Bill Nye Part III: Ignorant About Ignorance

The Christian and biblical belief about life is that it begins at conception. Although this can be arrived at both logically and scientifically, the Bible is the highest authority for all men and is the only infallible and inerrant source of truth for men to draw from. Thus, its testimony is valuable.
And the Bible seems to suggest life at conception:

Psalm 51: 5 “Surely I was sinful at birth, sinful from the time my mother conceived me.”

That’s David’s testimony above. David can’t be a sinner if David doesn’t exist. David can’t be a sinner if David isn’t David.

Another clear testimony of Scripture is the fact that Jesus only took on human flesh. He never took on flesh from another physical being. Thus, if the zygote is not human, Jesus took on another flesh, and that’s heresy. Jesus was a person from conception to birth, as was David.

However, Nye has a bizarre objection to this claim. His objection is that conceived eggs are passed. In other words, humans at their youngest possible stage of development die naturally.

Nye’s objection:

“If the standard is fertilization (conception), whom are you going to sue when eggs are naturally lost when not attached to the uterine wall?”

This is ignorance. It’s also a straw-man. Who would we sue?

We would sue the same person we sue when a tsunami takes lives.
We would sue the same person we sue when a senior citizen dies in their sleep.
We would sue the same person we would sue when a heart attack takes someone to the Lord.
We would sue the same person we sue when someone dies of cancer.
The person we sue: No one.

No one has ever claimed that in order to define person-hood, someone is always accountable for a person’s death. Natural causes kill people, and no Christian has ever demanded “justice” for that.

To equate sticking tools in a women’s vagina, ripping baby heads off, tearing limbs apart, sucking brains out with vacuums, or burning flesh with acid to eggs naturally being passed is asinine and absurd…from a science guy too.

Since the dawn of man there has always been a recognized distinction between a person dying (an egg not latching to the uterine wall) and a person dying from an intentional decision made from another (taking abortion pills). Anyone who doesn’t see the logic there needs to decide if there is a difference between someone dying in a car accident because they were hit by a drunk driver, and someone dying in a car accident because they were drunk and hit a tree. In both cases someone died in a car. In only one case is someone morally responsible for the death.

Have no fear, for the ignorant straw man is followed up with more ignorance through the rhetoric of a powerful non-sequitur:

“Your interpretation of a book written 5,000 years ago makes you think that when a man and a women have sexual intercourse they always have a baby, that’s wrong.”

Has the Bible ever been more misrepresented? Call this what it is: this is stupid. I would venture to say it could be the most stupid thing a public intellectual has said about the Bible in the last 50 years.

I preached a sermon about Jacob and Rachel not too long ago, and one of the major events of the plot was Rachel’s inability to get pregnant.

When has ANY Christian claimed that the Bible teaches that two people who have intercourse always conceive? Show me one group of Christians protesting a Planned Parenthood holding that sign. Show me one credible Christian blog post that has ever claimed that. Show me one study bible, commentary, or any other Christian resource that claims that.

How does that straw-man-ignorance-fest even apply to the argument on either side? Even if that were what we believed, what’s the point?

I have no idea where that comment came from. And it’s so silly, it’s left me almost no time to address the modern snobbery and logical fallacy of characterizing “the book” as being 5,000 years old.

1) Many of the books in the Bible are much younger than that.

2) It is an insane logical fallacy to imply something isn’t true because it’s old. That means Nye’s video gets more untrue by the second. It’s also hubris to discredit people from ages past as being wrong about reality simply because they didn’t exist 1,000 years later.

3) That presupposes what can’t be proved: God is not the author of the Bible.

It has also left me with no time to point out the not so subtle trick of throwing in the “your interpretation” claim. He stole this argument from the likes of Rome, Salt Lake, and Brooklyn; he should have left it there. This quip is tossed over fences like a grenade, yet, the assailants have plugged their ears too hard and curled up in the fetal position too tightly to recognize they don’t go bang.

Nye has to interpret everything. We live in a world we interpret. If we must discredit an authority or belief because it must be interpreted, if we must be forced into agnosticism about a claim of reality that must be interpreted, than we must be weary of accepting that very belief, because it was interpreted.

Anything Bill says must be interpreted. Thus, apparently, the Science he interprets, and the scientific information his listening audiences interpret from him don’t need to have veil of doubt gently blanketed over them, but since we must interpret the Scriptures, we must admit we can’t know what they teach objectively.

And the science guy refutes himself again.

Bill is a glutton for ignorance, and he then adds on to his ignorance by spewing more of it:

“[There’s a lot] of European men passing laws based on ignorance.”

Most of our laws were passed by white men; many of which Bill accepts. Their gender has no correlation to their ability to pass laws. This culture is obsessed with racism and sexism. One would expect a man who boasts in objectivity to be above that kind of mongering.

Yet, the issue here is none of these laws against abortion are based on what Nye claims they are: that Christians believe every single time two people have sex a child is conceived.

Thus, Bill has officially become the most ignorant man in this issue publicly, and that happened while calling his opponents ignorant. How ironic is it that a man vomiting claims of ignorance toward us is so blatantly ignorant about us?

Bill has refuted himself so many times that it’s hard to keep count. I thought Christians were supposed to be the hypocrites…

But don’t worry, more is yet to come:

You wouldn’t know how big a human egg was if it wasn’t for microscopes or scientists.

Bill then makes the ignorant leap across a chasm with no other side in sight. This leap of logic is truly extraordinary, and Atheists don’t even believe in the supernatural.

He then links our belief that life begins at conception to the equivalent thought of thinking science has not offered us any help, and that, apparently, we don’t believe in microscopes.

“You wouldn’t know how big a human egg was if it wasn’t for microscopes or scientists.”


What’s the point?

The real issue here is that the microscopes have helped our cause. It’s the science that has validated what that “5,000 year old book” has been saying. The science is on our side.

This is most readily demonstrated in the silence of this video. This video lacks one thing from the science guy, and we need to notice it.

What Nye did not provide was an alternative. He ignorantly misrepresented Christians and told them they were wrong about the science of life, but he was not able to provide the answer in return. He was not able to tell us when life begins. He didn’t even try. He can’t. He doesn’t actually care.

So much for that microscope rant.

Author: Resisting the Winds

I am a sinner redeemed by grace alone, through faith alone, in Christ alone, to the glory of God. I am a local church expositor, living in the small but beautiful town of Alamosa, Colorado.

Leave a Reply