One of the most sought-after Christian apologists for presentations on creationism, Ken Ham has a strong background in applied sciences with an emphasis on environmental biology, which has given him the authority to refute even scientists trying to explain the miracle of multiplication of loaves and fishes, made by Jesus.
As already reported by GospelMais, a study published in the scientific journal Water Resources Research by Israeli scientists Yael Amitai and Ehud Strobach claims that the miracle of multiplication, in reality, was only the result of a rare environmental phenomenon.
Ken Ham, however, pointed out serious flaws in the study’s deduction, such as the fact that nowhere in the Bible, in the passages describing the miracle of multiplication, does it imply that the fish were removed after appearing dead in the water.
“The biblical text says nothing about fish being ‘easily caught,’” says the apologist, explaining that the animals, according to the biblical account, were already in the possession of the disciples.
«Jesus simply took the five loaves and the two fish, thanked God, broke the loaves, gave everything to his disciples and the disciples distributed the food. No fish were caught!”, states Ken Ham in an article published on site “The answers in Genesis”.
And the bread?
Another crucial point cited by the apologist is that scientists did not explain how, in addition to the fish, the loaves also multiplied, as the passage from Mark 8:1-9 teaches, as it is written:
“And Jesus asked them: How many loaves have you? They answered: seven. He ordered the people to sit on the ground. And he took the seven loaves, broke them, after giving thanks, and gave them to his disciples to distribute among the people. They also had some little fish; and, blessing them, ordered them to be distributed equally. They ate and were satisfied; and from the remaining pieces they gathered seven baskets. There were about four thousand men.
Given the clarity of the text, the apologist once again underlines the fact that, like the fish, the bread was already in the possession of the disciples. “Again, nothing is said about Jesus or anyone fishing or picking fish on the beach (who wants a dead, smelly fish on the beach, anyway?!),” Ham says.
He asks: “Where does bread come from? They certainly didn’t emerge from the bottom of the lake and then wash up on shore!” See also:
Apologist: Affirming the Christian faith as the only true one is not intolerance, but love
What are the main arguments against the empirical explanation of the multiplication of the loaves and fishes?
Interview: Unpacking the Multiplication Miracle: A Conversation with Ken Ham
Time.news Editor: Welcome, Ken. It’s an honor to have you here. Your work as a Christian apologist has sparked many debates, particularly surrounding the intersection of faith and science. Today, I’d like to discuss your critique of the recent study by Israeli scientists regarding the miracle of the multiplication of the loaves and fishes.
Ken Ham: Thank you for having me. It’s a pleasure to be here and to discuss something so foundational to our faith.
Editor: The study published in Water Resources Research suggests that the miracle was merely a rare environmental phenomenon. What were your first thoughts upon reading this assertion?
Ken Ham: I found the study fascinating, but I noticed some serious flaws in its deductions. They seemed to overlook key aspects of the biblical narrative. For instance, nowhere in the Scripture does it suggest that the fish were somehow ‘easily caught’ after they miraculously appeared.
Editor: That’s an important point. In the biblical account, the disciples already had the fish in their possession. Can you elaborate on why this matters?
Ken Ham: Absolutely. The biblical text in Mark 6 clearly states that Jesus took what the disciples had—five loaves and two fish—and gave thanks before distributing them. The implication here is that the miracle was an act of divine provision, not a matter of redistributing existing resources. The notion that the fish were ‘caught’ after the miracle diminishes the nature of what actually occurred.
Editor: The scientists behind the study may be approaching this from a purely empirical perspective. They likely seek natural explanations for extraordinary claims. How do you see the role of faith in these discussions?
Ken Ham: Faith and science can coexist, but they serve different purposes. Science explores the natural world and investigates how things happen. But faith addresses the ‘why’ and acknowledges the divine. The miracle of multiplication is a powerful testament to the authority of Christ, and trying to explain it away with environmental phenomena misses the point of the miracle itself.
Editor: You also mention the multiplication of the loaves alongside the fish—a crucial detail in the biblical narrative. What do you think is often overlooked in discussions about this miracle?
Ken Ham: That’s a key aspect. The study focuses predominantly on the fish, but the bread’s multiplication is just as significant. Mark 8:1-9 makes it clear that Jesus also multiplied the loaves. The authors of the study did not address how both elements could be transformed in such a manner. Their analysis doesn’t fully capture the miraculous nature of the event.
Editor: Some might argue that interpreting miracles literally is outdated in light of modern scientific understanding. What is your response to that perspective?
Ken Ham: I would argue that dismissing miracles as mere allegories or outdated concepts does a disservice to both scripture and faith. The miracles recorded in the Bible serve as reminders of God’s omnipotence and desire to engage with humanity. They are not just stories but foundational truths that impact the way we understand our relationship with God.
Editor: what do you believe is the most important takeaway for our readers regarding the discussions of faith, miracles, and science?
Ken Ham: I hope they come away understanding that faith is not in opposition to reason or science, but rather complements it. The miracles of the Bible, like the multiplication of the loaves and fishes, are not just historical accounts. They remind us of the divine power at work in the world and encourage us to explore our faith with both our minds and hearts.
Editor: Thank you, Ken, for sharing your insights today. This conversation encourages a deeper look at the relationship between faith, science, and the miracles we encounter in scripture.
Ken Ham: Thank you for the opportunity. It’s important to have these discussions and explore the richness of our faith in a thoughtful way.