Bill Nye Debates Ken Ham (Evolutionist/Creationist)

by Aaron Dunlop

Just finished watching the debate broadcast live via SermonAudio. Ken Ham was very well prepared. He presented himself very clearly with a secure belief in the sovereignty and omnipotence of God. He was succinct, well reasoned, and he gave a very clear presentation of the gospel and the biblical understanding of life.

Bill Nye did not seem as well prepared. His confidence in Science is obese. He is philosophically and intellectually self-centered and he has no answers for the real questions of life or human consciousness. God does have the answers! In the absence of the answers it seemed that Mr Nye was trying to generate optimism in the pursuit of Science and the joy of discovery—which came across forced and empty. Romans 1:22 came to mind as I listened to Mr. Nye;

“Professing themselves to be wise, they became fools.”

3 Comments to “Bill Nye Debates Ken Ham (Evolutionist/Creationist)”

  1. I agree. Ken was scientific while Bill has passion for his brand of science. Bill even used the tired old method of Ad Hominem Abusive when he could not provide a viable means of defending his beliefs. I only wish that Ken would have addressed Bill’s “concerns” with a true concern for the state of Bill’s soul. I saw that Bill was continually trying to cast Ken in the “poor ignorant anti-intellectual” stereotype when Bill could not provide an adequate presentation of scientific logic and reason. To this Nye-ism that Ken had an open door to address Bill as a person trying to suppress the wonderful truth of the Gospel.

    • Thanks for your comment. You said; “I only wish that Ken would have addressed Bill’s “concerns” with a true concern for the state of Bill’s soul.” I disagree with this line. First, we don’t know that he did not have a “true concern,” we can’t read his heart. Second, there is evident throughout the debate that he does have a concern—he was gracious, and focused a number of times on the gospel message. Third, we have to remember the nature of the event—it was a formal debate and not a gospel campaign.

      • Hi. I hear what you are saying. I only wish he made his concern more verbally personal to Bill. Maybe the debate was not the place for that. Yes he did present the Gospel and “a formal debate and not a gospel campaign”. So I was somewhat confused when He brought the Gospel into a string of thought that seemed to deviate from emphasis on the meaning of scientific interpretation. All in all, Ken owned the night and Bill defaulted to what most naturalist do when they cannot provide a viable answer. I was sad about Bill since I enjoyed watching his PBS shows when we homeschooled our kids. I did write him once about his rabid beliefs in evolution and he could only answer by telling me to look at a blade of grass. I guess that means that even non-christians can witness for God by telling one how amazing a blade of grass is. Seeing, they will see … hearing, they will hear.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: