The YEC enterprise and grooming conspiracy theorists

When i look at a number of individuals whom i interact with on this forum…i am aware that a number of them have a lot of health issues, and these issues certainly affect those individuals mental health. These are people who are not YEC specifically.

I do not agree that the bible makes no mention of mental health problems…mental health is not a phrase found in ancient biblical languages. The entire bible narrative talks a lot about mental health…its a significant part of who we are and how sin causes so much pain and suffering. Sin affects more than just the physical.

TEism goes to great lengths to make the claim the death experienced by Adam and Eve was spiritual…ie mental separation from God…and yet here you are denying this is biblical? Something drastically wrong with your theology there Christy…you are shooting your own theology in the foot with such claims!

So does the bible talk about mental health? Most definately it does.

Typically mental health was considered in ancient and indeed medievil times as possession by evil spirits. However, I am certain that if modern Psychologists and Psychiatrists were able to go back in time, the vast majority of secular scientists would deny demon possession and claim mental health diagnoses for almost all instances of these individuals in the bible narrative.

Below are two significant biblical individuals who very clearly suffered from mental health problems in the bible:

  1. King Saul (engaged David to play the harp in order to keep his “demons” from overwhelming his mind…Saul was clearly mentally unstable and suffered greatly.
  2. Judas Iscariot (killed himself by suicide after betraying Christ)

I would argue its a fools errand to deny suicide is not driven by a significant decline in mental health. The death of Judas Iscariot is a significant and very real example of mental health problems in the bible narrative.

obviously, there are different types of mental health…one of these is driven by environmental factors that surround individuals…such as the circumstances they find themselves in after making poor choices (as was the case with Judas).

Another environmental one is talked about in Luke 21 related to the last days before the second coming of Christ…this is similar to the narrative in Egypt just prior to the Exodus:

  1. 23 But woe unto them that are with child, and to them that give suck, in those days! for there shall be great distress in the land, and wrath upon this people.

  2. 24 And they shall fall by the edge of the sword, and shall be led away captive into all nations: and Jerusalem shall be trodden down of the Gentiles, until the times of the Gentiles be fulfilled.

  3. 25 And there shall be signs in the sun, and in the moon, and in the stars; and upon the earth distress of nations, with perplexity; the sea and the waves roaring;

  4. 26 Men’s hearts failing them for fear, and for looking after those things which are coming on the earth: for the powers of heaven shall be shaken.

  5. 27 And then shall they see the Son of man coming in a cloud with power and great glory.

Nope. Not what was happening at all.
Plus, we are not the same. I don’t care if modern constructs are “biblical.” “Biblical” has become a meaningless word that essentially gets thrown around by fundamentalists to yell at people who have different interpretations or different approaches to applying Scripture to modern life. I absolutely do not care if the construct of mental health used by people in our modern context is “biblical.” I hope it’s not. I hope it’s research-based and grounded in best practices.


[EDIT i am self critising my statement about you not caring …its a bad one…i apologise, withdraw that and have removed it)

Perhaps this is why fundamentally TEists and YEC dissagree. You do not care for Bible theology over that of observational science. I worry taht in doing so is that you have this hope that science will save you. Those who refuse secular science, because its the mainstream view (the thunder and lightning), are listening to a still small voice and being led astray. I do not think that is biblical…the bible says differently i think.

We will not find any salvation in Science…that is a fools errand. One can try to make this my fault…“Adam a YEC who is corrupting the world into sin”, but it isnt my aim.

My Grandfather years ago always used to say, “if there was a God, bad things wouldnt happen. The fact that bad things do happen means there cannot be a God”. Bart Erhman makes the same claim.

So, when science cannot help suffering and death, who is at fault then? Why is it almost impossible for TE scientists to believe that Satan has more knowledge than we do, and can physically interract with and manipulate our reality? I also would like to add a caveat here…i recongnise that God has ensured a snippet of truth remains visible…i believe that because of the still small voice at the mouth of the cave that drew Elijah out of it after he didnt find God in the lighning, thunder, howling wind, or earthquake.

Read the first chapter of Job…Satan clearly does have both massive amounts of knowledge (more than we do only God knows more) and physical power…even to bring lightning down from heaven!

Christy you really need to explain biblically how it is that you do not believe Satan can do those things…i am genuinely interested in understanding your theology on this.

@dale and @adamjedgar I’m going to delete a bunch of your bickering. Stop it.

Correct. Because I don’t think they operate in the same domains and therefore there is no hierarchy that requires us to rank one “over” the other. I care a great deal about the Bible and theology and it’s proper use in proper domains.

Don’t waste your worry on me and my soul.

We know what you think, you repeat it ad nauseum. Please refer to the guideline:

  • State your case and then respect other people’s right to agree or disagree. Avoid repeating the same ideas over and over because you have failed to convince everyone to accept your viewpoint.

I’m not really interested in engaging your questions, Adam. It’s not been my experience that you try to understand what other people are saying or represent what they think fairly. I don’t “really need” to explain anything to you, and I frankly don’t believe that you are interested in understanding my theology, because I have already answered your question in a previous reply and I don’t have anything to add to it, and it’s off-topic on this thread.

1 Like

if i wasnt interested in your theology Christy, i would not be here criticising it (academic use of the word btw). You mistake robust challenge to your belief with useless bickering…i recognise that I frustrate you…we frustrate each other (i admit that), however, change requires intellectual conflict (this is academic fact). My fighting with you guys here is an indicator of the fight that goes on in my own head about this stuff. I cannot even begin to consider the science when the philosophical dilemmas remain unanswered. Anyone can choose to believe the science…but not everyone can simply overlook the philosophical problems Christians must resolve first.

Mine is not a grooming conspiracy…its demanding that all of us justify our positions and answer the hard questions. If we are incapable of that…what is the point of all of this in the first place…why are we even here? Are we here simply to have someone operate a tv remote and/or program us like robots?

Now to the point I am trying to make…the reality is, not a single one of you on this forum has (that i can recal at least) answered my question about the following:

  1. TEism claims allegory for the writings of Moses
  2. The Old Testament Sanctuary service pointed directly to how we are saved and to Christs death on the cross
  3. Exodus 20 states…in six days the Lord created the heavens and the earth but on the seventh day he rested
  4. The salvation those who are in Christ receive at the second coming is clearly stated by the bible as entering into Christs rest (ie the Sabbath)

these above are significant theological truths…they are paramount in understanding the bible theme and therefore knowing God. TEism seems to fall on its sword by claiming spritiual death and allegory…thats an impossible scenario given the following:

Why did Christ die physically for the atonement of the wages of sin is death?
** (as Adam and Eve were warned about in the garden of Eden)**

I am arguing that the mere fact TEists refuse to answer the question means that it is some thing even you cannot reconcile with your world view…this means you simply turn a blind eye and ignore it. The problem is, that is the fundamental theme of the entire bible…its the crux of Christianity.

What on earth is the point of all ones belief in science if one is completely unable to reconcile the most basic Christian question? Its seems to me to be a pointless exercise even bothering to be Christian. (I am not making this claim to say you are not Christian…I am making this claim because i struggle with it myself)

Sure, but there comes a point, where if I say “I think the Bible teaches Satan is a created entity, an angel, who is not all-knowing and is not omnipresent, and has no power to create or manipulate reality, only “accuse” and “deceive” (that is what he does in the Bible, he doesn’t use “forces”)” and you say “I think the Bible teaches that Satan knows all of science and can manipulate everything in the universe and corrupt all of the physical world and infiltrate and control human pysches” then we just fundamentally disagree about what the Bible says. There is nothing more to explain. We have come away from the Bible with very different pictures of what it teaches. It’s not really worth my time to dig up a bunch of verses and say “Look!” because I guarantee you will just read them differently than I do and assume they imply things I don’t think they imply. There is no “proving” to be done. We don’t use the same rules of hermeneutics or accept the same basic presuppositions about what the Bible even is and how it works.

Choosing to accept demonstrable scientific facts about things we can measure and observe is not the same thing as believing one preferred Bible interpretation over another. We’ve had this discussion a bunch of times but you don’t accept it, and without this basic presupposition, we don’t have enough common ground to have a discussion. The philosophical questions that you think must be resolved are not my questions because I don’t believe the Bible teaches what you say it does. And I don’t grant your givens, and you don’t grant mine, so our arguments are not going to be persuasive to each other.

These are all off-topic on this post. If you want to discuss them, start new threads, and address one of them at a time. But it gets frustating when you keep insisting things that aren’t true or are gross simplifications or insist on putting someone else’s claims into your own presuppositions that we don’t share. I think by “claiming allegory for the writings of Moses” you mean disputing that the Penteteuch had a single author, Moses." This really doesn’t have anything to do with allegory and shows that when people try to explain nuanced biblical scholarship to you, it somehow doesn’t compute in your brain and then you go around saying people claimed stuff they never came close to asserting. I have zero interest in your Old Testament Sanctuary service discussion. It’s an esoteric part of SDA theology I just don’t care to learn about and discuss. We have already discussed the Sabbath plenty, we don’t agree with your interpretation. Nobody owes you more of an “answer” if you aren’t convinced by ours. Sometimes people agree to disagree.

Whole books have been written on the topic of original sin and death and the EC position. There are multiple FAQs on the BioLogos website with well-researched, expert-reviewed answers to questions about death, sin, and the fall. This is just a silly accusation that holds no water.


With regards to the OP, I think at issue here is the strategy of claiming that “they” aren’t telling you everything, where “they” means everyone that doesn’t support the position of the claimant. This is a classic form of manipulation, that plays on people’s insecurities.

Mr. Ham is welcome to make whatever claims he wishes on dinosaurs, or whatever, and people can evaluate them on their merits. But I have difficulty with telling people that there is a conspiracy among scientists to withhold information.

What I see here with the presentation of Evolutionary Creation arguments is: here is what credible science is telling us, and here are some approaches to reconciling the basic doctrines of the Christian faith with that. Here are the tensions that exist, and some things that Biblical scholars have said about these. Evaluate them according to your belief system.


How did we go from Ken Ham’s most recent posting and the other things you list in your blog, Christy?

No, Christy. I do not think necessarily that there is any such between the various views you listed—and YEC in general. Some of this is just the era we live in, where literally everything is considered half-digested on a website somewhere for at least ten minutes. We thought superstition ended with the Enlightenment!..Some of the ideals you listed also likely come from reactions to other things and connecting them with creationist thinking or with vaccination policies and the high cost of Snickers Bars (just made the last one up).

I do know, or have known, people who hold to (for example) a young earth view. But they were not into “germ denial” or things of that sort. I know people of that YEC persuasion who also recognize that the earth is not flat etc…People can hold to some one of the views you listed and not accept others. …climate change, for example. As for the situation with vaccinating children in Mexico…the details of that case would be nice to know before we throw an entire group of people (the evil creationists) under the bus and assume it is all that.

And I do not think Christians are leading the “charge to elect conspiracy theorists who are pushing for destructive policies”- — is really more than maybe not agreeing with someone else’s political or social views and then painting all with a very broad brush.


Conspiracy theories have historical antecedents that predate the Enlightenment and the writings of Karl Marx. People have long suspected hidden plots and secret cabals throughout history. For example, the belief in witchcraft and witch hunts in the Middle Ages involved conspiracy-like narratives.

Marx’s ideas did play a role in shaping certain conspiracy theories, especially those related to class struggle and the notion of a secretive ruling class. Marx’s writings on capitalism and class conflict provided a framework for understanding societal inequalities, which some conspiracy theorists have applied to claim that a small, wealthy elite controls the world, but there are instances where a small, wealthy elite exerts significant political and economic influence, and this can be a legitimate concern. The concentration of wealth and power among a select few individuals or groups can have profound consequences for society, including exacerbating inequalities and undermining democratic processes.

Some conspiracy theories may draw on real-world concerns, but we have to distinguish between these and elements of misinformation, fear-mongering, and scapegoating, which can be counterproductive to addressing the underlying problems.

However, conspiracy theories appeal to cognitive biases and psychological factors that are not limited to any specific historical period. These include confirmation bias, the need for cognitive closure, and the desire for simple explanations to complex problems. And of course, conspiracy theories have evolved over time, drawing from various historical, cultural, and intellectual influences. Certainly, some aspects of modernity, including Enlightenment ideals and Marxist thought, have contributed to the development of some conspiracy theories, but it is an oversimplification to attribute their existence solely to these factors.

1 Like

I realize lots of things are debatable.

Framing it as a matter of “mental health” as if they are sick or injured is part of the problem.

How can you help someone who you can’t (won’t) relate to because you believe them to be “mind sick”.

1 Like

Meh. Name one true thing about people that modern psychology has taught us that isn’t already in the Bible.

Renaming things like “evil” or “selfishness” to “personality disorder” doesn’t count.

Yes this is tangential but I think it’s important to understand this is a moral battle not a health battle.

1 Like

I don’t either and specifically said so. I am talking about posture. If leaders constantly model a posture of paranoia and conspiratorial thinking (watch out, the general public is being deceived, they are hiding the truth, only a few select, enlightened people can get you the real information you need to understand), that modeling will have an effect on the followers and they will be more open to responding to that same posture from others. On the other hand, if leaders model a posture of cooperation with science, the government, other Christians, and convey that truth and reliable information are not difficult to discover if you have proper tools available to everyone, then the followers learn how to vet sources and keep themselves well-informed.


Health is a spectrum not a binary. There are plenty of people who are not sick or injured who could take better care of their health, mental and physical. And I have no idea why you assume that I don’t relate to people unless they are peak mental health. Most people, myself included, are struggling, in case you were not aware.

That’s a stupid exercise. But sure. Serotonin regulates mood.


Thanks for explaining yourself, Christy. You are right, at least, in that people need to learn how to vet sources and keep informed. At some point, that will be as far as it goes. People just think differently…and don’t think they are being conspiratorial or paranoid (they think YOU and I are). And sometimes they just want it to be that way. I tried looking for more online about the particular Facebook posting of Ham’s. (I don’t do Facebook much.) But there were other articles on his beliefs that way. Anyway, thanks for the response.

1 Like

First response here - I see a parallel in the way the Religious Right seems to flock to conspiracy theories like this. Ham seems to propose that HE owns a conspiratorial corpus of “key information that is not generally known and is with held from the public.” - once people come to him in trust he will supply the missing parts.
But in that case (think of Martin Luther asking the Church why, if the power to release souls from Purgatory was actual, did they need to sell this great mercy) Why does Ken Ham need to guard (sell) this great information?
It will help for Mr. Ham to explain how the sun, moon, and stars cross the sky beneath the waters some of which caused the Flood, yet Creation includes Planet Earth orbiting the nearest star.
Since he rejects science altogether for the highly effective reason that it isn’t consistent with his reading of Genesis1, he will also scoff at The first and third verses of Genesis, which announce that, as of “Let there be light” some 13.78 billion years ago, God invented time, space, matter, and light. Picture the Spirit, leaning over Moses’ shoulder while whispering the opening verses of Genesis into his ear for Moses to write down, the only actual science to be found there, with a fatherly wink aimed at the age of science finally figuring out the Big Bang.
Verse Two on the other hand grandfathers in the then-dominant pagan view of the universe’s cosmology - a vast body of water, featureless and void, with [for pagans, what would become] earth sequestered deeply within.
Genesis is about the Creator - that idea should be universal.
But, Mr. Ham, Creation does not lie and cannot mislead. Do us all a favor and explain the solar system in light of Days Two and Four.
Not sure where to send this love letter to the esteemed gentleman, but if enlightened, I will be happy to do so. (Please do not hold your breath waiting for a resemblance of thought to come back.)
A few months ago a member of my home congregation managed to supply an hour-long infomercial of Mr. Ham’s regarding his current “life size replica” of the Ark. On the one hand nonsense lurked around every corner (dogs are degenerate wolves, since changes in DNA are always subtractive) while some 21st-Century engineering brilliance answers the mechanical problems of ventilation, refuse collection, food distribution, and oh so much more.
But he forgot to include the significant presence of steel reinforcement buried in the hull to keep he ship intact in the occasional strong winds that make life above ground so interesting.


I do not believe this from my reading of the bible, show me where you get that from?

Did you mean terrane theory, a geological explanation?

1 Like

No, what Christy was referring to:


Please explain then how it is that Satan is the one who whips up a wind storm that kills Jobs children in Job ch 1?

18While he was still speaking, another messenger came and reported: “Your sons and daughters were eating and drinking wine in their oldest brother’s house, 19when suddenly a mighty wind swept in from the desert and struck the four corners of the house. It collapsed on the young people and they are dead, and I alone have escaped to tell you!

I find it a really difficult theological position to claim that Satan, a creature who is (even by your own world views claims) more than 6,000 years old, unable to learn science both faster and more intelligently than any human?

Add to the above youre confusing divine authority and power with God allowing Satan to have control of things like the weather. Satan is only allowed to have power to control things like the weather if God allows it. Here in Job 1, we clearly find an example of God doing just that…allowing Satan to control lightning and the wind.

Another example is found the Gospels when Satan took upon himself the form of an angel tempting christ. They did not walk to those places in that narrative, Satan was given the power to physically take Christ there (the roof of the temple being one of the spots he took christ).

This is an example of a person who recognises huge theological conflicts with their world view and then simply twists biblical text to fit their error in order to ensure the sqfety of world view. Philosophically, this is foolish and the conflict here is a major probpem for me.

I do not agree with your world view Christy because of massive philosophical stuffups like this…it becomes untennable.

If you would fix these problems and present a consistent and sound philosophical position, and then align that with the science, you would win me over…but honestly, this is a mess…