I really enjoyed and agreed with Terry Enn’s answer to the question, “Who won this week’s debate between Ken Ham and Bill Nye?”:
I suspect that both evolutionists and creationists will claim victory by their representative in the debate.
But for the believer in Christ the debate isn’t about winning and losing. It was encouraging to see and hear that believers have credible scientific answers to the claims of evolution. Certainly we claim the account of the Scriptures, and that is sufficient for us. Yet there are additional scientific answers that support the account of creation in Genesis 1. That was helpful for many believers to hear.
Yet the believer must be careful not to put his hope in a debate “victory” and must not be discouraged by a debate “loss.” The battle for creation (or any other debate with non-Christians) is not won with evidence. This is a spiritual battle and it can only be won with spiritual weapons. While evidence for creation or the life of Christ or the resurrection may play a part in moving people towards faith, but evidence itself does not produce salvation. People are changed by the movement of God’s Spirit in their hearts, changing their rebellion against Christ to allegiance to Christ. From Who won the Ham/Nye origins debate?
I think Denny Burk’s Brief reflections on the creation debate are very accurate:
1. Ken Ham has an unwavering commitment to biblical authority and to the gospel. I admire that about him and do believe him to represent the most compelling position. I am grateful that he is out there fighting the good fight. He’s one of the good guys.
2. Bill Nye believes that scientific innovation will die unless creationists abandon their beliefs and embrace Bill Nye’s view of science. That is why he treats creationists as a hindrance to the public good who must be stopped. The only problem with this belief is that it is empirically and verifiably false. As Ken Ham demonstrated, there have been and are many great scientists who have innovated from within a theistic/Christian worldview. Nye’s public service announcements warning Americans about creationists were therefore more condescending than helpful. Regardless of your view of creationism, Ken Ham showed that there is no opposition between Christianity and scientific innovation.
3. Bill Nye came across as a more impressive speaker than Ken Ham. Nye has a delivery and presentation style that many will find very compelling. I’d be interested to see if anyone actually scored the debate on points. It seemed like Nye probably won on that measurement.
4. Ken Ham was cordial and winsome throughout. Bill Nye was combative and condescending throughout. I doubt that Ham won many converts through his cordiality, and I’m certain that Nye didn’t win any with his condescension.
5. I doubt that either of these men persuaded anyone to switch their view one way or the other. If you watched this debate as a naturalist, you probably weren’t challenged to change that worldview. Likewise, if you watched the debate as a theist, there was nothing here to undermine your worldview either.
6. Bill Nye does not appear to have even a rudimentary understanding of the Bible or theology. When he ventured into questions of hermeneutics or biblical interpretation, he was way out of his depth.
I am thankful for Ken Ham and Answers in Genesis and organizations like them that teach biblical creationism because sadly ‘Most evangelical colleges teach evolution’.