"But God hath chosen the foolish things of the world to confound the wise; and God hath chosen the weak things of the world to confound the things which are mighty;"
1 Corinthians 1:27
Leaven Alert: Kent Hovind
Author:
Christopher J. E. Johnson
Published: Aug 22, 2015
Updated: Sept 18, 2015

Many of you out there who are avid fans of Kent Hovind will probably have nothing to do with me after you read this, and that's fine; I just pray that you read and understand it, that's all. With the amount of emotionally heated emails I've received after explaining to people the truth about what Kent Hovind is doing right now, I realized I needed to make a public page like this so people can at least be warned about what's happening.

Much of the reason I was convicted to write this is because many of you know that I based our seminar series on the original work of Kent Hovind, and since then, over the years, I've edited, updated, and polished them into my own seminar series. Because of this, many people thought I was going to jump out and immediately support everything that's happening with Kent Hovind right now, but Kent is not my final authority in all matters of faith and practice, and even though he was wrongfully put in prison, he is guilty of other things which he needs to repent and get right with the Word of God.

Although Kent will probably never read this, know that everything that I'm saying in this article is exactly what I would say to Kent himself. Although I've had very little direct communication with Kent, I have watched nearly everything he has ever put out on video. I have met Eric multiple times, and I've been to Florida and met Kent's family. I have written Kent while he was in prison, and Eric told me that they took one of my letters to their entire staff and read it to them because he said it was so encouraging to them, but with all that in mind, know that today, I sanctify myself from the Hovinds in general because they are in serious need of rebuke that, so far as I've experienced, they will not hear.

THREE POINTS BEFORE WE BEGIN:

1. The day after I was first saved, I found Kent Hovind's materials. I didn't have any work at the time, so I watched his seminars 16 hours a day for three weeks straight. I have watched all his debates multiple times, some of them I've listened to over forty times. I got to the point where I could quote him word for word out of his creation course series (101-104), and I've watched numerous other videos he's produced, including his radio show, and so I would please ask that people refrain from accusing me of not knowing anything about Kent Hovind, because I probably know more about Kent and his teachings than most of you reading this.

2. I really like Kent, and I tend to lean to the position that he is born-again in Christ; this is not a topic where I would charge him with being a false convert (at least, not yet... my indecision is due to his position on repentance/salvation -- I'll talk more about that later), which is why you don't see this article in our "Wolves in Costume" series. This article is being written so that others can beware of the danger, and sanctify themselves from the leaven the Hovinds have amassed, but also consider that many of the topics I have written about today that have helped some of you (based on the testimony of your letters), I was originally informed about those topics from Kent's materials.

On the other hand, please keep in mind that just because someone preaches well on one topic (like creation/evolution) doesn't automatically mean he is right with the Word of God. We need to stop putting our trust in men.

Thus saith the LORD; Cursed be the man that trusteth in man, and maketh flesh his arm, and whose heart departeth from the LORD.
-Jeremiah 17:5

3. Before any atheists (and some creationists) think they're sly to falsely accuse Kent Hovind of being a tax cheat, know that they are all ignorant of the facts, and because they hate Kent and his family, they perpetuate a lie. Kent was arrested on the accusation of "structured bank transactions," which the IRS Commissioner came forward and apologized last year for illegally arresting law-abiding citizens:
"Pressured by Congress, the IRS said Wednesday it is changing its policies and apologizing for seizing banks accounts from otherwise law-abiding business owners simply because they structured bank transactions to avoid federal reporting requirements. Their alleged crime: routinely making bank deposits of less than $10,000. That allowed the business owners to avoid reporting requirements designed to catch drug dealers and money launderers. IRS Commissioner John Koskinen told Congress that the IRS is changing policies to prevent the seizures, as long as the money came from legal means. 'To anyone who is not treated fairly under the code, I apologize,' Koskinen told the House Ways and Means oversight subcommittee. 'Taxpayers have to be comfortable that they will be treated fairly.' By law, bank transactions above $10,000 must be reported to the IRS. It's a felony, called "structuring," to manage transactions to avoid the reporting requirement, even if the money is legally earned. In some cases, the IRS seized and held bank accounts for years without bringing charges." [He apologized, but no one at the IRS is losing their jobs over it, and no one is getting restitution for their lives and businesses--how convenient.]
-Stephen Ohlemacher, "IRS apologizes for using bank secrecy law to seize accounts of law-abiding small businesses," Associated Press, Feb 11, 2015, retrieved Aug 12, 2015, [usnews.com/news/politics/articles/2015/02/11/irs-apologizes-for-seizing-bank-accounts-of-small-businesses]

Most people who were charged for this had fines, and others had some jail time, but most typically a maximum of 1-3 years. Kent Hovind received FAR over the maximum (10 years) for a first offense, which should lead anyone to raise an eyebrow in suspicion.

Granted, if Kent hadn't tried to start up "Dinosaur Adventure Land," which was completely unnecessary (following the footsteps of men like Ken Ham who unbiblically puts millions of dollars into a giant useless boat), this probably would never have happened, but the IRS stole tens of thousands of dollars of donated funds from the Hovind family, and atheists (and many creationists) couldn't care less because they hate Kent personally. I want people to understand that this article is coming from someone rubuking those scoffers in their shame, but I also want to warn my Christian brethren with the whole truth about Kent.

Let's start with some recent interviews Kent Hovind was in, and analyze some of the things he said:
Kent Hovind was asked: What are your thoughts on 501c3 churches, specifically Creation Today? (Creation Today is owned by his son Eric.)
"It's a difficult situation... does the government decide what is and is not a church? It's a real touchy question... I am not a legal expert on that; I'm aware that there's a real problem and I think we should tread softly... Paul Hansen would be the one to talk to about that."

If you have not yet read our article "501c3: The Devil's Church," please click the link and go read it now before you continue because Kent's statement is a cop-out if I've ever heard one, and we need to go into some details to understand why. First, I want everyone to notice that Kent NEVER mentioned Eric or Creation Today (which was the purpose of the question), and it shouldn't take a genius to figure out why: He's protecting his son.

Suppose ye that I am come to give peace on earth? I tell you, Nay; but rather division: For from henceforth there shall be five in one house divided, three against two, and two against three. The father shall be divided against the son, and the son against the father; the mother against the daughter, and the daughter against the mother; the mother in law against her daughter in law, and the daughter in law against her mother in law.
-Luke 12:51-53

We divide not for the sake of division itself, but for the purpose of sanctification in the truth of the Lord Jesus Christ and His Word. It is surprising to me that someone like Kent, who has never had a problem making waves, is afraid of the blowback from directly telling the truth about 501c3 and Creation Today, and one of the reasons we can see as proof of his fear is from his comment referring to Paul Hansen.

Paul Hansen is Kent's lawyer, and he has written a blog post on his website called "Churches Should Never Go 501c3: Reasons to Unincorporate Your Church." In it, he states:
"This is how the corporation came to the churches. We learned it from the heathen. Churches incorporate for basically three reasons: 1. To avoid responsibility and accountability for their deeds. (liability) 2. To make the church eligible to borrow money and go into debt. 3. To get tax exemption to increase giving. None of these are Scriptural... You can never restore Christ as head of your church as long as your church is tied to the law of an earthly king."
-Paul Hansen, "Churches Should Never Go 501c3: Reasons to Unincorporate Your Church," Paul J. Hansen Blog, Aug 5, 2011, retrieved Aug 13, 2015, [pauljjhansen.com/?p=389]

Please carefully consider the following question:
Why would Kent not just say that directly?
Why did he side-step the question and refer to Hansen? Kent is backing off from saying anything directly about 501c3 because he knows it'll make Eric look really bad, and it's a VERY bad sign when the lawyer has more Biblical conviction than the preacher.
(Hansen does not claim to be a lawyer because he refused to take the BAR test; getting a BAR license is basically getting a license to steal.)
Kent's statement about 501c3 was also very hypocritical because, in his many debates, Kent has pointed out his evolutionist opponent's escape mechanism, avoiding answering questions about a topic, by saying "I'm not a geologist" or "I'm not a chemist." Kent does the exact same thing, avoiding any direct statements about the topic by simply saying "I'm not a lawyer."

This lukewarm position on 501c3 should not be surprising to those of us who have followed Kent's teachings for many years because we know that he promotes MANY leavened 501c3 ministries, like Eric Hovind, Ray Comfort, Carl Baugh, and many others. Again, we don't sanctify ourselves from their wicked leaven because it's fun and we enjoy it; I am afflicted constantly by having to do this, but we suffer that afflication and sanctify ourselves for the sake of the Truth of the Word of God.

Choosing rather to suffer affliction with the people of God, than to enjoy the pleasures of sin for a season;
-Hebrews 11:25

Sanctify them through thy truth: thy word is truth... And for their sakes I sanctify myself, that they also might be sanctified through the truth.
-John 17:17-19

Let's listen to Kent's answer to "Christian" rock. If you don't understand the problems with it, please read "What's Wrong With Christian Rock?" before continuing:
Kent Hovind is asked for his thoughts on Christian rock music:
"My only concern with what's called Christian rock is the association that's going to be in the minds of some people with the other rock. Somebody driving by your church and they cannot hear the lyrics, all they can hear is the music, what will they think?... I wouldn't fight them; those that want to do it, great. I preach in lots of churches that do that stuff... it's one of those things I wouldn't fight them, but I wouldn't join them either... I'm thrilled for everybody who uses their rock music talent for the Lord, go for it, go get 'em. "

As a side note, I'd like to point out that the person writing the question to Kent Hovind mentions some artists who she claims are not just in it for entertainment and money, and she references to Chris Tomlin. I use one of his songs as a primary example of pure vanity that has nothing to do with the Lord Jesus Christ in our article on "Christian" rock, so please take a look at our teaching if you haven't already.

I'm glad he sanctifies himself from the "Christian" rock for the purpose of not putting a stumblingblock in others way; that's good and Biblical, however, he also encourages these people to get involved in "Christian" rock, and wouldn't say anything against it. Thus, he sees a problem with it, but then keeps his mouth shut so as not to offend anyone's lust of worldly music.

A good tree cannot bring forth evil fruit, neither can a corrupt tree bring forth good fruit.
-Matthew 7:18

Kent is really making things more difficult for preachers trying to teach the truth about these matters because he doesn't have any understanding that most of the lyrics used in these modern rock songs are not considered praise to the Lord Jesus Christ according to Scripture. Furthermore, it seems Kent has blinded himself to the false doctrine that's being taught in that very rock music he is encouraging others to dabble in, and again, I cover that in our article on the subject, showing that just because someone sings the name "Jesus" doesn't mean what they teach in the song is Biblical.
(Read "What's Wrong With Christian Rock?" here at creationliberty.com for more details.)

For God is the King of all the earth: sing ye praises with understanding.
-Psalm 47:7

The main problem I'm seeing in these answers is that they are lukewarm, and it gets really dangerous when church-goers who have transformed themselves into "Hovindites" (i.e. someone who follows Kent Hovind over God's Word) will use Kent as an excuse and justification for leaven. Although at one time I thought Kent was very strongly grounded on matters of the Bible, but as I have grown as a Christian by spending a lot of time studying Word of God, I have seen Kent is very lackadaisical and indifferent when it comes to some important doctrines, and especially traditions of modern American church buildings.

I know thy works, that thou art neither cold nor hot: I would thou wert cold or hot. So then because thou art lukewarm, and neither cold nor hot, I will spue thee out of my mouth.
-Revelation 3:16

The average Christian I meet has never spent time working in ministry outside of volunteering for some event at a local church building. Most have never started up ministry on their own, and attempted to work together with other Christian groups. Because few have ever done it, most of them do not understand how much "churchianity" politics go on behind the scenes today in America, and the massive amount of compromising, to the point of being forced to blind oneself to wickedness in order to do many basic things in church buildings (let alone being able to speak/teach in a church building), and thus the average Christian also won't understand the things I understand today having been through it, namely how much compromising Kent Hovind has had to do to get as far as he has in modern American church buildings.

Please also consider that if he comes out and takes a stand against wicked rock music with false doctrine, and 501c3 churches, Kent would automatically be rebuking at least 95% of the church buildings in which he's been invited to speak. That percentage will get MUCH worse if you include pagan witchcraft rituals.

Kent Hovind asked if he celebrates Christmas and/or tells the children about Santa Claus: "Jesus was not born December 25th... December 25th was a pagan holiday to celebrate the shortest day of the year when they bring the sun back up... My understanding is the Catholics were trying to evangelize some culture they were meeting that had this particular day as the holidays, so they blended Christmas with their pagan holiday of the winter solstice... it's an attempted blending of a Christian holiday with a pagan holiday... Do I celebrate it? Maybe celebrate is the wrong word. We put up a tree, and have presents, and give the kids presents. We tell them it's the birth of Jesus Christ, and we tell them this is not his real birthday, but we don't know when it was, so we're celebrating it now like the rest of the people, so you don't feel like a screwball at school."

If you don't understand the problem with a born-again Christian participating in Christmas rituals, please read our article "Christmas: The Rejection of Jesus" to gain understanding on the matter, and how this celebration is abhorrent to the Lord Jesus Christ. I put emphasis on learning about this subject because you will see just how many things Kent Hovind said that were wrong.

Those of you who understand the heresy of Christmas, and study the Word of God accordingly, can probably already see how compromising Kent Hovind really is on these issues. First, he tries to tell people that it's a blending of a "Christian" holiday, which has to first stand on the presupposition that Catholicism is "Christian," when it ABSOLUTELY is not. I'm not saying Kent believes Catholicism is Christian, but his explanation has to ride on that presupposistion.
(Read "Corruptions of Christianity: Catholicism" here at creationliberty.com for more details.)

Kent, once again, tries to side-step the issue by claiming that "celebrate" is the wrong word. Let me show you why he's a little nervous about saying that word in relation to Christmas:

celebrate (v): to honor or distinguish by ceremonies and marks of joy and respect
(See 'celebrate', American Dictionary of the English Language, Noah Webster, 1828, retrieved Aug 13, 2015 [webstersdictionary1828.com])

Why would he have a problem saying that he celebrates it if there's nothing wrong with celebrating it? Kent Hovind knows it's wrong, that was clear from his statements, but decides to celebrate it anyway, claiming he doesn't celebrate it, but participates in all the rituals of it (tree, presents, decorations, etc) which is what people do when they celebrate it. (See how Kent keeps up his lukewarm position on all these issues?)

Thus saith the LORD, Learn not the way of the heathen, and be not dismayed at the signs of heaven; for the heathen are dismayed at them. For the customs of the people are vain: for one cutteth a tree out of the forest, the work of the hands of the workman, with the axe. They deck it with silver and with gold; they fasten it with nails and with hammers, that it move not.
-Jeremiah 10:2-4

And finally, why does Kent Hovind celebrate Christmas? What's his reasoning for celebrating this Pagan & Catholic, witch & priest offspring? Is it a Scriptural reason? No. Kent celebrates Christmas so that his grandchildren won't feel left out of the reindeer games at school, because apparently, according to Kent Hovind, how your friends feel about you at school should be your final authority in all matters of faith and practice. (That's a pathetic and unbiblical example to set for your children.)

Kent's Wicked Traditions Are Passed To His Children

Kent taught these wicked pagan traditions to his children, and thus they continue in them. To this day (when I first published this article), Eric has still not removed my email address from his mailing list, and sends me a copy of his mass forward to all his subscribers for his "Merry Christmas" wishes to all. (That's a phrase that rejects Christ, read our article on that for more details.)

I have, in turn, responded to Eric with a rebuke every year, and I sent him our article on Christmas (which is free to read, download on PDF, and listen to our 5-part audio series). He sent me a link that he wanted me to read, and when I clicked on it, it took me to his store where I could pay Eric $8.99 to read a book on PDF by some leavened author trying to help church-goers justify their idolatry.

I can only pray that, since Eric will not repent of his wickedness, perhaps his wife and children one day may read these things and gain understanding so they can get right with the Word of God.

The lukewarm position Kent Hovind takes on all these subjects is not as surprising when we hear about some of the places outside of the Bible he is choosing to educate himself. Let's look at what Kent says about a book he recommends as the best he's ever read:
KENT HOVIND: "It [The Shack] is amazing!... It is incredible!"
"The Shack... is one of the best books I have ever read in my life... there is so much good meat in there... It's a fabulous book! I recommend you get that."

Author William P. Young wrote a book called The Shack in which he portrays God as a black female, Jesus as a long-haired male construction worker, and the Holy Spirit as an Asian woman. Young contradicts the Bible throughout the entire book, and gives the reader a false impression and understanding of the True Living God, which I'll demonstrate in more depth later, but I would like to reveal a bit of it with a few quotes.

Mack is the main character of the story, and his wife calls God "Papa." Papa says:
"I don't need to punish people for sin... It's not my purpose to punish it;"
-William P. Young, The Shack, Windblown Media, 2008, p. 120, ISBN: 9780964729292

"In Jesus, I have forgiven all humans for their sins against me, but only some choose relationship."
-William P. Young, The Shack, Windblown Media, 2008, p. 225, ISBN: 9780964729292

"For you to forgive this man [the murderer to who killed his daughter] is for you to release him to me and allow me to redeem him... He too is my son."
-William P. Young, The Shack, Windblown Media, 2008, p. 224, ISBN: 9780964729292

"Jesus... has never drawn upon his nature as God to do anything."
-William P. Young, The Shack, Windblown Media, 2008, p. 99-100, ISBN: 9780964729292

"The first aspect of God is never that of the absolute Master, the Almighty. It is that of the God who puts himself on our human level and limits himself."
-William P. Young, The Shack, Windblown Media, 2008, p. 88, ISBN: 9780964729292

So far we've already seen a false goddess of Young's making who does not punish sin, has automatically forgiven all men despite the lack of repentance, is incapable of redeeming one man without the help of another man, paints a "jesus" that has never used his power as God, and tears down the holy aspect of God as the Almighty Master. Without another word, a born-again Christian ought to have nothing to do with this false teaching, but the book is still deceiving millions around the world, Christian and non-Christian alike.

The "Jesus" character in book speaks about the people of the world, and says:
"I have no desire to make them Christians."
-William P. Young, The Shack, Windblown Media, 2008, p. 182, ISBN: 9780964729292

And yet, Kent Hovind says this book contains "a lot of meat." Author James B. DeYoung wrote a counter-book called Burning Down The Shack, and though I don't recommend DeYoung's book because he's uses the new-age NIV, he used to be a friend of Paul Young [author of The Shack], and knows much about his personal beliefs. Let's read his testimony to find out what Paul Young actually believes:
"For almost seven years Paul and I drove together to almost every meeting--a trip of about thirty minutes. We would share our latest thinking about a host of things. It now appears that some of the ideas found in The Shack took seed during those discussions. But none... ever rose to the level of heresy as the evangelical church defines the term--not till 2004, that is.
In April of that year, in a 103-page, single-spaced paper, Paul surprisingly presented his embrace of universal reconciliation. It is the Christian form of universalism, not the pagan form. It is crucial to understand this distinction. The pagan form, also called general universalism, claims that there are many ways to God and that Jesus Christ is only one of the many ways to God. This is rightly rejected in The Shack.
So-called Christian universalism, which Paul Young did embrace, insists that all must come to God through Jesus Christ either before they die or after they die. If people do not believe in Jesus before they die, God will use the fires of hell to purge away (not punish) the unbelief of all, even that of the devil and fallen angels, so that hell is finally emptied of all beings and all go to heaven. In others words, after people die, they have a second chance to repent of their sins--actually not just a chance to repent but a certainty that they will. The point is that in the end hell ceases to exist. There is no eternal judgment. This is the form of universalism embedded in The Shack."

-James B. DeYoung, Burning Down The Shack: How the 'Christian' Bestseller is Deceiving Millions, WND Books, 2010, p. xiii-xiv, ISBN: 9781935071846

How is it that Kent Hovind could have read this book nine times, and not discerned these obvious heresies to Scripture? Consider the answer to that question carefully.

But strong meat belongeth to them that are of full age, even those who by reason of use have their senses exercised to discern both good and evil.
-Hebrews 5:14

I believe there may be more behind what Kent actually believes than we see on the surface, because if he can't discern these things after reading that wicked book nine times, then something is seriously wrong. In addition to recommending wicked books, Kent commonly recommends ministries that do all these same wicked things, like 501c3, witchcraft holidays, unbiblical music, books with false doctrine, and much more:

Who knowing the judgment of God, that they which commit such things are worthy of death, not only do the same, but have pleasure in them that do them.
-Romans 1:32

And he yokes up with some of the most wicked men, one of them being Steven Anderson, who I have already told my Christian brethren that, because of his hatefulness and warmongering, I do not believe to be a born-again Christian at all, and our ministry will have nothing to do with anyone who chooses to yoke up with him. See for yourself:

STEVE ANDERSON: "Listen to me, I hate him [Bruce Jenner] with a perfect hatred. I have no love--NO LOVE--for this Bruce freak! I hope he dies today; I hope he dies and goes to hell."
"Here's my sermon: Why I hate Barack Obama... I'm not going to pray for his good; I'm going to pray that he dies and goes to hell."
KENT HOVIND: "I think he loves the Lord. I think he's trying to do what's right... as far as 'kill all the homos' I don't know... if that's been taken out of context... I consider him a friend."

It should be obvious, even to a new Christian, that Steven Anderson does not carry the repentant heart of one who was brought low and born-again in Christ.

So when they continued asking him, he lifted up himself, and said unto them, He that is without sin among you, let him first cast a stone at her.
-John 8:7

But I say unto you which hear, Love your enemies, do good to them which hate you,
-Luke 6:27

Anderson is what the Bible calls a "railer:"

rail (v): to utter reproaches; to scoff; to use insolent and reproachful language; to reproach in hateful terms
(See 'rail', American Dictionary of the English Language, Noah Webster, 1828, retrieved Aug 19, 2015 [webstersdictionary1828.com])

But now I have written unto you not to keep company, if any man that is called a brother be a fornicator, or covetous, or an idolater, or a railer, or a drunkard, or an extortioner; with such an one no not to eat... Therefore put away from among yourselves that wicked person.
-1 Corinthians 5:11-13

Notice the Word of God did not tell us not to keep company with all those who are railers, but specifically those who are called brethren in Christ. If someone claims to be a Christian, and they rail with their contempt and hatred, we ought to be sanctifying ourselves from them, but Kent Hovind doesn't do that.

Normally, among the Christians I know, if they were caught yoked up with a man like that, and heard the truth about him, they would be sorry they were involved with him, repent, and sanctify themselves. Instead, Kent just makes excuses and justifies himself with lukewarm "ride-the-fence" answers, claiming that he's not yoking together with Anderson, even though he's been on his show for interviews multiple times and calls him a friend who loves the Lord and does what's right.

During interview conversations between Anderson and Hovind, Kent made some statements that were very strange. Let's listen:
Kent Hovind: "I think there must be something like a mean gene; something in the genetic code that makes animals vicious or mean... if we would continually eliminate/execute people that do certain crimes, we would gradually get a much better society."

There's a lot to be said after a statement like that. First, please don't misunderstand Anderson and Hovind because in the interview, they specifically stated it's not Christians that should be executing anyone, but rather civil governments who are put in place to punish evildoers as it says in Romans 13.

For rulers are not a terror to good works, but to the evil. Wilt thou then not be afraid of the power? do that which is good, and thou shalt have praise of the same:
-Romans 13:3
(Read "False Doctrine: Unlimited Submission to Government" here at creationliberty.com for more details.)

There are numerous videos and websites out there falsely accusing Anderson and Hovind for teaching that Christians need to execute homosexuals, and that is NOT true. If you listen to their entire 40-minute interview, you can see that for yourself, and I would say to Christians: If you are born-again, stop with the railing and lies.

On the other hand, Anderson and Hovind both emphasize the following verse:

The law of the LORD is perfect, converting the soul: the testimony of the LORD is sure, making wise the simple.
-Psalm 19:7

What they completely miss is that it says "converting the SOUL," and not "converting the flesh." The problem is that Kent Hovind is now teaching a doctrine that says we can, through breeding of the morally superior, and the elimination of the morally inferior, we can breed out sin.

We need to understand that this is heresy that comes from some strange belief that mankind has goodness inside, and must (if I may use the term) "evolve" into that goodness by selection. If we operated according to eliminating the morally inferior, then no one would live, and that's why the Lord Jesus Christ did the following:

Jesus went unto the mount of Olives. And early in the morning he came again into the temple, and all the people came unto him; and he sat down, and taught them. And the scribes and Pharisees brought unto him a woman taken in adultery; and when they had set her in the midst, They say unto him, Master, this woman was taken in adultery, in the very act. Now Moses in the law commanded us, that such should be stoned: but what sayest thou? This they said, tempting him, that they might have to accuse him. But Jesus stooped down, and with his finger wrote on the ground, as though he heard them not. So when they continued asking him, he lifted up himself, and said unto them, He that is without sin among you, let him first cast a stone at her... And they which heard it, being convicted by their own conscience, went out one by one, beginning at the eldest, even unto the last: and Jesus was left alone, and the woman standing in the midst. When Jesus had lifted up himself, and saw none but the woman, he said unto her, Woman, where are those thine accusers? hath no man condemned thee? She said, No man, Lord. And Jesus said unto her, Neither do I condemn thee: go, and sin no more. Then spake Jesus again unto them, saying, I am the light of the world: he that followeth me shall not walk in darkness, but shall have the light of life.
-John 8:1-12

Certainly, when God judges the wicked, things get better; I have no argument against that. However, when Kent claims a "mean gene," I would ask: "What about the devil-possessed man Christ freed?"

And when he was come out of the ship, immediately there met him out of the tombs a man with an unclean spirit, Who had his dwelling among the tombs; and no man could bind him, no, not with chains: Because that he had been often bound with fetters and chains, and the chains had been plucked asunder by him, and the fetters broken in pieces: neither could any man tame him. And always, night and day, he was in the mountains, and in the tombs, crying, and cutting himself with stones.
-Mark 5:2-5

Should we just say he has a mean gene and execute him?

But when he saw Jesus afar off, he ran and worshipped him, And cried with a loud voice, and said, What have I to do with thee, Jesus, thou Son of the most high God? I adjure thee by God, that thou torment me not. For he said unto him, Come out of the man, thou unclean spirit. And he asked him, What is thy name? And he answered, saying, My name is Legion: for we are many... And all the devils besought him, saying, Send us into the swine, that we may enter into them. And forthwith Jesus gave them leave. And the unclean spirits went out, and entered into the swine: and the herd ran violently down a steep place into the sea, (they were about two thousand;) and were choked in the sea. And they that fed the swine fled, and told it in the city, and in the country. And they went out to see what it was that was done. And they come to Jesus, and see him that was possessed with the devil, and had the legion, sitting, and clothed, and in his right mind: and they were afraid.
-Mark 5:6-15

My analysis of Kent's words is that he has so dedicated himself to scientific evidence for so many years, he has lost sight that there is a spiritual battle taking place in the unseen. Although he would object to my saying that, the evidence of his falling away can be seen in his words.

A good man out of the good treasure of his heart bringeth forth that which is good; and an evil man out of the evil treasure of his heart bringeth forth that which is evil: for of the abundance of the heart his mouth speaketh.
-Luke 6:45

Worse still is that Kent Hovind and Steven Anderson are part of the "just believe" or "easy believism" crowd. These men believe that no repentance is necessary for saving grace, and that is based on their confusion and misunderstanding of what "repent" means in the context of the Word of God.

Before read this section, for those of you who may not understand this issue, I would strongly encourage you to read "Is Repentance Necessary?" here at creationliberty.com for more details. New-age church buildings will use their corrupt English-Greek lexicon and read one definition of "repent" as "to turn," when repent has more than one definition, and it changes depending on the context.
(Read "Dangers of Using Lexicons and Concordances" here at creationliberty.com for more details.)

KENT HOVIND: "I don't think it's cheapening the Gospel to not include repentance...
"Is repentance a work that man does... I would think probably yes."
"Is repentance a work? I think probably yeah... I doubt anybody is hindered from honestly being saved by that statement."
"Repentance... is unnecessary."

Though repent can mean "to turn" in some instances, it doesn't always mean that in every verse. In the video, you can hear both the host and Kent agree that repent only means "to turn" in every instance throughout the Bible. Repent also means godly sorrow, and that is the repentance that leads us into salvation; the law being the schoolmaster that gives us godly sorrow that we have done wrong in the sight of God, which brings us to the foot of the cross on our knees.

But shewed first unto them of Damascus, and at Jerusalem, and throughout all the coasts of Judaea, and then to the Gentiles, that they should repent and turn to God, and do works meet for repentance.
-Acts 26:20

Notice that it did NOT say "repent by turning to God," it said "repent and turn to God," because repentance is godly sorrow in which a man acknowledges and feels guilt at his own wrongdoing, and then turns to God AFTER he repents.

repent (v): 1. to feel pain, sorrow or regret for something done or spoken
2. to express sorrow for something past
3. to change the mind (Exd 13:17)
4. to change the course of providential dealings (Gen 6:7, Psa 106:45)
5. to sorrow or be pained for sin, as a violation of God's holy law (Luk 13:3, Act 3:19)
6. to remember with sorrow
(See 'repent', American Dictionary of the English Language, Noah Webster, 1828, retrieved Aug 20, 2015 [webstersdictionary1828.com])

This clearly shows us that not all instances of "repent" means "to turn." The Gentiles were to be sorry that they had done wrong in the sight of God, and do works MEET FOR repentance, or in other words, you do works that properly reflect the godly sorrow in your spirit, which sets repentance apart from works.

The Lord God must give us that godly sorrow:

And the servant of the Lord must not strive; but be gentle unto all men, apt to teach, patient, In meekness instructing those that oppose themselves; if God peradventure will give them repentance to the acknowledging of the truth; And that they may recover themselves out of the snare of the devil, who are taken captive by him at his will.
-2 Timothy 2:24-26

Kent Hovind believes the false doctrine that repentance is works, thereby removing that repentance from salvation, and believes instead that men can be given grace without being brought low in humility:

But he giveth more grace. Wherefore he saith, God resisteth the proud, but giveth grace unto the humble.
-James 4:6

This creates a serious problem when he led 800 men to Christ while he was in prison, and even started a website called "Kent's Converts" that lists them out. Don't misunderstand, I'm not saying that none of them are saved because there are probably a number of them who were in repentance when they heard Kent preach to them to believe, and were actually born-again in Christ, but the problem is that there are many more Kent is "leading to the Lord" who have never repented, and Kent will falsely call them brethren, deceiving them and those of us listening to him, about what's really going on.
(Read "False Converts & Eternal Security" here at creationliberty.com for more details.)

I'm sure that there will be more to add to this article in the future, but for now, this is more than enough for me to know that I ought to sanctify myself from Kent Hovind. Whether a Christian wants to believe Kent is saved or not could be debatable, but there is one thing Christians know for certain, and that's our duty to sanctify ourselves from leaven.

Then understood they how that he bade them not beware of the leaven of bread, but of the doctrine of the Pharisees and of the Sadducees.
-Matthew 16:12

And have no fellowship with the unfruitful works of darkness, but rather reprove them.
-Ephesians 5:11

Now we command you, brethren, in the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, that ye withdraw yourselves from every brother that walketh disorderly, and not after the tradition which he received of us.
-2 Thessalonians 3:6

A little leaven leaveneth the whole lump.
-Galatians 5:9

Kent might have some good material about creation/evolution, but that doesn't make him right in everything he teaches, and until he gets his life right with the Word of God, and (most importantly) SANCTIFIES from the worldly doctrines and traditions of men, then we need to sanctify ourselves. As someone who has listened to Kent for countless hours, I have listened to him many times quote 1 Peter 3:15, that Christians should be ready to give an answer, but he often skips the vital first part of the verse:

But sanctify the Lord God in your hearts: and be ready always to give an answer to every man that asketh you a reason of the hope that is in you with meekness and fear:
-1 Peter 3:15

If you want to love Kent Hovind, then pray that he would be brought low on these matters and given understanding and wisdom from the Lord God. And I also request that everyone pray for myself, and all other brethren; that the Lord God would keep our eyes open to the truth, and not be turned away by false doctrines, because just as it has happened to Kent, it can happen to anyone of us if we do not stay vigilant in prayer.

For this cause we also, since the day we heard it, do not cease to pray for you, and to desire that ye might be filled with the knowledge of his will in all wisdom and spiritual understanding;
-Colossians 1:9




CLE Only

Google+ Facebook Tumblr
Twitter Youtube Youtube

Android via Amazon
Google Play