Evidence for God from Science

There will be a debate between Ken Ham, the founder of Answers in Genesis, and Bill Nye, known as "the Science Guy", on February 4 at 7 pm Eastern Standard Time. The subject will be: "Is creation a viable model of origins in today's modern scientific era?" The debate will be live streamed free at this site:

http://debatelive.org/

I am washing my hair that night.

theophilus wrote:There will be a debate between Ken Ham, the founder of Answers in Genesis, and Bill Nye, known as "the Science Guy", on February 4 at 7 pm Eastern Standard Time. The subject will be: "Is creation a viable model of origins in today's modern scientific era?" The debate will be live streamed free at this site:

http://debatelive.org/

Too bad this is not an old earth creation vs evolution debate. In my view this debate will be damaging to the Bible's credibility..

Why debate Y.E.C, boring....

A talk on all the creation perspectives would be much nicer and probably more productive.

Also to hear a Rabbi's take on creation would be much more interesting.

I think this debate is going to hurt Christianity, why would you debate issues that are not important to salvation, issues which could drive away people, this is just a stumbling block put in the way of the non-believer.

Haters gonna hate. I'll tune in. Thanks for the link

Silvertusk wrote:I am washing my hair that night.

I'll be dyeing my hair orange...

Or just like me, you could die your skin orange and your hair green to look just like a CARROT!

cubeus19 wrote:Or just like me, you could die your skin orange and your hair green to look just like a CARROT!

Oh how the mind wanders..

Jac3510 wrote:Haters gonna hate. I'll tune in. Thanks for the link

I don't think anyone here hates the Y.E.C position, I think everyone is just sick of the stupid accusations they spew at you. If anything, that is what I can't stand and Ken Ham is pretty well know for such lying and deception.

I didn't anything about hater's hating YEC. It's pretty clear that most people hate Ken Ham. But this is an issue we've discussed in great detail before. I'll simply register my normal objection to such anti-Christian hateful vitriol and move on.

So, as I said, haters gonna hate. I'll tune in.

Jac3510 wrote:I didn't anything about hater's hating YEC. It's pretty clear that most people hate Ken Ham. But this is an issue we've discussed in great detail before. I'll simply register my normal objection to such anti-Christian hateful vitriol and move on.

So, as I said, haters gonna hate. I'll tune in.

No one hates Ken Ham either, we hate the lies, the deception and the way he attacks another Christians faith.
I thought we were supposed to hate sin?

As I've said, I've been through this before.

And let's not pretend that the hatred is just for his perceived sins. When he is called an "idiot," when he is painted with Hovind's mistakes and wrongly said to be in jail--and that with flippant defense of the mix-up when it is pointed out (as if Hamm somehow deserves to be in jail)--when it is regarded as "an added bonus" for an evolutionist to "cheese [him] off," when he is called "willingly ignorant", when he's termed a "nutjob" . . . I could go on, but you should get the point. As I've said before, it's one thing to think the man's arguments are wrong. It's one thing to even think that he is divisive. It's quite another to engage in the mockery and insults as is regularly done on this board, usually by moderators.

Besides, the behavior in this very thread demonstrates that it isn't just about his perceived sins. The vitriol is directed at the man. It's unbecoming, unChristian, and a shame on this board that it is tolerated--in fact that it is celebrated. Shame on all of you who are engaging in such behavior. You don't need to be a theologian or even know the Golden Rule to see the sin in it. Thumper's rule should be quite sufficient on this point.

So I think the objection has been lodged. I'll say no more other than this to beat it into the ground:

Haters gonna hate. I'm tuning in.

Haters hate sin, I am going to tune in too, even though I don't think it will achieve anything.

As to your comments on what people have been saying about Ken ham, while I don't agree with the personal things they say about him, I also don't agree with most of the things that are said to various people on this board this includes yourself and everyone else.

Most posts interacting with atheists, are rude, condescending and arrogant, and do not display the characteristics of Christ.

We are all guilty of being rude and arrogant most of the time, towards each other and towards people not associated with this board, seems to be a case of throwing stones in glass houses to me. I could point out many posts that you have made that fit this bill.

Ken Ham is definitely guilty of causing division within the Church, because of his teachings I have even experienced it within my own Church, I have heard it from his own mouth and as far as I'm concerned he is a liar and divisive person, maybe he has changed but unfortunately he needs to now correct the damage he has done.

Jac3510 wrote:As I've said, I've been through this before.

And let's not pretend that the hatred is just for his perceived sins. When he is called an "idiot," when he is painted with Hovind's mistakes and wrongly said to be in jail--and that with flippant defense of the mix-up when it is pointed out (as if Hamm somehow deserves to be in jail)--when it is regarded as "an added bonus" for an evolutionist to "cheese [him] off," when he is called "willingly ignorant", when he's termed a "nutjob" . . . I could go on, but you should get the point. As I've said before, it's one thing to think the man's arguments are wrong. It's one thing to even think that he is divisive. It's quite another to engage in the mockery and insults as is regularly done on this board, usually by moderators.

Besides, the behavior in this very thread demonstrates that it isn't just about his perceived sins. The vitriol is directed at the man. It's unbecoming, unChristian, and a shame on this board that it is tolerated--in fact that it is celebrated. Shame on all of you who are engaging in such behavior. You don't need to be a theologian or even know the Golden Rule to see the sin in it. Thumper's rule should be quite sufficient on this point.

So I think the objection has been lodged. I'll say no more other than this to beat it into the ground:

Haters gonna hate. I'm tuning in.

Ahhh, the memories with some of those older threads/posts.

Jac,

I'm pretty sure we could dig up some of your old posts and find some stuff that you've said, just as bad or worse than what others have said about Ham.

It's been a long time since any Ham bashing has gone on here.