"Creationists" is society's label for those who believe in the CHURCH version of creation: all things made in 6 literal 24-hour days. Adam and Eve living in Jurassic Park.
That is NOIT the version of Creation in the Bible we hold to...
JWs: not creationists but believe in creation...
by TheStumbler 56 Replies latest watchtower beliefs
-
-
NAVYTOWN
Since your Dad apparently believes God created humans a mere 6000 years ago, ask him if he believes there were Neanderthals? Since they died out a long time prior to 6000 years ago, how does he explain their existence? And most modern humans carry some Neanderthal DNA, so we know they existed. Of course, your Dad will have some prefabricated JW approved answer for this. But it might be fun to see how he responds. Just an idea. Hint: Do a little research on Neanderthals before you discuss this with him.
-
Vanderhoven7
Ann and Bohm: Excellent strategy to reduce threat and encourage communication.
-
TheStumbler
While I understand that there is no 100% true meaning to a word, a word means what ever meaning we assign to it, I do think words have generally accepted meanings through convention. language operates on this assumption. If not anyone could say that yes means no and it would be impossible to prove a lie.
Am i reall on my own in thinking JWs are creationists?
-
Apognophos
No, not at all. I also find it absurd that they deny this label. But BOC nails it when he says that JWs are simply opposed to all "ism"s. They will not let themselves be labeled because it makes them sound more mundane and less unique, grouping them in with others who share some of their beliefs.
My response was intended to get to the heart of the matter, though, which is that proving that the Society is not using a word correctly is not some sort of fundamental disproof of "the truth". It's not very good evidence of dishonesty since it's true that JWs are not the standard type of creationists that get the most attention these days, the young-earth variety. You could focus on other aspects of the jw.org FAQs to find better examples of dishonesty, but I still don't think it will make a difference, for the reasons I stated in my previous post.
-
yalbmert99
The Watchtower is hypocrite. It teaches a variant of creationism. There are many ways of interpreting the book of Genesis. The Watchtower has its own.
https://www.watchtowerlies.com/debate_evolution_or_creation.html
-
Island Man
The Stumbler, JWs at their core, are not pure lovers of truth - maybe they were when they were first introduced to the religion, but they morph into something else with time. JWs at their core, are first and foremost, loyal followers of the organization. They value loyalty to the organization above actual truth. You wanna know why that is?
Because they have been mentally and emotionally ensnared with the concept that their organization is "Jehovah's Organization" and their body of leaders is "the Faithful and Discreet Slave". They believe they must be loyal to "Jehovah's Organization" and accept whatever "the Faithful and Discreet Slave" teaches in order to have Jehovah's favor and survive Armageddon.
With their minds infected with this propaganda, truth becomes a secondary issue. "The Truth" is not so much about what is true as much as it is about loyal association with the Watchtower organization. So any time you point out any error in the organization's teachings, you are perceived as attempting to erode their loyalty to the organization. It doesn't matter if what you're saying is true and the Watchtower is wrong.
To a JW it doesn't matter if the Watchtower is wrong about anything or lied about anything because "they're just imperfect men" and "the light gets brighter" and it's still The Truth because Jehovah chose them in 1919! They have been fed cliche excuses for being in error, but they are conditioned to believe that they must not under any circumstances be disloyal to the organization - and to them, simply acknowledging that a current teaching is wrong, amounts to disloyalty.
Because disloyalty to the organization equals disloyalty to Jehovah which equals no paradise earth for them. So it all boils back down to fear of losing out. It is this fear that motivates them to be loyal to the organization at all costs - even at the expense of turning a blind eye to the real truth. Loyalty to Watchtower "truth" is more important than loyalty to actual truth because they think it is loyalty to Watchtower that will get them into paradise.
JWs are really followers of a group of men - the governing body - who hide their profane authoritarian leadership over them under the cloak of "Jehovah's Organization". It goes down more palatably to say "obey Jehovah's Organization to have Jehovah's favor", rather than to say: "obey Samuel Herd, Anthony Morris III, Guy Pierce, etc to have Jehovah's favor". The latter statement sounds cult-like, but ultimately it's the naked ugly truth being covered over by the former statement.
JWs obey the ever changing teachings of these men as doctrines. The teachings of these men is the ultimate focus of the beliefs of JWs - not the bible. They only make secondary use of the bible to proof-text these men's beliefs, according to how the men teach them to twist the scriptures to support them. So the bible is really not their ultimate authority or their ultimate focus of attention. Watchtower literature is. What JWs call a "Bible study" is really a study of Watchtower literature and Watchtower teachings.
-
Apognophos
Well said.
-
scary21
Wow Island man, that was great !!! So true.
-
TheStumbler
got an email saying my tone is hostike and arrogant and that I always assume I am right (and everyone else is wrong) and that I can never admit when I'm wrong. Bit ironic coming from a witness. Then it drifted into a rant about how evokution is a religion and based on faith and that science has proven intelligent design and god. Bizzarely he claimed that the worlds most famous athiest accepts the existence of god (he didn't say who) which is a bit weird.
he then said that no one has ever been able to tell him what the evidence for evolution is and asked me to explain, in my own words. what the proof is that life started without intelligent design.
should I bite? Was thinking about explaining what a theory is and discussing some of the lines of evidence for evolution. Won't convince him but maybe he'll understand a bit more where I'm coming from...