Chromosome 2 Fusion?

Chromosome 2 Fusion? 

(Semi-Technical)

Bodie Hodge, M.Sc., B.Sc., PEI

Biblical Authority Ministries, November 21, 2025 (Donate)

Introduction

God created apes on Day 6 and man distinctly different on Day 6. The evolutionary religion doesn’t believe God on this, but have man evolving from great apes. As genetic studies and knowledge grew there was a new problem for the evolutionists.

Humans have 46 chromosomes (23 pairs of chromosomes), while great apes have 48 (24 pairs of chromosomes). This is what we expected if God created man and apes distinctly. But in the evolutionary framework, they needed to figure out how, if humans evolved from the ape-like ancestors, did man arrive at 46?

This is where the evolutionary storytelling begins. Because two ape chromosomes are “somewhat” similar in structure and gene order to human chromosome 2, evolutionists proposed that these two chromosomes fused in a common ancestor. They even renamed these chromosomes in apes (2A and 2B). Thus, the fusion idea was suggested to explain the chromosome number difference while maintaining an evolutionary model of shared ancestry.

Image requested by Bodie Hodge (ChatGPT)

Creationist Researchers Did Their Homework

The idea that human chromosome 2 formed through the fusion of two ancestral ape-like chromosomes has been presented as strong evidence for common ancestry between humans and apes like chimpanzees. However, the claim is not not that good when you look closely at the observable genomic evidence, particularly the alleged telomere–telomere fusion site, the supposed remnant centromere, and the functional genetic features found in the region.

I stand with creationists researchers who maintain that the fusion model relies heavily on evolutionary assumptions and does not correspond well with the structural and biochemical expectations of chromosome biology.

Evolutionists believe that human chromosome 2 formed when two ape-like chromosomes fused end to end about 0.9 million years ago, leaving behind a relic centromere and head-to-head telomeric sequences. This has never been observed to occur nor has it been repeated; thus, it is a belief system based in the religion of evolutionary humanism.

Even so, there are millions of nucleotide differences, multiple gene-order differences, structural rearrangements, regulatory changes, centromere mismatches, and telomere-structure discrepancies between ape chromosomes 2A and 2B and human chromosome 2. Millions of genomic changes in 0.9 million years should throw up red flags even on the evolutionary side.

Evidence Analysis

The evolutionary conclusion is premature, poorly supported, and inconsistent with what is actually found in the genome. Our objections generally fall under several main problems: (1) the telomere issue, (2) the centromere issue, (3) functional DNA problems, and (4) assumptions built into evolutionary reasoning.

Telomeres

A telomere is a protective DNA sequence made of repeated patterns located at the ends of chromosomes to prevent damage during cell division.

A primary, and devastating, problem for the fusion conjecture concerns the telomeric sequences located at the proposed fusion site. A genuine end-to-end fusion of two chromosomes should contain a large block of intact telomeric repeats in a head-to-head orientation.

Instead, the region contains only a small, highly degenerated cluster of repeats that is far shorter and more disorganized than expected. These repeats are fragmented, mutated, and embedded within sequences not characteristic of functional or structural telomeres. Thus, the evolutionary prediction failed. This level of degradation is not consistent with a historic fusion event.

Centromere

A centromere is the central region of a chromosome where sister chromatids (one side of a chromosome) are held together and where spindle fibers attach during cell division.

During an alleged fusion event, there should be two centromeres from two different previous chromosomes. Human chromosome 2 doesn’t have that. So, evolutionists look and try to interpret particular regions to be a remnant or vestigial secondary centromere.

And of course, this alleged secondary centromere provides a second major point of contention. Evolutionists assert that human chromosome 2 retains a primary functional centromere and a second, vestigial centromere from one of the chromosomes that supposedly fused.

The problem is that this alleged vestigial centromere bears little resemblance to a true centromere, lacking:

·        the characteristic alpha satellite structure

·        epigenetic markers

·        specific sequence organization required for centromeric activity

What this means is that it isn’t a remnant centromere at all. The region displays only sparse repetitive content that does not match with the structure of known centromeres, refuting its identification as a functional remnant of a prior chromosomal structure.

Making matters worse, is that the evidence is not simply a genomic scar with useless information but contains functional DNA. Portions of the alleged fusion site overlap with regulatory regions and other genetic features that appear to play active roles in gene expression. In other words, it is not useless nor vestigial but proper working and fully functional genes!

From a design-based perspective, the presence of such function indicates that the region was never a meaningless leftover from a fusion event but an important and useful part of the original human genome architecture.

A Fusion Should Have Been Eliminated And Not Passed Along

In addition to sequence-based concerns, there is a huge biological challenge. This challenge has to do with fixing a broken chromosomal fusion event and then have it spread throughout a population. This is pure arbitrary storytelling.  

Chromosomal fusions often cause massive reproductive problems, like reduced fertility, due to mismatched chromosome pairing during meiosis. For a fused chromosome to spread throughout an ancestral population, multiple individuals, via dumb luck, would have needed to inherit and reproduce successfully with the same rare mutation. This scenario is just outrageous and speculative storytelling.

Evolutionary Framework Assumptions

The interpretive framework surrounding an alleged chromosome 2 fusion is influenced by a commitment to the evolutionary religion. Similarities between human and ape chromosomes are treated as evidence of ancestry rather than potentially reflecting common design.

Common design is rather a confirmation of a common designer, not ancestry. God, of course, being the Designer in this instance which is what we expect when we start with God’s Word as authoritative.  

Conclusion

When discrepancies arise—such as the degraded telomeric sequences or the lack of a recognizable secondary centromere—evolutionary decay is invoked as the explanation. This approach puts the arbitrary evolutionary assumptions into both the interpretation and the justification.

The chromosome 2 fusion argument does not withstand careful scrutiny. The fusion site lacks the intact telomeric signatures expected from a true chromosomal fusion, the supposed vestigial centromere fails to match the structural and epigenetic requirements of a centromere, the region contains functional DNA inconsistent with being a mutation-derived remnant, and the population-level feasibility of fixing such a fusion event remains questionable. These combined issues are a huge problem for the evolutionary camp.  Human chromosome 2 is best understood not as a product of ancient fusion but as a uniquely designed component of the human genome.

Recommended Reading:

·        Jeffrey P. Tomkins, October 16, 2013; Answers Research Journal 6 (2013): 367–375. https://answersresearchjournal.org/alleged-human-chromosome-2-fusion-site/.

·        John Sanford, Genetic Entropy and the Mystery of the Genome, FMS Publications, 2014.

·        Avery Foley Unraveling the Chromosome 2 Connection, March 21, 2021, Answers Magazine, https://answersingenesis.org/genetics/unraveling-chromosome-2-connection/.

·        Jean Lightner, Chromosome Tales and the Importance of a Biblical Worldview, Answers in Depth, June 18, 2014, https://answersingenesis.org/genetics/dna-similarities/chromosome-tales-and-importance-biblical-worldview/.

·        Ken Ham and Bodie Hodge, Glass House, Master Books, Green Forest, AR, 2019.

□

Bodie Hodge, Ken Ham's son in law, has been an apologist since 1998 helping out in various churches and running an apologetics website. 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. 

 

Can Christians Wear Fabric Woven Of Two Different Types?

Can Christians Wear Fabric Woven Of Two Different Types? 

Bodie Hodge, M.Sc., B.Sc., PEI

Biblical Authority Ministries, November 20, 2025 (Donate)

All passages NKJV or NAS 

Introduction 

This question comes up from time to time—usually from the secular side as a way of putting Christians on their “back feet”. There is an Old Testament law that says: 

‘You are to keep My statutes. You shall not … wear a garment upon you of two kinds of material mixed together.’ (a portion of Leviticus 19:19, NAS) 

Some mistakenly think this applies to the mixing of all threaded materials used for garments. Secularists, sometimes even mockingly, call Christians out for being “sinners” for wearing the common cotton-polyester mixture that permeates our society. I had an unbeliever tell me that on the phone once. 

However, another passage later clarifies what is meant. Moses, who authored both passages by the power of the Holy Spirit, stated in Deuteronomy: 

"You shall not wear a material mixed of wool and linen together.” (Deuteronomy 22:11, NAS) 

In the book of Ezekiel, this is confirmed even for Priestly garments. 

“And it shall be, whenever they enter the gates of the inner court, that they shall put on linen garments; no wool shall come upon them while they minister within the gates of the inner court or within the house. “They shall have linen turbans on their heads and linen trousers on their bodies; they shall not clothe themselves with anything that causes sweat. (Ezekiel 44:17-18, NKJV)

If there was any confusion, there shouldn’t be any longer. This is specifically about not mixing wool and linen. Linen comes from the flax plant (its fibers). Wool comes from sheep. 

Image requested by Bodie Hodge (ChatGPT, modified by Bodie Hodge)

Theological Understanding 

Dr. John Gill, in the 1700s, points out that ancient Jewish traditional understanding was strictly wool and flax: 

“the Jewish tradition is, nothing is forbidden on account of divers kinds (i.e. in garments) but wool and flax;”[1] 

Gill goes on to discuss the spiritual aspect of this law too. He says, 

“the design of this, as of the other, seems to be in general to caution against unnatural lusts and impure mixtures, and all communion of good and bad men, and particularly against joining the righteousness of Christ with the works of men, in the business of justification: Christ’s righteousness is often compared to a garment, and sometimes to line linen, clean and white; and men’s righteousness to filthy rags, Re 19:8 Isa 64:6; which are by no means to be put together in the said affair; such who believe in Christ are justified by the obedience of one and not of more, and by faith in that obedience and righteousness, without the works of the law, Ro 5:19 Ro 3:28 4:6; to join them together is needless, disagreeable, and dangerous.”[2] 

Even into the 1600s, John Trapp pointed out that Jews still didn’t wear wool and linen together.[3] Interestingly, the science of wool and linen being a bad mixture is confirmed today. Their physical structure makes weaving them together difficult as well: wool fibers are short and crimped, while linen fibers are long and smooth, leading to uneven weaving tension, slippage, and a coarse, unstable fabric. 

These factors also reduce the garment’s overall performance because wool is designed to insulate by trapping air, while linen cools by transferring heat away. A combined cloth fails to do either well, undermining both warmth and ability to breath. Popular commentators Jaimeson, Fausset, and Brown pointed out in the later 1800s, 

“and the observations and researches of modern science have proved that "wool, when combined with linen, increases its power of passing off the electricity from the body. In hot climates, it brings on malignant fevers and exhausts the strength; and when passing off from the body, it meets with the heated air, inflames and excoriates like a blister" [WHITLAW]. (See Eze 44:17,18).”[4] 

The Science Of Wool And Linen 

Wool and linen fibers behave very differently on a scientific level, which creates major problems when they are mixed in the same garment. For example, one is very coarse with certain properties and the other is very fine with different properties and they two have problems staying woven due to useful wear, fiber physics, durability, and behavior under stress.

Polyester is made from petroleum; Photo by Bodie Hodge

It’s not at all like a cotton-polyester mixture which actually work well (polyester is a synthetic manmade polymer material). Wool is highly elastic and changes size a lot with moisture and temperature; it can stretch quite a bit when wet and returns to its original shape as it dries. 

Linen, by contrast, has precious little elasticity and hardly stretches at all. When woven together, the expanding and contracting wool pulls against the rigid linen, causing the fabric to warp, twist, break, and wear out quickly. This mismatch also leads to uneven stress on the fibers, making seams tear and can cause the garment to be misshapen over time. 

Their thread shrinkage rates also differ quite a bit. Wool easily shrinks when exposed to heat or in water, while linen barely shrinks once woven (even in thread form). In blended fabric, the wool wants to contract while the linen resists, and this causes puckering, wrinkling, and even structural damage. 

Also, linen is extremely strong—especially when wet—while wool becomes weaker in moisture and water. When mixed, the stronger linen threads take the stress load, causing the wool fibers to break down more rapidly and the entire garment can fail quickly. 

The fibers also differ in electrical and thermal behavior (as mentioned by Jaimeson, Fausset, and Brown). Wool accumulates static electricity easily, while linen does not. This imbalance causes separation within the fabric, static cling, and fiber breakdown in dry conditions. Okay, enough about the science (you can probably tell I’m an engineer!) 

A Clothing Dilemma 

Back to the point—God was right all along about not mixing these two specific fabrics. And there may be spiritual aspects like what John Gill pointed out. But using one passage to clarify and understand the other passage solves the alleged behavioral inconsistency that secularists commonly suggested Christians have regarding the two fabrics.   

Clothing is biblical doctrine predicated on a literal Genesis 3; Image from Presentation Library

If I may, the secularists hurling these claims have a bigger problem. Their inconsistency is revealed when they walk around in public and wear clothes. Wearing clothes is a Christian doctrine from a literal Genesis chapter 3. When secularists wear clothes, they are being inconsistent with their professed religion of secular humanism (think evolutionism, naturalism, materialism, etc.).  

When they argue that man is just an animal and yet, defy the fact that critters don’t wear clothes on their own, it shows in their heart of hearts that they know that doctrine of clothing is a true belief. They just can’t justify it within their own religion and must borrow it from God’s Word—whether they realize it or not.

Unbelievers don’t wear clothes "just to keep warm" either—there are plenty of months where it is warm enough not to wear clothes. Yet, they wear clothes and thus, undermine their professed secular view. 

□

Bodie Hodge, Ken Ham's son in law, has been an apologist since 1998 helping out in various churches and running an apologetics website. 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.

---

[1] John Gill, Commentary notes, Leviticus 19:19.

[2] Ibid.

[3] John Trapp, Commentary notes, Leviticus 19:19.

[4] Robert Jamieson, A.R. Fausset & David Brown, Commentary notes, Leviticus 19:19.

The Doctrine Of The Interpretation Of Scripture (Hermeneutics)

The Doctrine Of The Interpretation Of Scripture (Hermeneutics) 

Bodie Hodge, M.Sc., B.Sc., PEI

Biblical Authority Ministries, November 19, 2025 (Donate)  

What Is Hermeneutics? 

Hermeneutics, in its simplest form, is about how to interpret Scripture correctly. More properly, hermeneutics is the method of interpreting written texts. The point of hermeneutics is to use consistent rules so that meaning is drawn out of the text, not read into it. 

In other words, we are trying to see what the text of the Bible is saying to us, as opposed to taking our own ideas as superior and reinterpreting God’s Word (usually Genesis by Moses) to fit modern cultural opinions. 

Proper hermeneutic method is called the historical-grammatical approach, which is about finding the plain and natural meaning of the words and sentences and surrounding context as understood by the original audience. 

Moses with the stone tablets; Image requested by Bodie Hodge (Grok)

Good hermeneutics is done by looking at the grammar, context, and style of what is written (poem, literal history, genealogies, laws, metaphors, songs, etc.). There is a biblical basis for this methodology by the way. Consider: 

·       “All the words of my mouth are with righteousness; nothing crooked or perverse is in them. They are all plain to him who understands, and right to those who find knowledge.” (Proverbs 8:8–9, NKJV)

·       “But we have renounced the hidden things of shame, not walking in craftiness nor handling the word of God deceitfully, but by manifestation of the truth commending ourselves to every man’s conscience in the sight of God.” (2 Corinthians 4:2, NKJV)

·       “The entrance of Your words gives light; it gives understanding to the simple.” (Psalm 119:130, NKJV)

·       “So they read distinctly from the book, in the Law of God; and they gave the sense, and helped them to understand the reading.” (Nehemiah 8:8, NKJV) 

All Scripture is God-breathed, without error, and internally consistent; therefore, the Bible must interpret the Bible, and the meaning revealed in Scripture stands above human traditions, changing scientific models, or changing cultural assumptions. 

Hermeneutics begins with the Scriptural presupposition that the Bible speaks truthfully about history, including creation, the Flood, time, chronology, and people groups. Since an all-knowing God of perfect truth is the ultimate author, His Word is fully trustworthy in all matters it addresses. A sound hermeneutic therefore starts with God’s Word as the foundation for understanding reality. 

Because of this, good hermeneutics doesn’t ignore the Bible’s own claims about its passages. Often, other passages of Scripture help clarify a certain text—this is called interpreting Scripture with Scripture. God is His best interpreter. So, we often used other verses to help us understand the meaning of ones that you might be confused on.   

Exegesis vs. Eisegesis 

Exegesis 

Exegesis means “to draw out.” It is the process of discovering the author’s intended meaning by carefully examining the words, grammar, historical context, and literary style of the passage. Exegetical hermeneutics submits to the text, allowing Scripture to speak for itself. 

The historical-grammatical method takes the plain, natural reading of Scripture as the default unless the text signals a different genre. Thus, the exegetical approach uses historical-grammatical method. Exegesis honors the authority of God’s Word above modern assumptions, scientific models, cultural opinions, or theological traditions. 

Image from Presentation Library

Exegesis basically is: 

·        Letting the Bible interpret the Bible

·        Reading passages in their full context

·        Recognizing Scripture as inerrant and internally consistent

·        Affirming that the original meaning is knowable and authoritative 

Exegetical hermeneutics produces interpretations rooted in what the text actually says, not what the reader wishes it said. When the historical-grammatical method is neglected and man’s ideas are used to interpret God’s Word, this is no longer good exegesis but become eisegesis. Let’s discuss that. 

Eisegesis

Eisegesis means “to read into.” It is the act of inserting one’s own ideas, experiences, expectations, meanings, or external/outside ideas, myths, whims, and secular perspectives into Scripture, trying to force the text to conform to them. 

This often occurs when readers impose modern naturalistic assumptions, evolutionary timelines, or philosophical preferences onto Genesis—for instance. Instead of allowing the text to define its own meaning, eisegesis starts with a preconceived conclusion and bends Scripture to fit it. 

Image from Presentation Library

Eisegesis includes: 

·        Redefining the Genesis days as long ages because of evolutionary timescales

·        Treating Adam and Eve as symbolic rather than historical

·        Interpreting the global Flood as a local event based on modern geology

·        Turning Genesis 1–11 into myth or allegory to fit secular models 

Eisegesis undermines biblical authority and erodes foundational doctrines such as sin, death, redemption, and foundation of the Gospel with the Last Adam (Christ). It can be a dangerous slippery slope. Exegesis is the proper method for interpreting Scripture where eisegesis distorts the meaning of the biblical text by elevating human reason to supersede God’s Word. 

Applying Hermeneutics To Early Genesis 

Genesis 1–11 is written as historical narrative, not poetry or myth. Later Bible authors and Jesus Himself took it as literal history, so therefore it is. A proper hermeneutical analysis confirms this. 

The Bible repeatedly treats early Genesis as literal history. Jesus referred to Adam and Eve as real individuals created “at the beginning” of creation. New Testament authors ground doctrines of sin, death, marriage, atonement, and the need for Christ in the historical events of Genesis. A consistent hermeneutic requires that Scripture interpret Scripture. 

Moses wrote Genesis for ancient Israel to explain real history: Creation, the Fall, marriage, sin, bloodshed, clothing, redemption promised in Genesis 3:15, the genealogical line to Noah, the global Flood, and the origins of nations at Babel. A hermeneutic that honors intent must read the text as Moses expected it to be understood—a straightforward account of real events. 

Good thing Moses did not practice eisegesis; Image from Presentation Library

The Hebrew grammar and structure of the text uses the same narrative verbs forms found in the rest of Old Testament history books, including the use of waw-consecutive verbs—standard markers of sequential historical events. 

The repeated phrase “evening and morning” paired with ordinal numbers (“first day,” “second day,” etc.) signals literal, normal days. A historical-grammatical method therefore interprets the “days” of creation as ordinary 24-hour days, not symbolic ages. 

Genesis contains detailed genealogies with specific ages and relationships, showing it intends to provide an actual historical timeline, not open-ended eras. These genealogies continue seamlessly into Exodus, 1 Chronicles, and Luke’s Gospel. 

A sound hermeneutic is foundational to core doctrines that depend on Genesis being real history. The doctrine of the Fall, the origin of death, the need for redemption, and the Last Adam (Christ) versus the first Adam all collapse if Genesis is interpreted figuratively. Thus, an exegetical hermeneutics must be applied to Genesis and be understood as the literal, historical foundation for Christian doctrine. 

□ 

Bodie Hodge, Ken Ham's son in law, has been an apologist since 1998 helping out in various churches and running an apologetics website. 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.

 

Life, Freedom, Liberty, And Rights—Christian Concepts?

Life, Freedom, Liberty, And Rights—Christian Concepts?

Bodie Hodge, M.Sc., B.Sc., PEI

Biblical Authority Ministries, November 18, 2025 (Donate)

Think deeply for a moment. Rights, freedom, and liberty—are they made out of material? Are they made of atoms and quarks? Can you trip on them in the middle of the night? No.

With this in mind, can rights, freedom or liberty even exist in a religious worldview that says the only things that exist are material (e.g., matter and energy)? No. That would be inconsistent and illogical.

Sadly, citizens of the United States (and others in the Western World) are being dupped into secular worldviews (think of religions like secularism, atheism, evolutionism, naturalism, materialism) where they teach that the only things that exist are matter and energy in motion within space-time.

These secular religions are permeating modern textbooks, museums, education, and the media. Oddly enough, if these flavors of religion are true, then truth can’t exist because it is not material either—but freedom, liberty, and rights wouldn’t exist either!

Declaration of Independence signed; Image requested by Bodie Hodge (ChatGPT)

Promoting secular worldviews undermines the founding documents like the Declaration of Independence and Constitution which discuss rights and freedom as real. These concepts make no sense in secular worldviews but are, instead, predicated on the truth of the Bible.

Eastern religions fare no better as they are monistic (i.e., all is spirit and all is one and the material world doesn’t exist in their view but is an illusion). They can’t make sense of freedom and rights—since having no freedom and having freedom are one and the same and having no rights and having rights are one and the same!

It makes your brain spin, doesn’t it? I told you we were going “think deeply”. In short, non-Bible-based religions fall short of concepts like freedom, liberty, and rights.

Life, Liberty And The Pursuit Of Happiness

The Bible provides the true foundation for life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness because it presents God as the Creator, Lawgiver, and source of all human dignity. Life comes from God alone, for He created mankind in His image and breathed life into humanity (Genesis 1:26-27). Science confirms this with the Law of Biogenesis.

Because every person bears His image, each human life—no matter how old or how young—holds sacred worth and must be protected from unjust harm. This divine origin of life is the basis for recognizing that life is an unalienable right not granted by government but by God.

Liberty also flows from Scripture. The Bible teaches that God made humans as moral beings capable of choice and responsible for obedience to Him. True liberty is not the freedom to sin but the freedom to live according to God’s righteous standards.

Christ’s redemptive work frees believers from the bondage of sin and restores the ability to live as God designed. The moral law, revealed by God, protects this liberty by restraining evil and promoting justice. Without biblical morality, liberty collapses into relativism and tyranny—sadly, this has happened to far too many societies of the past.

Christ’s work on the cross liberates the believer from the power of sin and restores the capacity to live as God intends. This spiritual foundation shaped the historic Western understanding that civil liberty must be tied to God’s moral standard.

“Now the Lord is the Spirit; and where the Spirit of the Lord is, there is liberty.” (2 Corinthians 3:17, NKJV)

The pursuit of happiness, rightly understood, is predicated on the biblical idea living under God’s hand of blessing. Happiness is found not in self-centered and sinful pleasure but in living a virtuous life that aligns with God’s purposes. Christ’s Word teaches that joy, peace, and blessing come from walking in obedience to God’s commandments. Families, work life, church, and community all flourish when grounded in biblical truth.

Freedom And Rights

“Therefore if the Son makes you free, you shall be free indeed.” (John 8:36, NKJV)

The Bible is also the supreme basis for freedom and rights because God is the Creator of humanity and the ultimate source of moral authority. Scripture teaches that all people are made in the image of God, giving every person inherent worth and dignity.

First Amendment; Image requested by Bodie Hodge (ChatGPT)

This divine image establishes that basic rights do not come from government but from God Himself. Because humans bear God’s image, they possess an unchangeable moral claim to life, fair treatment, justice, and protection from oppression. No earthly authority may strip away the rights that God has given.

“Stand fast therefore in the liberty by which Christ has made us free, and do not be entangled again with a yoke of bondage.” (Galatians 5:1, NKJV)

Biblical freedom is based on the truth that God created people as moral agents capable of choosing good or evil. Freedom is not the license to do whatever one desires but the ability to live in accordance with God’s righteous standards without the rigidity. Sin brings bondage, while obedience to God brings true freedom.

“But he who looks into the perfect law of liberty and continues in it, and is not a forgetful hearer but a doer of the work, this one will be blessed in what he does.” (James 1:25, NKJV)

The Bible is also presupposed as the reason for the concept of rights. Old and New Testament law repeatedly defends the rights of the poor, the vulnerable, the family, property owners, and the innocent. God commands His people to uphold justice, resist partiality, and protect those who cannot protect themselves.

“Do we have no right to eat and drink?” (1 Corinthians 9:4, NKJV) 

These principles show that rights are grounded in God’s character and His unchanging moral law. Because God is just, human beings are called to uphold justice; because God is impartial, human rights apply equally to all—even if their professed secular region can’t account for rights!

The Declaration of Independence appeals to several unalienable rights, meaning rights granted by God that no human government may legitimately remove. The most explicit rights listed are life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness.

·       Life refers to the right to exist and to be protected from unjust harm.

·       Liberty refers to the freedom to act, speak, worship God, and live without unlawful restraint as was done in England with Anglicanism being the national religion. This is done so long as a person does not violate the rights of others.

·       The pursuit of happiness refers to the ability to seek virtue, property, family well-being, vocation, and the general flourishing that comes from living according to moral and natural law.

Beyond these three, the Declaration clearly acknowledges other unalienable rights as well. It affirms the right to equality under God by stating that all men are created equal. This means each person has the same God-given dignity and inherent rights, not that all outcomes in life must be the same. This often confuses people today thinking all should have the same outcomes, but that is not the same thing.

The Declaration also teaches the right to government by consent, asserting that governments derive their just powers from the consent of the governed. The Old Testament speaks of the people asking for a king and God gave them Saul (when they shifted from the times of the Judges to the times of the Kings). In doing so, they rejected God as their direct king.

The United States appeals to God as the King of Kings above the royalty in England for their governance. This establishes that authority is not imposed by force but comes from the people under God’s higher authority.

The Declaration further confirms the right to resist or abolish tyranny when a government becomes destructive of God-given rights. When rulers refuse to protect life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness, the people retain the right to alter or abolish such a government.

Along with this, the 1776 document recognizes the right to establish new government in a way that best provides for safety and happiness.

Finally, the Declaration appeals to the “Supreme Judge of the world,” acknowledging the right to seek divine justice when human authority fails. These rights together form the foundation of the American argument for independence and underscore that legitimate government exists to secure, not redefine, the unalienable rights given by God.

Conclusion

The Bible provides the only coherent basis for these unalienable rights. Life reflects creation in God’s image, liberty reflects God’s moral order, and true happiness reflects living under His righteous reign. These principles shaped the founders’ understanding of rights because they recognized that God, not man, is the source of all human freedom.

Thus, freedom, liberty, and rights ultimately rest on biblical revelation. Without the Bible’s teaching on creation, sin, justice, and redemption, human rights become unstable and changing human opinions. With Scripture as the foundation, they stand as God-given truths that no government can overturn. 

□

Bodie Hodge, Ken Ham's son in law, has been an apologist since 1998 helping out in various churches and running an apologetics website. 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.

 

 

 

The Bible In Early America

The Bible In Early America

Bodie Hodge, M.Sc., B.Sc., PEI

Biblical Authority Ministries, November 17, 2025 (Donate)

Pre-1776

From the earliest initial colonies to colonial America just before the Revolutionary War, the Bible was the foundational textbook in nearly every classroom—especially after The Great Awakening that occurred earlier in the 1700s. Children learned to read using passages from Scripture, especially from the Psalms and the Gospels.

Image requested by Bodie Hodge (ChatGPT)

The famous New England Primer, the most widely used schoolbook of the 1600s and early 1700s, taught the alphabet, phonics, and basic doctrine with biblical verses and moral lessons. Teachers used the Bible to reinforce spelling, reading comprehension, and memorization, because nearly every family owned one and it was rightly viewed as the highest authority on truth and morality (and all matters!).

Beyond literacy, the Bible shaped ethics and the foundation for rights, truth, dignity, honesty, love, hope, faith, science, and morality. Students were taught to model their behavior on biblical virtues such as honesty, diligence, and respect for authority.

Colonial leaders believed a literate and moral population was necessary for maintaining a Christian protestant society, so biblical instruction was woven into daily school, life and political routines—prayer, Bible readings, and so much more. Many colonies also had laws requiring children to learn Scripture to prevent “that old deluder, Satan” from keeping people ignorant of God’s Word. By 1776, biblical education had deeply influenced the mindset, values, and language of the American colonies.

Post-1776

After 1776, the American colonies could no longer depend on England for Bibles because wartime hostilities cut off imports—obviously! To meet the need, churches, political leaders, and individuals first relied on any remaining copies already in the colonies and on limited shipments that arrived through other European sources such as the Netherlands and Scotland. That is, if they weren’t intercepted by the British. These supplies were small, inconsistent, and far from enough for a population that considered Scripture essential for worship, education, and family life.

The shortage soon became so severe that congressional committees received formal petitions asking for help. In 1777, the Continental Congress even discussed importing Bibles from Europe, but wartime conditions and costs made this difficult. As the war continued, it became clear that the United States needed its own printing capacity.

The Aitken Bible, 1782

The first complete English Bible was printed in the United States and it was produced by Robert Aitken in Philadelphia. He published the New Testament in 1777 and 1778, then completed the full Bible in 1782.

Recognizing the national need, the Continental Congress officially commended Aitken’s work in September 1782, making it the only Bible ever recommended by Congress. Aitken’s Bible marked the beginning of American Bible printing, and by the 1790s other presses in places like Philadelphia, Boston, and New York began producing additional editions. By 1816, the American Bible Society (ABS) formed and Bible printing exploded.

The Bible In Washington’s Era

The Bible was used for swearing in public figures. George Washington used a Bible at his first presidential inauguration on April 30, 1789. This particular Bible, kept by St. John’s Masonic Lodge No. 1 in New York, became a national treasure.[1]

Washington placed his hand on it while taking the oath, giving the volume a symbolic connection to the birth of the presidency and the new republic. It is a large, beautifully bound 18^th century King James Bible, notable for its ceremonial use ever since. Many later presidents and public figures have used it for inaugurations and major civic events, adding to its historical prestige.

George Washington also helped commission anther Bible printed in the USA in New York. It was the Brown’s Self-Interpreting Family Bible of 1792, produced by minister John Brown of Haddington, Scotland. Originally published in Edinburgh, Scotland in 1778, this first printing in the USA was vital in 1792.

A friend, Dale Mason, has an original copy of it and has republished it with the permission of Mount Vernon, the Washington estate. I’ve seen it and was fascinated by it. This new printing is called, The Forgotten George Washington Bible.

Brown’s was unique because it combined the full King James text with extensive study helps designed for ordinary families rather than scholars. It included verse-by-verse explanations, thematic summaries, theological notes, and practical applications that clarified difficult passages. Brown also added detailed introductions, maps, genealogies, and cross references, making it one of the earliest truly comprehensive study Bibles.

Its clear organization and accessible language helped families read Scripture confidently without relying on clergy for interpretation. The work became influential in both Britain and America and set the pattern for later family and study Bibles.

Conclusion

The Bible in early America helped education thrive, society develop, sciences thrive, and gained morally astute people. It opened the door for citizens to begin abolitionist movements as well as women’s rights; these roots go back to the early days in the republic where the Bible’s teachings became clear.

With mixed feelings, much was inherited from the former ties to the British Empire. Though much good came from “our parent”, there was also terrible baggage like slavery and many opposed it but it took years to get rooted out in some Southern states where about 5% were slave owners (13^th Amendment finally ended slavery). But it was the teaching in the Bible that opened the door to that freedom.

□

Bodie Hodge, Ken Ham's son in law, has been an apologist since 1998 helping out in various churches and running an apologetics website. 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.

 

---

[1] The Free Masons used to be a Christian organization or “club” with people from various denomination going back to the early 1700s with James Anderson. Over the years—particularly in more modern times, it has changed significantly from those original roots. See World Religions and Cults Volume 1 by Bodie Hodge and Roger Patterson published by Master Books.

Pre-1776 Legal Christian Documents In England And The Colonies

Pre-1776 Legal Christian Documents In England And The Colonies

Bodie Hodge, M.Sc., B.Sc., PEI

Biblical Authority Ministries, November 14, 2025 (Donate)

The United States, prior to being their own fledgling nation, was part of British Empire. The colonials came largely from England and few places within Christianized Europe.  

The USA Was Born Out Of A Christian Nation

From the 1600s to 1776, the colonies were Christian in their outlook, governance, and daily life. Christianity permeated the entire culture. This was in the days prior to Charles Darwin when the religion of secular humanism began taking over in the latter part of the 1800s in England.

King John signing the Magna Carta AD 1215; Image requested by Bodie Hodge (Chat GPT)

Prior to 1776, documents like the Magna Carta or the Thirty-Nine Articles of Religion were in force as legal documents. With this in mind, it shows that the United States started with an immersion of Christian worldview in every area of society.

What was the Magna Carta and other religious and political documents of the time? Let’s evaluate these in more detail to show the heavy Christian roots even prior to the founding of the nation.

The Legal Christian Documents

The United States won their independence from England and later called the United Kingdom. England (technically the Kingdom of Great Britain at the time the United States became independent) was unmistakably a Christian nation, especially in its Anglican denominational identity post-Reformation. This can be shown by several foundational legal documents.

Magna Carta Of AD 1215

The Magna Carta arose in 1215 when King John’s heavy taxation military failures, and arbitrary and changing rules pushed English land owners (lords/barons) to rebellion. Yes, this is the same King John in Robin Hood shows!

English landlords demanded that the king recognize ancient God-given rights and limit his power under law. Negotiations at Runnymede—a rural area next to the Thames River in Surrey, England—resulted in a charter that bound the king to legal restraints, protected the English Church, and secured rights for nobles and, indirectly, free men. It was essentially a peace treaty that became a foundational document for constitutional government that has influenced the entire Western World.

The Magna Carta (originally in 1215, reaffirmed in 1225) begins with the explicit declaration that the English Church shall be free, placing the realm under God and recognizing the Christian Church as a protected and central institution within English law. A few blatantly Christian quotes are:

1. “First, we have granted to God, and by this present charter have confirmed for us and our heirs forever, that the English Church shall be free, and shall have its rights undiminished and its liberties unimpaired.”

2. “The English Church shall be free, and shall have its rights undiminished, and its liberties unimpaired.”

3. “We have granted and given to God, and by this present charter have confirmed, for us and our heirs forever, the freedom of the Church of England and all its rights and liberties.”

4. “We have granted to the archbishop of Canterbury, primate of all England, and to the bishops and clergy of our kingdom, all their accustomed liberties.”

5. “The Church of England shall enjoy all its ancient liberties free and unhurt.”

Bear in mind that this is prior to the Reformation and the official organization of the Church of England (Anglican Church).

The Acts of Uniformity Of 1559

The Acts of Uniformity, particularly those of 1559 and 1662, mandated Anglican worship throughout the nation by requiring the use of the Book of Common Prayer, enforcing attendance at Anglican services, and binding ministers, educators, and many public officials to affirm Anglican doctrine.

Of course, this caused tension with other denominations coming out of the Reformation like the Reformed or Puritans—many of whom later fled to the colonies due to heavy persecution. Even so, these sources show clearly that England’s government, monarchy, and public life were legally and structurally Christian (a particular denomination of Christianity) at the time the United States emerged as an independent nation.

At the founding of the US, there was never a question about the freedom and intertwinement of Christianity in politics. It was how to navigate a key difference from that of England. How to be Christian (with Bibles and Law) without imposing one denominational view on all citizens. England imposed Anglicanism and persecuted those who weren’t, even if they were orthodox in their biblical view (unlike Rome’s deviation from Scripture).

Thirty-Nine Articles Of Religion (1571)

Doctrinal standards such as the Thirty-Nine Articles of Religion (1571) shaped the nation at a deeper level. While designed for the Church of England, the Articles influenced universities, clergy licensing, education, and the expectations for many public officials.

Grand Church buildings blanket the United Kingdom many with ancient roots; Phot by Bodie Hodge

Parliament required conformity to these Christian doctrines in various capacities, making the Articles a kind of national theological framework.

The Test Acts Of 1673

Beyond the monarchy, Parliament (House of Lords and House of Commons) and public office were also tied to Christianity. The Test Acts of 1673 and 1678 required anyone serving in civil or military office, including members of Parliament, to take the Lord’s Supper according to Anglican practice and publicly reject Catholic doctrines.

Parliamentary oaths reinforced this requirement by including affirmations such as “upon the true faith of a Christian.” These measures meant that service in the House of Commons or House of Lords required explicit Christian profession.

The Coronation Oath Act Of 1688

The Coronation Oath Act of 1688 required every monarch to vow before God to maintain the laws of God, uphold the true profession of the Gospel, and defend the Protestant Reformed Religion established by law. This made the Christian (specifically Anglican) faith a constitutional requirement for the head of state, who also served as the Supreme Governor of the Church of England.

This is why the King or Queen of England—to this day—is the head of the Anglican Church.

During Queen Elizabeth II's reign she headed the Church of England. In her passing, King Charles, her son, ascended to those duties over the Church of England. Public Domain image.

Bill of Rights Of 1689

England’s identity as a Christian nation was reinforced by several major documents that shaped its monarchy, Parliament, and civil order. The Bill of Rights of 1689 required that the monarch be Protestant and barred Catholics from the throne, embedding Protestant Christianity directly into the constitutional structure.

This made the Christian faith a prerequisite for national leadership and was intended to secure the nation’s stability through adherence to the Protestant religion. This Bill of Rights also protected people from excessive bail and cruel punishments. One can easily see how this document had influenced the US Constitutional Bill of Rights, even though they are very different documents.

The Act of Settlement Of 1701

The Act of Settlement of 1701 strengthened this by insisting that the monarch must profess the Protestant faith, remain in communion with the Church of England, and pass the crown only to Protestant heirs. This is why some heirs of the past were overlooked because they were not Protestant.

Since the King or Queen serves as the Supreme Governor of the Church of England, this act ensured that the nation itself remained aligned with Protestant Anglican Christianity in both governance and religious identity. Together, these acts placed the Christian faith at the core of the English constitution.

Conclusion

Collectively, these sources show that England was constitutionally, culturally, and politically a Christian nation during the period when the United States was founded. This meant that the colonies were also under that same influence. Even though some suggest that the United States was formed as a secular nation (e.g., the religion of secular humanism), remedial research shows the opposite was the case.

□

Bodie Hodge, Ken Ham's son in law, has been an apologist since 1998 helping out in various churches and running an apologetics website. 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.