Three Reasons Why the 'Truth' Isn't True (#1)

by metatron 15 Replies latest watchtower beliefs

• 

  metatron

  Reason number one:

  You have a 'soul'!

  While I cannot prove herein that consciousness survives death of the
  body, I can point out a solid arguement that you MUST have some sort
  of soul or spirit that is far more than a mere figure of speech like
  "the spark of life".

  Over a hundred years ago, a Hindu philosopher argued, long before
  the discovery of DNA or genes, that "hereditary transmission" would
  never be able to explain the marvelous fund of knowledge needed to
  create a working human form (Vedanta, Voice of Freedom pg. 260).
  Fast forward to today and what do we find? THE BLUEPRINT FOR HUMAN
  FORM IS STILL MISSING! Scientists at Celera admitted that the human
  genome "is not a blueprint" and that "there are only a few hundred
  genes that we have in the human genome that are not in the mouse
  genome." (!!) Keep watching the news - I heard recently that clones
  are not always turning out identical (cats).

  Beyond form, amoung animals, the question of inherited instinct
  remains a mystery - especially in those creatures that could not
  have been taught complex behaviors by their parents (A New Science
  of Life pg. 22)

  For more information on this mystery of transmission, read Design
  for Destiny and In the Presence of the Past.

  The above is not new - it stretches back thousands of years to Plato
  (who gave us Platonism!). While the Watchtower derides this subject,
  they offer NOTHING HOPEFUL by the preaching of a resurrection that
  SIMPLY CREATES A COPY OF A PERSON WHO ONCE WAS ALIVE. Oddly enough,
  the Watchtower Society seems to carry the SAME VIEW of many atheists
  who would reduce humanity to simple atoms and molecules.

  I really believe that , by default, science will lead us into a
  spiritual revolution once form - and mind(another complex topic)
  are found to be beyond reduction.

  As for the Bible, no one can prove that it is without internal
  contradiction or the ambiguous belief of its writers.
  When the Hebrew Bible was written, there were no quotation marks
  around the name "Samuel" to warn readers that he wasn't really
  alive in spirit( 1 Sam. 28:14) Nor did Saul necessarily see this
  contradicting his own belief in Jehovah (1 Sam. 28:10).
  
  Apparently, Jesus' disciples believed in ghosts (Luke 24:37)
  Jesus didn't seem very zealous about correcting them about that
  or asserting that such were actually demons.

  It always used to bother me that although the Watchtower had an
  explanation for every contradicting text(Gen.35:18), the ambiguity
  was still there - and likely to mislead any ancient reader who
  lacked critical reference books and footnotes. Why would God do this?,
  I thought. A variety of viewpoints is more likely. The Bible record
  is as ambiguous as the opinions of those who wrote it.

  metatron (#2 to follow, when I get time)
• 

  Ginosko

  Hi,

  That the clones are not identical with today technology is not any surprice, is of public knowledge, they are also the mithocondrials RNA's, or something that sounds similar, that also take part in the genes of the clone. I'm not an expert, only a reader.

  And about the Celeras guys. How do they could be sure that the DNA aren't the human blueprint, could they be sure ? Please provide us an URL with this statement. As much as I know is hard to believe this point.

  That the genes of a cat are so similar to humans DNA don't means anything. For me is similar to say that the components of a TV proyector, are similar to the components of a computer, and try from this point to deduce some philosophical true. Is not a matter of components, but of organizations and sinergics. Two companies can have a thousands engineers each one, and one is a succes, the other a complete failure. Similar components, members or genes dont means anything.

  Cordially,

  Ginosko
• 

  peacefulpete

  Read the book "Genome" it will explain in layman's terms how genetics shape us and dispells many myths. Nothing is mysterious only complicated.
• 

  metatron

  I can see that the spiritual revolution I prophesy will take awhile since it requires
  a lot of clear, hard thinking - rather than simply accepting whatever the status quo
  uncritically broadcasts.

  I continue to be shocked at the obfustication on this topic. Even when Jurassic Park
  was a new movie some biologists objected that getting dinosaur DNA meant nothing.
  It doesn't contain a blueprint for for a dinosaur - just the protein building materials.

  Imagine the most complex machine or building you can possibly conceive of - now imagine
  that there's no blueprint or locatable plan for constructing it or a billion like it.
  That's the problem.

  Connecting genes with form doesn't prove that they contain a blueprint or program
  anymore than expecting a television set to contain programs simply because it
  presents them on its screen. It doesn't contain programs, it receives them.

  In the end, Plato was right when he looked for another dimension or world that
  contained the 'forms' - and science will expose this by default, grudgingly
  as it 'runs out' of plausible explanations other wise.

  metatron
• 

  funkyderek

  Metatron,

  I'm curious as to why you reject the only known proven mechanism of inheritance in favour of a mystical one that has never been observed, is completely unnecessary and makes considerably less sense than it did when it was thought up by a philosopher with no access to modern science.
• 

  Realist

  metatron,

  i think there is a misunderstanding.

  the DNA isn't a blueprint in the usual sense. there is not one gene that will form a leg and another gene that forms a toe etc.

  the DNA encodes all the proteins that an organism has. all these proteins work together in a VERY complex and in most cases not too well understood way to form the organism.

  nevertheless the DNA is the "blueprint" of how we develop during embryogenesis. change a few genes and the person will look differently.

  identical twins look identical because they have the same DNA. little cats look different just like non identical twins because they have NOT identical DNA.

  clones look different if something in the cloning process goes wrong. for instance if the machinery that "reads" the genes in the cell doesn't work as it should be.
• 

  MacHislopp

  Hello metatron,

  thanks for the thought provoking topic.

  Based on today's knowledge we are ...light

  years away from the answer and...the solution.

  Interesting also the Scriptures quoted .

  I'll ...serarch.

  Greetings, J.C.MacHislopp
• 

  metatron

  "completely unnecessary" is simply not so. The path of normal reductionism within science
  is leading into a brick wall. If you think otherwise, produce the human blueprint!

  If they succeed in growing an entire embryo or organs outside of a womb, the fact of
  this blueprints' "mystical" nature will become even more obvious.

  Sheldrake (among others) raised these objections ago. While his books are recommended
  for burning, I am unable to find any disproof or effective debunking by skeptics.
  Ridicule is not disproof.

  Doesn't simple logic dictate that a program MUST exist that is more powerful than
  active genetic code? If the code is the same in every organ, how does differentiation
  of organs take place? What "mystical" inherited program - apart from genes - makes us
  what we are instead of a pile of undifferentiated goop?

  A cartoon appeared once in which a huge mathematical formula is written on a blackboard
  which terminates in someone writing in chalk "and then a miracle takes place".
  That's it in a nutshell.

  Here's another hidden connundrum: There is no clear explanation for how the correct
  molecules get into the correct places. Keep in mind that , with ions, you only have
  negative and positive. It's difficult to imagine active living processes relying simply
  on random motion to "select or reject" molecules that happen to pass by - or how the
  attraction and repulsion of only two charge states allows for complex choices in cells.

  Life ain't random atoms whacking into each other - it's much more than that.

  metatron
• 

  peacefulpete

  Genetic engineering of the past 25 years should make the error of any "Ghost in the Machine" foolishness all too obvious. The foods you eat likely are the product of gene splicing. Corn in the U.S. has benefitted especially from this science. Stem cell research has largely enlightened us to how and when celllar division and specialization occurs. Some reading is in order Metatron. At least the newspaper. If you feel wonder at how it all works, thats good it should stir feels of awe. Life is amazing and this should move us to understand and cherish it.

  Edited by - peacefulpete on 30 January 2003 13:0:49
• 

  Realist

  metatron,

  i think you have a lot of open questions that most biology books can answer.

  for instance why do we have different organs if all cells have the same genetic code.for this you have to know how genes are read by a cell. not all genes are constantly active. only a few genes a read in each cell type. the others are kept silent. each cell type (starting with the fertilized egg cell, over the different celltypes in embryos, to the final organs and cell types such as livercells, neuron, kidney cells etc.) have a unique set of proteins that activate the specific genes and keep the others silent.

  Edited by - realist on 30 January 2003 12:25:8