User Name:

Password:

FAQ Donate Join

Comparative Religion
Influks video with the "Sun and Moon caller."

I watched your video segment - http://www.influks.com/post1487.html - I would like to first say that I am a Baptist Christian. Although I do not agree with your religious views I can respect them and you. I also agree with you that science has proven itself time and again and that it is a good foundation. That called also was quite ignorant, it's people like him who are very passionate, but not knowledgeable, that give other Christians bad names. As for that video, the point that my God is trying to make by not proving himself is a test of faith. Being the creator of the heavens and the earth, man and all life on the planet, yes he should be able to very easily prove himself time and again, (which he has many time in the bible). However after the crucifiction of his son the only way to get into heaven was through Jesus, times changed, standards changed, God himself changed, he was no longer the ruthless, vengful, angry God, he was now kind, and forgiving. He no longer felt the need to prove himself, the "new standard" was if you want into heaven, show me blind faith. Yes, many wars have been started over religion, and some incredibly stupid religious reasons too (i.e. the 100 year war Catholic and Protastants over a name?!) However, science has also caused quite a few porblems themselves, (i.e. the Earth being the center of the universe/galaxy, the earth being round, medical science, alchamey (iron to gold)) I feel the main reason for ANY faith, is that (here's where your fear comes in) if you lead a good and MORAL life here on earth, you'll be rewarded in the afterlife, is christianity the true religion? I don't know. I like to believe so. Is there a true religion? I have to believe that there is, I have a much harder time believing that the entire, endless universe was a freak accident. This is the main reason that I'm writing you today. I'm not trying to convert you into a christian, but there has to be a higher being out there that started it all. (Here's a little proof of the existance of A god. Next time you go to a Dr. ask him how a human eyeball exists, how it's formed and created during a fetus' developmental stage, why are the majority of eyesballs (except for color) all the same? Being a ball of fluid, the potential for a mutation, disformity should be pretty great, yet everytime all the veins and innards are right where they're supposed to be.

Mitch Metcalf Fjord83@yahoo.com

Hi, Mitch, Just a couple of comments; first, don't post your email address to message boards! You will get hammered with SPAM. (Trust me on this one.)

Second, an MD, even an eye specialist, may not be the right person to ask how the human eye developed to its current configuration, but there are large numbers of scientists who understand this in excruciating detail. They would tell you (if you asked them) that the eye is referred to as a "neat trick" of evolution, as they have developed independently several times in similar manner, but with somewhat different results. The human eye is not even close to the best!

The eye has frequently been put forward as something just too complicated to have evolved…but it did. This is not a mystery, but is really pretty clearly understood. You will not hear the truth of this in church, but the answers are available if you want to look.

Regards, bfa

I would also add that the statement that something is too complex to have evolved is as meaningless as saying the odds of life in the universe is too astronomically small to have happened without a designer.

We don't know what the limits of evolution are. We don't know how to calculate odds of life in a unviverse that extends beyond our ability to measure. The statements presume we know what the odds of life occurring are, and we don't; or that we know what the limit of evolution is, and we don't.

Nobody knows what evolution "can't do"--and nobody knows what the odds of life in the universe are. There's no way, at present, anyone could make such claims with any validity; since information required is currently lacking.

So, you're a Baptist and you believe that God changed? What about Hebrews 13:8, Malachi 3:6 and other verses that refute this?

Why does God consider blind faith to be a good thing? Why does he place us in a world where investigation is the most consistent path to truth - and then expect us to believe in some "ultimate" truth based on blind faith?

You wrote: "This is the main reason that I'm writing you today. I'm not trying to convert you into a christian, but there has to be a higher being out there that started it all."

No, there doesn't. There must be an explanation for everything and that includes the state-change at the event horizon of the big bang - but there's no justification for making claims about the nature of that explanation. You simply assert that it's an intelligent being, but there's no reason to assume this and the assumption of an intelligence preceding the current state of the universe is illogical and contradicts everything we understand about reality.

You wrote: "(Here's a little proof of the existance of A god. Next time you go to a Dr. ask him how a human eyeball exists, how it's formed and created during a fetus' developmental stage, why are the majority of eyesballs (except for color) all the same? Being a ball of fluid, the potential for a mutation, disformity should be pretty great, yet everytime all the veins and innards are right where they're supposed to be."

Have actually asked a doctor this? I'd be avoiding any doctor that agrees with your argument as they clearly don't understand the basics of human physiology. The eyeball argument (in all of its forms) is one of the weakest argument for the existence of God. It exploits the ignorance of the general public.

Visit: http://www.talkorigins.org/indexcc/CB/CB301.html

And, on a related note, why would you worship something that you believe used to be "ruthless, vengful, angry"?

You sound like a battered wife, "Yes, he used to be a horrible person, but he's much more loving now and he's promised it'll stay this way."

Your new and improved God doesn't get a pass for his former actions. Moving from 'morally bankrupt' to 'morally corrupt' isn't much of an improvement.

I read up on your link. One of the last sentences "Nilsson and Pelger (1994) calculated that if each step were a 1 percent change, the evolution of the eye would take 1,829 steps, which could happen in 364,000 generations." I find it hard to believe that for 364,000 generations (7,280,000 years) people (or in your opinion early decendents of homosapiens) went around w/o the sense of sight. Now I'm expecting the "They wern't always blind" defence ok sure, I'll buy that but 7.2 Million years ago (before there was even life on this plant) when the eye was in early stages of evolutionary development, I'd imagine that they couldn't see very well if at all and would be prone to walking off cliffs, or into the mouths of predators, etc... regardless they would more than likely be killing themselves off left and right. And by the way, the internet is an AWFUL place to look for evidence supporting your claim. You will ALWAYS be able to find someone with documentation to support your theory. Here's the skin and bones of my arguement. I say God exists, you say he doesn't. I say the only being able to prove a negitive is God, do you disagree with me there too? You want me to believe that he doesn't exist, then prove it. Prove the negitive. And as far a having "battered wife syndrome" I've done more than enough to exclude my inclusion into heaven when the rapture comes, so if he's still willing to forgive me and let me into those pearly gates, I think I can forgive him for ridding the world of sinners and heathens.

Fjord83:

Eyes evolved many times independently, but they did not evolve once for each species. 7,280,000 years is not terribly long when you've considering a span of about 3,500,000,000 years (which is about how long ago the initial conditions of life got into motion). Relatively simple life forms had already evolved visual systems before there were animals like us that had to worry about "walking off cliffs". You try to spin a scenario in which evolution occurred, but you assume that the environment (and the organisms in it) remain static - you beg the question before your "argument" even begins.

As for proving a negative, that is a most childish request (in the same way that a child wants an adult to "make everything better" - an impossible standard that isn't even necessary). If we cannot disprove your god, then you cannot disprove Allah, Thor, the Easter Bunny, Santa Claus, and the little invisible gremlin that lives in your nasal cavities. We don't believe in them with very good reason - they are inconsistent with all we know about the world. The same goes for your vengeful Sky Daddy.

Sorry, but no one GAVE Christians a bad name….they EARNED it!

Follow us on:

twitter facebook meetup

blip.tv ustream.tv

From the officers:

The audio and video from Steve Bratteng's July 13th lecture are now available.