The money is in the DVDs!!
Will the Society Ever Print Another Evolution Verse Creation Book?
by frankiespeakin 32 Replies latest watchtower bible
-
-
BurnTheShips
Will the Society Ever Print Another Evolution Verse Creation Book?
My prediction is: Never.
They don't have the mindshare to put together a plausible refutation of evolution over there. At least not anymore. The science has become more established, we have far more powerful gene tools that produce data to verify the theory, and besides, they are only getting stupider on the Tower.
Realizing the Creation book was bunk was my first step out of the Tower.
BTS
-
Farkel
:My prediction is: Never.
:They don't have the mindshare to put together a plausible refutation of evolution over there. At least not anymore. The science has become more established, we have far more powerful gene tools that produce data to verify the theory, and besides, they are only getting stupider on the Tower.
Agreed. However, they won't repudiate their theological idiocy, either. Here's a good example: for decades they taught that each "creative day" was 7,000 years long. You haven't seen 7,000 year creative days mentioned in a long, long time. They now give some vague period of time, like "many thousands of years" when they refer to those time periods.
Ergo, since the 7,000 year creative days teaching has not been repudiated, it is STILL current JW doctrine. It has just been quietly swept into the corners with the hopes that dumbed-down-dumb-dubs will not discover the fact it IS still current doctrine, and of course, all Bible-Based(tm)!
Farkel
-
BurnTheShips
It has just been quietly swept into the corners with the hopes that dumbed-down-dumb-dubs will not discover the fact it IS still current doctrine, and of course, all Bible-Based(tm)!
With JW turnover being as high as it is, a large part of the population will never know unless they start digging up old info.
Toss it down into the memory hole, Winston.
BTS
-
DrJohnStMark
Farkel: You haven't seen 7,000 year creative days mentioned in a long, long time. They now give some vague period of time, like "many thousands of years" when they refer to those time periods.
But never "millions of years" or even "perhaps millions of years" or more? Always just "thousands" whenever some time scale is given? If so, they know they're lying and covering up... do not want more noise on 1975, may be that simple. When was the most recent "thousands of years" in WT publications?
-
Farkel
:But never "millions of years" or even "perhaps millions of years" or more? Always just "thousands" whenever some time scale is given?
Right, but that is part of the typical WTS practice of gradualism. In time, it will be "perhaps tens of thousands of years", and eventually will be taught using a longer, but vague term like "eons" or "many millennia." The WTS is too smart to scuttle the doctrine by immediately referring to periods of time immensely longer than 7,000 years.
Farkel
-
DrJohnStMark
Farkel: The WTS is too smart to scuttle the doctrine by immediately referring to periods of time immensely longer than 7,000 years.
But they still continue to say "thousands of years"? Unnecessary, it seems. They might simply say that the creative days were "long" and let the those for whom it is important dig up more details in their bookshelf.
-
Farkel
Dr.JohnStMark,
Here is a quote and the link from my friend Alan Feuerbacher. He is probably the best researcher on JWs and science there is.
http://corior.blogspot.com/2006/02/for-friend.html
Oddly enough, those who determine WTS doctrine have abandoned this teaching for internal purposes. That's why the teaching about 7,000 year creative days has seen no affirmation in WTS literature since 1987. Instead the writers make statements about the creative days lasting "millennia". However, when individual Jehovah's Witnesses are questioned about what "millennia" means, they almost always go back to the latest specific statements from 1987, and decide that "millennia" means "7,000 years". Discussions on the witnesses.net forum, in the now-defunct "Bible Research" forum, prove that this is what most JWs do.
Farkel
-
Cadellin
The "Creation" book is a "theocratic" embarassment that is still, to my amazement, being published. They just put a new paperback cover on it. Discovering the many botched quotations was what initially opened my eyes--and caused enormous pain, because I couldn't believe the Society would be so dishonest or stupid or both.
I agree that it's unlikely they will publish anything like it--I think the Writing Dept. knows it can't take on evolution science-wise. The most recent stuff ("Was it Designed" in the Awake, and the new DVD) relies on incredulity to promote Intelligent Design ("How could anything so amazing/complex/intricate happen by chance?")and emotional persuasion ("Such a wonderful/caring/loving God..."). It makes me fume to see them play the "chance" card--anyone with even a small amount of knowledge about evolution knows that natural selection is NOT chance. And the irony is that they will feature, for instance, the smoothness of shark skin as evidence of design without every discussing exactly WHY God would NEED to design sharks to skim through the water so fast and undetected...or WHY owls are designed to fly at night without making a sound. Remember, all animals were given "vegetation" to eat, according to Genesis!!!
The last attempt to treat evolution in any kind of scientific way was the special September 2006 Awake on the subject where they drew liberally from Jonathon Wells' "Icons of Evolution," a book that has been roundly debunked by the scientific community for its ill presentation of factual information.
-
frankiespeakin
A critical analysis of the scientific material in the book
Life - How did it get here?
By evolution or by creation?