On February 4, 2014 Bill Nye, The Science Guy, debated Ken Ham on evolution. I must admit that I am not exceedingly familiar with either participant. Most of the factual information in my post is from an MSN internet article and Wiki. Bill Nye had a television program on PBS from about 1993 to 1998 called Bill Nye, The Science Guy. Ken Ham is the leader of a church in Kentucky and founder of the Creation Museum. By most accounts, the Creation Museum has been wildly successful and makes money hand over fist. The debate was held at the Creation Museum in my home state of Kentucky.
I need many disclaimers to say what I think God is calling me to say. Firstly, Bill Nye needs to be congratulated for giving a solid defense of evolution and having the guts to debate Ken Ham on his home turf. Secondly, Ken Ham needs to be congratulated for giving a solid defense of a very rigid, literal interpretation of Creationism. Thirdly, I think Ham presented the Creation exactly the way he thought God wanted him to. God has blessed him significantly through his ideas on Creationism. Why would Ham think he could possibly be wrong? Fourthly, God is doing something great through Ham, and I think God will continue to use him and the Creation Museum for good. Nevertheless, I am a Christian; I am a Creationist, and I completely disagree with many of Ham’s assertions on the Creation.
There tends to be two main camps of Creationists. There are the more literal Creationists, who somewhat believe that the answer to every question about the Creation can be found in Genesis. Then there are the “other” Creationists, who believe in a divine Creation, but do not think that the answer to every question about the Creation can be found in Genesis. The literal Creation argument is full of holes, and it is full of holes because the Bible is not a science book. The Bible “intersects” science, as it was once explained to me. The Bible “intersects” history, as well. And where intersections occur, I believe in the Bible. However, the Bible is incomplete in those areas. To make it complete, we must make too many assumptions. Thus, we get some absurd ideas from some, literal Creationists. However, I truly believe that science and Christianity are not opposed to each other. For example, if God wanted to start the universe, with a Bang, a Big Bang, I am okay with it. If God wanted to allow his creatures to evolve through a process called natural selection, I am okay with it. If God wanted us to evolve from monkeys- with the “finished product” in his own image, I am okay with that too.
Science can be compatible with the Bible. The only place where the Creation runs into serious problems with science is in the timeline. According to most literal Creationists, God created the Earth around 6000 years ago. Also, according to most literal Creationists, God created the world in 6 Earth days. There is simply too much evidence to suggest that the Earth was created 6000 years ago. Perhaps, Earth, as we know it, was created 6000 years ago. Most historians date the rise of civilization to about 4000BC, which is in line with Creation. Maybe that is what the Bible is talking about-the rise of civilization-not the creation of the Earth itself. Also, there is simply too much evidence to suggest that the Earth was created in 6, 24 hour, Earth days. God is eternal. How can mankind comprehend how long a day is from God’s perspective? A day is God’s eyes could be a billion years. We just do not know. Some literal Creationists even contend that humans and dinosaurs coexisted. Until a paleontologist digs up a T-Rex with a saddle, I will reserve my opinion…
All in all, I would advise Creationists, like me, to keep it loose. The Bible, Creation, and science are compatible. We only run into problems with the rigid, literal interpretations. Also, Creationists should embrace science. We would gain more credibility and maybe even find more evidence for our claims of a divine Creation. Furthermore, and perhaps more importantly, I think as Christians, we struggle when we take the emphasis off Jesus. The case for Jesus is a winning argument, whether we are talking about his existence or the significance of his life. Who can read the story of Jesus’ life and not think that the world would be a better place, if everyone acted more like him? You just cannot lose “that” argument.
You won’t believe it…Karl and I were having this very conversation a couple days ago. You have somehow managed to gather our exact thoughts into a meaningful concise post. Next time I get into a conversation about creation, I’m going to reopen your post and say, “read this”. As always, thank you so very much for your heart and wisdom. Karl also wants to see a T Rex with a saddle. Take care.
As always, thank you very much for your comments. Actually, I almost left out the T Rex statement. I thought it might have been a little harsh, but Rachel talked me into keeping it. Glad someone got a chuckle out of it. Maybe they’ll discover T Rex rodeos too…