Our Websites

Lie – “When you die, you cease to exist”

This is one of the most dangerous lies textbooks teach. God created the universe and left us a record of how and why He did it. You were created by an all-wise Creator and you will live forever in Heaven or Hell. All humans have broken God’s laws by lying, cheating, stealing, etc. Being a just and holy God, He cannot simply overlook our sins. Either we must be punished by going to Hell forever or we must accept the perfect substitute God provided in Jesus Christ.

Satan is a liar. John 8:44, “You are of your father the devil, and the lusts of your father ye will do. He was a murderer from the beginning, and abode not in the truth, because there is no truth in him. We he speaketh a lie, he speaketh of his own: for he is a liar, and the father of it.” Satan is using lies to keep people from coming to Christ to be saved.

In my fifteen years of traveling and speaking on the creation/evolution subject, I’ve done ninety debates against people who believe in evolution. I often ask them the question: If evolution is true, how does anyone tell right from wrong? If evolution is true, there is no possible way to tell right from wrong. Survival of the fittest becomes the way of life.

Further Study

Spread the word | Share this post: Share on Facebook
Tweet about this on Twitter
Share on LinkedIn
Pin on Pinterest
Email this to someone


24 Responses to Lie – “When you die, you cease to exist”

  1. John Bebbington December 7, 2010 at 9:37 am #

    “If evolution is true, how does anyone tell right from wrong? If evolution is true, there is no possible way to tell right from wrong. Survival of the fittest becomes the way of life.”

    Even after 2,000 years the Roman Catholics are still fighting amongst themselves over birth control, the Anglicans and Episcopalians over women bishops and gays, baptists over creationism, etc etc. For anyone with a knowledge of history what is clear is how christianity has evolved over the centuries to accommodate scientific discoveries and humanistic philosophy. The christian-based Barna Research Group has found that “divorce rates among conservative Christians were significantly higher than for other faith groups, and much higher than Atheists and Agnostics experience.” which, if Kent is correct, needs some explaining.

    So when you religionists eventually work out what is right and what is wrong please let me know and I’ll compare it to my own list derived from what I have observed goes to make a happy, contented and fulfilled life.

    By the way, paying my taxes is on my list but “survival of the fittest” is not.

  2. Don Sprand December 7, 2010 at 9:43 am #

    Jordan and I have been watching your video since he was a baby… he can say the lines coming before they get there. (-: … Jordan is 11 I am a … retired Science substitute teacher!!! thank you for getting the TRUTH accross to us about creation!!!! I…. Don …. am amazed at how … ‘broad a brush stroke’ satans lies have been ‘brushed’ We wish you a great day!!!! God bless you Dr. Hovind!!! Don and Jordan Strand

  3. Jay Liemowitz December 7, 2010 at 10:17 am #

    Kent, can you point to where a science textbook makes this claim? I’d be surprised to find that in any textbook. If you do have an example then I’d agree it needs to be taken out.

    As for the morality question, I personally have offered an explanation for how we tell right from wrong on this blog on multiple occasions (blog post dated 8/27, and again on 11/1 as well as others). The summary of those lengthy posts is as follows: we tell right from wrong in the same way we tell when we’re hungry, or when we’re in love (desire to mate). It’s instinct. We have unpleasant feelings when we see harm done to others, in the same way we have unpleasant sensations when we’re hungry. These instincts and the unpleasant or pleasant feelings we receive when we respond to them, drives us to determine what is right and wrong, or eat when we’re hungry.

    You are free to disagree with this explanation and offer an alternative that you believe better fits the evidence (there is plenty of evidence for this that I have touched on in the cited posts). However, to simply claim that there is NO explanation is at least wrong, and possibly dishonest on your part. You are either very forgetful of the comments you receive in your own blog posts, choose not to acknowledge the explanation(s) for unspecified reasons, or you’re simply lying about there being no evolutionary explanation. I hope it’s not the latter.

  4. Alfred Russell Wallace December 7, 2010 at 10:48 am #

    This is what death means. You do not have another life somewhere else. The soul does not exist outside of the body.

    Think about it, before you were born the world was in existence for roughly 4.57 billion years with tons of exciting things happening. You were dead for that time. Did it matter to you?

    Kent, this is your only life. Think about how long you’ve wasted your time trying to convert people and win souls.

  5. Louis Tolchin December 7, 2010 at 1:28 pm #

    The bible teaches that the wicked will be punished, but they will not burn in hell for eternity. When you die the breath of life goes back to God, the dust goes back to the ground, and then you are no longer a living soul.The opposite of what happened when God creating Adam. When Jesus returns we will be resurrected to meet Jesus in the clouds.

  6. Neal Platt December 7, 2010 at 2:00 pm #

    With all due respect, I have been in school for a very long time and have NEVER seen/heard/been taught/read in a text book that when you die you cease to exist.

    Honesty I think you need to reference this book, because if it is a science text book I am as enraged as you.

    If you cannot provide the reference then I find it highly ironic you would lie given the biblical verses you posted.

  7. Jeff Brace December 7, 2010 at 2:39 pm #

    Well, I guess that eternal life whether in heaven or hell in your case will be a rude awakening eh?

  8. Don Carr December 7, 2010 at 2:40 pm #

    Of those 90 debates I wonder how many professors have secretly watched the seminar series and changed their tunes.

  9. Peter Moeller December 7, 2010 at 8:02 pm #

    Did anyone else observe that many who chose to believe “when you die, you cease to exist”, accept this without any proof whatsoever. The same people will demand proof for “you will live forever in Heaven or Hell”. I guess it comes down to what they *want* to believe.

  10. Don Carr December 7, 2010 at 8:35 pm #

    We are in a consciousness grading or sifting program. There’s nothing easy about it, save it will all make sense some day. Many would simply take their pleasures here and now – and they do.

    Anyone watched Mel Gibson’s “Apocalypto?”

    The key images seem to be:
    1. The slaughtering priest looked up to the sun, as if he knew an eclipse was about to occur, then he checks with the mob boss to see if it is the appropriate time to halt the con job.
    2. When the europeans arrive a Jesuit (?) is on one of the first boats, standing with a tall slender cross. As if the Mayans weren’t bad enough the european mob was on its way.

    Out of the frying pan and into the fire…

    Question: Who runs the seminaries?
    Question: Who translated the King James bible?

  11. Leon Brooks December 7, 2010 at 9:39 pm #

    Sin does not live forever. Sodom & Gomorrah are subject to “eternal fire” (Jude 7), yet are not aflame now.

    One model used for Hell in the Good Book is Gehenna, the rubbish dump of Jerusalem, in the adjacent Valley of Hinnom. The fires did not stop burning, day or night, however the objects in the fires were (sooner or later) completely consumed.

    Sin & sinners are destroyed permanently in the lake of fire (intended for Satan & his messengers, Matthew 25:41).

    The doctrine of sin surviving forever is imported wholesale from Paganism, by Emperor Constantine’s little political movement. They also imported temple priestesses from the Pagan goddess Vesta, the setting-Sun ringed crucifix from the Pagan god Tammuz, “purified” round sacrificial biscuits from the Pagan team Isis/Horus/Seb & so on.

    The penalty paid by Christ at His execution, the price of our choice to sin, was the equivalent of that punishment, which Revelation (20:14) calls “the second death.”

    The second death only happens to unrepentant sinners. It is not bad news for someone who does not reject the offer of Christ’s life, as it does not happen to any such person, ever.

  12. Henry Fiorentini December 7, 2010 at 10:04 pm #

    And this is related to science, how? It assumes that God exists, not a very “Creation SCIENCE Evangelism”-esque method.

  13. Truth_Seeker H December 8, 2010 at 6:34 am #

    Hi Jay,

    Animals & Humans have certain instincts but the difference is we can control our instincts. If you get “desire to mate” why don’t you just grab the first person and mate like animals do, let your “pleasant feelings lead” you? How do you know it’s wrong? That is what Kent meant by difference between right and wrong.

    Did you know Jesus fasted for 40 days/nights (without food)? How can you do that without God?

    Mat 4:2-4

    ( And when HE had fasted forty days and forty nights, HE was afterward an hungred.
    And when the tempter(satan) came to HIM, he said, If thou be the Son of God, command that these stones be made bread.

    But HE answered and said, It is written, Man shall not live by bread alone, but by every word that proceedeth out of the mouth of God. )

  14. Eric Hanley December 8, 2010 at 6:53 pm #

    Throwing eggs the God of the Bible only proves that the egg thrower is intimidated by the belief in a God that rules over all.You see,I am in no way intimidated by the beliefs of evolutionists because they act just as the scriptures say the would.Scoffing and blaspheming because they are afraid of hell.A Christian who loves Jesus Christ has compassoin on the decieved masses who are quite aware in their hearts that judgement is coming one day.Question.If evolutionists are so sure that their belifs are true, why waste time on debate?Sounds to me like before a person decides to believe we came from nothimg they must have already rejected taking serious stock not in what scientific theories to believe,but rather to respond to the calling on thier hearts by Jesus Christ to repent.Thus to be involved in the debate that we live on after death is, in itself an admition that one wonders!!!!

  15. Carl M December 8, 2010 at 9:09 pm #

    Birth and death are two sides of the same coin. And like a coin, it is what is in between that determines its true value.

  16. Carl M December 8, 2010 at 9:27 pm #

    I often ask them the question: If evolution is true, how does anyone tell right from wrong?

    Evolution Theory has nothing directly connected with “right or wrong”. What Hovind really means is: “If my religion is false how do I tell right from wrong”.

    If evolution is true, there is no possible way to tell right from wrong. Survival of the fittest becomes the way of life.

    Hypothetically, if “evolution is true” but can’t determine “right from wrong” nobody is obliged to follow a “survival of the fittest” philosophy because, apparantly, Evolution Theory can’t tell you if that is the correct path. Internal contradictions harm an argument.

    What Hovind’s argument implies is there is no intrinsic “right or wrong” in the Universe. Morality (for want of a better word) is therefor only determined by the declarations of religious texts or the pronouncements of theologians. There is a word for people who have no instincitve “morality” or are able to switch value systems at will: psychopath

  17. andrew Ryan December 9, 2010 at 7:49 am #

    “If evolution is true, how does anyone tell right from wrong?”

    That’s a non sequitur. You might as well say, “If soil erosion is true, how can one tell right from wrong”. The two statements have nothing to do with each other. Ken Miller is a Catholic biology professor – he probably believes our morality comes from God. Richard Dawkins is an atheist, and can give you a completely different but no-less-robustly defended explanation

    Given Euthryphro’s dilemma, I’d go with Dawkins’ explanation, but that doesn’t affect the flaw in your original question.

  18. John Bebbington December 9, 2010 at 9:44 am #

    Don Carr: “Of those 90 debates I wonder how many professors have secretly watched the seminar series and changed their tunes.”

    Why would they watch the series in secret and why would Kent’s incoherent performances change their views?

  19. Geno Castagnoli December 9, 2010 at 10:01 am #

    Kent Hovind claims:
    “When you die, you cease to exist”…. This is one of the most dangerous lies textbooks teach
    Geno responds:
    As a public school science teacher with 11 years experience, I must object. I would agree with Mr. Hovind that any textbook that says such a thing should… no ….. MUST…. be removed from the schools.

    The problems is that no text book makes that claim. Not one. If it does, I call upon Mr. Hovind to produce the reference with appropriate bibliographical information.

    I suspect there is a lie here…. but it is on part of the one making false claims about what school science text books say.

  20. David Ray December 10, 2010 at 6:21 am #

    “This is one of the most dangerous lies textbooks teach. ”

    There have been repeated requests for a single example of a textbook making the statements attributed to them by Kent.

    Kent? Eric?

  21. Eric Hanley December 10, 2010 at 8:41 am #

    When a textbook teaches evolution,it by default is teaching that there is no life after death and that all of the universe is governed by “natural selection ” and specifically not the god of Abraham,Isac and Jacob.Who in fact made everything in 6 literal days.

  22. Duane December 10, 2010 at 8:54 am #

    People have been asking why we post here. It is this kind of blatant dishonesty that is why we post our objections to Hovind’s nonsense. Why trust anything he says?

  23. Geno Castagnoli December 10, 2010 at 1:25 pm #

    Eric Hanley wrote:
    When a textbook teaches evolution,it by default is teaching that there is no life after death
    Geno points out:
    That’s absolutely absurd. Science texts say nothing about spiritual matters because those issues are outside the scope of scientific inquiry.

    Eric wrote:
    and that all of the universe is governed by “natural selection” and specifically not the god of Abraham,Isac and Jacob.Who in fact made everything in 6 literal days.
    Geno points out:
    Science doesn’t discuss God either. As a supernatural being, God is also outside the scope of scientific inquiry.

    Of course, Eric could prove me wrong and produce a test available to science that would demonstrate divine intervention.

  24. David Ray December 10, 2010 at 4:40 pm #

    @Eric Hanley

    Evolutionary theory has nothing to say about life after death. It only deals with changes in populations of living things over time. Thus, your statement that textbooks teach “no life after death” is incorrect. If you disagree, I challenge you to provide a single example of a textbook to support your assertion.

    Still waiting on Kent or Eric to support Kent’s opening statement. I suspect we will be waiting a very long time.