I’m copying over (with permission) two FB posts in the order I encountered them, and following with a link to the author’s (Riley Barton ) blog post of the same title. The first is a mini-history of AiG, the second some commentary, then the blog post going into greater detail.
From the conclusion:
The AiG–CMI schism is not simply a regrettable episode in ministry history—it is a mirror. It reflects what can happen when theological certitude is accompanied by institutional insulation, and when spiritual authority is exercised without spiritual accountability. Ministries that prioritize branding over brotherhood, image over integrity, may produce polished presentations of Scripture while quietly eroding the very virtues they profess to defend.
The Mini-History, Source: FB1
I never even heard of this. Sadly, it’s not surprising.
I came across this information researching another article, and also compiled a “Ken Ham” timeline following the revelation highlighting key flashpoints in AiG’s history. Some may find it useful.
1961 — The Genesis Flood is published
Authors: Henry M. Morris and John C. Whitcomb
Impact: Launches the modern Young Earth Creationist (YEC) movement by presenting a literalist interpretation of Genesis supported by pseudoscientific arguments for a global flood.
1974 — Ken Ham discovers The Genesis Flood
Context: While teaching science in Australian public schools
Impact: The book profoundly shapes Ham’s views on science and Scripture. He later describes it as the catalyst for his transition into full-time creationist ministry.
1977 — Creation Science Foundation (CSF) is founded in Australia
Founders: Ken Ham, John Mackay, Carl Wieland, and others
Purpose: Promote biblical creationism and counter evolutionary science in Australia
Vision: Inspired by Morris’s work, CSF aimed to blend apologetics with scientific-sounding arguments for a young earth.
1987 — Major internal split at CSF: John Mackay is removed
Conflict: Accusations against Mackay for authoritarian behavior and spiritual manipulation
Allegations: Mackay reportedly accused Margaret Buchanan (then Ham’s secretary) and others of demonic possession, witchcraft, and necrophilia
Outcome: Mackay is expelled from CSF and later forms Creation Research
Significance: Introduces a pattern of spiritualized personal attacks and deep institutional fracture within YEC leadership.
1987 — Ham moves to the U.S. to work with the Institute for Creation Research (ICR)
ICR Founder: Henry Morris
Role: Ham becomes a popular speaker and eventually head of ICR’s “seminar ministry.”
Tensions: Ham’s increasingly aggressive tone and desire for independence begin to cause friction.
1994 — Ham leaves ICR and founds Answers in Genesis (AiG)
Co-founders: Mark Looy, Mike Zovath
Goal: A more media-savvy, rhetorically aggressive YEC ministry
Relationship with CSF: AiG-USA and CSF (still in Australia) operate under a shared brand—for now.
1998 — AiG publishes The Lie: Evolution (revised edition)
Tone: Intensely polemical; frames evolution as a satanic deception
Rhetoric: Begins drawing sharper lines between “true” creationists and compromisers.
On Pg. 18 Ham reveals just how central YECism is to his faith stating, “I did not know from a scientific perspective why I did not believe in evolution - but I knew from a Biblical perspective it had to be wrong or my faith was in trouble.”
2000 — AiG announces plans for the Creation Museum
2005–2006 — Tensions erupt between AiG-USA and AiG-Australia (CSF, now CMI)
Conflict: CMI proposes decentralization and accountability; Ham resists
Flashpoint: Ham reportedly views a proposal to move him into an advisory role as a personal affront
Outcome: AiG-USA severs ties, launches Answers Magazine , and cuts off Creation Magazine distribution.
2007 — CMI files lawsuit against AiG in the Supreme Court of Queensland
Allegations: “Unbiblical/unethical/unlawful behavior,” including misleading donors and reviving discredited personal accusations
Accusations: AiG questions Carl Wieland’s spiritual integrity and resurrects old claims of witchcraft and necrophilia against Margaret Buchanan
Resolution: Settled out of court in 2009; AiG retains U.S. brand, CMI rebrands globally.
2007 — Creation Museum opens
2010s — AiG rhetoric intensifies against other YECs
Target: YECs who accept post-Fall animal death, functional genomics, or nuanced Genesis readings
Notable Targets: Todd Wood, Kurt Wise, and even CMI at times
Label: AiG begins referring to them as “young-earth evolutionists ”
First documented use: Around 2011–2013 in blog posts and conference talks.
2011 — Ken Ham banned from two major homeschool conventions
Reason: Accused of “ungodly and mean-spirited” attacks on fellow Christian speakers like Peter Enns
AiG’s Response: Defends Ham, denies wrongdoing.
2016 — Ark Encounter opens in Williamstown, Kentucky
2016 — Ham Family Legacy Exhibit quietly introduced
Location: Initially tucked away in a hallway at the Creation Museum
Ham’s description: In a 2016 video tour , Ham described it as “not intended to be a major exhibit … standing out in front of everyone.”
Contents: Included personal items like his father’s annotated Bible and a wooden Ark model—framed as a private tribute to his parents’ spiritual influence.
2017–2024 — Media expansion and ideological hardening
Books & Talks: Divided Nation , Will They Stand , and others
Themes: Cultural decline, militant defense of “biblical authority,” and warnings about Christian compromise
Strategy: Reinforces brand identity through conferences, curricula, and online platforms
Criticism: Growing concern over gatekeeping, spiritual arrogance, and rhetorical harshness—even among fellow YECs.
2020s — Intensified polemics and internal consolidation
Ham’s blog and AiG articles: Routinely accuse other Christians of undermining the gospel
“Young-earth evolutionist” label becomes more common in AiG’s public materials
Critics: Accuse AiG of gatekeeping orthodoxy and weaponizing biblical authority.
2021 — Ham Family Legacy Exhibit significantly expanded and relocated
New location: Prominently placed outside Legacy Hall at the Creation Museum
Ham’s comments: In a Facebook post , he wrote: “I love the new, upgraded ‘Ham Family Legacy’ exhibit… don’t miss this exhibit that each day challenges parents regarding the training of their own children.”
Framing: Repositioned from a quiet personal tribute to a public exhortation on generational faithfulness
Symbolism: Includes a cardboard cutout of Ham for photo ops, reinforcing the fusion of personal legacy and institutional branding
Further reflection: As noted in AiG’s “A Father’s Legacy” article , the exhibit now functions as a visual narrative of four generations of Ham men, positioning the family as a model of spiritual inheritance.
2025 — Present
Ken Ham remains CEO of AiG
Current focus: Expanding Ark Encounter and Creation Museum exhibits, promoting AiG curricula, and warning against theological compromise
Ongoing critique: Accusations of authoritarian leadership, lack of transparency, spiritual bullying, and rhetorical escalation
[Commentary, Source: FB2]
While researching an upcoming article on the history of creationism and the tangled ideological lineage of Answers in Genesis , Creation Ministries International , and the Institute for Creation Research (ICR) , I stumbled across something I’d never heard of before: a lawsuit between AiG and CMI. At the time the lawsuit took place, I was still deeply committed to AiG—and would remain so for another decade—completely unaware that any such controversy had ever happened.
But the deeper I dug into the details of the split—the lawsuit, the accusations, the rhetoric—the more I began to recognize troubling patterns. I’d seen this script before: a central figurehead, a ministry that protects the brand at all costs, critics quietly dismissed, spiritual accusations used to shield leadership from scrutiny. It’s the same storyline that’s played out in other high-profile ministries—Ravi Zacharias, Mars Hill, and others—where institutional loyalty quietly eclipses integrity.
The drama reads like a bad soap opera and, frankly, would be darkly funny if it weren’t unfolding within a global Christian ministry that claims to stand for truth.
This article wasn’t planned as part of my usual Scribal Saturday lineup, and it isn’t written to sensationalize. It’s written as a warning and a call to action. Because what happened—and in many ways, is still happening—behind the curtain at AiG has implications far beyond the creationism debate. It’s about leadership, witness, and what we as the Church are willing to excuse.
And finally the blog post.
4 Likes
I apologize for the disjointed presentation, but I didn’t find the mini-history or commentary in the blog post itself. Any errors in how this is presented are mine.
1 Like
Well! It is very obvious that Ken Ham is toxic.
5 Likes
Tim
July 2, 2025, 10:46am
4
The culture at AiG (and I would suspect at the other “high-profile ministries” mentioned) would appear to be fairly close to typical Right-wing authoritarianism – “a set of attitudes, describing somebody who is highly submissive to their authority figures, acts aggressively in the name of said authorities, and is conformist in thought and behavior.”
So…who’s gonna take over? My money’s on the AiG Canada guy. Calvin Smith? I think that’s it. I bet he’s next in line, since Bodie and Martin didn’t shake out.
2 Likes
Paul_King
July 2, 2025, 10:47am
6
No mention of Martin Iles? His apparent anointment as Ham’s successor followed by his stepping down is the most recent sign of a power struggle at AiG.
3 Likes
Thank you for that very helpful timeline. I thought I understood the history of AIG relatively well but for me there was more to learn. And I had no idea that there was a Ham family shrine and that it had been updated and moved to a more prominent location. I wonder if the cardboard cutout of Ken Ham can be purchased at the gift shop or ordered online. (The parody potential is enormous. I have visions of a special version of it at a seafood restaurant where the text balloon over it says, “Try our Filet O’ Great Fish Sandwich.”)
But taking it all in, I began to seriously wonder if you have the impression that my chances of being appointed the next CEO at Answers in Genesis are low. (Maybe I shouldn’t even bother to apply.) That said, I do think that I would make a good cardboard cutout. For that matter, I often get mistaken for one.
3 Likes
I predict Ham will leave no clear successor, leaving it to the family to decide, which leads to (sooner than later) a split into two or more organizations.
3 Likes
Alas. It is the Curse of Ham.
5 Likes
system
July 10, 2025, 12:18pm
10
This topic was automatically closed 7 days after the last reply. New replies are no longer allowed.