I applaud both men for striving to have a civil honest discussion about their disagreements. If more people especially our government would take their civil approach our nation and our churches would be much better off. These two men were both very passionate about their stated stance and both articulated without destroying the other in a humiliating and nonsensical manner.
|Photo Credit: Answersingenesis.org|
It was very evident that Ken Ham was much more prepared for this debate. That isn’t an attack on Bill Nye. Ham has devoted his life’s work to promoting a Biblical explanation for the theory of origins. He has spent a considerable many hours researching and understanding the evolutionist theories, teachings, and process. A simple walk through the Creation Museum indicates that Answers in Genesis knows and understands evolution.
Bill Nye wasn’t underprepared for the debate, he simply lacked the storerooms of knowledge that Ham has ready. He did say he learned something for Ham’s thirty minute presentation. I would love to have known what that lesson was. Was it a better understanding of what Ham believes? What it a better understanding of the process of creation scientist? Was it something else? Nye did an excellent job but it was evident he isn’t complete in his knowledge of the whole of creation science.
I found the debate format a little troubling. Nye asked Ham several questions that I just don’t believe the format gave Ham the proper ability to respond to. I would have liked to have seen the debaters be allowed to ask each other questions and then responses given to the others questions. The Q&A portion was fine, but real questions were raised without a time to have a dialogue before the next question was presented. Maybe this was done to ensure the civility of the debate, but it would have provided answers and real debate.
What I found that was lacking from the debate was belief. Ken Ham reminded everyone several times that his starting point is the Bible. He admits that and doesn’t back down. What I would have loved to see Ham do was remind that because we cannot observe the world that we are looking back to, the evidence we see takes some level of faith to believe in. At the very least, if I have to have faith to believe one of the systems, I like the one that gives me hope and purpose and doesn’t say I am here by accident.
Bill Nye was trouble by Ken Ham’s lack of being able to predict an outcome. I failed to follow his logic on this one. The debate was centered on the question, “Is creation a viable model of origins in today’s modern scientific era?” What Nye was troubled by was not a part of the debate. Was Nye implying because Ham was working through the debate to support Biblical Creation to look at origins, that creation scientist could not predict outcomes and invent technology? If so Ham did answer that question by presenting the scientist who invented the MRI that is a creationist. Nye was troubled by Ham looking back but wasn’t that the point of the debate?
I was troubled by Nye when he kept promoting education and scientific exploration for America’s (specifically Kentucky’s) youth. His promotion didn’t trouble me, but his undermining idea that a creation scientist would find no success did. That I believe is the fallacy of his and other evolutionist’s problem. They see creation scientist as people who are faith based and not intelligent. Nye reinforced the notion that creationists are not given proper academic accolades simply because they have faith. Nye really showed this when he misrepresented the Bible. While he claimed to not be a theologian, he didn’t have to, it was evident that he doesn’t understand the words contained in the Bible and the narrative it tells. He doesn’t understand the knowledge that it takes to understand the Bible whether that is through an academic institutions or from simple years of studying scripture. This notion that intelligence is not present in the Biblical Creation community was amplified in Nye’s poor understanding of scripture and his promotion of science education for the future.
I understand that I am biased. There were questions Nye raised last night that I cannot answer. There were questions asked to both men that Nye could not answer. But my faith … I understand to those outside the church find it silly … answers those questions. My faith reminds me that I serve the creator of the universe. My faith tells me He can do in Nye’s 4,000 years what might take billions in Nye’s view to accomplish. I understand that faith is the foundation for me, but I am ok with that. What I love is that when given the evidence, even with the pieces we are missing, God still shows himself through the scientific evidence. My faith isn’t blind.