2. Mr. Xís "Wow" Letter
[Note: I have attempted to reproduce Mr. Xís letter in its original form, including punctuation, spelling, etc. When Mr. X. talks about "your book," he is referring to a rather lengthy rebuttal document that I prepared in 1995 in response to a pro-creationist seminar that had been presented locally by a Rev. Knepper. Unfortunately, that document is no longer available in electronic format.]
Dear Mr. De Baun,
"Wow" is probably the best word I could use when I opened your package. While I might enjoy a debate such as you vs. Knepper I will refrain from that. In your letter (page 1), you mention the typical creationist and that his "rejection of evolution is firmly grounded in fervently held religious beliefs". Since I was raised in a Catholic school for 9 years and was taught traditional evolution with the graph charts of millions of years, invertebrate that turn into fish etc, I donít fit the typical creationist you envision. Of course I was also taught there, about our immortal soul that might wind up burning forever. Both these horrible doctrines have tainted my whole life. ---So then I go into high school, and 4 more years of the same evolution bull.
How glad I was to find out (though much later) it was not the god of chance that has put us here, and that we do not have immortal souls. I am thankful for the creationists and the S.D.A. church who made the effort to uncover the bunk and outright fraud that I was taught.
What do I mean by outright fraud? I remember the charts of these layers of the earth from supposed ages past to the present time. NEVER once was I told that nowhere on earth is there such a column. Nor did they tell me that in some places some of the column is in a reverse order or that there are places where fossilized trees are standing through many layers, which of course totally invalidates the whole idea. I was shown drawings of a developing fetus and how it resembles the evolution model, thereby proving our ancestors were tadpoles and frogs. But the pictures were t otal [sic] frauds, doctored up to prove their point, I was also shown drawings of the Piltdown man and Nebraska man that were just as bad.
Now let me tell you what true science means to me. Beside [sic] my school training, my science comes from technical magazines, engineering books, Popular Science and the like. I am an extremely careful person in how I plan and do most of my life, and the scientific findings of others, I use to my advantage. For instance: The science of combustion and aerodynamics has enabled me to get exceptional fuel economy from my vehicles. Knowing some science about burning fuels enabled me to modify our home stove to burn newspaper (which was available to me free in large quantities) and the knowledge of heat and water flow helped me build into the stove a water heater that required no pump, thus giving us free heat and hot water. The science of hydrodynamics allowed me to build a 17í boat to commute to work in, that used less than Ĺ the gas of the average factory boat of the same length.
Besides enjoying these things, the money saved over the years because of science, has bought me a sports car, and also has allowed my wife Susan to be an at home wife for the past 30 years. But science is my hobby also. Knowing about light waves etc. has helped me build numerous astronomical telescopes. Practical chemistry, besides helping my motorcycle shop prosper, has allowed me to build composite structures like telescope parts, motorcycle fairings, car parts etc. Knowledge of sound waves I have used to design beautiful sounding musical instruments. Susan also knows quite a bit about nutrition and is able to cook healthy meals that also taste good. Our church has helped us here, putting true science to use.
Why am I saying all this? To let you know how I stand on the science issue, as you have done in your letter to me. I put little value (although I do consider their import) in the opinions of others. For instance in what Pastor Knepper believes. This is especially true of him because he teaches his flock to disregard the the [sic] very memorial [?] of what he is trying to defend. How ironic. For God has told us to memember [sic] and set aside the seventh day of the week to honor His tremendous work of creating this earth and all that is in it in 6 literal days. (See Exodus 20 verses 8-11) While I put more stock in Vance Ferrel [sic], his conclusions means [sic] less to me than the information he has gathered. The 3 books that the Cruncher was taken from is [sic] superior, the Cruncher is like a readers digest.
Now to your book. Let me tell you it was tough to suffer through 80+ pages of arguments against someone I would put little faith in anyway. And not anywhere in there was one scientific fact to prove evolution. You seem to have a vengeance to discredit those who believe in God to where you outright insult them. This is not necessary in the world of science. So, what about this attack? If you start out with wrong premises, and suppositions instead of provable facts your conclusions will be flawed. That is what I find in your book. For one example on page 71 we read: "According to the biblical account, Noahís flood involved a tremendous amount of water Ė enough to completely inundate the earth to highest mountains"Ö"Since the Bible says nothing about the creation of any mountains after the [Flood] (or during it for that matter), it can be inferred that the highest mountains were inexistence [sic] when the water supposedly started receding". The key words: "it can be inferred". If the Bible says the earth was covered with the water we see today, it is quite obvious that the mountains of today were not there when the water covered them. So the "fact" that there is not enough water to do the job is meaningless.
Again you infer the good book says what it does not, typical of false religion. For example page 74 "everything from amoebas and night crawlers to dinosaurs and whales". The Bible is silent about sea creatures in the ark, speaking only of fouls and beasts and creeping things. (Gen 7) What died was [sic] those on "dry ground" in whose "nostrils was the breath of life". There is no need for fish to be in there, the whole world was full of water. And no dinosaurs need be taken on the ark, which would be why they all became extinct in one shot, something that has troubled evolutionists to this day. They were buried to make the fossils and follis [sic] fuel we get out of the earth today.
But page 75 is worse; Here again you make a statement which you pass off as if it is fact, but it is merely speculation. "the ancient HebrewÖ.new [sic] nothing about the true size of the earth". The book of Genesis was written by Moses around 1570 B.C. How could you possibly know what Moses knew or did not know? And animals adapted to what? There were no oceans or polar caps etc. And how hard would it be for God to simply cause the animals to walk or fly or crawl to the ark? It may take a little faith to believe this, but it takes a lot more faith to believe some small hoofed animal went back into the water and turned into a whale, of which I read about in National Geographic.
I assume you believe the guy who wrote the "transitional Vertebrate Fossils". These also are not facts but assumptions. The author p7 even admits that, himself, by saying "I have outlined 5 Possible [sic] models above and have explained why I think some of them are better than others". Is this scientific fact? So what makes me such an expert? I will tell you: SIMPLE PROVABLE OBSERVATION OF FACTS!
FACT: There are billions of people, animals, birds, fish, bugs; and untold number of fossils of the same. And every one has the proper munber [sic] of eyes, legs, stomachs, organs, ears, skin, fur, or whatever, that the creature needs.
None have eyes under their armpits or lungs attached to their kidneys as random chance would have it.
FACT: There are NO transitional fossils where there should be hundreds of thousands of them. Archeopteryx is a poor excuse and he may even be another fraud.
FACT: Even on the bottom strata are creatures like the trilobites as complete specimens with perfect complex eyes etc.
One day this fall I was driving to work, with the autumn colors all about me. In the distance I could see a straight line, perhaps a mile long, of almost pure yellow. You can bet that a road creator was there, causing a clearing for the brighter colored trees to grow along. When you see the inside of a computor [sic] with parts connected to the proper diodes or whatever you know that inteligent [sic] creativity was here. So when I see that my eyes are perfectly connected to a most marvelous computor [sic] my ears are connected perfectly and do their job, taste buds are in my mouth and not in my feet, tears moistion [sic] eyes and not liver bile, I KNOW that no chance thing can do this.
And what about life begining [sic] at all? In the dark ages people believed if you left a piece of meat long enough, life (maggot s) would just spring into being. Evolutionists have never left the dark ages for they still teach the same thing. Just leave some stuff around long enough and life will spring into being. But they must have doubt about this, for I read of a martian rock that may have brought life here or that it came in on a comet. You (nor anyone else for that matter) has ever seen life just start up from anything non living and then reproduce itself. It takes faith for you to believe in this; the same kind of faith it takes for me to believe in a God that I have not seen.
You put Christianity at odds with science, which I donít know where you get that from, not from history I assure you. At my motorcycle shop I have a working model engine that you just heat up the cylinder turn the crank once and it purrs away. You should stop by and see it. It is a fascinating engine and no one that has seen it run can figure out how it works. Yet it was invented by a Scottish minister in the late 1700ís. The nations that have grasped Christianity have always been in the lead of scientific advancement, as opposed to the heathen nations of Africa, India, South America, etc.
Remember my personal practical science approach? Things should be to my benefit. So, let us for a moment assume evolutionists are correct, and I convert over and believe in evolutionism. What gain is there in it for me, or anyone else? NOTHING! Then assume for a moment the Bible is correct. What benefit is there in it? Lots, starting right now. Like peace on this earth, knowing an intelligent entity who cares is controlling the stars in their courses. And how about the promise of an eternity of happy healthy living where I can add to my knowledge of God and science with no death to look forward to. There is no comparison.
But in your book I found hidden what could be the thing that set you off on the course you are following, and remember that course has only a dead end. And here I donít fault you, in fact I am in sympathy with you because of my early training. I have had the same thoughts. I will elaborate on this, but let me deal with the other trouble spot you mentioned. The cruel actions of so called Christian churches. The dark ages, the inquisition the witch hunts, including the present battle in Ireland is a blot on Christianity, if ever there was one. The Roman church which is the leader here, is the anti-christ we are warned about in the Bible and still does the devils doing. In the book of Daniel chapter 7, God lays out the order of the nations from Babylon at the time the book was written till the end of the world. Verses 4 to 6 include Babylon, then comes Medo Persia, then Greece. The Roman empire and itís [sic] dividing into the 10 nations is verse 7. The Roman church coming into power in 538 AD destroying 3 of the nations in verse 8. Verse 24 to 26 gives us more details, but the one I want you to think about is verse 25 where "he shall wear out the saints of the most High". Here is the crusades, wars and cruel prison cells used in the name of Christ, but run by Satan.
I would be glad to come over to your house with a history book and Bible, and explain these things or just answer questions you may have on this or the next thing I will write about.
The omniscient God that made a mistake, and the nasty way He deals with it, that is the flood. Of course we must remember we are dealing here with things we may not be able to prove, mainly we were not there when it happened. God claims to be omnipotent and thereby takes the blame for all things, with the exception of sin. In the scriptures He sometimes says He does what He allows to happen. This is done in a number of places but I will show one of them and how I believe God dealt with the flood. Sometimes innocents suffer with the guilty, such as when a pregnant woman drinks booze, her child through not fault of his own may suffer serious learning problems. We cannot understand now why this is allowed, but if faithful to God He will tell us. Anyway , if you have a Bible, open it to 1 Chronicles chap 10. The setting is that Saul grieved away Godís Spirit, and went to a medium to find out the future. Then he went into battle and was wounded, and we see that in verse 4 he committed suicide. But how does the writer of Chronicles put it? Verse 14: "And (Saul) inquired not of the Lord: therefore He (God) slew himÖ" I believe the same thing happened at the flood. The people had grieved away Godís Spirit and therefore His protection. I believe that a comet which the Lord would normally steer aside, was pulled into the outer water canopy, causing it to burst. There is an acted out parable of this principal [sic] with Moses and Pharaoh in Exodus Chapter 7. Verse one says of Moses: "See I have made thee a god to Pharaoh" So Moses represents God and in verse 8 he is told to tell Aaron "Take thy rod and cast it before Pharaoh and it shall become a serpent". And it did happen in verse 10. The implication being that as long as Moses (God) held the rod it was useful, but when he let go, it became deadly. Then because the Pharaoh refused to obey God, He (God) let go of nature and it became nasty, as is detailed through chapter 8. Christ will allow the devil to finish his work of evil to prove to the universe that this way is no good, and God was right all along.
How can we make these "assumptions"? Because Christ only helped and healed people while on the earth, and told the deciples [sic] "If you have seen me you have seen the Father".
While I am no preacher I would love to share these things with you. And it would be fun to have you there in heaven. That way we could both laugh together at some of the things we believed, travel to worlds unknown, and to Orion where Godís throne is.
If nothing else, at least come and visit me at my shop and see my little heat engine run. Looking forward to meeting you again.
Return to A Frank Dialogue with Mr. X