Bill Nye vs Ken Ham Debate

Considering we just spent several weeks going through the first book of Romans, the Bill Nye vs Ken Ham debate between Evolution and Creation Science was quite timely. Both men acting pretty professional, and avoided most rhetoric associated with the two sides. It was good to see how an actual debate is to be run instead of the political circus debates that we’re used to. At the end of the day, a debate is standing up for the truth that you believe in. There is no place to hide. ---Both men held their own giving their explanations for fossil records, the dating of the earth and that sort of thing. The only two things that the opponents threw at each other that the other left undone or forgot to answer (although they were not required to) were the following: 1.) Bill showed a picture of a bunch of skulls and asked Ken for an explanation (however, Ken does deal with that and thousands of tougher questions on his website: answersingenesis.org) 2.) Ken made a statement saying that the rock that evolutionists used to date earth at 4.5million years was part of a meteorite and not even earth rock. Bill chose not to respond. Those were just a couple of jabs that were left undone.--- Bill tried to act like christianity and science were incompatible. It was basically the old “christians check you’re brain at the door”, except he focused on Ken as to not offend the rest. In the limited time given, Ken showed a few creation scientists who have done remarkable work to combat that. However, Ken gave scientists that were atheists their due as well. Bill portrayed himself as a “reasonable man” totally suggesting Mr. Ham was not. In fact, a few times he called creation science “Ken Ham’s model”, attempting to isolate him from the scientific world.--- Bill’s main attack was to belittle Mr. Ham and the Bible, thus why should this world listen to such a silly man. Ken differentiated historical science and observational science. The origin of the earth and the origin of man fall under the first category. Evolutionists have to make up amazing arguments based on all kinds of assumptions. Creationists go unapologetically to the record in Genesis. Ken stated on more than one occasion how the Gospel and Creation go together. You really can’t separate the two. Perhaps many reject Creation, because they’re rejecting the Gospel. Bill pointed out that he has a bottom-up view, while Ken has a top-down view; which is probably the most enlightened thing said all night (even though I am sure he didn’t mean to do it). In that statement my mind raced directly to Romans 1The wrath of God is being revealed from heaven against all the godlessness and wickedness of men who suppress the truth by their wickedness, since what may be known about God is plain to them, because God has made it plain to them.(18,19)--- Ken spoke clearly about what God has plainly revealed to man. No, we weren’t there to see it, but neither were Bill Nye and Carl Sagan. Bill’s view is a man-made intellectual only...”I can figure it out myself” view. Ken’s view is based on divine revelation or “because God has made it plain to them.” I do appreciate Bill Nye coming out to debate, because many were telling him not to. By staying mum, they are able to easily suppress the truth. It is two belief systems. No one was here in the beginning, so we all start with a belief or presupposition. The Laws of Nature are God’s Laws. Things work in an organized fashion, because God made it that way. To find a watch in the middle of nowhere, and pretend that just happened to form is ludicrous. That sir is checking your brain at the door. ---Just admit it. You believe in evolution, because you reject the Gospel of God. Science is good, but it’s not revelation. We need divine revelation to know how we got here, and what our purpose is. Most of all, we need divine revelation to know Christ our Savior. --- The saddest part of the evening was Bill Nye saying that exploring and trying to figure stuff out was the joy of life(that’s fine, but nothing after this life?). He was most interested in children becoming scientists and taxpayers. Where is the hope? What a dud-ending it will be! *To see the debate go to debatelive.org as it will be archived for about five days.