Hilariously Illogical!
Bodie Hodge,
M.Sc., B.Sc., PEI
Biblical
Authority Ministries, March 23, 2026 (Donate)
Letter,
explicative edited out:
The
information on your website is so illogical and wrong that it’s hilarious. Yet
I feel worried that there are so many people who obviously believe this
@!*&%$. I’m an Australian and I feel utterly embarrassed to think that Ken
Ham is an Australian. And also someone that supposedly has an applied science
degree from the university of queensland? Just because you believe in something
doesn’t make it true. It’s one thing to read the bible’s stories and garner
moral lessons from them, but to take its word literally? The bible is a
historical book, which has been edited and changed over history. This site’s
utter hate of science is ridiculous. Scientific thought is logical and critical
thinking. The thoughts and ideas on this site are illogical and disgusting.
Just because you can’t explain something or science is yet to explain it,
doesn’t mean that the unexplainable is attributed to an unseen entity. This
site even tries to refute things that science clearly explains. It’s just sad!
A.D.
Australia
Response
(point-by-point style):
Thanks for sending the email. I am replying below to your comments and questions. Please note that my comments are said with sincerity. (I understand that tone is sometimes difficult to display in writing, so I wanted to be up front about it.)
The
information on your website is so illogical and wrong
Such as? This
is called an unsubstantiated allegation. So, I’m surprised such a claim was
made without any backing. We want the information on the website to be both
logical and correct, so if there was anything to be challenged, please point it
out so we can revisit it to make sure it is accurate and modify it if
necessary.
Based on the
humanistic worldview promoted in your email (i.e., the Bible is not true), why
do you think logic exists? For logic
to exist, the Bible must be true. The sheer fact that you believe logic
exists betrays the very worldview to which you pay lip service. In other words,
your worldview is self-refuting.[1]
that it’s
hilarious.
This is an
epithet fallacy. But consider the humor of someone claiming something is wrong
and chuckling about it, and yet they cannot name why it is wrong.
Yet I feel
worried
Why would an
evolutionist worry (see Luke 12:22)? If everything follows either purely
random processes or purely predetermined material results of chemical
reactions, then why worry? In such a worldview, this is illogical.
Again, the
fact that people worry reveals that they want some sort of moral code, which is
meaningless in an evolutionary worldview, by the way. But I’m glad you have the
sense of worrying because it means that you want morality. I want to encourage you to realize
that morality comes from God.
that there
are so many people who obviously believe this @!*&%$.
This is
another epithet fallacy.
I’m an
Australian and I feel utterly embarrassed to think that Ken Ham is an
Australian.
Why? The
feeling of embarrassment in an evolutionary worldview is simply chemical
reactions in the brain and is no different from chemical reactions for love and
compassion.[2]
But again,
why the sense of morality in an evolutionary worldview? What is going on here
is that in your heart of hearts, you know God exists (Romans
1:20–21), and God is the basis for morality since He is the
ultimate Law
Giver. You are trying to suppress that knowledge (Romans 1:18),
but you must still borrow from the biblical worldview in order to uphold some
form of morality.[3]
And also
someone that supposedly has an applied science degree from the university of
queensland?
Not
supposedly; Mr. Ham earned it years ago. This should come as no surprise since
Christians earn advanced degrees every year at universities all over the world
and are not anti-science. But consider that science is possible simply because
the Bible is true, so this should come as no surprise either. In fact, most of
the great founders of scientific disciplines believed the Bible such as Newton,
Boyle, Galileo, etc.
Just because
you believe in something doesn’t make it true.
Ditto. What
makes things true is predicated on the possibility of truth existing. In a
materialistic, atheistic universe, why would truth, which is immaterial, exist?
This is a major problem for materialists like atheists. Of course, truth is not
a problem for Christians since God is both the truth (John 14:6)
and the source of truth.
Without His
Word, truth is meaningless. Of course, there is so much more we could dive into
from this point, but that’s another discussion.
It’s one
thing to read the bible’s stories and garner moral lessons from them,
But morality
is meaningless if God does not exist. In a purely evolutionary worldview,
chemicals react. Why would anyone care about morality unless there is an
ultimate standard to reveal what morality is? God is that standard, and in His
Word He has told us what is right and what is wrong.
but to take
its word literally?
What do you
mean by literally? Literally has traditionally meant to take something
the way it is written (not the false modern concept that everything must be
taken in a strict literal sense—i.e., that the metaphorical use of “pillars of
the earth” means the earth is sitting on top of pillars in space). If it is a
metaphor, then it should be understood as a metaphor. If the writing style is
literal history, then it is literal history and should be interpreted as such.
If it is a song, then follow the principles for understanding a song. This
concept is entirely biblical.
But consider
something else here. What if I were to argue that evolutionists should not
interpret evolutionary papers literally when they use metaphors? They should
interpret them in a strict literal sense. Would the evolutionists accept this?
Not at all. So why attack Christians for trusting what God’s Word says in its
context and literary style?
The bible is
a historical book,
Yes, but it
is more than that (psalms and songs, genealogies, prayers, prophecies, etc.).
But I’m glad you agree that it is a historical book in some sense anyway.
This very premise challenges the evolutionary ideas of origins at their very
core. So how can one trust an evolutionary history of billions of years,
knowing the Bible is indeed history?
which has
been edited and changed over history.
This is
basically a contrary to the fact
conditional error fallacy. Any student of this subject would say the
opposite after only a little research. The Bible’s words have been attested to
through thousands of ancient manuscripts that repeatedly affirm the texts have
been faithfully transmitted to us.
This site’s
utter hate of science is ridiculous.
This is false
and is another epithet fallacy, as well as equivocation. As an aside, it should
have been obvious on our website how much we do love and enjoy science.
However, I think the equivocation fallacy is pertinent here. Equating science
with an evolutionary worldview is a fallacy.
The issue is
not science versus religion, as many seem to think. It is worldview versus
worldview. More specifically, it is humanism (with its views of evolution and
millions of years) versus biblical Christianity (with its views of creation and
thousands
of years).[4]
We both have
the same science, and when it comes to repeatable, experimental science (known
as operational science), both evolutionists and creationists would agree almost
every time! Where we disagree is our interpretations of the past (i.e.,
origins).
The reason we
disagree here is due to our differing authorities. Is God the ultimate authority, or is
mankind the ultimate authority on the subject? This is the debate—humanism
versus biblical Christianity.
It is better
to trust in the Lord than to put confidence in
man. (Psalm 118:8)
It will be a
sad day when people who rejected God stand before Him in judgment (Hebrews 9:27)
and tell Him that they trusted the false ideas of man over what God lovingly
revealed to mankind. How should a just God respond?
Scientific
thought is logical and critical thinking.
We agree, but
again, this view is only possible because the Bible is true. (Keep in mind that
the point is not that people need to believe the Bible is true, but simply that the
Bible is true.)
The thoughts
and ideas on this site are illogical and disgusting.
Again, this
is an unsubstantiated allegation and question-begging epithet.
Just because
you can’t explain something or science is yet to explain it, doesn’t mean that
the unexplainable is attributed to an unseen entity.
This is a
reification fallacy. “Science” doesn’t explain things; it is a methodology.
People use it as a tool to help explain things, but science doesn’t make
the statements; people do. This reveals how much faith is given to the religion
of humanism. People have such faith in other people to come up with strange stories to
explain things. This puts the ultimate authority in mankind. When the ancient
Greeks didn’t know the answers, they came up with some fancy stories that fit
within their worldview. And sadly, generations of people believed those
stories, and now we look back and call those stories mythology.
The same
thing is going on today. In an evolutionary worldview, when people don’t know
an answer, they come up with stories that fit within their worldview (e.g.,
Oort cloud, abiogenesis, missing links, etc.) I look forward to a time when
people look back and the evolutionary stories as mythology. But the point is that
evolution, like Greek mythology is a product of the religion of humanism.
The issue is
that when God speaks on a subject, He cannot be wrong, but fallible, sinful,
imperfect human beings can and will be wrong when they try to explain things,
especially about the past, apart from God and His Word.
This site
even tries to refute things that science clearly explains.
Again, this
is a reification fallacy. “Science”
does not explain things; people do. I’ve had some people say science speaks,
tells,
or explains
things to them, but what they really mean is that scientists speak,
tell, or explain their views of the data.
Also, this is
another unsubstantiated allegation.
It’s just
sad!
This is an
appeal to emotion fallacy, which is especially illogical in an evolutionary
worldview because everything would ultimately be meaningless (like sadness) in
a strictly chemical universe. This actually undercuts the anti-Bible argument
that has been presented in this email.
I want to
encourage you to consider abandoning the humanistic worldview with its
materialistic evolutionary bent. A materialistic
evolutionary worldview is illogical on many fronts (such as having no basis
for logic, which is immaterial, and no basis for truth or knowledge).
With that in
mind, I would like you to consider a biblical worldview, which does have a
basis for logic, truth, knowledge, and more—including morality, which seems to
be important to you (to your credit). Please take some time to read this
message entitled What
Does It Mean to Be “Saved”? This extended article explains salvation, one
of the major themes in the Bible in an easy to read fashion starting at the
beginning.
With kindness
in Christ,
Bodie
Bodie Hodge, Ken Ham's son in law, has been an apologist defending
6-day creation and opposing evolution since 1998. He spent 21 years working
at Answers in Genesis as a speaker, writer, and researcher as
well as a founding news anchor for Answers News. He was also head
of the Oversight Council.
Bodie launched Biblical Authority Ministries in
2015 as a personal website and it was organized officially in 2025 as a
501(c)(3). He has spoken on multiple continents and hosts of US states in
churches, colleges, and universities. He is married with four children.
Mr. Hodge earned a Bachelor and Master of Science degrees from Southern
Illinois University at Carbondale (SIUC). Then he taught at SIUC for a
couple of years as a Visiting Instructor teaching all levels of undergraduate
engineering and running a materials lab and a CAD lab. He did research on
advanced ceramic materials to develop a new method of production of titanium
diboride with a grant from Lockheed Martin. He worked as a Test Engineer
for Caterpillar, Inc., prior to entering full-time ministry.
His love of science was coupled with a love of history,
philosophy, and theology. For about one year of his life, Bodie was editing and
updating a theological, historical, and scientific dictionary/encyclopedia for
AI use and training. Mr. Hodge has over 25 years of experience in writing,
speaking and researching in these fields. Originally at Answers in
Genesis; Edited; Republished by permission.
[1]
Atheism: an irrational worldview, Dr. Jason Lisle, Answers in Genesis website, October 10, 2007, http://www.answersingenesis.org/articles/aid/v2/n1/atheism-irrational.
[2]
For the reader, Ken Ham, who is originally from Australia, was the president
and CEO of Answers in Genesis.
[3]
Evolution and the Challenge of Morality, Dr. Jason Lisle, Answers in Genesis website, April 14, 2008, http://www.answersingenesis.org/articles/2008/04/14/evolution-challenge-of-morality.
[4]
See The New Answers Book 2, Ken Ham, Gen. Ed., chapter entitled: How old is the
Earth? by Bodie Hodge, Master Books, Green Forest, AK, 2008, https://www.biblicalauthorityministries.org/2024/05/how-old-is-earth.html.










