Putting the JW Stand on Evolution in Perspective

[Subduction Zone]

The poll taken from by the PEW forum doesn't make any sense if 58% of Catholics believe in atheistic evolution which is against their official doctrine.

CATHOLIC ENCYCLOPEDIA: Catholics and Evolution

Or, that they're not Bible believing Christians, but have replaced the Genesis account of creation with theistic evolution.

The Language of God: A Scientist Presents Evidence for Belief (2006), p. 211

• As someone who's had the privilege of leading the human genome project, I've had the opportunity to study our own DNA instruction book at a level of detail that was never really possible before. It's also now been possible to compare our DNA with that of many other species. The evidence supporting the idea that all living things are descended from a common ancestor is truly overwhelming. I would not necessarily wish that to be so, as a Bible-believing Christian. But it is so. It does not serve faith well to try to deny that. Francis S. Collins M.D. Ph.D.

Whether it's a common designer or common ancestor, a common designer likewise supports the theory for similarities in DNA. Similar building blocks can be used to create a diversity of life forms. Evidence for a supreme being and the Genesis account sustain the faith of JWs.

There is no requirement to believe all of the.myths of the Bible to be a Christian. And I'm ways Catholics may be better Christians than Bible literalists. At least they do not claim that God is a liar.

And your source fails utterly since they do not even understand the concept of a scientific theory.

 

[Jose Fly]

The poll taken from by the PEW forum doesn't make any sense if 58% of Catholics believe in atheistic evolution which is against their official doctrine.

CATHOLIC ENCYCLOPEDIA: Catholics and Evolution

Or, that they're not Bible believing Christians, but have replaced the Genesis account of creation with theistic evolution.

FYI, the Catholic Encyclopedia at the New Advent website is the 1907-1912 version.

Whether it's a common designer or common ancestor, a common designer likewise supports the theory for similarities in DNA. Similar building blocks can be used to create a diversity of life forms.

Well, since "common designer" is just a euphemism for "God did it", it's not scientifically meaningful. One can assert "God did that" after the fact for absolutely anything imaginable.

 

[metis]

The poll taken from by the PEW forum doesn't make any sense if 58% of Catholics believe in atheistic evolution which is against their official doctrine.

CATHOLIC ENCYCLOPEDIA: Catholics and Evolution

Or, that they're not Bible believing Christians, but have replaced the Genesis account of creation with theistic evolution.

The Language of God: A Scientist Presents Evidence for Belief (2006), p. 211

• As someone who's had the privilege of leading the human genome project, I've had the opportunity to study our own DNA instruction book at a level of detail that was never really possible before. It's also now been possible to compare our DNA with that of many other species. The evidence supporting the idea that all living things are descended from a common ancestor is truly overwhelming. I would not necessarily wish that to be so, as a Bible-believing Christian. But it is so. It does not serve faith well to try to deny that. Francis S. Collins M.D. Ph.D.

Whether it's a common designer or common ancestor, a common designer likewise supports the theory for similarities in DNA. Similar building blocks can be used to create a diversity of life forms. Evidence for a supreme being and the Genesis account sustain the faith of JWs.

The ToE does not negate the belief in divine creation as it is neutral about that. The Catholic Church teaches that the ToE is quite acceptable as long as it is viewed that God created all.

 

[ecco]

Viable Predictions? What does that mean? Many people get paid to predict tomorrow's weather. Most get it right, sometimes it's wrong. Big Whoop.

But the big prediction, the prediction that pretty much defines JW, the prediction that Jesus is going to return and the world as we know it is going to end, that prediction, they got it wrong, repeatedly!

That's what I'm asking....how many? "Repeatedly" means "several ".

Does it matter? If they were wrong on something this big and important even once, that should be enough to disqualify that religion from serious consideration by any rational person.

Do you want to contend that JW leadership never made incorrect predictions regarding the return of Jesus?

Here, two years after the fact, they are still contending that they were right.

Watch Tower Society unfulfilled predictions - Wikipedia
"The Harvest is Not Ended", The Watch Tower, September 1, 1916.
.. We see no reason for doubting, therefore, that the Times of the Gentiles ended in October 1914; and that a few more years will witness their utter collapse and the full establishment of God's Kingdom in the hands of Messiah.​

 

[Ryan5973]

FYI, the Catholic Encyclopedia at the New Advent website is the 1907-1912 version.


Well, since "common designer" is just a euphemism for "God did it", it's not scientifically meaningful. One can assert "God did that" after the fact for absolutely anything imaginable.

Behind every great invention is an inventor who helped change the world. If the conclusion was “it” got here by itself, everyone would live in caves, because nothing that reflects intelligent design materializes through an unguided process. DNA instructions for example guide the development of life.

You really don’t have to provide a metaphysical explanation to work with nature as it exists to provide benefits to society. That wasn’t necessarily the primary purpose for the human genome project. But after extensive work in this area, Francis S. Collins made a case for theistic evolution.

 

[Jose Fly]

Behind every great invention is an inventor who helped change the world. If the conclusion was “it” got here by itself, everyone would live in caves, because nothing that reflects intelligent design materializes through an unguided process.

Well given that ID creationism is predicated on things being produced by guidance, the above is obviously circular.

DNA instructions for example guide the development of life.

Yet whenever we study DNA, we see absolutely no indication of "guidance" occurring. Instead, all we see are natural processes taking place.

You really don’t have to provide a metaphysical explanation to work with nature as it exists to provide benefits to society. That wasn’t necessarily the primary purpose for the human genome project. But after extensive work in this area, Francis S. Collins made a case for theistic evolution.

And if you read Dr. Collins' actual scientific work, there's no mention at all of "design", God, "guidance" or anything other than natural processes.

 

[Subduction Zone]

The ToE does not negate the belief in divine creation as it is neutral about that. The Catholic Church teaches that the ToE is quite acceptable as long as it is viewed that God created all.

Not only that it appears that the literailsts are not only trying to limit the power of the God that they worship. What drives me nuts is that they seem to worship the Bible and not the God that was supposed to have inspired it. They break the First Commandment by making a false idol of the Bible.

 

[Ryan5973]

Yet whenever we study DNA, we see absolutely no indication of "guidance" occurring. Instead, all we see are natural processes taking place.

What you see is a set of instructions that executes a lot like a programming language that executes into a functional and working program. Biochemical “nanocomputers” already exist in nature. They are manifested in all living things. Man-made instruction sets aren’t similar to nature's design, but they are the same in that they don’t arise through a natural process. Single-celled organisms don’t arise from inorganic molecules. In fact, you generally don’t see chemical reactions that create organic molecules from inorganic chemicals.

 

[Subduction Zone]

What you see is a set of instructions that executes a lot like a programming language that executes into a functional and working program. Biochemical “nanocomputers” already exist in nature. They are manifested in all living things. Man-made instruction sets aren’t similar to nature's design, but they are the same in that they don’t arise through a natural process. Single-celled organisms don’t arise from inorganic molecules. In fact, you generally don’t see chemical reactions that create organic molecules from inorganic chemicals.

Actually we do see organic molecules arise on their own. Haven't you heard of the Miller-Urey Experiment?


Miller–Urey experiment - Wikipedia

And why do you think that new functions and traits cannot arise naturally? You made the claim, that puts the burden of proof upon you.

 

[Jose Fly]

What you see is a set of instructions that executes a lot like a programming language that executes into a functional and working program. Biochemical “nanocomputers” already exist in nature. They are manifested in all living things.

And they all involve natural processes, without any sign of "guidance" going on.

Man-made instruction sets aren’t similar to nature's design

Then analogies between the two is the fallacy of faulty analogy.

but they are the same in that they don’t arise through a natural process.

Sorry, but things aren't so just because you say so.

Single-celled organisms don’t arise from inorganic molecules. In fact, you generally don’t see chemical reactions that create organic molecules from inorganic chemicals.

Okay, I can see where you're going with this. Yes, it's true that at the present time we do not know how life on earth first arose. But that does not lead to "therefore God did it". I'm hoping you understand why.

 

[Deeje]

Does it matter? If they were wrong on something this big and important even once, that should be enough to disqualify that religion from serious consideration by any rational person.

Do you actually understand what they got wrong? It wasn't the prophesy....it was the timing. Even Jesus' own apostles got the timing wrong. (Acts of the Apostles 1:6)

The rulership of the Kingdom was to come through the return of Christ. It meant the end of man's inhumanity to man and the restoration of God's rightful sovereignty over his own creation. It was greatly anticipated and so, because there was no timeframe provided, the disciples were eager for it to take place. Because it was still thousands of years into the future, God never revealed exactly when it would come. No one expected that it would take so long because the prophesy kept the anticipation as something imminent. That in itself kept hope alive....it still does. The fact is, no one ever has to wait longer than their own lifetime for it to happen. At death, all consciousness ceases.
Once God fixes up the mess that humans created by leaving him, those sleeping in death will be brought back life....into a "new earth", ruled by Jesus Christ. (2 Peter 3:13)

Do you want to contend that JW leadership never made incorrect predictions regarding the return of Jesus?

There were no incorrect predictions. The only thing incorrect was the timing....who could possibly have known that the human race would descend into its current level of wickedness? The last time we hoped for a specific year, was just after the Vietnam war ended. Look how much has happened since then? Who could have predicted that terrorism would change the world and our definition of wickedness, and alter the way we view our neighbors? How much political corruption has been revealed in that time? How has social media changed attitudes and the way people behave in general?

The prophesy just keeps being fulfilled in ways we could never have imagined!

Here, two years after the fact, they are still contending that they were right.

Watch Tower Society unfulfilled predictions - Wikipedia
"The Harvest is Not Ended", The Watch Tower, September 1, 1916.
.. We see no reason for doubting, therefore, that the Times of the Gentiles ended in October 1914; and that a few more years will witness their utter collapse and the full establishment of God's Kingdom in the hands of Messiah.​

Yes, we have never wavered on the year that these "last days" began. The "Gentile Times" were mentioned by Jesus as still continuing in his day. They begin with Babylon's domination of Israel and continue through the conquests of Medo-Persia, Greece, Rome, Britain and finally the alliance of Britain and the USA.....the rulership of the current world powers. There are no other world powers, according to the prophesy in Daniel.

It is still not a matter of when the last days began...but when the are to end....Jesus said his coming to judge the earth would be "like a thief in the night" taking most people by surprise. (Matthew 24:42-44)

So, it's still a "wait and see" for us. We seriously can't imagine things getting much worse, but according to the prophesy, they inevitably will.

All things come to those who wait......

 

[Jose Fly]

There were no incorrect predictions. The only thing incorrect was the timing.

That has to be one of the funniest things I've read in quite some time.

"Next Tuesday Australia will be hit with a massive earthquake."

Tuesday comes and goes with no earthquake

Your prediction was wrong.

"My prediction wasn't wrong, the only thing wrong was the timing."​

 

[Audie]

What you see is a set of instructions that executes a lot like a programming language that executes into a functional and working program. Biochemical “nanocomputers” already exist in nature. They are manifested in all living things. Man-made instruction sets aren’t similar to nature's design, but they are the same in that they don’t arise through a natural process. Single-celled organisms don’t arise from inorganic molecules. In fact, you generally don’t see chemical reactions that create organic molecules from inorganic chemicals.

Are there nanocomputers in each atom that
instruct them to behave as they do?

Single-celled organisms don’t arise from inorganic molecules. In fact, you generally don’t see chemical reactions that create organic molecules from inorganic chemicals

If, s is the case here, you know not the first thing
about chemistry, dont for example know what an
organic molecule is,you'd be best off not pontificating.

 

[savagewind]

It looks like about 6:

Watch Tower Society unfulfilled predictions - Wikipedia

After each failure the JW's made excuses and reinterpreted their predictions in an attempt to give themselves plausible deniability, only the Kool-Aid drinkers were taken in by that.

That wasn't what was worst. They blamed their own people for spreading the rumour.

 

[Audie]

Actually we do see organic molecules arise on their own. Haven't you heard of the Miller-Urey Experiment?


Miller–Urey experiment - Wikipedia

And why do you think that new functions and traits cannot arise naturally? You made the claim, that puts the burden of proof upon you.

You dont need no stinking Miler-Urey to make
organic molecules.

Burn some carbon, and you have organic molecules.

For more one could visit some of the "gas giants"

https://www.google.com/search?q=jup..._AUIDigB&biw=851&bih=489#imgrc=Qt-TN6ki2W2gpM:

 

[ecco]

Do you actually understand what they got wrong? It wasn't the prophesy....it was the timing.
There were no incorrect predictions. The only thing incorrect was the timing

The prophesy just keeps being fulfilled in ways we could never have imagined!

So, it's still a "wait and see" for us. We seriously can't imagine things getting much worse, but according to the prophesy, they inevitably will.

All things come to those who wait......

Prophesy must consider what and when. If either what or when is wrong, then the prophecy is wrong.

Your leaders made incorrect prophecy after incorrect prophecy. Each time, they declared that the information for the prophecy came directly from The Word Of God. Each time, they were wrong.

Fool me once, shame on you.
Fool me twice, shame on me.

Do you understand what that means? That means if someone gets fooled twice with the same nonsense, then it is their fault.

What does it say about people who let themselves get fooled over and over and over?

 

[Subduction Zone]

Prophesy must consider what and when. If either what or when is wrong, then the prophecy is wrong.

Your leaders made incorrect prophecy after incorrect prophecy. Each time, they declared that the information for the prophecy came directly from The Word Of God. Each time, they were wrong.

Fool me once, shame on you.
Fool me twice, shame on me.

Do you understand what that means? That means if someone gets fooled twice with the same nonsense, then it is their fault.

What does it say about people who let themselves get fooled over and over and over?

You mean at least six time?

 

[Ryan5973]

Are there nanocomputers in each atom that
instruct them to behave as they do?

Single-celled organisms don’t arise from inorganic molecules. In fact, you generally don’t see chemical reactions that create organic molecules from inorganic chemicals

If, s is the case here, you know not the first thing
about chemistry, dont for example know what an
organic molecule is,you'd be best off not pontificating.

I said "generally," I didn't speak in absolute terms.

From what I've read for example, Curiosity, a rover on Mars, "gathered mudstone samples and gradually heated them to 860 ºC, using gas chromatography/mass spectrometry to study the gases produced. It identified a smorgasbord of molecules, including thiophene, methylthiophenes, and methanethiol, which are probably fragments from larger organic macromolecules in the sediment. These organic deposits may be something like kerogen, the fossilized organic matter found in sedimentary rocks on Earth that contains a jumble of waxy hydrocarbons and polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons."

Ultimately, life comes from non-life. Even the Genesis account states that. You may see phenomenon as described above that results in organic molecules. But it's not life or life sustaining.

All organisms need four types of organic molecules: nucleic acids, proteins, carbohydrates and lipids; life cannot exist if any of these molecules are missing. This type of combined animate matter arising from inanimate matter doesn't exist.

 

[Skwim]

Ultimately, life comes from non-life. Even the Genesis account states that. You may see phenomenon as described above that results in organic molecules. But it's not life or life sustaining.

All organisms need four types of organic molecules: nucleic acids, proteins, carbohydrates and lipids; life cannot exist if any of these molecules are missing. This type of combined animate matter arising from inanimate matter do

Genesis 2:7
7 Then the Lord God formed a man from the dust of the ground and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life, and the man became a living being.​

​

 

[Audie]

I said "generally," I didn't speak in absolute terms.

From what I've read for example, Curiosity, a rover on Mars, "gathered mudstone samples and gradually heated them to 860 ºC, using gas chromatography/mass spectrometry to study the gases produced. It identified a smorgasbord of molecules, including thiophene, methylthiophenes, and methanethiol, which are probably fragments from larger organic macromolecules in the sediment. These organic deposits may be something like kerogen, the fossilized organic matter found in sedimentary rocks on Earth that contains a jumble of waxy hydrocarbons and polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons."

Ultimately, life comes from non-life. Even the Genesis account states that. You may see phenomenon as described above that results in organic molecules. But it's not life or life sustaining.

All organisms need four types of organic molecules: nucleic acids, proteins, carbohydrates and lipids; life cannot exist if any of these molecules are missing. This type of combined animate matter arising from inanimate matter doesn't exist.

True, you said "generally", not "absolutely" or "exclusively" That
would, yes, have made it more wrong.

In fact, you generally don’t see chemical reactions that create organic molecules from inorganic chemicals

The above is not correct. Quite the opposite is true. Every flipping
reaction known to exist in the universe that involve carbon creates
an organic molecule, unless, of course, it was already organic.

In the event, your whole post except the last line was pointless.
It appears to say abiogenesis is impossible.

Assertions of facts not in evidence are, you know, generally
a sign one does not know what he is talking about.

Or, no, second to last also. You seem to have
some absolute knowledge there too Info that
nobody else has, actually.

 

[Deeje]

Prophesy must consider what and when. If either what or when is wrong, then the prophecy is wrong.

Since prophesy is only ever really understood in hindsight, unless God gives a clear date for the fulfillment its always a wait and see.
God's prophet named Cyrus as the one who would liberate the Israelites from Babylon, but he never said when. I'm sure that if they showed Cyrus the prophesy that he fulfilled, I believe he would have been a bit chuffed to see that his existence was foretold hundreds of years before he was born. (Isaiah 44:28)

'By his decreeing the end of the Jewish exile, Cyrus fulfilled his commission as Jehovah’s ‘anointed shepherd’ for Israel. (2Chronicles 36:22-23; Ezra 1:1-4)'
Cyrus — Watchtower ONLINE LIBRARY

Your leaders made incorrect prophecy after incorrect prophecy. Each time, they declared that the information for the prophecy came directly from The Word Of God. Each time, they were wrong.

Nonsense. They were always referring to the same prophesy as I have already made clear....it wasn't that the prophesy was wrong....we just got the timing wrong. It is still awaiting fulfillment, so we wait for God to act just as he said he would...in his time, not ours.

Fool me once, shame on you.
Fool me twice, shame on me.

But no one has ever fooled you...or have they? And more than once? Is a deceived person aware of a deception until it is exposed? Let's wait and see....

Do you understand what that means? That means if someone gets fooled twice with the same nonsense, then it is their fault.

I couldn't agree more.....but it works both ways.

What does it say about people who let themselves get fooled over and over and over?

Hmmmm....what would you call it if that applied to you?