JWs: not creationists but believe in creation... (page 3)

SuperBoy

My understanding of creationists has always been that they believe in literal 24 hour creative days.

AnnOMaly

It's classic Orwellian double-think.

JWs say they abstain from blood, but they take from blood (in fractionated form);

JWs say they don't follow human leaders, but they follow the Governing Body's lead (w.10, 9/15, pp. 21, 23);

JWs say they are not creationists, but they believe the universe was created.

Your dad can't back down even on this no-brainer, trivial matter. If he admits he's wrong on this, he'll also have to admit the Org's wrong on this and he senses where that could lead. You've more than adequately made your point. Having been confronted with the glaringly obvious, once your JW insists that black is white, you've gone as far as you can for the present. It's time to smile knowingly and change the subject.

AnnOMaly

Suggestion for future discussions with your dad. Ask questions. Get your dad to explain himself. Questions can be less threatening. And keep a sense of humor.

E.g. something like this:

"How can it be that JWs believe in creation but they deny they are creationists?"

"Ah creationists believe God created everything in 6 24-hour days and JWs don't believe that."

"But you're describing Young Earth creationists. Are you aware other types of creationists exist? Can't JWs be classified as Old Earth creationists?"

"No. JWs are not creationists."

"I don't understand. The dictionary and encyclopedia definitions say creationism means [blah, blah]. JW beliefs fall within that description, don't they?"

"The dictionaries and encyclopedias have it wrong."

"ROFL! Really? What do you think the proper definition should be?"

[Allow response.]

"LOL. Maybe you should write in and correct them, dad. You're a hoot. Hey, let's meet up for lunch."

bohm

I think you should have made less assertions and rather asked him questions, that approach has always worked better for me at least. There are three main questions here:

1) What is a creationist (according to him)

2) Is creationism good or bad (watchtower says bad so you can assume that)

3) why is it bad?

He will properly answer item 1 by saying "according to ..." or giving a link to jw.org because thats how all arguments go in la-la land. Ask him what HE believes and get a definition. He will properly go with "someone who believe in 6000 years old universe" but that is contradicted by jw.org as you pointed out, then it is merely a matter of paying attention to what he says and switch between q. 1 and 3 because it is very hard to give consistent answers to those two questions.

designs

The Wt. should not write books on Science or Medicine...

TheStumbler

Hi Superboy,

you are the perfevt test case. After reading me email do you still believe creationism means only Youn-earth creatiomums? I don't want to debate you. I'm just interested in the opinion of someone who believes the same as my dad

thanks

breakfast of champions

I think what is happening here isn't an issue of semantics or what dictionary/encyclopedia says what.

It's a matter of worldview, that is, JWs don't believe they're part of any "-ism" -- period.

Being the only true religon in the universe they operate outside "man's knowledge" with all it's "-isms" and such.

Phizzy

JW's are taught to argue about words and meanings, to deflect a discussion away from actually examining their beliefs.

Do NOT fall in to their trap ! For example, if the point you wish to get over is that they are in a High Control Group that uses the "BITE" method, the very worst way to start off the discussion would be to say "You are in a Cult", what would then ensue would be a huge discussion on the meaning of the word "Cult", after which the JW suddenly cannot discuss further, having proved to you that he is not in what is his definition of a cult.

Waste of time.

The only way to perhaps get through is to ask exactly what their belief is, and then ask them to explain contrary evidence.

For example," I know JW's believe that jehovah created all things, even the first man and woman, when do you believe that occurred ?"

When they squirm and then answer "Around 6,000 yrs ago" say "But something that troubles me is, what are termed Neandrthal men died out at least 35, 000 years ago, and yet most humans carry Neanderthal DNA, how can that be ?"

Or some such similar argument, make them actually defend their silly beliefs, not their definition of words.

Apognophos

I care a lot about words, but I still don't see the point of doggedly arguing over a word definition. There's no chance this will help your father see the light. In fact, there is no such thing as an iron-clad argument to make a JW see TTATT. There's a strange underlying assumption here that Witnesses believe it's the truth for logical reasons. It's an emotional stance first and foremost, so when you cross a line as far as arguing too much, they simply shut you down, as your dad did. This outcome was 100% predictable.

Phizzy

Too true Apog, in all the long discussions I have had with JW's where I have demolished all their arguments based upon Dub Logic, they have ended up resorting to an emotional argument, one that cannot be refuted by logic or reason.

Whether born-in or convert, it is emotion that keeps them in the religion, or more accurately, a variety of emotions, love for those they view as friends within, fear of leaving, love of the idea of Paradise etc etc.

Rational thinking, Logic and even Truth are of no real concern to JW's.

JWs: not creationists but believe in creation...

Share this