re: Bill Nye Debates Ken Ham

I was merely making the point that an argument for a 6000 year old earth was ridiclous, but just because Hamm may be a poor debater doesnt make his opponent's argument correct

Nye brought up the point of the New Testament. The article I posted earlier made a great point. Keep in mind this article was written by a Christian. The young-Earth creationists use genealogies to calculate the age of the earth. However, the Hebrew word that is used for "beget" does not necessarily mean a father-son relationship. It could imply that one is the other's great-great-great grandfather. For example, the English translation of the New Testament calls Jesus the son of David. However, there were many generations between Jesus and David. I think this is a great point that true biblical scholars can use to counter the young-Earth creationists.

This debate really is pathetic

But my personal opinion is any debate between these two side will always be lacking bc they don't accept the same premises.

For example, Evolutionists want scientific proof of creationism/ a higher being and that simply does not and will not exist. The whole basic belief system of Christianity is based on faith. Faith in the supernatural ability of God to do supernatural things unexplainable by science.

Problem being Evolutionists will not accept things that are not explainable by science.

I understand their unwillingness to do so but that is why these debates are always apples to oranges.

FTR, I'm a Christian who isn't really to worried about how old the earth is as it just doesn't seem all that important to me but I do tend to lean towards 6 day creationism bc I have faith that God is able to do the impossible in 6 days

I hope I managed not to sound incredibly stupid in that little comment

ETA: I see Ham just sort of touched on my point

Evolution is real, IMO theres no doubt about it and there is no logical argument against it...none.

Creationists refer to a "book" that supposedly has the answers to everything, well who wrote that book? Did God himself write "well hey I breathe life into you and you are man, heres a piece of paper to carry around for when I make more of you so you can tell them how you got here." Its BS, the Bible is a book written by man for man in a time when science did not exist in the open, so a magical being became the answer.

quote:

---

FTR, I'm a Christian who isn't really to worried about how old the earth is as it just doesn't seem all that important to me but I do tend to lean towards 6 day creationism bc I have faith that God is able to do the impossible in 6 days

---

Despite the fact that all evidence is to the contrary?

Is the stream still going? I'm always intrigued by a good civil debate. Especially when no one truly knows if they are all the way correct, party correct, or not correct at all with their assertions.

Somebody usually wins these debates. But that doesn't mean their ideology is any more valid than their defeated foes.

I am of the opinion that we have not evolved to the point where we can even begin to comprehend the secrets of the universe's beginnings or if it even if the universe "began" at all. It may have always been there.

It is, and you can rewind it to the beginning if you want. They are answering audience questions now.

quote:

---

Problem being Evolutionists will not accept things that are not explainable by science.

---

Why should they?

I like that Nye does not claim to be able to prove incorrect that which he can't disprove. He says he disagrees and finds it unreasonable, but he doesn't outright say it isn't true. He also wasn't afraid to admit that he didn't know the answer to a question earlier.

quote:

---

I like that Nye does not claim to be able to prove incorrect that which he can't disprove. He says he disagrees and finds it unreasonable, but he doesn't outright say it isn't true. He also wasn't afraid to admit that he didn't know the answer to a question earlier.

---

Which IMO is better than saying "Oh go to the book!"