Did God actually create the cosmos?
I recently learned that Bill Nye (The Science Guy) is going to be involved in a public debate with Ken Ham, the founder of the Creation Museum. The primary point debated: “Is creation a viable model of origins?”
The tickets are already sold out – now the powers that be are contemplating streaming the debate, recording it for video, and other options for those of us who cannot attend.
To be honest, I really had no idea that Bill Nye was a vocal opponent to creationism. I’m not so naive as to think everyone believes the way I do – I had simply never heard him talk about it before. So with a little (very little) digging I found an interview he have regarding the upcoming debate:
Let’s look at and respond to three moments from the brief interview.
– At 0:35 Mr. Nye comments that people who want to teach that the earth is 10,000 years old is not in the best interest of the U.S. or the world.
This is a gross overgeneralization of the creation perspective. Even in the Evangelical camp there are different perspectives on the age of the earth. Some of us are Old-Earth creationists. Some of us are Young-Earth creationists.
Tolkien freaks are Middle-Earth creationists (bad-um-bum!).
No matter what one’s position on the age of the earth, a creationist’s worldview does not negate science. We don’t turn in our science card when we claim we believe that God laid the foundations of the world.
– At 1:40 Mr. Nye claims that we need to have a scientifically literate populace in order to solve the world’s problems.
Continuing with the first point, creationists do not disregard science. I personally know Christian scientists who very much believe in the scientific method and processes. Some of the great scientists in the past have been people who hold to a creationist worldview. Their science is not lessened or cheapened because they believe that life began from God rather than a cosmic accident.
– At 3:25 Mr. Nye claims that this issue is an economic concern.
Finally, Mr. Nye seems to think that economics comes into play. While he doesn’t explain fully, my guess would be he believes that a poor scientific community would ultimately create world instability and, thus, economic failure. How can people who believe words from an ancient text be innovative thinkers and problem solvers?
But his argument doesn’t stand the test of history, for innovations have long been brought on by religiously minded people. And Mr. Nye’s arguments seem to be straw men that never really address the issue of the debate:
“Is creation a viable model of origins?”
Rather than looking at the viability of the model, Mr. Nye resorts to setting up hypothetical problems that may be brought on if creation continues to be taught.
I think it’s clear where I stand – I believe that everything that is had to have a beginning. Even a Big Bang has to come from somewhere. I believe that God is the impetus behind the cosmos. I can’t say specifically how He did it, or give you the exact timeline. The Bible is a book to lead us to faith. It is not a science textbook.
But science does not negate my faith.
My faith does not diminish my understanding and interest in science.
God is big enough to deal with science.
It will be interesting to see how this debate plays out. Will you be watching?
**Sound off!** What’s your take on this debate and the issue of creation being a viable model of origins?
Related Posts:
– Jesus Loves Dinosaurs
Chris Linzey 
Its only in the last 10 years that old earth creationists have had any voice. Ken Ham is part of the fold that insists the earth is 6000 years old. A local AG church I frequently visit insists on the same. “The Bible isn’t a science book” is a new stance in evangelicalism. The Abeka homeschooling crowd is who Bill Nye is going after. And they are a large chunk of creationism.
Should be a fun debate for sure.
LikeLike
Recently posted some thoughts on creation myself, regarding the first three days before the sun was created. The point that drove my thinking was the limits of our certainty. As your previous commentor pointed out, we know some, we don’t know a lot.
LikeLike
I’ll have to go check it out!
LikeLike
My problem with the whole thing, and any other debates on this issue, is that they are mostly about someones theory of how creation was done. You’ll find these debates aren’t necessarily about whether or not God created (although some are), but about how He did it, how long it took, etc., etc. There is no “creation model” other than what God tells us in the Bible and that leaves a lot of room for interpretation. These are nothing more than a bunch of overly educated people trying to push their particular theory, none of which is provable.
LikeLike
You’re right. We all have the same facts that we choose to interpret differently. Thx for reading!
LikeLike
I find some of the debates rather amusing. The mental gymnastics some of those theories go through to make them fit the biblical narrative is really entertaining. I think that sometimes our own “creation” scientists tend to make the same mistake they point out the evolutionists make when they claim their theories are fact when they really aren’t.
LikeLike