Did you ever feel dissatisfied by the quality of 'proof' from the FDS?

by bohm 21 Replies latest jw friends

• 

  bohm

  Hey!

  I have tried to debate evolution/ark a couple of times with witnesses. Two of these were elders, and one had the benefit of conversing with me over mail; he also showed an interest and knowledge on some scientific subjects that told me he had studied it a bit by himself. (it was him who brought up evolution in a pretty cocky, 'what is it you do not understand', manner).

  The thing is that at every instance it has basically been a rehashing of the same conversation. I have been met with the same wrong arguments taken from "Life, how did it get here?" book as well as various creationist misunderstandings. I have yet to meet a jw who could DEFINE evolution remotely correct.

  Because of this i have never really tried to 'proove' anything. I have never gone into the dirty details regarding birdlike/reptilelike traits of archaeoptoryx, which kind of fossilisation process that may occur over many years and which over few, etc. An example: The other day a guy wrote me and told me a 'proof' man is not created is the fact that we have 46 chromosomes and apes have 46 - you got to have a little background to know why this is funny.

  It is not that the JW arguments against evolution are not supported by evidence, or contradicted by other evidence. I think everybody could live with that situation. It is that most of the time they never had any hope of being true, because they are build on wrong assumptions, misquotations or lies to begin with. I dont understand how a person can be sattisfied when the FDS, Gods own chanel, supplies arguments a snotty 20-something years old guy can shoot down by saying "well, it would indeed be critical if evolutionist didnt have any theory of how emotions could have evolved, but they do and they have had for 50 years, just google it!".

  It is my impression that Jehovahs Witnesses in general care a lot for the truth (not only with a capital T). They believe they have found it, they are proud they have done so, and when they fearlessly jump in to defend creationism, they do so because they truly believe the Creation book and the litterature have supplied them with scienfically sound arguments, and that being right will negate whatever knowledge the other party may have.
  What i am trying to understand is what mental process is triggered when it turns out that the other party not only have strong arguments, but are able to pick apart Gods own chancel's arguments one by one as being riddled with errors.

  What did you do? Did you just shrug it off as yourself not having enough understanding of the FDS's arguments? That satan was pulling the strings? That the FDS was 'dumbing down' things to make it easier for some to understand?
• 

  JWoods

  I have told it here several times before - but a Circuit Overseer once told me in all seriousness that the reason the Dinosaurs were made by God was to provide petroleum. He said it ON THE PLATFORM -

  I got him to the side later, explained that while there might be a miniscule amount of Dino guts in crude oil, it was really undefined organic material likely much like from what coal or natural gas was formed, etc...

  He looked at me like I was a lunatic, and told me that the ultimate proof was that the Sinclair Oil Company had a big green DINOSAUR on their signs.

  When I later resigned as an Elder (to pursue my own goals, which was to get the hell out of this cult) - to this same ridiculous C.O. - he did not know what the word "monolithic" meant when I told him that I thought the society had become monolithic post 1975.

  This is the supreme logic we are dealing with. The FDS writers are equally clueless. BTW - this little twerp's name was Bennett; some others here knew him back in the 1970s, early 1980s. I think he has passed on now without, of course, seeing anything come to pass except Ray Franz leaving.
• 

  leavingwt

  WT had so effectively poisoned the well, I would essentially turn my brain off when reading scientific material that contradicted my WT worldview. I would say to myself, "Those stupid, mislead scientists. They are tools of the Devil."

  At a very personal level, JWs are taught that doubts = disloyalty. As such, a JW is literally afraid to entertain thoughts contradictory to WT dogma, out of fear of being disloyal.
• 

  leavingwt

  He looked at me like I was a lunatic, and told me that the ultimate proof was that the Sinclair Oil Company had a big green DINOSAUR on their signs.

  LOL!

  That is comedy gold. Thank you for sharing that one.
• 

  Outaservice

  They would often quote something/someone but usually never give the reference material information so as to check it out for yourselves. So, yes, I was quite dissatisfied with any proof.

  Outaservice
• 

  JWoods

  LeavingWT, this same guy also devoted almost his whole Saturday evening talk during a CO visit to the notion that we were feeding the kids processed foods (including the evil processed wheat starch and sugar).

  He could tell this by observing that many of the kids in the cong were unruly, squirming about during his fascinating speeches. He went on to lecture on his personal diet by going to all natural foods, vegatables mostly, and that this had cured him of diabetes. Yes, from the platform.

  Someone here on the board sadly told us that they heard he actually passed on a while back from largely uncontrolled diabetes. It is laughable, but also often tragically sad, to go through life in such delusion.
• 

  neverendingjourney

  What did you do? Did you just shrug it off as yourself not having enough understanding of the FDS's arguments? That satan was pulling the strings? That the FDS was 'dumbing down' things to make it easier for some to understand?

  To be fair, when I bought into the JW belief system, I was 15 years old. This was back in the mid 90s when the internet was in its infancy and not widely available. I couldn't simply google "Life. How did it get here? By evolution or creation?" and read a critique of the arguments presented therein.

  To a sophmore in high school, the arguments presented in that book were solid. I lived in an echo chamber of like-minded individuals who encouraged those beliefs. Any non-JWs who disagreed either lacked the knowledge or the desire to argue with me. Once I took the bait, it wasn't easy to go back. The JW belief system taught that we were imperfect men and could easily be led astray by Satan the Devil. After all, he had been able to lead perfect people astray.

  Therefore, I refused to entertain any information that contradicted official JW doctrine. If the Society said that Noah's ark had enough room in it to hold sufficient "types" of animals to produce the diversity of wildlife available today, I accepted it. The Society had demonstrated their credibility to me by "debunking" a myriad of "false doctrines." If something didn't make perfect sense, I reasoned that science was a work in progress. Science books of 50 years ago contained many ideas that were considered wrong by today's standards. I felt that, over time, new scientifice discoveries would result in scientific theories more in line with what the Bible taught.

  I don't know what would have happened had the internet been widely available around the time I decided to embrace JWism. I did research JWs from the material that was available to me at the time. I went into my high school library and read encyclopedia entries about them. This wasn't of much use. One of them, I remember, was written by Fred Franz. The library didn't have copies of Crisis of Conscience or similar books written by XJWs. Even if it had, I'm sure they would have been stolen and dumped in the garbage by zealous JWs.

  It's no use crying over spilled milk now. I took the bait and paid for by giving the WTBTS my teenage years and early 20s. I disregarded evidence that the JWs didn't in fact have the truth until it was just too much to bear. When the time came, I allowed myself to entertain the doubts that I had discarded earlier in my life, and it all began to make sense. When I finally got to the point where I felt comfortable reading material critical of the WT, my doubts were validated, and I crossed the point of no return. It's not an easy place to get to. The WTBTS does a very good job of convincing adherent to reject anything critical of "the organization."
• 

  cantleave

  I knew the arguments in the Life book were unable to stand up to scrutiny, but I wanted to belive in a God. By believing in a god I could continue to have hope of everlasting life in a paradise earth, a hope that my mother instilled into me from birth. I wanted to see my grandfather again, I wanted to see earth restored to its natural balance, those desires led me to ignore what I knew was wrong. I feel such a fool now, the evidence for natural selection and the testament of the fossil record are such powerful indicators of an evolutionary process, how could I have ever tried to state the contrary.

  The really sad thing is I have passively watched the earth being ruined, I never protested, when I should have raised my voice, because Jehovah would make it right. I am now determined to make my voice heard, I going to get involved in the political processes and I am going to exert my right to peaceful protest and do whatever I can to protect this planet for my children.
• 

  bohm

  LEAVINGWT: Actually, on several occasions i have taken myself in doing something similar when i read long 'proofs' of doctrines like 607: I stop to think because i 'know' it is wrong and just look for flaws.. strange it is so easy to fall pray to such a crappy attitude.

  JWOODS: A lady recently told me another theory of why God created dinosaurs. Apparently, they were made so they could stomp around and fertelize the ground with their dead bodies so that other animals could live on it. I asked her how the dinosours could find food on a earth if they had to die to make it fertile, and that confused her so much she told me that the creation story was written in a way people at the time would understand. I didnt press the subject. I think the experience with the CO cannot be told to many times :-D .

  NEVERENDINGJOURNEY: First off, i think i would have been an EXCELENT jw. Secondly, even with a BS degree in physics and a very skeptical attitude, the arguments in Life: How did it get here was pretty convincing to me. I mean, i didnt buy all of it, but i remember putting it down and thinking: "Damn, didnt know there was so much stuff about evolution we didnt know, these creationists have a pretty good case". So my question is only what the mental process is if one eg. meet a biologist in field service who take his time listening to the arguments and present contrary evidence - im trying to understand it, so i can become better at asking questions that actually provoke thought.
• 

  OUTLAW

  "Believe us or Else!"..

  Was never a very impressive arguement with me..

  .............................OUTLAW