Here are few links post-debate links for further reflection on the debate between Nye and Ham (updated throughout the day):
–Watch the full debate here.
–Albert Mohler observes that the primary issue in the debate is that of worldview:
“…the argument was never really about ice rods and sediment layers. It was about the most basic of all intellectual presuppositions: How do we know anything at all? On what basis do we grant intellectual authority? Is the universe self-contained and self-explanatory? Is there a Creator, and can we know him?
On those questions, Ham and Nye were separated by infinite intellectual space. They shared the stage, but they do not live in the same intellectual world. Nye is truly committed to a materialistic and naturalistic worldview. Ham is an evangelical Christian committed to the authority of the Bible. The clash of ultimate worldview questions was vividly displayed for all to see.”
–For those (like myself) who thought the debate format muddied the waters even more, Justin Taylor provides additional video resources for further reflection surrounding the age of the earth, including a very level-headed response by R.C. Sproul:
–Denny Burk provides his brief reactions to the debate.
–Pastor Matt Rawlings reflects on why he didn’t watch the debate:
“It is a shame that these side shows garner so much publicity while a true debate over issues of consequence, such as the one between Dr. William Lane Craig v. Duke philosopher Alex Rosenberg get so little attention. It is telling how many Christian apologists all but ignored last night’s debate. Many of the people I respect chose instead to watch Mike Licona lecture at HBU (you can catch a breakdown and videos of it at the blog of Wintery Knight). I, on the other hand, watched the UK v. Ole Miss game on ESPNU and then read for two hours. I guarantee you either were a better use of time.”