Bill Nye vs. Ken Ham, Can the Questions be
Answered?
Yesterday
evening Ken Ham, a biblical creationist, debated the likes of Bill Nye, the
science guy, who is a Darwinian scientist.
Let me explain my perspective of these two men before I began researching their
histories further yesterday afternoon.
Both of these men have been around for a long time. They have both been excellent at what they
have set out to do. They have both been
educated in the sciences, both have built reputable careers in their given
areas, and both have made it a lifelong pursuit to educate the population
(especially children) in their given areas of science. Before checking out their backgrounds, I had
certain perceptions of each of these men.
I viewed Ken Ham as someone who may be a little too literal in his hermeneutics but was well meaning in defending the biblical accounts of the origins of the earth and mankind. I do believe that Genesis is a necessary part of the foundation for a biblical worldview which I uphold. I must admit that I did not know much about Ken Ham, but had only heard about him in passing. I do remember being shown some of his videos when I was a teenager, but I was not too interested. I was impressed to read about his accomplishments and the Creation Museum which he has built.
Moreover, I did not know much about Bill Nye either. I vaguely remember watching his television show as a child and being interested in it, maybe it was because he seemed fun and nutty as well as informative. After all, it was a very popular show for many kids. After reading his biography, I can say that I am also impressed by his accomplishments. He has led a very productive career in science and not only on the children’s level. Nye has been involved in many major projects and is a graduate of Cornell University.
I viewed Ken Ham as someone who may be a little too literal in his hermeneutics but was well meaning in defending the biblical accounts of the origins of the earth and mankind. I do believe that Genesis is a necessary part of the foundation for a biblical worldview which I uphold. I must admit that I did not know much about Ken Ham, but had only heard about him in passing. I do remember being shown some of his videos when I was a teenager, but I was not too interested. I was impressed to read about his accomplishments and the Creation Museum which he has built.
Moreover, I did not know much about Bill Nye either. I vaguely remember watching his television show as a child and being interested in it, maybe it was because he seemed fun and nutty as well as informative. After all, it was a very popular show for many kids. After reading his biography, I can say that I am also impressed by his accomplishments. He has led a very productive career in science and not only on the children’s level. Nye has been involved in many major projects and is a graduate of Cornell University.
The debate
was primarily to answer the question, is creation a viable model of origins in
today’s modern, scientific era? This is
an important and interesting question for all of us to consider. Ham is correct in stating that there are significant
scientists in both the Darwinian and Christian camps. Yet, as Nye proposes in his opening statement,
which camp’s story best explains the origins of the earth and mankind? I do not intend to give a detailed answer in
this article, but to simply explore the question and give some preliminary
thoughts. I must honestly say that the
debate does not interest me very much.
Is a Christian aloud to say that, especially a Christian pastor? I am not sure, but I do not worry too much
about being politically correct, whether it is secular politics or church
politics. I am known for thinking out
loud, and that is what I intend to do with this article. I am only somewhat interested in the debate
because it seems to have attracted a lot of attention.
Although I
am not going to give a detailed answer as to my belief on this subject, I will
state emphatically that I believe that the creation account in the book of
Genesis and the supporting material found throughout the Christian Scriptures
are completely logical and the results are observable today. I believe that the God of the Bible is the
Creator of all things, the things we can see and the things we cannot see, and
He is the Creator of science. There are
natural laws and systems precisely because God has set the world in order.
The argument
of whether or not God created the heavens, earth, and everything in them only
6,000 years ago within six 24 hour days, in my humble opinion, is an unproductive
debate (and this statement comes from a biblically conservative, literal-leaning
minister). The book of Genesis, and the
other passages of Scripture concerning this topic, does not intend to answer
the types of questions that are being asked.
The Bible is not a science textbook nor is it a self-help manual or
anything of the sort. Genesis simply
declares to us that there is a Creator and, as John 1 and other places state,
there has been nothing made that was made without Him. The point is that the heavens and the earth
had a beginning, and it was not by accident.
Does the Bible attempt to answer the question of whether the earth is as
young as 6,000 years old? No, the Bible
does not intend to answer that question.
Do I believe that the earth is 6,000 years old? It probably is not, but human history is
probably about that age. There is a
difference. The answer to this question
does not significantly affect my life or faith.
Does the Bible attempt to answer the question of whether God created
everything in six, literal, 24 hour days?
No, the Bible does not intend to answer that question either. Do I believe that God created everything in
six, literal, 24 hour days? I can accept
two or three answers to this question and still be faithful to Scripture. The Bible does not speak to this issue which
is why I think that the debate is frivolous on this subject. The God of the Bible could have created
everything each day in only a few seconds.
After all, He spoke everything into existence. What I will say is that God created light and
dark, sea and sky, land and plants, sun and moon, fish and birds, as well as
animals and humans in six days.
I am not a
legalist about it (because I like to theorize over certain issues just for fun), but
for the most part I hold to the principle that we should speak where the Bible
speaks and be silent where the Bible is silent.
The Bible is mostly, if not totally, silent on the subject of science in
relation to creation. There are things
that we must conclude, but they do not explain some of the details of origins
and the existence of matter and life.
Based on the
biblical accounts, I must conclude:
(1) Everything
had a starting point, except God.
(2) God is
the Creator of all things, things we can see and things we cannot see.
(3) There
are laws and order in nature because God put those things in place.
(4) God
created the things in and around this world in six days.
(5) There is,
therefore, meaning to life.