What do you think?
Rate this book
The Lie: Evolution by Ken Ham [Master Books, 2012] (Paperback) 25th Anniver [Paperback]
The Evolution by Ken Ham [Master Books, 2012] (Paperback) 25th Anniver [...
- GenresNonfiction
Paperback
9 people are currently reading
43 people want to read
About the author
Ken Ham
236 books358 followersDr. Ken Ham is the president of Answers in Genesis USA and is a well-known speaker and author on the subject of Young-Earth Creationism. He received a bachelor degree in applied science (emphasis on environmental biology) from the Queensland Institute of Technology, and a Diploma of Education from the University of Queensland. He has also received two honorary doctorates: a Doctor of Divinity from Temple Baptist College, and a Doctor of Literature from Baptist Liberty University.
He was a director of Creation Science Foundation (CSF) in Australia, an organization which he jointly founded with John Mackay. In 1987 he moved to the United States, still maintaining his links with CSF.
From 1987 to 1993, Ham worked for the Institute for Creation Research, and in 1994 set up what in 1995 became Answers in Genesis (AiG), a creation ministry dedicated to "upholding the authority of the Bible from the very first verse."
In 2008 Ham was described by well known atheist and evolutionary biologist PZ Myers as a "Wackaloon" for carrying out a prayer session with members of the Pentagon. Ham responded regarding the validity of that prayer breakfastand that PZ Myers and other critics were intolerant of his position.
He was a director of Creation Science Foundation (CSF) in Australia, an organization which he jointly founded with John Mackay. In 1987 he moved to the United States, still maintaining his links with CSF.
From 1987 to 1993, Ham worked for the Institute for Creation Research, and in 1994 set up what in 1995 became Answers in Genesis (AiG), a creation ministry dedicated to "upholding the authority of the Bible from the very first verse."
In 2008 Ham was described by well known atheist and evolutionary biologist PZ Myers as a "Wackaloon" for carrying out a prayer session with members of the Pentagon. Ham responded regarding the validity of that prayer breakfastand that PZ Myers and other critics were intolerant of his position.
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 10 of 10 reviews
September 22, 2024
If you undermine the Creation, you have no basis for taking the rest of the Bible as truth. This is the main point and purpose of this book. To help you understand the importance of Genesis not just from a Biblical standpoint, but from a practical and even scientific one. Ken Ham and AiG ministries has made tremendous strides in helping the masses understand this. As someone who teaches kids in the church and community as well as adults, this has valuable information to guide you. Genesis is important to the entirety of the Word. Don't dismiss it.
December 6, 2025
This is the 25th anniversary edition of Ken Ham's original work written to oppose evolution and millions of years. He has shifted his approach in this version to opposing the teaching of man's reasoning over God's authority, which is a stronger approach.
Think of this read as a primer on the evolution/creation issue. He never delves too deep into any one sub-issue but does gloss the tops so that you know what is there and whet your appetite to study out each topic further.
Think of this read as a primer on the evolution/creation issue. He never delves too deep into any one sub-issue but does gloss the tops so that you know what is there and whet your appetite to study out each topic further.
June 1, 2024
A CRITIQUE OF EVOLUTION AND DEFENSE OF CREATION BY A PROMINENT CREATIONIST
Ken Ham is a prominent “Young Earth Creationist,” and the president/CEO and founder of Answers in Genesis, and the Creation Museum.
He wrote in the Introduction to this 1987 book, “Understanding the foundational nature of the Book of Genesis to all Christian doctrine was a real awakening. This book is the result of a series of messages developed so that Christians could understand the significance and relevance of Genesis and the real nature of the creation/evolution issue. Over and over again people have come and said that they had never realized the importance of Genesis---in fact, for many of them it meant a complete revival of their faith… This book deal with the relevance of a literal Genesis.”
He states, “It is important to understand that special creation, by definition, is also a belief about the past. The difference is that creationists base their understanding of creation upon a book which claims to be the Word of the One who was there, who knows everything there is to know about everything, and who tells us what happened. Evolution comes from the words of men who WERE NOT THERE and who do not claim to be omniscient. This whole issue revolves around whether we believe the words of God who was there, or the [words] of fallible humans (no matter how qualified) who were not there.” (Pg. 24)
He says of a Creation/Evolution debate, “One of the evolutionist’s ‘refutations’ of creation centered around his assertion that there were to many imperfections in the world to have been made by a Creator. This particular evolutionist would not understand, even after it was clearly presented, that the world we are looking at today is not the same world that God created because of the effects of the Fall and flood.” (Pg. 28)
He observes, “Models of science are subject to change for both creationists and evolutionists. But, the beliefs that these models are built on are not. The problem is that most scientists do not realize that it is the belief (or religion) of evolution that is the basis for the scientific models… used to attempt an explanation of the present. Evolutionists are not prepared to change their actual belief that all life can be explained by natural processes and that no God is involved (or even needed). Evolution is the religion to which they are committed. Christians need to wake up to this. Evolution is a religion; it is not science!” (Pg. 37) Later, he adds, “They haven’t eliminated religion from the public school. They have eliminated Christianity and have replaced it with an anti-God religion---humanism.” (Pg. 52)
He asserts, “If the Bible is not the infallible word of the One who knows everything, then we have exactly nothing. We can never be sure about anything. What then is truth: my word, your word, or someone else’s word? In fact, how do you determine what truth is or how to search for it?” (Pg. 41-42)
He recounts, “In the public school system … when first teaching creation … I would show the students the problems with evolution and how the evidence supported the creationist view. However, when the students went to another class where the teacher was an evolutionist, the teacher would just reinterpret the evidence for them. I had been using what can be called an ‘evidentialist’ approach… I then changed methods and taught students the nature of science… They were told that all scientists have presuppositions (beliefs) which they use in interpreting the evidence…. I had begun teaching from what could be called a ‘presuppositionalist’ approach. The difference was astounding… the students were able to identify for the teachers the assumptions behind what the teachers were saying. The students recognized that it was a teacher’s belief system that determined the way in which he looked at the evidence. The question of origins was outside of direct scientific proof.” (Pg. 46-47)
He clarifies, “I need to state here emphatically that I am not saying that if you believe in evolution you are not a Christian. There are many Christians who, for varying reasons (whether it be out of ignorance of what evolution teaches, pride, or a liberal view of the Scriptures) believe in evolution. Those who do believe in evolution are being inconsistent and, in reality, are destroying the foundations of the gospel message. Therefore, I would plead with them to seriously consider the evidence against the position they hold.” (Pg. 90)
He says, “Man and animals were created to be vegetarians. This, of course, fits with the fact that there was no death before Adam’s fall. But, because of the entrance of sin into the world, death resulted… Many people think that because animals have certain kinds of teeth they must have been created to be meat eaters. However, there are many animals living today that have sharp canine teeth that eat only plants. Originally the teeth of these animals were used to eat the plants which God had made for them. As a result of the fall, some animals now eat meat. Also, the Bible does not exclude the possibility of direct action by God at the time of the Fall having a direct biological effect on the creatures in relation to feeding habits.” (Pg. 152-153)
Ken Ham and the Answers in Genesis ministry are some of the most prominent voices in the modern creationist movement. This book will be of keen interest to those studying the subjects of Creation and Evolution.
Ken Ham is a prominent “Young Earth Creationist,” and the president/CEO and founder of Answers in Genesis, and the Creation Museum.
He wrote in the Introduction to this 1987 book, “Understanding the foundational nature of the Book of Genesis to all Christian doctrine was a real awakening. This book is the result of a series of messages developed so that Christians could understand the significance and relevance of Genesis and the real nature of the creation/evolution issue. Over and over again people have come and said that they had never realized the importance of Genesis---in fact, for many of them it meant a complete revival of their faith… This book deal with the relevance of a literal Genesis.”
He states, “It is important to understand that special creation, by definition, is also a belief about the past. The difference is that creationists base their understanding of creation upon a book which claims to be the Word of the One who was there, who knows everything there is to know about everything, and who tells us what happened. Evolution comes from the words of men who WERE NOT THERE and who do not claim to be omniscient. This whole issue revolves around whether we believe the words of God who was there, or the [words] of fallible humans (no matter how qualified) who were not there.” (Pg. 24)
He says of a Creation/Evolution debate, “One of the evolutionist’s ‘refutations’ of creation centered around his assertion that there were to many imperfections in the world to have been made by a Creator. This particular evolutionist would not understand, even after it was clearly presented, that the world we are looking at today is not the same world that God created because of the effects of the Fall and flood.” (Pg. 28)
He observes, “Models of science are subject to change for both creationists and evolutionists. But, the beliefs that these models are built on are not. The problem is that most scientists do not realize that it is the belief (or religion) of evolution that is the basis for the scientific models… used to attempt an explanation of the present. Evolutionists are not prepared to change their actual belief that all life can be explained by natural processes and that no God is involved (or even needed). Evolution is the religion to which they are committed. Christians need to wake up to this. Evolution is a religion; it is not science!” (Pg. 37) Later, he adds, “They haven’t eliminated religion from the public school. They have eliminated Christianity and have replaced it with an anti-God religion---humanism.” (Pg. 52)
He asserts, “If the Bible is not the infallible word of the One who knows everything, then we have exactly nothing. We can never be sure about anything. What then is truth: my word, your word, or someone else’s word? In fact, how do you determine what truth is or how to search for it?” (Pg. 41-42)
He recounts, “In the public school system … when first teaching creation … I would show the students the problems with evolution and how the evidence supported the creationist view. However, when the students went to another class where the teacher was an evolutionist, the teacher would just reinterpret the evidence for them. I had been using what can be called an ‘evidentialist’ approach… I then changed methods and taught students the nature of science… They were told that all scientists have presuppositions (beliefs) which they use in interpreting the evidence…. I had begun teaching from what could be called a ‘presuppositionalist’ approach. The difference was astounding… the students were able to identify for the teachers the assumptions behind what the teachers were saying. The students recognized that it was a teacher’s belief system that determined the way in which he looked at the evidence. The question of origins was outside of direct scientific proof.” (Pg. 46-47)
He clarifies, “I need to state here emphatically that I am not saying that if you believe in evolution you are not a Christian. There are many Christians who, for varying reasons (whether it be out of ignorance of what evolution teaches, pride, or a liberal view of the Scriptures) believe in evolution. Those who do believe in evolution are being inconsistent and, in reality, are destroying the foundations of the gospel message. Therefore, I would plead with them to seriously consider the evidence against the position they hold.” (Pg. 90)
He says, “Man and animals were created to be vegetarians. This, of course, fits with the fact that there was no death before Adam’s fall. But, because of the entrance of sin into the world, death resulted… Many people think that because animals have certain kinds of teeth they must have been created to be meat eaters. However, there are many animals living today that have sharp canine teeth that eat only plants. Originally the teeth of these animals were used to eat the plants which God had made for them. As a result of the fall, some animals now eat meat. Also, the Bible does not exclude the possibility of direct action by God at the time of the Fall having a direct biological effect on the creatures in relation to feeding habits.” (Pg. 152-153)
Ken Ham and the Answers in Genesis ministry are some of the most prominent voices in the modern creationist movement. This book will be of keen interest to those studying the subjects of Creation and Evolution.
February 24, 2024
This is a pretty terrible book. Look for your "young earth" arguments from another source!
One of Ham's greatest errors is repeated throughout the book. He claims that the foundation for a true believer is the Bible (aka the Scriptures, the Word of God, or God's Word). In truth, Jesus Christ is our foundation. Jesus is not the Bible. This misplacement of our real authority is how Ham codifies his beliefs. Ham repeatedly claims authority by using the phrase "the Word of God, the one who was there at Creation," then insults anyone who questions him by saying they are relying on the "word of man." With this method, Ham has created a set of rules and required beliefs that Christians should have (namely, his own interpretation of Genesis 1-11) and is thereby adding to the gospel, creating a burden for believers, and making a stumbling block for the brothers & sisters. Saying "the Word of God, the one who was there at creation" is an intense appeal to authority, but it is a misapplication and violates logic. Do not buy the argument.
Other Issues:
-Ham uses the slippery slope fallacy throughout the book. In one example he says, "And of course, we ask the same question! Where does it end! If there is no absolutes, then all is relative; anything ultimately goes (pg 34)." The context for this quote is that a man chose to walk naked next to an elementary school, and Ham is asserting that the abandonment of a literal reading of Genesis causes behavior like this to be tolerated. Ham repeatedly states throughout the book that if one believes in millions of years, then complete immorality will be the inevitable outcome. This is irrational and fear-mongering. God did not give us a spirit of fear.
-Ham REWRITES scripture. On page 37, Ham says "From a biblical perspective, Romans 1 teaches that the evidence for creation is all around us; therefore, anyone who does not believe in the Creator and Savior is condemned." Romans 1:20 actually reads, "For since the creation of the world, His invisible attributes have clearly been seen" (NKJV). Ham changes scripture from "God is clearly seen" to "creation is clearly seen". That is changing scripture to fit his agenda. Believers should read this with their discernment mode on high.
-Ham writes HERESY. On page 41, he writes "Belief in creation is a religious position based on the Word of God, and its fruits are love, joy, peace, patience, kindness, goodness, faithfulness, gentleness, and self control." No, Ham. Belief in CREATION does not yield these fruits. Walking with the HOLY SPIRIT yields these fruits. (Check it out for yourself--Galations 5:22) The Holy Spirit is God. Creation is not God (and the Bible is not God either). These two should not be conflated. This is a seriously bad teaching, and on this sentence alone the book should be discarded by believers.
-Another HERESY: On page 75, Ham writes "It is only through the Word of God that a sinner is saved." Once again Ham is mixing up Jesus and the Bible. To be clear, the Word of God (that is, scripture) does not save. Jesus saves, and he does not always use scripture to do it.
-VERY BAD: Ham EQUATES himself with Jesus. On page 135, Ham writes "They were impressed that I did not question God's Word but totally accepted it. It reminded me of the statement in the Scriptures: 'the people were astonished at His teaching, for He taught them as one having authority, and not as the scribes.'" In case you missed it, the "He" in that verse is Christ himself. Ham could have used a different scripture reference. He could have said that he was not intending to equate himself with Jesus. But that is what was done!
-Failure to accurately convey what the gospel is. On page 157, Ham lists three main points of the gospel. 1) Christ & Creation, 2) Jesus Crucified, 3) Consummation of all things (he identifies this as our hope). Yes. However, our sanctification is a huge part of our lives as Christians. There is a way we are supposed to live and a way we are supposed to treat others. We are to walk with the Spirit. Ham misses this point entirely, here and in the other material I have read from him.
-A new SLUR: Anything that Ham doesn't like is called "evolutionist." On page 160 he claims that the Athenians in Acts 17 are evolutionists. The ignorance displayed here is mind-boggling. Ancient Greeks believed the world was created, only from a polytheistic model. (Read Hesiod's Theogony if you are interested in their version of the creation story. It's a trip.)
Again, if you believe in "young earth" please look elsewhere for your information! This book is anti-intellectual, contains bad Christian teachings, dangerously misuses Scripture and poorly represents the expected Christlikeness of believers.
One of Ham's greatest errors is repeated throughout the book. He claims that the foundation for a true believer is the Bible (aka the Scriptures, the Word of God, or God's Word). In truth, Jesus Christ is our foundation. Jesus is not the Bible. This misplacement of our real authority is how Ham codifies his beliefs. Ham repeatedly claims authority by using the phrase "the Word of God, the one who was there at Creation," then insults anyone who questions him by saying they are relying on the "word of man." With this method, Ham has created a set of rules and required beliefs that Christians should have (namely, his own interpretation of Genesis 1-11) and is thereby adding to the gospel, creating a burden for believers, and making a stumbling block for the brothers & sisters. Saying "the Word of God, the one who was there at creation" is an intense appeal to authority, but it is a misapplication and violates logic. Do not buy the argument.
Other Issues:
-Ham uses the slippery slope fallacy throughout the book. In one example he says, "And of course, we ask the same question! Where does it end! If there is no absolutes, then all is relative; anything ultimately goes (pg 34)." The context for this quote is that a man chose to walk naked next to an elementary school, and Ham is asserting that the abandonment of a literal reading of Genesis causes behavior like this to be tolerated. Ham repeatedly states throughout the book that if one believes in millions of years, then complete immorality will be the inevitable outcome. This is irrational and fear-mongering. God did not give us a spirit of fear.
-Ham REWRITES scripture. On page 37, Ham says "From a biblical perspective, Romans 1 teaches that the evidence for creation is all around us; therefore, anyone who does not believe in the Creator and Savior is condemned." Romans 1:20 actually reads, "For since the creation of the world, His invisible attributes have clearly been seen" (NKJV). Ham changes scripture from "God is clearly seen" to "creation is clearly seen". That is changing scripture to fit his agenda. Believers should read this with their discernment mode on high.
-Ham writes HERESY. On page 41, he writes "Belief in creation is a religious position based on the Word of God, and its fruits are love, joy, peace, patience, kindness, goodness, faithfulness, gentleness, and self control." No, Ham. Belief in CREATION does not yield these fruits. Walking with the HOLY SPIRIT yields these fruits. (Check it out for yourself--Galations 5:22) The Holy Spirit is God. Creation is not God (and the Bible is not God either). These two should not be conflated. This is a seriously bad teaching, and on this sentence alone the book should be discarded by believers.
-Another HERESY: On page 75, Ham writes "It is only through the Word of God that a sinner is saved." Once again Ham is mixing up Jesus and the Bible. To be clear, the Word of God (that is, scripture) does not save. Jesus saves, and he does not always use scripture to do it.
-VERY BAD: Ham EQUATES himself with Jesus. On page 135, Ham writes "They were impressed that I did not question God's Word but totally accepted it. It reminded me of the statement in the Scriptures: 'the people were astonished at His teaching, for He taught them as one having authority, and not as the scribes.'" In case you missed it, the "He" in that verse is Christ himself. Ham could have used a different scripture reference. He could have said that he was not intending to equate himself with Jesus. But that is what was done!
-Failure to accurately convey what the gospel is. On page 157, Ham lists three main points of the gospel. 1) Christ & Creation, 2) Jesus Crucified, 3) Consummation of all things (he identifies this as our hope). Yes. However, our sanctification is a huge part of our lives as Christians. There is a way we are supposed to live and a way we are supposed to treat others. We are to walk with the Spirit. Ham misses this point entirely, here and in the other material I have read from him.
-A new SLUR: Anything that Ham doesn't like is called "evolutionist." On page 160 he claims that the Athenians in Acts 17 are evolutionists. The ignorance displayed here is mind-boggling. Ancient Greeks believed the world was created, only from a polytheistic model. (Read Hesiod's Theogony if you are interested in their version of the creation story. It's a trip.)
Again, if you believe in "young earth" please look elsewhere for your information! This book is anti-intellectual, contains bad Christian teachings, dangerously misuses Scripture and poorly represents the expected Christlikeness of believers.
March 20, 2025
Sometimes you need a book to refocus your mind on truth. This book did that for me. It probably wouldn’t have had to be this book. Any book as deeply focused and reliant upon God’s Word would have done the same thing. But this book, about this issue, reminds us that God’s Word from the first word is truth. It’s so very easy to lose sight of that. But that was the concern that caused Ham to write it. Parents and teachers are the primary focus as he warns the readers about the dangers of abandoning the early chapters of Genesis in favor of man’s speculations. He talks a little about the science, but mostly about the moral and religious dangers of doing so.
So if you find yourself feeling lost pulled away from the firm foundation of the Scripture by “science” or “history”, read this little book. Honestly, evaluate what the foundation of your beliefs are or will be if you reject the sure word of prophecy and see if find truth anywhere else.
So if you find yourself feeling lost pulled away from the firm foundation of the Scripture by “science” or “history”, read this little book. Honestly, evaluate what the foundation of your beliefs are or will be if you reject the sure word of prophecy and see if find truth anywhere else.
May 31, 2025
It's a good read if you treat it as a bare-bones introduction to the purpose and message of Answers in Genesis. It is not, however, a deep treatment Creation Theology. If you're looking to dive deep into issues like the age of the earth, you might want to check out books like Understanding Genesis by Jason Lisle.
August 22, 2025
This book has been life changing for me in the way I’ve thought! I’ve never believed in evolution but wasn’t sure how millions of years fit into creation so this was very eye opening. It is true that believing in millions of years and evolution is a religion and faith since it can’t be proven. I loved the facts, arguments, and topics!
October 31, 2025
A fantastic overview of Creation apologetics, the foundation of the Christian faith on the first 11 chapters of Genesis, and the need to bring people back to the reality of Creation before sharing the Gospel.
October 30, 2025
This book is a must read. It is very well written and explains how the Bible addresses church doctrine through Genesis chapters 1 through 11.
April 8, 2025
Great book - highly recommended.
PROS
+ Wonderful teachings, especially when it comes to properly differentiating between observational science (present = good) and historical science (problematic, rather an religion); people groups vs. races; and speaking about the enormous problem of an opinion-driven church.
+ Apologetics employed with a spiritual focus is a thing rarely found today. He discusses those stumbling blocks / veils which are more important to be removed, than any scholarly discussion in itself could contribute.
+ The book does not employ any questionable discernment or endorsements. Instead he correctly calls out Hugh Ross, which was about time.
+ A great combination of humbleness paired with boldness and definition.
+ No excessive use of technical terms, academic titles or cuma laude friends as found in most other apologetic books.
CONS
- While his rebuttal of 'Historic Creationism' is valid as this concept assumes the Heaven to be already equipped with the sun, moon and stars which are created only during the creation week, his generic rebuttal of the gap between Gen 1:1 and 1:2 is very shallow.
He makes exactly one argument against and uses the Masoretic text for it, which was -NOT- the text the early Christians received. If he would have studied the term 'beginning' in the GOT and had compared it with the GNT in the same language, he would have noticed that the term clearly has 2, not only 1 reference point(s) - if not CHRISTOS Himself would have been created on creation day 1 which is obviously impossible. It is also misleading that he chose Mark Discroll in order to discredit the gap (even a problematic teacher does get some things right).
The fact that in the plain reading (Old Earth - Young Creation, OEYC) the spiritual heavens and the naked foundation of the flooded earth existed before day 1, while no organism lived on those waters except the HOLY SPIRIT hovering over it, does not take away anything, and the conclusions of this reading are absolutely identical to those described through his view (YEYC).
The only difference is the unbiblical stumbling block which his simplification / merging of the creation account creates, while conflicting in the sense that THEOS would not flood a recently created earth.
- He confused adultery with fornication. Lust and his example of an unmarried couple have nothing to do with adultery, which is a concept exclusively related to marriage (a very common error today).
- Promotion of the (Catholic) Christmas, which is not a High Sabbath, but an extrabiblical feast despised by CHRISTOS.
- Erroneous use of the ~4000 BC (Masoretic Text), instead of the correct ~5500 BC (Greek Old Testament) creation date.
- The addendum states that he received a doctor of divinity, which is a title to be considered almost blasphemous. He received it on an honorary basis, but he could (and should) have rejected it, and much less should list it prominently in his curriculum.
PROS
+ Wonderful teachings, especially when it comes to properly differentiating between observational science (present = good) and historical science (problematic, rather an religion); people groups vs. races; and speaking about the enormous problem of an opinion-driven church.
+ Apologetics employed with a spiritual focus is a thing rarely found today. He discusses those stumbling blocks / veils which are more important to be removed, than any scholarly discussion in itself could contribute.
+ The book does not employ any questionable discernment or endorsements. Instead he correctly calls out Hugh Ross, which was about time.
+ A great combination of humbleness paired with boldness and definition.
+ No excessive use of technical terms, academic titles or cuma laude friends as found in most other apologetic books.
CONS
- While his rebuttal of 'Historic Creationism' is valid as this concept assumes the Heaven to be already equipped with the sun, moon and stars which are created only during the creation week, his generic rebuttal of the gap between Gen 1:1 and 1:2 is very shallow.
He makes exactly one argument against and uses the Masoretic text for it, which was -NOT- the text the early Christians received. If he would have studied the term 'beginning' in the GOT and had compared it with the GNT in the same language, he would have noticed that the term clearly has 2, not only 1 reference point(s) - if not CHRISTOS Himself would have been created on creation day 1 which is obviously impossible. It is also misleading that he chose Mark Discroll in order to discredit the gap (even a problematic teacher does get some things right).
The fact that in the plain reading (Old Earth - Young Creation, OEYC) the spiritual heavens and the naked foundation of the flooded earth existed before day 1, while no organism lived on those waters except the HOLY SPIRIT hovering over it, does not take away anything, and the conclusions of this reading are absolutely identical to those described through his view (YEYC).
The only difference is the unbiblical stumbling block which his simplification / merging of the creation account creates, while conflicting in the sense that THEOS would not flood a recently created earth.
- He confused adultery with fornication. Lust and his example of an unmarried couple have nothing to do with adultery, which is a concept exclusively related to marriage (a very common error today).
- Promotion of the (Catholic) Christmas, which is not a High Sabbath, but an extrabiblical feast despised by CHRISTOS.
- Erroneous use of the ~4000 BC (Masoretic Text), instead of the correct ~5500 BC (Greek Old Testament) creation date.
- The addendum states that he received a doctor of divinity, which is a title to be considered almost blasphemous. He received it on an honorary basis, but he could (and should) have rejected it, and much less should list it prominently in his curriculum.
Displaying 1 - 10 of 10 reviews