Bill Nye on the limits of religion

Josh Larsen

Josh Larsen
February 4, 2015

An excerpt from a BioLogos interview with Bill Nye about the supposed conflict between science and faith.

February 5, 2015

Of course it's really difficult, if not impossible to really dig into what a person is thinking when they decide to agree or disagree with something. But I think it's fair to say that all too often, people try to make the Bible do things it was never intended to do.

In no situation, ever, is the Bible a scientific textbook. No book, or collection of books will ever be able to answer all the scientific questions about how creation came to be. At best, Holy Scripture tells us that what we exist within was created by God. We get only a very shallow look at what He did because what he did isn't as important as the fact that it was Him who did it.

And this is probably the biggest mistake that both atheists and Christians make when it comes to deciding their point of view of the Bible and Christianity.

If I opened up a high school textbook, and I read the paragraph about Pythagora's theorem and how it came to be, I'd be thought of as ridiculous if I concluded that I knew all the intimate details about how Pythagoras thought and went about discovering his theorem. Yet - somehow, there's this thought that Holy Scripture is a great scientific textbook that gives us everything we need to know about how creation came to be. Why is it that people insist on using the Bible in this way?

February 5, 2015

It's funny... Nye likes the quote about nothing being too wonderful to be true as long as it agrees with the laws of science. Yet he embraces Evolution (the atheistic, purely naturalistic brand) which has inanimate matter organizing itself into living cells, writing its own DNA code, becoming ever more complex over time in direct violation of one of the most foundational laws of science ever discovered and codified:
The Law of Entropy (or 2nd Law of Thermodynamics), which says that everything in the universe is progressing toward disorganization, not organization (and incidentally proves the universe had a beginning also). So he is actually Bill Nye the "anti-science guy" in this instance.

Tim Hendrickson
February 6, 2015

Yes, Cory. I could not agree more. Also, though, don't forget that we can't expect the Bible to provide the kind of scientific information some try to find in it because that would have required its recorders to understand the world in ways they could not possibly have, not only because they did not have the knowledge, but also because they did not have had the language to express that knowledge.

September 19, 2015

In Reply to 2cortenfour (comment #26926)
Hey Mr. "Anti-Science Guy":

The 1st Law of Thermodynamics proves you wrong. According to the 1st Law, energy is neither created nor destroyed, but simply changes form. All organisms require energy (a.k.a. food) for survival and reproduction. The potential energy stored in food is ultimately transformed into usable forms of energy, such as kinetic energy. Unfortunately, no energy transformation is perfectly efficient, so some of it ends up as unusable heat (disorder). But here's the thing: just because the universe is heading towards a heat death, does NOT preclude the existence of complex and orderly systems.

I realize you are just trying to disprove life arising "on its own", but the side effect of your argument is that ordered systems (and hence life) do not exist at all!

I know you didn't intend this. Science still doesn't have a definitive answer on the subject, but neither does your faulty logic.

January 20, 2016

In reply to Josh:
It doesn't make sense to say that the first law of thermodynamics disproves the law of entropy. They are both consistent laws. 2cortenfour stated what the law of entropy is and you claimed the 1st law disproves it. This is not true. The second law is an empirical finding accepted as an axiom of thermodynamic process.

Add your comment to join the discussion!