The challenge is fundamentally dishonest. CMI has absolutely no interest in a rational, honest debate. You know how I know this?
Here's how.
(A) PRIORITIES
- The scientific aspects of creation are important, but are secondary in importance to the proclamation of the Gospel of Jesus Christ as Sovereign, Creator, Redeemer and Judge.
- The doctrines of Creator and Creation cannot ultimately be divorced from the Gospel of Jesus Christ.
(B) BASICS
- The 66 books of the Bible are the written Word of God. The Bible is divinely inspired and inerrant throughout. Its assertions are factually true in all the original autographs. It is the supreme authority, not only in all matters of faith and conduct, but in everything it teaches. Its authority is not limited to spiritual, religious or redemptive themes but includes its assertions in such fields as history and science.
- The final guide to the interpretation of Scripture is Scripture itself.
- The account of origins presented in Genesis is a simple but factual presentation of actual events and therefore provides a reliable framework for scientific research into the question of the origin and history of life, mankind, the Earth and the universe.
- The various original life forms (kinds), including mankind, were made by direct creative acts of God. The living descendants of any of the original kinds (apart from man) may represent more than one species today, reflecting the genetic potential within the original kind. Only limited biological changes (including mutational deterioration) have occurred naturally within each kind since Creation.
- The great Flood of Genesis was an actual historic event, worldwide (global) in its extent and effect.
- The special creation of Adam (the first man) and Eve (the first woman), and their subsequent fall into sin, is the basis for the necessity of salvation for mankind.
- Death (both physical and spiritual) and bloodshed entered into this world subsequent to, and as a direct consequence of, man’s sin.
(C) THEOLOGY
- The Godhead is triune: one God, three Persons—God the Father, God the Son, and God the Holy Spirit.
- All mankind are sinners, inherently from Adam and individually (by choice) and are therefore subject to God’s wrath and condemnation.
- Freedom from the penalty and power of sin is available to man only through the sacrificial death and shed blood of Jesus Christ, and His complete and bodily Resurrection from the dead.
- The Holy Spirit enables the sinner to repent and believe in Jesus Christ.
- The Holy Spirit lives and works in each believer to produce the fruits of righteousness.
- Salvation is a gift received by faith alone in Christ alone and expressed in the individual’s repentance, recognition of the death of Christ as full payment for sin, and acceptance of the risen Christ as Saviour, Lord and God.
- All things necessary for our salvation are set down in Scripture.
- Jesus Christ was conceived by the Holy Spirit and born of the virgin Mary.
- Jesus Christ rose bodily from the dead, ascended to Heaven, is currently seated at the right hand of God the Father, and shall return in like manner to this Earth as Judge of the living and the dead.
- Satan is the personal spiritual adversary of both God and man.
- Those who do not believe in Christ are subject to everlasting conscious punishment, but believers enjoy eternal life with God.
(D) GENERAL
The following are held by members of the Boards (Directors) of Creation Ministries International to be either consistent with Scripture or implied by Scripture:
- Scripture teaches a recent origin for man and the whole creation.
- The days in Genesis do not correspond to geologic ages, but are six [6] consecutive twenty-four [24] hour days of Creation.
- The Noachian Flood was a significant geological event and much (but not all) fossiliferous sediment originated at that time.
- The view, commonly used to evade the implications or the authority of Biblical teaching, that knowledge and/or truth may be divided into ‘secular’ and ‘religious’, is rejected.
- Facts are always subject to interpretation by fallible people who do not possess all information. By definition, therefore, no interpretation of facts in any field, including history and chronology, can be valid if it contradicts the scriptural record.
This is their
statement of faith. They hold
on faith that they cannot be wrong. They state outright that scientific inquiry comes second to spreading the gospel message and all that that entails. If you take it
on faith that your position cannot possibly be wrong, an open and frank debate is a complete waste of everyone's time, because even if the scientists are willing to argue honestly and adjust their views based on the evidence (which they do, consistently), the creationists are fundamentally unable or unwilling to do so.
What's more, the format of a structured debate is ill-suited to scientific discourse. Ever heard of a "Gish Gallop"? It's a technique which essentially
breaks the debate format, in which one side makes about a dozen completely bogus points in two minutes, all of which
sound somewhat reasonable, and which would each take time to rebut which simply is not there. This is just one obvious dishonest tactic which
wins debates. It does this because the winner of a formal debate is not the one with the facts on their side, and not the one with the knowledge. It's the one who is able to come across strongest to a lay audience without any significant understanding of the subject. This is why debating a creationist is such a bad idea: scientists are usually not orators by profession. Preachers
are. Why do you think Nye vs. Ham went so well for Nye? Because Nye is a trained public speaker and he went on the offensive, actively challenging, rather than passively rebutting the nonsense Ham spewed.
If such a debate were to happen, I think it more fitting that it take place where scientific matters are more commonly discussed:
in the scientific literature. In fact, that's a debate creationists are welcome to have literally
whenever they want to! It's really simple, and anyone can start it up. Find some legitimate evidence that contradicts the theory of evolution, put together a thesis based on this, and start submitting it to journals. Any creationist with any interest in doing this in the last 50-odd years has been completely free to do so. Creation Ministries Internatonal could have this debate the very moment they find some legitimate evidence against evolution or an old earth and present it for peer review.
Science is not generally resolved via formal debates in
any situation. The fact that CMI thinks that this is an applicable example merely shows their ignorance.
Let's just cap this off with a few words from someone you might be familiar with:
"When the debate is with someone like a Young Earth creationist, as the late Stephen Gould pointed out – they've won the moment you agree to have a debate at all. Because what they want is the oxygen of respectability," Dawkins told Seth Andrews of "The Thinking Atheist" in a recently-published interview about his latest book, An Appetite for Wonder.
"They want to be seen on a platform with a real scientist, because that conveys the idea that here is a genuine argument between scientists," Dawkins continued. "They may not win the argument – in fact, they will not win the argument, but it makes it look like there really is an argument to be had."
"Just as I wouldn't expect a gynecologist to have a debate with somebody who believes in the Stork-theory of reproduction, I won't do debates with Young Earth creationists," he said.
Or, as one of Dawkins's colleagues put it when challenged by a creationist:
"That would look great on
your CV, not so good on mine!"