It's not Trying to discover the truth should not be hindered. I sent the debate to my Daughters science teacher at her Catholic school, she responded "Bill Nye was great!"
So I will chime in just a bit. I want to correct one assertion that was made... maybe this can help with some of the confusion. This deals with what kept being repeated... that Dr. Ham's model was a literal 24 hour day, as we know it. Without going into detail about the word "Yom." I see this as an issue... Firstly, time was not kept in hours, as we know it, at creation. In fact there was no way of recording the length of the day... Check it out... by definition a day would be one complete revolution on it's axis whereby the sun would be seen in the east, what we call rising, which is a misnomer, then setting in the west... then not seen for a while as the earth rotates some more. The problem is... in Genesis 1, it would not be until the third day of creation that the sun and moon would be created. The light given on days one and two was the light of God emanating from Himself. This is the same eternal light mentioned in Revelation 23 The city does not need the sun or the moon to shine on it, for the glory of God gives it light, and the Lamb is its lamp. Just something to consider... there is room for both creation and science, new discoveries and old ones. We just have to be careful with our assertions, our assumptions and our definitions. I doubt seriously those who do not believe in creation will be swayed by Dr. Ham's arguments. Nor will those who favor a creationist view be swayed by the science guy. What I do hope we can all agree to is something wonderful happened when all that we see exploded into the realm of a very magnificent and glorious tapestry. I believe the biblical account... though there are many aspects of it... I cannot even begin to understand. Making stuff up... that bothers me. Neither will science ever satisfactorily explain something from nothingness as that is a violation of science's own laws. Matter can neither be created nor destroyed... it can only change states. Yes, I know that law has been restated in modern times. I don't think God intended to explain to us in a single chapter... as if He owes us an explanation... "how" He created all things... other than He willed it... spoke it... and it was so. That's a lot to wrap our minds around... I know. God never intended to prove His existence to us. But at the end of the day... we all must acknowledge... wow!... something beautiful occurred and amazingly, we get to be part of it... I am so grateful to share it with all of you. May God bless us all... I believe He has in the past... is now... and forever will do so... as He chooses.
Used that passage in a sermon last Sunday. Absolutely! Answer... Amos 5:8 He who made the Pleiades and Orion And changes deep darkness into morning, Who also darkens day into night, Who calls for the waters of the sea And pours them out on the surface of the earth, The LORD is His name. Or Job 9:9 He is the Maker of the Bear and Orion, the Pleiades and the constellations of the south. Job 12:22 He reveals the deep things of darkness and brings utter darkness into the light. Job 38:12 "Have you ever given orders to the morning, or shown the dawn its place, Job 38:31 "Can you bind the chains of the Pleiades? Can you loosen Orion's belt? Many Theologians consider Job to be the oldest book of the Bible... BTW
We didn't watch the whole program, just the first 1/2 hour presentation by Ham and the first 1/2 hour presentation by Nye. I thought Nye's presentation was a little dry. As Muzzy points out, the sun and moon were not placed until the third day, so there's room to suggest that the whole creation prior to that could have taken billions of years. But you're still stuck with the 6,000 year calculation after the creation of Adam and Eve. And we know humans have been around for a whole lot longer than that. He also looks around, (observational science, I suppose) and concludes that, since there is only one race (species, I think he means) of humans, that we are all descended from Adam and Eve. I posted a link to a couple of recent studies in another forum that shows we modern humans possess an easily measurable amount of Neanderthal DNA. Now this is in accordance with Ham's "observational science" for sure. But it also requires, by necessity, what he calls "historical science." So by finding Neanderthal DNA in modern humans, we know that there was interbreeding between the two species and that this had to occur prior to about 30,000 years ago, by which time the Neanderthals went extinct. We can also conclude that the Neanderthals got around quite a bit because the amount of Neanderthal DNA in people, like myself, of East Asian descent, is higher than in people of European descent. Ham and many creationists do another thing to which I strongly object. They continue to propose that, unless one accepts the Biblical version of creation, that one is, somehow, an atheist. That is definitely wrong and decidedly annoying. And the scientific version of creation is not the only alternative to the Biblical version. My husband posted links to the Korean and Japanese creation stories. Did anyone check them out? Some scientists are atheists or agnostics, there's a difference, but many are not. I personally have a very strong belief in the Creator and a spiritual world, just as strong as anyone who follows the Biblical version. What prompted me to post here though, was reading what Muzzy Man posted. He does a really beautiful job of expressing what it's really all about in the latter half of his post. I'm not going to spoil it by trying to paraphrase. I would just suggest that we all go back and take a couple minutes to read it.
Correct me if I'm wrong, but during the debate, didn't Ham say that creation took place over a literal 7 24 hour days?
Correct me if I'm wrong, but during the debate, didn't Ham specifically say that creation happened over literally 7 24 hour days?
Thanks... I do believe the Biblical view, I am just not sure Ham's is the only Biblical view to be considered.
