Kent Hovind

And by the way,
Answers In Genesis folks are not necessarily the end all and be all as far I am concerned, either. Just because you can find dirt on someone(anyone) on the internet, IMO does NOT make it so.
Jim

 

That's what I'm talking about when I put the word "knowing" in quotation marks. I personally don't trust anything I read on internet sources. It amazes me how people are willing to go all in on something because they read it on the internet. (And of course they will all say, "but my source was reliable!)

Now this stuff about the subject preacher may all be true, or might not be...I don't know. I simply heard his sermons on the subject and liked what I heard.

I don't know about his:
</font>

• college degree</font>
• thesis</font>
• doctorate</font>
• etc...</font>

...nor am I willing to malign his character because I read something negative on the internet.

I'd be interested to know the perspective of anyone who was actually an "eye-witness" to any of these things.

 

Kent Hovind is perhaps one of the most vocal and high profile of the creationists. He makes a living-debating evolutionists and conducting seminars on creation and how we Christians can trust our bibles and that in itself makes himself a big target. What I’ve found on this message board is that a few members are staunch evolutionists, who deny the authenticity of Genesis. With that being said, since Hovind is a person of non-compromise when it comes to the bible, these Christian evolutionist will attack him or anyone for that matter, who puts on the whole armor of God and defends His Word. If they can’t discredit his preaching, they will attack his character by reading something they get from the net.

No one here knows the facts surrounding the allegations against Hovind, other than what they read on the net. The tax evasion question could stem from his creation science museum or theme park called ‘Dinosaur Adventure Land’ in Pensacola, Fl. He claims (if I remember correctly) that it’s a ministry and shouldn’t have to pay taxes on it. I don’t know Florida law, but here in Indiana; if a church owns land they may file an exemption from taxes. He is having or had a dispute concerning taxes, but last I heard this is the USA, the Muslims haven’t taken over yet, so people are innocent until proven guilty not guilty until proven innocent.

I’ve personally never had the opportunity to attend any of Hovind’s seminars, but I’ve listen to all of his online seminars. I enjoy listening to anyone who’s going to defend Gods Word, every jot and tittle of it. Thanks to Kent Hovind and his ministry, my faith in the Word of God I hold in my hands is stronger than ever. He opened the door to a new world of apologetics for me and has exposed the errors of this false religion of evolution. I praise God for Hovind, Morris from ICR, and those at AiG for their steadfast, non-compromising position in regards to scripture.

 

The so-called "dirt" on Hovind is factual. The guy's a blatant liar and deceiver, and has never repented for his deceptions.

The discussion regarding Hugh Ross are matters of interpretation. If you want to disagree with a person's intpertation, that's perfectly proper. I know that I certainly disagree with Dr Ross on several points. However, there's a difference between having a differing interpretation, and being a deceiver. Assuming you agree with Hovind, Hovind is still guilty of being a deceiver. Assuming that you disagree with Ross, Ross is guilty of simply being mistaken.

 

That's interesting, because many people on the board will malign, say, Billy Graham, Joel Olsteen, RIck Warren, or Robert Schuller, based on negative things they've read on the internet.

I guess it's okay to malign someon on matters of interpretation, but not malign them on matters of clear and purposeful deception. We have no problems maligning Benny Hinn and Jack Chick (and rightly so) for the same. I guess, if someone says "some good solid stuff" that's sufficient to excuse their deception.

 

Dude, I don't attack those people you mentioned either. If a person's only source of information is some internet site, then that person is better off getting of the net and living a real life in the real world.

The fact that others malign another person's character without proper first-hand knowledge does not make it alright for us to do so.

This is a bulletin board, and the fact is while I gain very valuable insight here, I don't consider this or any other BBS an absolutely authoritative source of information - nor does a person's longevity on a BBS make them any more credible. Also, there are very few web-news sources that are truly objective and credible.

 

I got my information off of a reputable news source. It showed that Hovind, indeed, is not acting reputable in his business transactions. I Corithians 5:11 tells me to have nothing to do with him. I'm just following the Word of God.

 

USN2Pulpit, point taken. I did not mean to imply that you were attacking others as mentioned above. No disrespect intended.

John6:63, I'm not making an issue of his YEC position. I have no problem with a person having a literal translation of Genesis, and using science to support it. I have an issue with his other deceptive practices, which have been mentioned already. Defending God's word is perfectly fine. However, using lies to do so is blatantly wrong.

 

I'm in absolute agreement with these statements. Using lies or exagerations to reinforce our position makes us no better than those we believe to be wrong. When we do that, it becomes more about "winning" a debate rather than teaching the truth.

 

I don't know about the things you posted here JohnV, but it was obviously in a mean spirit, along with your other posts about Dr. Hovind. As someone said earlier, the ones that have a problem with him is the evolutionist or someone leaning that way. According to some of JohnV's posts, I believe you lean that way, see the following,

Now, if you don't believe Genesis 1, why should we believe you?

BTW, I've been away for awhile, but I see everyone is still up to their old tricks.

 

johnv wrote

Okay, now this makes sense. I knew there had to be an underlying reason why you dislike Hovind so much.

I've been in enough creation/evolution debates on the net over the last several years (in secular forums) that I should have seen the signs.

Now I understand where you are coming from Johnv.

 

I hate to disappoint you, but, while I don't share the views of my YEC brethren, I don't have a problem with that view. I respect the work done by AiG, as well as our own Helen on this board. The difference between folks like Helen and AiG, and Hovind is that Helen and AiG are above board, and sincere. Hovind is not. He's a fraud. I'd be saying the same thing about Hovind if he were a staunch evolutionist.

Why not? You're a KJVOnlyist, which is unscriptural. Why should I believe you?

Better yet, why don't you do some digging on Hovind yourself? You'll find that I'm right.

 

Authorized by whom?

 

State laws (including Florida, where Hovind resides) generally define the proper use of educational title. The laws are designed to prevent professional fraud. The laws state that you cannot use an educational title unless your profession is directly related to that field. For example, if you receive a Doctor of Divinity, it is illegal and fraudulent for you to work at a doctor's office as, say, a clerical staff member, and use the title Dr. Only MD's can use the term "Doctor" in the medical profession. Also, unacredited degrees (Hovind's degree is unacredited) have even stricter guidelines.

Additionally, educator certification guidelines allow a certified teacher with a post-graduate degree who have received their degrees during the time of employment for which they are certified to use the title.

Hovind has claimed that he is allowed to use his title because he was a high school teacher. But he did not receive an accredited degree during that time, and his PhD has nothing to do with childhood education or science.

Additionally, Hovind has on several occaisions give medical advice. With my own ears, I heard him advise people not to vaccinate their children. I also heard him say that apricot seeds will prevent cancer. His degree is not in medicine, yet he was presenting himself as "Dr Hovind" when he made those statement.

 

What is his Ph.D. in?

A lot of people give that advice. I happen to think it is a blatent misunderstanding of statistics, but that doesn't make it wrong.

Weeeeellllll, I have a hard time believing that he was actually expecting people to think of him the same way as a medical doctor while making those statements. I think if you asked he was just giving advice. But either way, if someone who goes to a lecture on creationism by a Dr. Yadayada then also thinks Dr. Yadayada is the same as his Doctor down the street, well, they deserve what they get.

BTW, I'm not disagreeing that he is a fraud. Lots of the Young Earth Crowd like to post Ph.D. that came from mailboxes and many more respectable young earth scientist have called on them to remove it.

 

Christian Education. If it were degree in the field of a science, he'd be allowed to use it (so long as it were in the science of his profession).

Alas, that's true. Carl Baugh has gotten crawled on the carpet for that from time to time.

 

I have heard many people say that vaccinations can be dangerous. The medical community itself says that there is always a chance that children can have deadly reactions, though rare. My sons pediatrician has told us that vaccinations can lead to autism. All of this before I heard it from Hovind.

Plus, the Apricot Seed therapy has been around LONG before Hovind. My folks used to eat apricot seeds back in the 60's and 70's, and they learned it from their parents. Apricot seeds contain Laetril/B17, a form of cyanide that only attacks mutants cancerous cells in the body.

Some people believe that cancer is a definciency disease, much like scurvy was in the 1800's. Scurvy was just as deadly as cancer, and the cure was a simple dose of vitamin C.....GASP!

Americans eat very little vitamin B17 today. Americans used to get healthy doses of B17 when they ate a more natural diet of fresh organic vegetables and breads made of whole grains, not bleached, processed flour, void of any nutrients.

I had a close friend cure himself of a cancer the size of a grapefruit protruding from his side. He ate apricot seeds and started the famous Hulda Clark diet. He had six months to live and within six months, his cancerous tumor dried right up.

Cancer treatment is a multi-billion dollar a year industry. They don't want people curing themselves by eating a simple vitamin. That is why they lobbied the FDA to get Apricot seeds taken off the market. If they were around in the 1800's, there is no doubt the scurvy treatment industry would have done the same to vitamin C.

Didn't God instruct us to eat the meat of the fruit and the seeds too in Genesis?

God gave us these things. We just have to use them.

 

Johnv,

You seem to attack Kent Hovind in his personal life only.

If he is truly a wolf in sheeps clothing, then please refute his teachings. Isn't this really the heart of the matter?

 

Oh brother! You don't really believe that do you????

I think some of the criticism of Kent Hovind is a bit overblown, but as a strict 6 24-hr day YEC, I would not recommend him at this time. All science progresses and scientific creationism has progressed since the early days of Morris and ICR. We need to drop the moon dust, canopy theory, and other falacious arguments. In fact, for the most part, I would just stick with the Bible and argue theologically. Theological arguments provide the strongest proof for the YEC position. I do appreciate the contributions of ethical creation scientists, though.

Andy