The October Awake on Creation/Evolution!

by Gill 29 Replies latest watchtower beliefs

• 

  fullofdoubtnow

  It can't be the word of god if you constantly have to re-explain what it is 'supposed' to mean every time reality proves the old explanation wrong. When the "TRUTH" has to constantly undergo revision, it isn't really truth, is it? But, to admit the nature of such "Truth" is to deny themselves authority, and that is something they never want to do.

  Dave, that sums the wts up perfectly. It seems whenever time is running out on something they have said "must" happen, they come up with "new light" as an excuse to adjust their thinking, and the rest of the jws have to accept it, or be disciplined. They have been getting away with this trick for so long now, and it works every time, so why stop now? Some might question it, but the majority won't (daren'0 even think of doing so.
• 

  M.J.

  Not to mention that this day-age explanation means that disease, bloodshed, natural disasters, and death were very much en vogue before Adam even came on the scene.
• 

  Gill

  The WTBTS also mocks the possibility of life coming from innanimate things - would one call the dust of the earth inanimate? And yet it sees nothing wrong with God apparantly blowing life into inanimate soil. Another way of looking at that would be power/electricity/life force (whatever that might be) creating a living cell.

  It says in its 'What is Evolution?' section

  'One definition of 'evolution' is: 'A process of change in a certain direction.' However, the term is used in several wauys. For example, it is used to describe big changes in inanimate things - the development of the universe. In addition, the term is used to describe small changes in living things - the way plants and animals adapt to their environment. The word is most commonly used, though, to describe the theory that life arose from inanimate chemicals, formed into self replicating cells, and slowly developed into more and more complex creatures, with man being the most intelligent of its productions. This third notion is what is meant by the term 'evolution' as used in this article'

  So, the WTBTS are not happy with the notion that life could come from inanimate things. How would they explain God making Adam then, as explained in Genesis?
• 

  Quandry

  I do not have access to any of the WT literature anymore. It seems that after years of my husband's being an elder, when we quit going, no one wondered whether we had mags or wanted them or not.

  Anyway, my question is--does the reasoning still hold to each day being 7,000 years long as they had previoulsly insisted for years? I never understood how all life on earth-whether vegetation or animal-could be instituted within 49,000 years.

  Did they mention dinosaurs or early man?

  How was Moses (or anyone else) looking up and seeing the early days of creation from the vantage point of the earth when this was several thousand years before man's creation-as we all know, 1975 marked 6,000 years of man's existence on earth (of course it also was the date of the end, but I digress).....
• 

  Gill

  It appears to me that the WTBTS has meandered away from the belief that one creative day was 7000 years. They seem to have an indefinite approach and are non specific as to what one day may be now.

  I'll reread this section and get back to you on this.
• 

  Satanus

  Gill

  It appears to me that the WTBTS has meandered away from the belief that one creative day was 7000 years.

  Since their 1914/end of the world and incoming paradise is all built on the 7000 yr creative day concept, if they dump it, that means that what is based on it falls into ruin as there is no foundation for it.

  S
• 

  Gill

  Page 19

  How Long Were the Creative Days?

  What about the length of the creative days? Were they literally 24 hours long? Some claim that because Moses - the write of Genesis - later referred to the day that followed the six creative days as a model for the weekly Sabbath, eacho of the creative days must have been 24 hours long. EX 20:11 Does the wording of Genesis support this conclusion?

  No, it does not. The fact is that the Hebrew word translated 'day' can mean various lengths of time, not just a 24 hour period. For example, when summarizing God's creative work, Moses refers to all six creative days as one day. Gen 2:4 In addition on the first creative day, 'God began calling the light Day, but the darkness he called Night'. Gen 1:5 Here, only a portion of a 24 hour period is defined by the term 'day'. Certainly, there is no basis in Scripture for arbitrarily stating that each creative day was 24 hours long.

  How long, then, were the creative days? The wording of Genesis chapters 1 and 2 indicates that considerable lengths of time were involved.'

  There it is! More New Light! No mention of their former standing on one day being 7000 years long.

  It has been quietly dropped and brushed under the carpet!
• 

  Gill

  Satanus! There's the proof for you that it IS well and truly dumped. One day is no longer 7000 years.

  Oh dear WTBTS! What have you done? Perhaps you should never have bothered with trying to get involved with the evolution/creation debate!

  Foot of WTBTS well and truly in Mouth of WTBTS!!!
• 

  Gill

  Quandy - I need to read up on the early man or dinosaurs bit to see if there's any mention.

  However, they do actually make quite a fuss about interviewing a Roman Catholic Scientist! That's an interesting one. Will get back after feeding the starving kids ....before they start chewing on me!
• 

  moshe

  
  With all the shows on TV it would be hard for a JW to be totally ignorant about the Evolution/intelligent design debate going on.

  The thing that should be of paramount interest to a JW is the unbroken record of ice cores from Greenland and Antarctica going back several hundred thoudand years. This alone calls into question their creation timetables. DNA analysis has also traced modern men back to their origins in Africa 100,000 years ago. Their are so many questions that inquiring JW minds want answered, but are never talked about. The WT always reverts to knocking down a strawman of their own construction to win the argument in the end.