Menu ☰

Get every post emailed to you - click here

The One Reason Why Ken Ham Won The Debate

Why is what separates us from them, you from me. Why is the only real source of power, without it you are powerless. And this is how you come to me: without why, without power, another link in the chain.- The Merovingian, from The Matrix Movie

I didn’t want to watch the debate the other night. I really didn’t. I thought it was stupid to even be debating with an evolutionist, seeing it nothing more than a mere theatrical, attention seeking event. It’s like the presidential debates. They are really worthless if you think about it. While it’s fun to watch, it doesn’t change the facts. I mean you can be right on everything, but if you can’t debate it right it means you lose, when really it just means you suck as a debater.

All that being said, I ended up liking the debate and Ham’s constant push of the Gospel. I was delighted to see the irritation in Nye’s face every time he went back to the Book. I wrote this on my facebook wall:

Does anyone really believe Nye’s evolutionism to explain you and I – the how and why of our existence and purpose? Nye puffed himself up as a “reasonable man”, but failed to adequately explain where this reason came from, failed to explain the why behind anything, saying we’ll one day find the answers. His argument: well just because I don’t know doesn’t mean we should give up looking. Umm, yeah I would stop wasting your time looking for that answer through science. Nye also kept going on about the predictive benefits of evolutionism. Umm, you have to first explain how matter turns into you and I before you can even touch that one mr smarty pants. And he didn’t do it. He couldn’t. In the future, we’ll look back and see the lunacy of it all.

Maybe even Nye will see the lunacy of it all and one day come to the Lord? Like Paul who spoke out against the Church before being saved, maybe Nye will have a damascus moment some day…..I’d much rather see that then have him stand before God at Judgment day, saying, oh shoot I was wrong.

My tone is a little snarky perhaps, but I’m serious when I say this. If you don’t have the Why behind it all, you have nothing. You have no power. You bring nothing to the table.

And Ken Ham had power. He had the why, and he flaunted the why over and over again. You and I might not know all the little details for this and that, but we have the deep why behind it all. Nye failed to explain the why behind any of his observations, and just kept describing himself as a “reasonable man.”

I love my pastor’s conclusion to this:

After watching the Nye/Ham debate last night I walked away with this one truth: I am not a “reasonable man” I am a sinner saved by God’s grace. I will build my life on that foundation.

Boom. There you have it.

Nye wants us to build a foundation on his own man-made religion. More than once Nye said this: “It fills me with joy to know that we can pursue these answers.” Why? Because it does feel good to think you have all the answers, that you don’t have to submit to a High Power. It does feel good to make yourself – man – the end all be all in life. But praise God we know that’s a dead end road. Praise God for His grace and revealing that we are in need of rescuing.

Ham was right, it does come down to authority. And Ham recognizes God has the authority. He recognizes he is a sinner saved by grace. He recognizes the why behind all of what you see and don’t see in this world. And that, my friend, is why he won.

  • Lori Benka

    I love what you wrote: “If you don’t have the Why behind it all, you have nothing.” What a powerful statement that really got me thinking. Great Post!

    • http://www.donaldmcallister.com/ Don McAllister

      Thanks, Lori!

    • David

      Your “why” is simply belief derived from tradition and your experience, which is biased by your expectations. It has no validity except in the opinions of a shrinking group of believers.

  • JibJab2

    Oh dear Lord.

    Look, this is nothing new. Martin Luther, John Calvin, and the Catholic church all furiously quoted scripture to prove that the earth does not rotate. And that it does not orbit the sun. And that, in fact, the sun orbits the earth. As Martin Luther put it, “Joshua commanded the Sun to stand still, not the Earth.”

    Then as now, the Bible literalists derided the scientists of their generation (i.e., Copernicus) were puffed-up heretics who were bent on making a name for themselves and attacking the church.

    Then as now, the Bible literalists were dead wrong. The Universe is several billion years old. NASA is, right now, observing galaxies from billions of years in the past, whose light has taken billions of years to reach us.

    You certainly have the right to stay with your fixed conclusion that the world is six thousand years old. But don’t act like it’s science, and don’t blame the rest of us for rolling our eyes.

    • http://www.donaldmcallister.com/ Don McAllister

      My fixed conclusion was only that the WHY matters much more than any of the details here. Whether you want to label people as puffed up heretics or Bible literalists doesn’t really matter to me. What matters is that we’re all sinners in need of God’s grace. Evolutionists don’t have real power. They show up each day without why, without power, just another link in the chain.

      • burger7

        Surely science, by definition, only deals with the HOW. Not the WHY.

        • Nick

          No, science does deal with the WHY, especially in this sense. Predictions and hypothesis are answers as to WHY, and experiments are to resolve the HOW. WHY does a person act the way they do? Well we can investigate brain activity and chemical levels and draw conclusions and compare that to other individuals and understand the WHY of an individual. What science does not answer is WHAT is our purpose as a species. We can answer WHY we act the way we do, HOW we evolved to think and behave this way, but WHAT is our purpose is a question which starts with the scientifically invalid assumption that we have a purpose and as such is a question science cannot answer because it begins with a nonfalsifiable assumption.

      • Nick

        You missed a key point that Nye brought up, although only briefly. There is no WHY. There is no greater meaning to WHY we are here. We are a product of evolution just like every other being alive right now.

        The “Laws of Logic” are not some supernatural gift given only to humans. They are human constructs created by humans to help us find answers to the questions WE created. Our brains have evolved to allow us to better answer these questions, although you can see more primitive forms of logic in other species.

        Because of this, the WHY is a subjective question which each and every one of us much ask and answer ourselves. Do we help the poor? Do we devote our lives to the seeking of knowledge? Do we devote ourselves to our family? Do we live selfishly and ony for our own pleasures? There is no fundamentally or objectively right or wrong answer, only answers which we define as right and wrong as a society. And to answer the question which I have a feeling you would ask in response… Who gives society the authority to define right and wrong? We do, we the people, in the founding of this nation gave ourselves that authority, much like in a monarchy, the king gives it to himself. All pack species have societal rules, it is the only way for the group to survive as a pack. If one member decides to go rogue, he is cast out of the group, much like we do in when a person breaks a law. For examples see wolves and rhinos and numerous other species. I know this is long but I felt it important to say because you appear to find those of us who understand and accept scientific findings as “lacking” something or broken, and we are not. We are free to live our lives as we see fit with all the added responsibility and personal accountability that entails.

        • http://www.donaldmcallister.com/ Don McAllister

          I’m a biology major. I love science. I accept scientific findings, and don’t consider you lacking. I do however think if you avoid the why that I’ve addressed here that you’re missing out. Societal rules are one thing, but then there is the perfect rule/law that God requires and we all have come short of that and deserve to be cast out. We are all free to choose how we want to live, but a life that ignores this is also a choice we make. And knowing that we can’t live up to God’s perfect law and standard, there is power in knowing the WHY of his grace..of Jesus.

          • Nick

            I have not avoided the WHY, I have instead proposed that there is no global WHY. That there is no universal, objective, perfect rule/law. You may not agree with that answer, but don’t say it has not been acknowledged because it has been explicitly addressed. Your assertion that there is a WHY is simply being denied. If you want to state there is such a universal law, provide evidence for that statement, but as yet, none was provided, by you, nor by Ham in the debate. The closest Ham came to this was his rules of logic which can clearly be shown to not have Biblical origins as similar rules were proposed by the Greeks & Chinese separate from any Biblical teachings. Going beyond that, the rules have changed over time and are unique from group to group showing that they are not universally consistent as would be suggested by divine origin. On top of that they are not unique to our species.

      • Jake McAllister

        If Ken gets to use the “gospel” for the why then the Jews have just as good a chance as being right as you. Hell that means the Muslims do too. I mean they have books, they have artifacts…what’s the difference? As Ken Haim said “we just don’t know we weren’t there.” You won’t even look at evidence from anything else other than the bible. What makes you different from a Muslim?

        • http://www.donaldmcallister.com/ Don McAllister

          The only evidence I need is that I’m a sinner in need of God’s grace and salvation. The Gospel for me is the answer.

  • Ianos Gnatiuc

    How a totally wrong “why” answer is better than a honest “I don’t know” answer?

    • Sebastian Thimm

      Don, I would also love an answer to this question.

      • Sebastian Thimm

        Yep, that’s what I expected.

        • http://www.donaldmcallister.com/ Don McAllister

          I intentionally didn’t answer to avoid wasting my time. I don’t believe it’s a totally wrong “why” and an honest “I don’t know” answer is untrue, because I honestly do know, as God told us in the Bible.

          • Sebastian Thimm

            “Yep, that’s what I expected.” again. Thanks and peace out.

  • Jason

    Seek help, I fear you may be retarded. Hopefully this won’t hurt your feelings, that’s not my intent. I just feel that you need to be aware so that you can find the help you so desperately need. Your pastor too.

  • Pingback: Debate between Bill Nye and Ken Ham tonight watch it live - US Message Board - Political Discussion Forum

  • Andrew_Burton

    I’m an Atheist. I was brought up as a Roman Catholic. I believe that we live, and we die, and that’s it – for us.

    While we’re alive, we can choose – many, many, many times over – to behave well, or behave badly. We can be selfish, or generous. We can be role models to others, especially our children: or we can lead them by our example into being greedy and thoughtless people. We can treat others with kindness and sympathy, or we can exploit them.

    At the end of our lives, nothing of us will remain: no fragment, no particle, no soul nor spirit. In time, the memory of us will be gone. A billion years from now, this universe will not remember us.

    But while we live, and for some years after we die, we and many people around us will live better lives if we act well rather than if we act badly. I don’t need faith in the after life to tell me that purpose comes from learning then acting well. If you are someone who does require this faith, that’s OK by me. I don’t ask you to believe what I believe. But I still ask you to act well.

    • http://www.donaldmcallister.com/ Don McAllister

      I like the Why that my God has provided as told in the Bible. Your why is frankly depressing and devoid of any meaning. And my God says His creation declares His existence. Atheism is your choice to deny His existence. You have that right, but know that even though you deny God, He wants you to know there is a better story you can be living, there is a better reality found in embracing this God of grace and truth. The difference between you and me is that while you don’t care what I believe, I do care what you believe because God’s way leads to Life.

      • Angling Saxon

        Since when does meaning have to have a time limit? Or, rather, since when is something devoid of meaning just because it’s not “eternal”?

        We live, we die, we cease to exist (nor do we have any sort of “eternal” consciousness). My life is full of meaning to me and those around me, in spite of the fact that in two or three hundred years my existence will be remembered by essentially no one.

        Who on earth would want to have never-ending consciousness anyway? And in the company of a jealous, spiteful, murderous and unrelievedly petty being as portrayed in the Bible? Sounds like hell to me.

        Edit: You’re a biology major and you don’t believe in evolution? How is that even possible?

        • http://www.donaldmcallister.com/ Don McAllister

          You can believe what you want, but I believe ignoring that there is a God who gives us meaning is both risky and foolhardy. If you know the God of grace, you’ll understand that life doesn’t have to be so bleak as you’re making it out to be, and that what we do now does indeed have eternal consequences.

      • Andrew_Burton

        There’s a certain amount of “someone is wrong on the internet” about this conversation, but what the heck.

        I care about what you do much more than I care about what you believe. For the most part, what you believe is a matter for you. I genuinely am happy for you that you feel that belief in your God helps you find purpose in life – as I would if you were a Roman Catholic, or Muslim, or Buddhist, or Hindu, or Jain, or….

        Each of these people may feel that their life matters and has meaning. I fully, completely affirm this. You, interestingly, tell me the opposite. You tell me that my choice denies me the ability to find purpose and meaning in life. I understand why you do this, but I don’t think saying “you should believe what I believe” is a persuasive argument.

        But your post was occasioned by the discussion between Ken Ham and Bill Nye. I love being part of a universe that, to the best of our knowledge, is 13.5 billion years old. I love learning how the stars came to shine, how our solar system formed, how life forms continue to evolve, how the smallest pieces of matter and energy interact with each other. It’s so much fun to find things out! And there are a lot of things we don’t understand yet, but that’s OK – we’ve only been good at thinking this way for about 400 years or so. There’s so much more we can learn!

        • http://www.donaldmcallister.com/ Don McAllister

          And to me it’s so fun to find these things out through reading the Bible. It not only explains how the stars came to be, but also you and I, and also how to have a right relationship with Him who Created it all.

  • JH

    The conclusion from your post, it is better to be illiterate and ignorant rather than actually learn about reality?