posted on behalf of jon p. .
http://www.jw.org/en/publications/magazines/g201403/untold-story-of-creation/.
i don't find the article itself very compelling but it seems to be opening up the possibility that a creative day is not a specific time period.
No problem, if there is anything the interlinear has taught me, it's that english translators assumed what complex scriptures such as Genesis 1 were talking about and many omissions and assumptions can really change the meaning and hide what was originally being taught.
My entire understanding of the creation is changed after dissecting it in the interlinear. It makes sense and is impossible to understand and learn in any english bible.
posted on behalf of jon p. .
http://www.jw.org/en/publications/magazines/g201403/untold-story-of-creation/.
i don't find the article itself very compelling but it seems to be opening up the possibility that a creative day is not a specific time period.
http://www.scripture4all.org/OnlineInterlinear/OTpdf/gen1.pdf Look at what Genesis really says.
I'll write an example very simply to help explain it easier.
The Earth, SHE BECOMES chaos and darkness. So Earth is a SHE, and SHE is now darkness and chaos over the top of the abyss. (Those notes are also symbolic, so from here on, the Earth or land is female, and represents darkness)
Imagine the Earth now if it was completely covered in water. Right now we have land and there are the deep sea trenches as well. Imagine the Earth as it is today with visible land being the description of the elevation that is "over the faces of the abyss" the sea level and water on Earth today cover over the deep sea trenches.
Now imagine all of Earth and land was completely covered in water, that takes us into the next part described in Genesis.
The spirit of Elohim is on the faces of the waters (ON TOP OF THE WATERS), and HE (notice HE, NOT SHE) HE (the spirit of elohim and the surface of the waters) shall become light, and HE becomes light. The light is GOOD (not good meaning this is a nice thing but Good meaning the OPPOSITE of evil) The light is GOOD also as in the tree of knowledge of GOOD and evil. So light is GOOD and he then makes a seperation between the light (GOOD) and the darkness (EVIL). (he begins creating the knowledge of good and evil)
I'll stop here because this is already probably too much for most to take in, but if you really think deep about the Genesis creation story, you'll see there is a lot more to it then has been taught and explained.
they use vile hate speech towards the victims of the cult who leave and speak out to warn others .. .
words like.
haters of god.
Listen, Obey, or be Shunned!
they use vile hate speech towards the victims of the cult who leave and speak out to warn others .. .
words like.
haters of god.
You forgot the recent assembly program.... http://www.jw.org/download/?output=html&pub=ca-pgm14&fileformat=EPUB%2CPDF%2CBRL%2CRTF%2CMOBI&alllangs=0&langwritten=E&txtCMSLang=E&isBible=0 "You must hate your enemy" aka those who are disfellowshipped or who leave the organization
thw wts likes to play games with their statistics.
one interesting but truly tragic is the number of jwhovah's witnesses who commit suicie.. now i suspect that if a person commits suicide shortly before or after they are disfellowshipped then the elders would say that person wasn't a witness or that they had done something so terrible that they were too guilty to admit it and by their action of committing suicide they pretty much declared they were no longer a jw.. yup fancy talk to make sure any crap didn't fall on them.. so my question.. do you know of cases like this?
if so then can you answer a few more questions.. had this person been dfed or in real danger of being dfed or whatever the equivalent is if they were never baptized?.
2, one after getting dfed for smoking a cigarette, the other unsure the reason but jumped off a high bridge that's popular for suicides.
the part that does make sense are how bodies adapt over time to surroundings and use.
for example because of eating habits changing, our jaws have become smaller and we don't need wisdom teeth.
or the effect of the sun on our skin, etc.
meanmrmustard - I understand that video concept and ofcoarse the smarter fish survive and pass on those genes, etc. Now let's say within that same video, they had sharks as well.
What WOULD make sense are that the fastest, quickest, and smartest fish would escape and those are the ones that by many generations would improve and get away.
What would NOT make sense is that let's say the sharks absolutely hated jellyfish and suddenly out of those same fish, some developed the ability to look like those exact jellyfish that the sharks hate, according to many people here, that could happen and they can't find anything to question how that makes sense. Whereas how would they get the ability to look like something the predator doesn't like? Or camouflage, how did and WHY did camoflauge develop/evolve?
If there is no thought process involved, what could cause the ability to look identical to your surroundings to evolve, what would trigger it? What chemical response could possibly cause that? And aside from the thought or idea of camouflage and hiding or blending in, where did the idea of copying and looking like surroundings get introduced?
Does not evolution teach that each thing evolved served a purpose and reason in response to environment and the loss due to no longer needing it?
the part that does make sense are how bodies adapt over time to surroundings and use.
for example because of eating habits changing, our jaws have become smaller and we don't need wisdom teeth.
or the effect of the sun on our skin, etc.
jon preston - okay, telling me that a chamelon developed the ability to blend in and change it's colors to hide from predators by just evolution seems as likely as telling me that lets say humans were being hunted by monster snakes and they kept thinking if they could fly, they could get away from them, so somehow a mutation eventually develops that allows humans to fly away, or that humans think if they were invisible they could hide, so at some point they develop the ability to go invisible.
A chemelon having the ability to camoflauge and even chamoflauge more in detail depending on the specific predator is a lot different then a chemeleon developing legs to walk on the ground if it evolved from a water creature, from it's skin in response to the constant sun, or body changes because of the weather. All changes like I just mentioned evolve because of a constant response to direct feedback and interaction on it's body.
Saying the the ability to camoflauge and look identical to what it's standing on is the exact same thing is not, that's comparing apples to oranges.
the part that does make sense are how bodies adapt over time to surroundings and use.
for example because of eating habits changing, our jaws have become smaller and we don't need wisdom teeth.
or the effect of the sun on our skin, etc.
jon preston - " to say atheists and agnostics and others are wrong is downright....strange". - many things in the science field are still 'theory' they can be wrong, they can't be proven.
Years from now some of what is being taught or understood may be equivalent to several hundred years ago when most believed the Earth was flat.
I'll demonstrate how it doesn't have to be just one or the other for possibilities.....let's say God and all life began from random chance and grew after somehow single cells developed are both wrong.....
Some possibilities...... 1. We are in the middle of the chain of life and find out all of life on Earth was due to another intelligent life form, far advanced beyond us, learned how to create biological life. We are the result of what began as biological robots. It won't answer where they come from, but it's a step in learning what happened.
2. God, whatever and whoever he is, could even be part of the above example, created all, but as the bible says and hints although most people have failed to see it, says that Earth and man were divided among the sons of God to rule them and YHWH inherited Israel. That would answer those who wonder why he would be jealous, or seemingly different attributes from who Jesus says are part of the Father, if they were two different entities.
3. There was another world before that was mostly destroyed, this one came from the remnants of that, or those that fled it, or this world itself. Again it won't explain the origin but would still be a step closer.
the part that does make sense are how bodies adapt over time to surroundings and use.
for example because of eating habits changing, our jaws have become smaller and we don't need wisdom teeth.
or the effect of the sun on our skin, etc.
I know the origin of the universe and evolution are two different things, but I know that those understandings and beliefs are shared and understood the same way by many.
More back to the original question or idea I was trying to explain...... A chameleon for example, it's ability to camoflauge and look almost identical to where it's standing, and to get even more specific depending on the type of predator in the area, evolution absolutely does not make sense and explain that.
The cameleons body itself can't know if predators are looking for it or that camoflauge will hide it.
Even within cells itself and viruses, some viruses when they take over cells will camoflauge the cells they are taking over so the t cells won't notice them.
Is not hiding a thought? Somebody is looking for me, I must try to hide and blend in?
The peppered moth example stated earlier, I did some research, the moth did not suddenly evolve to a darker color, they were already around. The dark colored moths population grew due to it's ability to blend in better with darker trees. But it was already there to begin with.
Let's focus on the cameleon example because that eliminates merely how they look since they can change their appearance instantly.
the part that does make sense are how bodies adapt over time to surroundings and use.
for example because of eating habits changing, our jaws have become smaller and we don't need wisdom teeth.
or the effect of the sun on our skin, etc.
Those who turn around the questions with asking about God.....I didn't even say the alternative answer is God created it either. All I am seeing is that the things that have made God unbelieve to those who don't believe, have been replaced with essentially the same explanations in a scientific sense. "God can't possibly be eternal, having no beginning and no end" is replaced with "Matter cannot be created nor destroyed" So God being eternal is replaced with matter being eternal. Then there is God suddenly decided to create everything out of nothing is replaced with the big bang theory, some abundance of energy spontaneously creates everything out of nothing.
If you want to think critically, why are you limiting yourselves to one of those 2 explanations? In regards to evolution on specifics like I just mentioned, if random evolution does not make sense, if God does not make sense to you, then why do you think it has to be one or anohter? Look at other untouched possibilities.
The big bang obviously did not make sense to some scientists and they decided to look into other possibilies or the new 4th dimensional black hole theory would not have ever been thought up, which supposedly may soon replace the big bang theory as the most scientifically plausible theory.
