For all x-JW's: quick question.....

by Kathy 34 Replies latest jw friends

• 

  terraly

  Hi Jason,

  I don't mean to be rude either, but Patio actually said "probably every other scientific source" agrees that dinosaurs predated humans, and this is a very good statement. Yes, there are groups that insist upon a literal creation period of 6 24-hour days, and some of these even have scientists working for them.

  It is the role of science to determine the truth about our world. For this reason, we tend not to give credence to the folk stories of a band of hermits above the evidence we can dig up and examine for ourselves. The scientific consensus is on the side of evolution. Since we are scientists, there is always the possibility that we are wrong, and so it's good to have some scientists trying to prove evolution wrong. If they succeed, we shall abandon evolution just as scientists for so many years have abandoned incorrect theories as new evidence comes to light.

  So far, no such evidence has arisen.

  Dinosaurs are not mentioned in the Bible. The largest ones could not have fit in the very specific record we have of the size of the Ark. Whether the Leviathan and company were trumped up accounts of crocodiles and hippos we don't know. It's a good guess though. There are several notable instances of biological mistakes in the Bible. For instance:

  "Yet these may ye eat of every flying creeping thing that goeth upon all four, which have legs above their feet, to leap withal upon the earth; Even these of them ye may eat; the locust after his kind, and the bald locust after his kind, and the beetle after his kind, and the grasshopper after his kind. But all other flying creeping things, which have four feet, shall be an abomination unto you." --Leviticus 11:21-23

  In fact, all of the examples are six-legged insects. The point is that the Bible does not always get it's biology correct, and so why expect this from Job?

  I would be greatly interested in hearing some of your evidence to support the Biblical view in favor of evolution. First though, I would like to hear your explanation of evolution. It makes things much easier to debate if we both agree on what we are trying to prove or disprove.
• 

  larc

  Jason,

  I have a few questions, and I am sure there are many here with questions for you. If all animals were vegetation before the flood, and you don't believe in evolution, how did some animals become adapted to the life style of the carnivourous so quickly after the flood? Was this another miracle of God, or did they very rapidly evolve into meat eaters. Without going into detail, carnivors have different kinds of eyes and teeth than vegetarian animals. How, pray tell, did that come about? Was this stuctural change due to another unrecorded miracle by God or was it an example of extremely rapid evolution?
• 

  funkyderek

  For me, the moment I knew with certainty that I was not only being bullshitted, but deliberately bullshitted, was when they changed the "generation" doctrine. For years, I had been told, and told others that people in their 80s would definitely be alive when the end came. Definitely, as in the Bible says so, beyond any dispute. And then they just changed it. I saw it coming, but it was still a shock. But the bigger shock was that noone else seemed to notice. They all just answered whatever they'd underlined and went on to the next paragraph. not even a big announcement. Just a "new understanding."

  --
  Ubi dubium ibi libertas
• 

  tergiversator

  Hmm. To put it in a nutshell, I ultimately left precisely because I knew what would happen to me afterwards. I knew my friends would suddenly never send me another email or letter or phone call again, I knew my mother would toe the party line and drastically curtail contact with me (currently, she won't eat with me... except at family gatherings where there are worldy relatives around), and that tore me up for a while (I was 17 when I left btw).

  But I had come to hate disfellowshipping and shunning, and did not want to be part of an organization that would do something that cruel to people who couldn't accept their doctrines any more. (And especially to those of us raised that way; I was baptized at 13.) I came to this realization not just because I wanted a more acceptable way out, but also because I had had to deal with a disassociated dad when I was growing up, and found the strict "one-size-fits-all" counsel of the society to be unacceptable. (If you want to read more on that, I wrote an essay on my website: http://tergiversator.freeservers.com/story.html)

  That was the breaking point. What led me there was a combination of never accepting the arbitrary regulations about women (just how does not wearing a handkerchief on your head make you ineligible to say a prayer in front of a baptized male?); of finding the official teaching on evolution to be scientifically impossible to justify to myself; of discovering how much I hated the propagandistic style of the magazines; and yes, even of reading online about the blood doctrine (and just why would God want us to value a symbol of life more than life itself?) and about the shocking facts that the witnesses had once forbidden organ transplants and prophesied the end in 1975 (and soooo many other things, but I didn't find out about those until afterward).

  But disfellowshipping/disassociation is what did it for me. If you have the truth, then why do you need to keep your followers from having absolutely any contact with people who chose to leave? That, to me, is why the witnesses cannot be from God.

  -T.
• 

  aud8

  gsark-

  "Shunning. Not in the Bible. Not in there. Period."

  I don't have my bible with me now, but what about the scripture that says that for unrepentant sinners " you must not even eat a meal with them"???
• 

  Quester

  I really think that spiritual abuse
  gets to the core of the problem.

  Which is more about behavior than doctrine.

  Spiritual abuse covers a wider scope than
  just the jw religion. It helped me to
  identify environments that are unhealthy
  and also it helped me identify and work
  on my own issues.

  I wanted to understand what happened to me
  so that it would not happen again and so
  that I don't just repeat the cycle of abuse
  elsewhere.

  Quester
• 

  Liberated

  Hi Kathy,

  I left after researching this question:
  Who in 1914 knew that Jesus returned in that year?

  The authority of the WTS to guide and direct everything one believes and does is based on the premise that Jesus selected them as the faithful slave in the 1914....1918 period. In the Greatest Man book we are told that Jesus would return in the same manner that he left... without public fanfare and with only is faithful believers aware of it, and that 1914 was when this happened.
  But research shows (in their own publications) that in 1914 they were teaching that Jesus had already returned in 1874. This continued well into the 1920's, as late as 1929 in the book Prophecy by J.Rutherford, which was studied into the 1930's. I don't know the exact date that they began teaching Jesus returned in 1914, but they certainly weren't aware of his return in 1914.

  So the answer to the question: Who in 1914 knew of his return in that year? No one.

  Libby
• 

  Frenchy

  Dear Kathy,
  I'm sure you're realizing by now that there are many reasons why a number of JW's leave their faith. There does not seem to be any one thing that does it and I'm sure most here would agree that while perhaps one particular thing was difficult to digest, it took other things as well to finally do the trick.
  If you have never been a JW, it is impossible for you to really appreciate their mindset. Their viewpoint of the world and everything in it is filtered. If you want to reach this person you will have to first gain her confidence. This will not be easy nor will it be done quickly. Begin by asking questions and not challenging her faith.
  Good luck.
• 

  Marilyn

  ::::::what about the scripture that says that for unrepentant sinners " you must not even eat a meal with them"???

  So, somehow we take a scripture that's aimed at people who repeatedly rob banks or molests children, and we apply it to anyone we don't like? Innocent people, who in all conscience, can no longer be JWs ??? Or we apply it to someone who commits a sin, confesses and repents, but we don't like them so we shun them for a year or until we're satisfied that they've suffered enough. Cause we love them so much..... yeah right? The WTS one size fits all shunning arrangment!!!

  Marilyn
• 

  Jason

  Terraly and Larc, (and everyone else)

  It amuses me that you say "it is the role of scientists to determine the truth about our world. That is such a crock. Their role is to determine the truth only about things in the present or that have been recorded by men. No one has EVER witnessed macro-evolution take place, it has never been recorded and it is therefore, unscientific.
  "Folk stories" "Band hermits" "we tend not to give credence", and yet you go on to say "I would be interested to hear some of this evidence." Why don't you people listen the first time. I said, "visit www.answersingenesis.com." Yes, real scientists, real science, real evidence.

  It is also humorous how you say you know the truth from the evidence we dig up." Sorry buddy, evolutionists don't dig up evolution. They dig up dead animal fossils. Dead animals do not prove or even support evolution. Evolutionists and Creationists have ALL the same evidence. The reason they come to different conclusions is because they start with different assumptions about the past.

  And about the scientific consensus is on the side of evolution, that's because almost every person who decides to be a scientist is taught evolution throughout highschool. The reason they believe in evolution because they are scientists. It is because they believed in it before they were scientists.

  And I highly double you are a scientist. If you are, stick to science.

  You said "It is good to have some scientists trying to prove evolution wrong. If they succeed, we shall abandon evolution just as scientists for so many years have abandoned incorrect theories as new evidence comes to light."

  They HAVE proven evolution wrong. Over and over and over again.

  And dinosaurs ARE mentioned in the bible. And why would you be ignorant to say "The largest ones (dinosaurs) could not have fit in the very specific record we have of the size of the Ark." Where do you get this information. First of all, no the biggest full grown giant dinosaurs could NOT have fit on the Ark. But who ever said the biggest full grown dinos were on the Ark? In case you didn't know, big dinosaurs start out SMALL. And since the purpose of saving the animals was so they could repopulate the earth it is quite likely God would have chosen TEENAGE dinosaurs, not fully grown adults. And another thing. An entire book has been written on the feasability of Noah's Ark. It had more than enough room for ALL the animals including the dinosaurs.

  And tell me how your examples are "biological mistakes." Crawling "on all fours" does not mean "with four legs." It is an idiom for "crawling on the ground."

  And I would be interested to hear some of your evidence for evolution.

  "If all animals were vegetation before the flood, and you don't believe in evolution, how did some animals become adapted to the life style of the carnivourous so quickly after the flood? Was this another miracle of God, or did they very rapidly evolve into meat eaters. Without going into detail, carnivors have different kinds of eyes and teeth than vegetarian animals." Actually, Speedy, there wasn't an "evoltionary" change at all. Did you know that some species of bears with "sharp teeth for eating meat" are strictly vegetarian. Sharp teeth doesn't mean "eats meat." Sharp teeth are perfect for eating friuts and veggies. Their teeth didn't change, but the did start using there teeth for another purpose.

  And you want me to explain evolution? Isn't it obvious. One living organism changing over time into an entirely different organism by means of natural selection. What else do you want to know. Any form of evolution, except for micro-evolution, is stil...evolution.

  If you choose to do so you can email me personally at [email protected]. feel free.