I hope that you were all able to watch the debate Tuesday night. It was both lively and insightful. More than anything, it confirmed what I had already heard about Bill Nye, that he is unabashedly convinced of an evolutionary origin of life.
Although I don’t share his views, I do applaud Mr. Nye’s willingness to take part. As to the winner, I suppose it all depends.
To those of us certain that life began by our Creator, we know that Ken Ham did exceptionally well at defending that position. Since creation was a supernatural event, it is humanly impossible for anyone to prove, but Mr. Ham made excellent points about how the fingerprints of creation are everywhere. I get a good mental picture of Christ standing up after Mr. Ham’s presentation and applauding him.
To those siding with a Darwinian mindset, you are likely as pleased about how Mr. Nye performed. He outlined the typical, naturalistic talking points very well. I doubt God was pleased, though, with Mr. Nye’s repeated assaults as to the veracity of His written word.
Below is a short summary of my take on both of the orators’ viewpoints on science.
According to Bill Nye, science is the joy of finding “extraordinary” discoveries, such as those that he asserts conclusively proves natural selection. To him, science is an end all; it is preeminent. Yet, if science is but a means to help us figure out how we fit into the universe, of what value is life lived on earth other than self-discovery? Is not science, in this sense, nothing more than temporal experiences or arbitrary conclusions?
Science can never answer the deep-seated longing we have for knowing why we exist. It offers no hope for eternity.
According to Ken Ham, science is the joy of making discoveries about all of God’s creation, such as those he asserts are clearly visible in our world, and of how we fit into His plan. To him, God alone offers the reasons for both how and why we exist; He is preeminent. In this sense, science validates itself as a meaningful pursuit.
Only God can answer the deep-seated longing we have about why we exist. He offers the only hope for eternity.
“For the invisible things of him from the creation of the world are clearly seen, being understood by the things that are made, even his eternal power and Godhead; so that they are without excuse” Romans 1:10
Blessings as you seek, and may your quest lead you to God. The evidences for His existence are clearly visible.
I have managed to watch half of the debate so far, I agree that Ham did an excellent job so far as I have watched in defending/enlightening the origins of humanity from a Biblical/faith worldview. What I have learned the most through the debate is that Nye fails to admit his worldview is also a belief system, he states things as truth when it is belief- at least we know what position Ham has! For me, the point is not necessarily where we have come from, but where we are going- The Creation model has something to say, the Darwin/atheist view is fairly quiet on the issue!
Great Post Sue!
Thanks very much. I love your thought about how what really matters us where we are going. Mr Nye doesn’t seem to think that really matters. Sad. I appreciate your thoughtful comments! Blessings.
Thank you for the summary of the debate, Sue. I didn’t get to watch it. A thought I heard recently is fitting for Dr. Nye, “We are not human beings having a spiritual experience; we are spiritual beings having a human experience.” Life is not all about the things you can see or figure out. True life comes from knowing your Creator.
Excellent point! Those of us who know the Creator have figured out our source if True life! Blessings
Both these guys have a B.S. Neither guy is well qualified to debate the science. It was a PR event for both. And Ham adds to what the Bible says. Most Christians do not accept his YEC view. http://textsincontext.wordpress.com/2012/05/03/in-the-beginning/
Here was a recent debate by real scientists.
Thanks for stopping by Michael. I appreciate the link and look forward to checking it out. I do agree that from an academic standpoint there are others more qualified than both of them. However, I will respectfully differ about Mr Ham. By the power of
The Holy Spirit, he has access to the mind of Christ- who is quite the scholar! 😊 Mr Hams young earth views are a strict interpretation, and I know that there are those who struggle with it. Perhaps since God is outside the confines of the dimension of time, it is both? I still applaud Mr. Ham, for keeping the dialogue alive and for standing up for a biblical perspective. Anyway, thanks very much for your thoughtful input. Blessings.
Oh! I wrote about this, too, today. I am so glad you got to see it, as well. I enjoyed it. Although, when they announced there was another 45 minutes for questions and answers, I got worried I would not be able to handle the steel chairs anymore. 🙂 This was a great post about it, Sue. Thank you!!!
Thank you Skye. Have been at work all day, but I am excited to read your post. Blessings
You hit the nail on the head when you said that “science can never answer the deep-seated longing we have doe knowing why we exist.” That is the ultimate question: WHY?? Thank you.
…FOR knowing…. Sorry. Computer error 🙂
Thanks so much. I appreciate your feedback. I agree- discovering our real purpose for existing, by coming to know Christ, is the most important thing in life. blessings
Your summary of the debate was right on.
Over the years I have talked to several people about this subject and I am convinced the main issue is that of faith. Both the evolutionist and the Creationist are exercising a great amount of faith as they seek to answer the question of our origins. Bottom line…. I am much more comfortable trusting in the Word of God to settle the issue than to trust in the scientific method or the external “evidences” of the age of the world.
There is no reason why the Lord could not have made the earth with the appearance of old age. For example, I believe Adam was created as an adult. Although he was only a few seconds old he would have looked as if he had lived for years. The Lord could have easily created the earth to look millions of years old, although it was only seconds old. There is nothing too hard for God.
If we keep that one basic principle in mind it destroys 75% of the arguments that Bill Nye had advanced.
Lord bless you, Sue. Thanks again for a great posting.
Thanks, Rob. I agree totally with what you described as ‘the bottom line.’ I may not have all the answers (none of us do), but I would rather err on the side of taking God at His word for how it all began! blessings!
Reblogged this on Through the Eyes of This Calvinist.
Great post, Sue. Did you see the post debate wrap up: http://debatelive.org/answers/
And this one by Dr Mohler: http://www.albertmohler.com/2014/02/05/bill-nyes-reasonable-man-the-central-worldview-clash-of-the-ham-nye-debate/
I love this story and will be including it in a future post: “Ravi Zacharias recalls a professor of his, a quantum physicist, describing what the first few microseconds of the creation of the universe would have looked like… so precise and the margin of error so small…. the equivalent of taking aim at a one square inch object twenty billion light years away – and hitting it bull’s eye.”
Awesome!!! thanks for sharing
I feel like Bill Nye spent most of his time disputing the age of the earth and Bible bashing and very little time on his “Big Bang to single cell to monkey to man” theory, which was good for his argument since that leaves a whole lot more questions unanswered.
Agree. The Bible bashing was offensive, but not surprising. Thanks Jim! 😉
Thanks so much for this post, Sue!!! I appreciate you spending time and effort in bringing us the condensed version!!! LOVED it!
I appreciate the feedback. Thanks a bunch!
Reblogged this on Wings of the Wind and commented:
I haven’t posted anything on this debate, which I heard live. I think Heavenly Raindrops summarizes my thoughts well. She believes, like I do, that God’s Word is true.
Missed the debate, so thank you for sharing your thoughts. I wonder if scientists notice how they make discoveries of things already in existence, but never create something from nothing as our Lord and Savior did. I’ll never understand how someone could fall for whole evolutionary thing yet think creationism is unbelievable. As a dear old friend used to say, “It just don’t make no sense!” 🙂
Yes. I don’t get it either. Very good point about how all scientists are doing is discovering what has already been created! Thanks for your wise words!
Great post, Sue! I LOVE your bottom line and how you arrived there.
(“Science can never answer the deep-seated longing we have for knowing why we exist. It offers no hope for eternity……
Only God can answer the deep-seated longing we have about why we exist. He offers the only hope for eternity.”). Amen dear sister in Christ! Keep up the great blog! To God be the glory!!
Thank you. Science alone offers no answers. Too bad there are so many blinded to the truth!