Is creation a viable model of origins in today’s modern scientific era?

It’s been almost 4 years since the highly popularized debate between Ken Ham from Answers in Genesis and Bill Nye, “The Science Guy.” Heralded as the “debate of the century,” it is estimated that an astounding 5 million people viewed this debate LIVE on February 4, 2014 and over 6 million have watched it since on YouTube and DVD.

I was privileged to watch the debate from the back room at the Creation Museum while preparing to host the post-debate discussion with some of the scientists from AiG. It was frustrating to see Bill Nye trotting out all the old evolutionary clichés which have been answered a hundred times over. His refusal to listen and respond to Ken made the debate feel more like two separate lectures. There were many assertions made, but very little defense given.

Beginning with an anecdote about his bow tie, “The Science Guy” continued to amuse the audience with stories throughout the duration of the debate. Ken Ham started by pointing out that everyone has different starting points, different worldviews, and different presuppositions by which they examine the evidence. By even referring to truth, science, or the natural laws, Bill Nye has to borrow from the Christian Worldview. He went on to explain that, while the evidence Creationists have is consistent with a biblical worldview, we don’t hold that worldview because of the evidence. We hold that worldview because of God’s revelation to us in His Word. With eloquent simplicity, Ken repeatedly reminded us all, “We have a book for that!”

We have a book for that!

Having gone back and watched the debate many times since then, I can see exactly what Ken Ham was doing. It becomes more and more powerful as I realize how he passed the surface objections and descended to the foundation of everything. You can’t even do science without the God of the Bible. Without the One who created the laws to which science is bound, there is no rational explanation for any of our scientific discoveries. The more I have watched the debate, the more I have loved seeing Ken Ham pull the rug out from under Bill Nye to show that he doesn’t even have a foundation for his arguments.

When Nye claimed that we can’t have technology without evolution, Ken pointed out numerous creation scientists who have made amazing contributions to technology; scientists like Raymond V. Damadian, inventor of the MRI machine and an outspoken Creationist.

It soon became evident that Bill Nye wasn’t listening because his mind was already made up. Ken Ham wouldn’t be swayed because he stood on the authority of Scripture. In the end, many derided Ken for his adherence to Scripture over Evidence. Yet, by using God’s Word as his foundation, Ken demonstrated something we all need to learn: whatever we use as our authority, is our God. Bill Nye trusts in his own ability to reason and interpret the evidence. Ken Ham puts his trust in the Word of God and interprets the evidence accordingly.

I believe in Christianity as I believe that the sun has risen: not only because I see it, but because by it I see everything else. —C. S. Lewis

Now don’t get me wrong. Evidence is awesome! As a Creationist, I LOVE evidence. There are so many amazing scientific facts which support a biblical worldview. I enjoy learning about them all the time. But if I trust in my ability to understand that evidence over the plain teaching of God’s Word, I am throwing away my foundation for truth.  

Sadly, many Christians have done just that. In May of 2012 I was asked to join a televised discussion hosted by Matt Crouch on TBN’s Praise the Lord program. Ray Comfort, Ken Ham, Sean McDowell, Hugh Ross, John Bloom, and I were given nearly 2 hours to discuss the topic: Old Earth vs Young Earth Creation. I remember sitting there and thinking, “Wow, I can’t believe that they are letting us do this!”

eric bibleFor Ray, Ken, and myself it was more of a “Biblical Authority” debate. What is our starting point? What is our authority? Will we trust the Bible or modern scientific understanding? Continuing to point the audience back to the beginning, we explained that a literal understanding of Genesis is essential to every major doctrine in the Bible.

The other guests on the program made every attempt to defend an Old Earth position by comprising God’s Word with the assertions of secular science. Yet the two mix even less than oil and water!

You cannot accept the geologic timetable of evolution without also accepting death before Adam. When God finished His creation and proclaimed it “very good” were Adam and Eve standing on millions of years of death, decay, and destruction? How could that be very good? And if Adam’s sin did not bring death into the world, what need would we have for a Redeemer? The very concept of Atonement and Regeneration breaks down by a disregard for Genesis and the authority of God’s Word.

Consequently, two-thirds of the kids raised in Christian homes are walking away from church before they finish their first year of college; many professing Christians cannot give an adequate defense of the God they claim to worship; and our churches are becoming more and more impotent at reaching the culture with the Gospel. Why? Because we have substituted Divine Authority with the opinions of man.

Who are you trusting? Like Bill Nye, is your faith in your own ability to understand the evidence or will you stand with me on the authority of God’s Word? Truly, “we have a book for that!”

The grass withers, the flower fades, but the word of our God shall stand forever. Isaiah 40:8


  • Post Debate with Creation Today and Panel: WATCH NOW
  • Best Review of Ken Ham vs Bill Nye: READ NOW
  • TBN Debate on Old Earth vs Young Earth Creation: WATCH NOW
  • Ham and Hovind Get Sparks to Fly on TBN: READ NOW