Bible, that’s rare in our day. The problem is; “I once saw Hovind” and now you are going to advise others not to listen to him. That’s part of what is wrong in our country today, Ignorance and Apathy.

  • Bill Pratt

    Hi W. C.,
    I also believe the Bible, but there are many people who believe the Bible who are wrong about its teachings. If Kent really believed the Bible, then why did he break the eighth commandment by not paying taxes? It is possible that what he teaches is correct; I’ll grant you that. I am not going to take time, however, on this blog to answer his teachings one by one, as that is not the purpose of this blog. The best I can do is point readers to Reasons to Believe where many young earth creation arguments are addressed, and also to Answers in Genesis, which is a young earth creation site that argues against some of what Kent Hovind teaches.

    I agree that just because Kent Hovind was extremely rude on a TV show doesn’t mean he is wrong about everything, but any time I see a Christian acting that way, I cringe to think of the witness he is giving. Is he reflecting Christ well? No, he isn’t. If you are persuaded that the earth is young, then I would recommend interacting with Answers in Genesis more and Kent Hovind less. I, myself, am not persuaded the earth is young, but I am not dogmatic about it. I think it’s one of those topics where a Christian can’t be certain.

  • Joseph Sarkissian

    I agree with Mr. Totherow,
    it is truly sad when Christians whine and complain about a little “rudeness” when it comes to defending the Word of God. I guess Jesus would be on Mr. Pratt’s rude list also cause he tossed over tables and whipped people…or maybe Paul the Apostle was a little too rude in his sarcasm against king agrippa. In actuality, Hovind should be applauded for his rudeness against Hugh Ross in that debate. Christians, Pratt is right about Answers in Genesis, but 100% wrong about Reasons to believe. Hugh ross runs reasons to believe and doesn’t even believe in a world wide flood in the days of Noah…he also twists the original words of Genesis to FIT HIS BELIEF in evolution, which is nonsense and deserving of rudeness. Unlike Pratt who attacks Hovind’s belief through ad hominem rhetoric, I just showed you two crucial points to stay far away from Ross. Oh, yea Mr. Pratt, a side note for the uneducated such as yourself….to claim that Hovind was “stealing” or in your words, breaking the 8th commandment, requires you to legally explain the tax exemption that is legal in regards to church and missionary work along there never being a constitutionally mandated federal income tax (which is what Hovind stood upon & many agree with). Do your homework before you open your mouth.
    And Christians, don’t twist the Word of God to fit your beliefs and stop worrying about rudeness in regards to witness cause many who claim Lord, Lord will be told depart from Me, I never knew you, you workers of iniquity…BE BOLD AND PROCLAIM THE GOSPEL OF TRUTH

  • Bill Pratt

    Hi Joseph,
    What do you with 1 Pet 3:15-16:
    “But in your hearts set apart Christ as Lord. Always be prepared to give an answer to everyone who asks you to give the reason for the hope that you have. But do this with gentleness and respect, keeping a clear conscience, so that those who speak maliciously against your good behavior in Christ may be ashamed of their slander.”

    Again, I wish Hovind no ill will, but I do think he has lost credibility by breaking the law. I also believe that many of his arguments are not only refuted by old earth creationists, but by young earth creationists, as well. A person’s belief about the age of the earth does not determine their salvation or their standing as an orthodox Christian. Hovind repeatedly questioned Ross’ standing as a Christian in the debate and he repeatedly belittled him in a mocking way. If you really believe that Christians are justified in treating people rudely whenever they like, I fear you have grossly misunderstood the teachings of Jesus and his apostles.

    God bless,
    Bill

  • Joe

    Bill,

    I agree that Hovind has lost credibility by breaking the law, it is somewhat expected when taking a position such as he did. Personally, I feel that if we Christians are to lose our liberties, there are better battles to wage war against then the shady realm of church/federal taxation (then again, all things, including jail, work for the good of those who love God & are called according to His purpose).

    It has been a long, long while since I viewed the debate between Ross and Hovind but I will agree with you that IF Hovind did belittle Ross and attack his person rather than his position then that is not right, and Hovind should not be respected for doing that in a professional debate where our witness is at stake.

    I do not believe that Christians are justified in treating people rudely whenever they like, I agree totally with I Peter 3: 15-16. However, in certain situations or circumstances it may warrant it & is therefore justified. Anger is not sin but can be sin. Jesus’ was angry and quite possibly “rude” when He called the Pharisees children of their father the devil and whitewashed tombs. Why did He do this, because they were the birds in the branch of the mustard seed…they did not represent the Word of God although they knew the Word and thought they believed in it, they lead people astray and did not truly love Christ.

    Remember the woman, with the spirit of divination…she went before Paul proclaiming truth. She said no lie, only that these men are the servants of the most High and yet Paul rebuked the demon inside of her.

    A person might know the Word, seem to love God but what is the effect of their message? Where does it lead people? Does it aim truth at Sola Scriptura or mans interpretation? What is behind the person? Even the demons know truth

    No, I don’t believe that a person’s belief in the age of the earth is required for salvation. But I am here to tell you that teachers have the greater condemnation and for those of you, like Ross, old-earth creationists are going to be held accountable for grossly contorting the Word of God to conform to an un-proven, un-scientific, humanistic religious ideology that has done nothing but hurt God’s children and elevate man as the supreme being…EVOLUTION.

    You see, you might THINK that science shows the age of the earth being old…which is nonsense, but fine…everyone needs their comfort blanky. But the problem is, in order for you and Ross, to make it fit you have to isogete your belief into the scripture and go against the science of hermeneutics and hebrew grammar. If you go with a day is as a thousand years nonsense, then you violate your sacred cow of the order of science (sun, plants, food, animals, etc.) cause time elapsed too long between each day of creation. If you go with the gap between Genesis 1 & 2 then you have to create an imaginary pre-Adamic race non-sense which ultimately you are calling Jesus a liar because He said there was no death before Adam…either way your group of psuedo-believers denies a world-wide flood of Genesis.
    It seems unfortunately, that when you stand before the LORD of Heaven who claims HIS WORD is Breathed by HIS SPIRIT and correct, every jot & tittle, then you have a little more to worry about then “rudeness.”

    I say this not in arrogance, anger, or pride…but out of concern and worry. If you are saved then stop being carried to and fro by the secular doctrines of this world. God’s word is the truth, the measure by which we test science or any belief to and when science has failed after holding to false beliefs it is the Word of God that has never failed and always stood the test of time. Get your priorities right if you are a believer, start defending the Word of God AND actually believe what it says

  • Bill Pratt

    Joe,
    I don’t have time tonight to respond to everything you said, but I will respond to just a couple of things. First, Hugh Ross and I do not promote Darwinian evolution. I reject the idea that natural selection and random mutation could have created all of the diversity of life on earth. I believe that Darwinian evolution can account for small changes within life forms within the genetic boundaries already present in a species. I am deeply skeptical that evolution can produce a new species or genus.

    Second, there are many evangelical Hebrew scholars and leaders who allow for the interpretation of the days of Genesis as long periods of time. I also invite to quickly read another post I wrote on this issue.

    Third, where did Jesus say there was no death before Adam? I don’t recall that.

    God bless,
    Bill

  • Kevin
  • Kevin

    Here’s a good resource
    http://www.asa3.org/ASA/RESOURCES/WIENS.html
    and another
    http://www.bringyou.to/apologetics/p14.htm

    Both are from perspectives of Christians who are also scientists who have seen the evidence and understand what it means.
    A good faq and all around great website full of amazingly large amounts of evidence and information about what we know is here:
    http://www.talkorigins.org/origins/faqs-qa.html

  • Jimmy

    I like how you use the “eighth commandment” against Hovind. If you ever once opened your eyes then you would realize that there is NO LAW REQUIRING US TO PAY TAXES ON OUR LABOR.

    The difference between Hovind and people like you is that you distort verses from the bible to justify you doing nothing about tyranny. Hugh Ross twists the word of God. This is a neo-christian blog and I’m all set with it.

  • jasonseneca

    Hi, Bill.

    I thought you might be interested to know that Hovind’s doctoral dissertation was recently made public on wikileaks. I use the term “doctoral” in the loosest possible sense, since the correspondence diploma mill that issued his PhD is not accredited by any Department of Education recognized institution.

    Nonetheless, it makes for some fun reading, if you’re interested. You can read the whole thing here:
    http://wikileaks.org/wiki/Young-earth_creationist_Kent_Hovind%27s_doctoral_dissertation

  • http://creationletter.com Sirius

    RE: Kevin

    wow. I’m frankly a bit worried that somebody’s feeding you TalkOrigins as a support for any type of Creationist, since that site is firmly dedicated to debunking it. Guys, he’s probably not on our side.

    @Joe:

    RE: “I believe that Darwinian evolution can account for small changes within life forms within the genetic boundaries already present in a species. I am deeply skeptical that evolution can produce a new species or genus.”

    With due respect, the sort of horizontal variation within created kinds that your describing should never be conflated with the term Darwinian evolution which describes vertical microbes-to-man common descent. I casn only presume that you’re turned around a bit by the whole microevolutiuon/macroevolution thing. Darwinian evolution presumes that observed changes within kinds of animals eventually results in those kinds changing into new kinds. Theodosius Dobzhanski [one of the founders of the Modern Synthesis] noted that since we can’t observe mac-evo, evolutionists would simply have to believe that observable mic-evo accounted for mac-evo; that little changes eventually accumulated into big ones. Of course, the fossil record’s Big Picture doesn’t bear out his presumption: as Gould noted it evidences stasis and sudden appearance instead of gradulaism, aka Darwinian evolution. I’ve pretty much abandoned the whole mac/mic-evo [little/big change] thing as simply misleading at best. I use the vertical versus horizontal change descriptives to eliminate confusion. I would never use the term Darwinian evo to describe what Creationists believe. Food for thought. If you don’t believe in Darwinian evo, don’t invoke it at all; more to the point, you’re actually describing Mendellian inheritance when you speak of changes within the genetic boundaries of the life form. Mendellian genetics were absorbed into the Modern Synthesis, but the architects of Neo-darwinism purposely ignored Mendel’s conclusions that genetic inheritence had fixed limits, so perhaps this is where the confusion arises. Point is: don’t invoke Darwinian evo when you’re actually affirming Mendellian inheritance. Let your yea be yea and your nay likewise and all that.

    If you’re wondering, I am a Young Earth Creationist.

    Rev Tony Breeden
    aka Sirius Knott

    PS – Tell GeoChristian I said Hello and, as always, God bless!

    As for

  • http://creationletter.com Sirius

    And Bill,

    Joe has a point.

    When you ask me if Hovind was being very Christ-like, I cringe.

    Did Hovind cross the line? Possibly. In all honesty, I’ve not seen the debate you mention, but I’ve seen Hovind and I have a pretty good take on his overall personality. It’s quite possible he crossed the line in his zeal to preserve God’s intended, revealed Word from the impositions of 21st century opinion – so long as it calls itself science, mind you. I’ve crossed that line as well, though I’ve never meant to.

    That’s not why I cringe.

    I cringe because I know what you mean by Christ-like and it’s not your fault, per se, but it’s this strangely lop-sided Sunday school stained-glass version of Jesus you mean. We prefer Jesus politely knocking upon a door [btw, He flat-out knocked mine down, bro!] or cradling a lamb. We cringe away from the cleansing of the Temple [look how we term it "cleansing" to spiritualize it and clean it up a bit!]. We make excuses for Jesus’ use of insult [you play-actors! [hypocrites], white-washed tombs full of rotting corpses, snakes!] and the fact that he made [not merely found nearby] yes-fashioned a whip from cords lying nearby to drive the moneychangers from the Temple by force.

    The point is: The Jesus we get in Church oftimes – and certainly the one invoked when we’re browbeaten into being more Christ-like – is lop-sided when we compare our stained-glass Jesus to the One we actually read about in Scripture. I suspect it’s because we prefer a safe God. To paraphrase Lewis [as he intended], but of course He’s not safe; He’s good.

    I’ve explored this a bit more fully in a post on my site, Are Christians Too Nice? http://siriusknotts.wordpress.com/2008/04/20/are-christians-too-nice/

    As for Hovind’s arguments, some of the arguments he used did make the Arguments Creationists Should Not Use list. Not all. And by disagreeing with some points of said list, while I think it a pretty good guideline and pretty sound over-all, Hovind wasn’t showing his ignorance. If one bothered to read his retort, he had some genuine disagreements and reasons backing this for why he thought some of those arguments shouldn’t be on the Do Not Absolutely Use These list. Point in fact, there’s also a derivatory list of arguments we probably, maybe shouldn’t use because they’re speculative or what-have-you, but the reason there is such a secondary list is because no one’s saying you shouldn’t absolutely use them under any circumstances. It’s more of a Proceed with Caution notice – and Hovind was saying that some of the arguments on the Do Not Enter list should have been more appropriately placed on the Proceed with Caution one instead. It’s a man-made list. I largely adhere to it, but again it will doubtless be revised again and again.

    To try to dismiss Hovind because he disagreed with The List is a bit arbitrary. To try to dismiss his theological arguments based on his being convicted [and grossly overpenalized] for charges completely unrelated to said theological arguments is a sick and slanderous ad hominem. The godless atheists do this. I fully expect better of Creationists – even if they also compromise the plain meaning of a calendar day to impose 21st century opinions upon God’s revealed Word. To dismiss his theological arguments concerning Creation because he was rude to someone he was debating is purest cowardice. Christians ought not to be rude; this we can both affirm, but a true argument spoken rudely may be less palatable but it cannot be said that it is any less true.

    Thanks again,
    Sirius Knott of DefendingGenesis.org

  • Bill Pratt

    Hi Sirius,
    Thanks for the comment. I certainly wish Hovind no ill will, and I’m sure he believes he is defending the true biblical view of creation, as you do. I was completely turned off by his approach with Ross, and this is when I considered myself to be a YEC. I have changed “sides” in the ensuing years, mostly because I was introduced to conservative evangelicals who interpreted the days of Genesis as long periods of time, and I learned more about astronomy and physics.

    In any case, I am not one of these “meek and mild Jesus” types, so you have me miscast. Hovind was simply out of line in the debate I saw. My wife, who could care less about these issues, also watched the debate and was amazed at how nasty he was. He holds himself up as a Christian leader, and I think it is our duty to call out leaders who behave poorly. The fact that he was cheating on his taxes just makes it worse. He has not represented Christians well, and I therefore do not believe he should be in the role of Christian leader any longer.

    God bless,
    Bill

  • Shastri JC Philip

    Friends, I am one of those “Young Earth” creationists that you have been talking about. You can see more about me at http://www.creationwiki.org/Johnson_C._Philip

    I came to the young earth position based upon my understanding of the current state of information available physics.

    Johnson C. Philip
    http://www.ShastriPhilip.Com

  • Rodney Pelles

    I also believe in a young earth but to throw a rock at Hovind by saying he broke the eighth commandment is not very wise and most unfruitful. It’s an act of self righteousness. Let not it be true that christians are the only ones who kick their wounded. Christians tend to dispose of another more quickly than God does.

    Let’s give grace and allow him to grow just like all of us need to grow. We all are a work in progress. Remember, Abraham tried to pawn his wife off as his sister to save his own skin, David commits adultry and then commits murder, Peter denies the one who died for him, etc. I realize that some of God’s people committed such acts BEFORE the law was instituted but God gave grace, mercy, and allowed them to grow in Him. We are HIS workmanship….

    Yes, God is working on all of us and we all need a lot of cleaning, but within time we shall be like Him. Remember, if we brake one commandment we are guilty of breaking all the commandments. So, all of us have broken ALL of God’s law….even the eighth!

  • RICHARD GREGORY

    24And when they were come to Capernaum, they that received tribute money came to Peter, and said, Doth not your master pay tribute? 25He saith, Yes. And when he was come into the house, Jesus prevented him, saying, What thinkest thou, Simon? of whom do the kings of the earth take custom or tribute? of their own children, or of strangers? 26Peter saith unto him, Of strangers. Jesus saith unto him, Then are the children free. 27Notwithstanding, lest we should offend them, go thou to the sea, and cast an hook, and take up the fish that first cometh up; and when thou hast opened his mouth, thou shalt find a piece of money: that take, and give unto them for me and thee.
    The King James Version, (Cambridge: Cambridge) 1769.

  • RICHARD GREGORY

    I must add that many / most debaters against a young earth / “athiests” are extremely rude. I find myself getting rude as I come across them also.
    Jesus was rude to people like that when he came across them also, giving me the impression this is accepted when dealing with these pharisees, vipers and the like.

  • RICHARD GREGORY

    I find myself following THE SWORD OF THE LORD format.
    I can’t help not believing some of the new junk that is accepted as Scripture.
    It is KJUV or nothing.
    When ncomparing scripture, you need to go with the closest you can get; I know there are so many others.
    Hovind was railroaded.
    There are hundreds of people who domn’t pay taxes LEGALLY.
    Go to ”
    “JOINTHETEAPARTY.US”
    to see twenty or so links telling about it.
    Alsu amongst these is
    I will send the many links YOU CAN SOET THEM OUT.

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Wj_PTqtzqro

    http://www.ecclesia.org/forum/uploads/bondservant/greenbackP.pdf

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pRnawJDTTPA

    http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-1656880303867390173#

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=s1UT2Ms5E2k&feature=PlayList&p=8442454CC389EE01&index=0&playnext=1

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=s1UT2Ms5E2k&feature=PlayList&p=8442454CC389EE01&index=0&playnext=1

    http://atlah.org/atlahworldwide/?p=8408

    http://www.greatdanepro.com/Pray%20For%20America/index.htm

    http://blogs.forbes.com/craigsilver/

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8HnkxIh62 http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/video/2010/11/19/VI2010111905872.html dQ
    EXAMPLE OF A CITIZEN LEGISLATOR
    TIME TO GET YOUR CANDIDATE READY

    What would you say about a candidate who fought the infernal business COMPANY and won?
    Well, there is one in particular. He did not get elected; he had to endure a runoff election.
    JODIE HICE.
    He ran in the 7th Congressional district of GA.
    He founded the Ten Commandments “GA, INC”.
    Raised right around $300,000 to defend against the ACLU lawsuit forcing removal of the Ten Commandments Display from Barrow County Court House.
    He is the leader of the Alliance Defense Fund “Pulpit Initiative”
    “The Myth of Separation of Church And State”.
    Don’t get me wrong, I think who was elected may be a very good man, I just think he’s been too close to being a pro to be very concerned about WE-THE-PEOPLE.
    What are his accomplishments vs Mister Linder’s protege`’s.
    Jodie Hice already IS fighting for our financial and moral rights.
    On Sept 28th, 2008, 33 Pastors across the country stood in the pulpit and challenged the IRS by endorsing candidates for public office and reclaiming Pastors’ constitutional right to speak the truth.
    The IRS was backed down from the loss of tax exempts status and criminal sanctions if political issues and endorsements are delivered from the pulpit.
    Issues such as Jobs, Health Care, Tax and Kill, Government Spending, National Defense, Life, Fair Tax, Constitution, The First Amendment, Religious Liberty, The Right to Bear Arms and Immigration are what this man is working for.
    Every election should bring new candidates to their senses and ours.

    Remember; there is a difference between PROFESSIONAL POLITICIANS and ESTABLISHMENT POLITICIANS.
    Some keep the New World Order in their sights , and some are WE-THE-PEOPLE ORIENTED.

SEO Powered by Platinum SEO from Techblissonline