Looks like you are using an old version of Internet Explorer - Please update your browser
Creation vs. evolution is not a battle of science vs. the Bible or science vs. faith. It’s a battle between two starting points; God’s Word and man’s word. Which starting point you chose will determine how you interpret the evidence.
In the creation/evolution controversy and battle over biblical authority, much of the dispute may become clearer if writers would carefully provide readers with precise definitions of terminology. These definitions may help clear up confusion.
Why is it that evolutionists are unwilling to allow for competing models, i.e., creation or even intelligent design? The hypothesis of evolution changes every year; if one theory is said to be fact, but then a year later is shown to be wrong, then how can it be fact in the first place? A true fact is something that never changes.
Can science and religion get along? Some secular scientists do seem to be making an effort to reach out; the problem is that they are only reaching out to religious individuals who won’t let their faith “get in the way” of science.
Russell Garwood in his article “Reach out to defend evolution,” complains that creationists present “perceived gaps in scientific knowledge as evidence in support of theistic world views.” Taking a biblical stand does not undermine science; it illuminates science, just like reliable eyewitness testimony enables a detective to correctly interpret the circumstantial evidence at the scene of a crime.
It’s hard to believe it’s already been five years since my debate with iconic TV personality and ardent atheist and evolutionist, Bill Nye, “the Science Guy.”
The ten best evidences for a young earth and creation including sea floor sediment, soft tissue in fossils, carbon-14, short-lived comets, and more.
There is much debate about the nature of science and religion. Some argue the two areas give us understanding in distinct ways. But should there be a battle?
Like a TV courtroom drama, evolutionists present their case as though it’s open and shut. But we know something is missing.
If creationists are unwilling to change their basic beliefs, does that mean they’re not true scientists?
One of the big dangers in sharing our faith is to get sidetracked. It helps to acknowledge areas of agreement before getting into the deeper issues.
A recent two-part piece on The BioLogos Forum admits that meshing evolution and the image of God that all humans possess is a “challenging issue.”
An old French essay “On Liars” contains a little gem that may help you greatly in any debate about evolution and creation.
The debate with Bill Nye really illustrated the clash of two worldviews—choosing to decide truth for ourselves instead of trusting God’s Word.
Dr. Tim LaHaye shares his perspective on the Bible teachings of the Creation and the Bible teachings of the end times.
Within the first three minutes of the Ken Ham vs. Bill Nye debate, it was obvious how radically the creation-evolution debate has changed since the 1970s and 1980s.
Bill Nye maintains that any critical evaluation of evolution is tantamount to “fighting against science.”
Cosmos: A SpaceTime Odyssey host wonders why Answers in Genesis critiqued his series and why anyone cares.
It seems they cannot stand the fact that we would even dare to question and expose their bias-filled conclusions for what they are.
Not only do Bill Nye and Ken Ham hold totally different positions on origins, they also have different accounts of the history surrounding the recent debate at the Creation Museum.
In an interview prior to the Ham-Nye debate, Dr. Terry Mortenson engaged the question “Is teaching creation to children harmful to them and to our society?”
In the debate, Bill Nye did not talk much about astronomy. But when he did, he made several erroneous statements.
ABC News covered the debate between Bill Nye and Ken Ham with segments in two of their major news programs.
The debate between Ken Ham and Bill Nye “the Science Guy” on February 4 has evoked some strong and incredibly mixed reactions from the media, atheist bloggers, and Christians.
In what some observers have dubbed “Scopes II,” Nye and Ham sparred in a cordial yet spirited debate in front of a live audience that braved a winter storm.
Few events in the history of the creation/evolution issue have garnered as much attention from the public as Ken Ham’s debate last night with Bill Nye.
Two men who love science debate the question, “Is creation a viable model of origins in today’s modern scientific era?”
This very title promotes a misconception that the debate should clarify for many.
Debates between spokespersons who come from different perspectives can help develop critical thinking in students.
Scientific facts work beautifully in a Christian worldview.
Critics have put forward creative but erroneous conjectures about the upcoming debate between Bill Nye and Ken Ham.
Why are some atheists throwing a tantrum about the upcoming debate between Ken Ham and Bill Nye?
Why not arrange to have this debate shown in your college—Christian or secular—and make it an outreach to the student body, faculty, and the community?
We are pleased to announce that the upcoming debate between Bill Nye and Ken Ham will be available to view online—free of charge.
It’s remarkable to what lengths some secularists will go in order to create bizarre conspiracies out of nothing!
Tickets sold out within minutes for the debate between TV’s personality Bill Nye “the Science Guy” and Answers in Genesis president Ken Ham, to be held at the Creation Museum.
On February 4, 2014, TV’s famed “Bill Nye the Science Guy” will debate Creation Museum founder and president Ken Ham on the topic of evolution, creation, science, and origins.
It is often claimed that it takes more faith to believe in evolution than creation.