Why are Jehovah's Witnesses reluctant to discuss their faith?

[YoursTrue]

There are standards, which I’m happy to support. If I unrepentantly committed adultery, or unrepentantly stole from another person, I would be in the same boat.


Why would I want to ruin my relationship with Jehovah God by denying Him as the Creator? (I realize, unfortunately, that you probably can’t grasp this fact.)


This is the real issue that would result. Even if I kept my feelings hid, Jehovah God would know.


Now, I notice you’ve ignored my questions:

1) Do you know where I stand on evolution, iow, how much of it I do accept? (Quite a bit, probably more than you think.) If you’ve read the explanation I provided of “every plant yielding seed”, mentioned in Genesis 1:29, that would give you some idea.


2)You do agree that life is ‘complex‘?


3) What is your evidence supporting how these complex, novel phenotypes arose by mindless, undirected natural methods?


4) Have you read- and agree with - any of Gerd Müller’s papers referencing the explanatory deficits of the MS?


5) You claimed I ‘avoid it, whenever you bring it [Behe agreeing with CD evolution] up’. (As if you have many times.) When did you ever mention it?

King David was repentant for his bad actions, and Jehovah forgave him. Also he loved Jehovah.
I am so glad I studied with Jehovah's Witnesses, although I turned them away from my door several times before I agreed to a Bible study.
P.S. I used to be an atheist, that is, after I realized all the bad things going on in the world and how many different religions there were, so I left my birth religion. I attended church as a paid musician, this very large church hired professional musicians, didn't matter about their religion or belief or orientation. I heard a lot about their religious beliefs while I was there, and although I liked the music, Jesus was very far in the background for me, until -- I studied with Jehovah's Witnesses.

 

[Jose Fly]

That is how I feel treated by the JWs in the discussions about evolution. Instead of responding to my questions or points, the subject is diverted (often quickly) to how can I be a Christian and see things the way I do. Completely irrelevant to creationist or JW arguments for a literal Genesis version of reality as opposed to one built on the evidence. But it is a frequent turn of the discussion. I see it as a diversion and a means to shake me off. As if you cannot believe in God and accept the evidence and rational conclusions regarding that evidence and that makes you somehow tainted and not a real believer.

It's tiresome. It's insulting. It is unkind. It isn't true.

Well yeah, because to many creationists, folks like you (theistic evolutionists) are a bigger threat. Atheist evolutionists like Richard Dawkins play into the fundamentalists' false dichotomy, where it's either evolution (atheism) or creation, with no middle ground. Theistic evolutionists like you and Francis Collins destroy that contrivance by demonstrating that one can indeed acknowledge the reality of evolution but not have to abandon belief in God, which fundamentalists fear will be alluring.

So on that basis, you must be opposed, attacked, and stopped at every turn. You're a very real threat.

 

[Jose Fly]

There are standards, which I’m happy to support. If I unrepentantly committed adultery, or unrepentantly stole from another person, I would be in the same boat.


Why would I want to ruin my relationship with Jehovah God by denying Him as the Creator? (I realize, unfortunately, that you probably can’t grasp this fact.)


This is the real issue that would result. Even if I kept my feelings hid, Jehovah God would know.

So to Jehovah's Witnesses, becoming an "evolutionist" is akin to committing adultery or stealing. And if you did, you could no longer be a Jehovah's Witness (either by voluntarily leaving or being kicked out).

I'm also going to assume that you agree with JW.org in that "if evolution is true, life has no lasting purpose".

1) Do you know where I stand on evolution, iow, how much of it I do accept? (Quite a bit, probably more than you think.) If you’ve read the explanation I provided of “every plant yielding seed”, mentioned in Genesis 1:29, that would give you some idea.

I honestly have no interest in that.

2)You do agree that life is ‘complex‘?

Of course.

3) What is your evidence supporting how these complex, novel phenotypes arose by mindless, undirected natural methods?

4) Have you read- and agree with - any of Gerd Müller’s papers referencing the explanatory deficits of the MS?

I see absolutely no point in trying to discuss evolutionary biology with a person who, if they became an "evolutionist" would see it as no different than committing adultery or stealing, would have to leave their church and faith, would feel they've ruined their relationship with God, and would have to conclude that life has no lasting purpose.

You (and the other Witnesses here) are about as biased as can be on this subject, which guarantees any attempt to discuss the science with you will be pointless. You have far too much at stake.

5) You claimed I ‘avoid it, whenever you bring it [Behe agreeing with CD evolution] up’. (As if you have many times.) When did you ever mention it?

Given the above, I've lost interest in that. So please accept my apologies if I've mischaracterized things.

 

[Hockeycowboy]

I'm also going to assume that you agree with JW.org in that "if evolution is true, life has no lasting purpose".

If evolutionary processes have formed all living organisms, which would include humans, as you believe, then Jesus’ sacrifice has no value to “redeem” mankind! There’s nothing that was lost (i.e., everlasting life), nothing to be redeemed!
So, yes of course! What *lasting* purpose for any of us could there be?

“Let us eat and drink, for tomorrow we are to die.”

 

[Jose Fly]

If evolutionary processes have formed all living organisms, which would include humans, as you believe, then Jesus’ sacrifice has no value to “redeem” mankind! There’s nothing that was lost (i.e., everlasting life), nothing to be redeemed!
So, yes of course! What *lasting* purpose for any of us could there be?

“Let us eat and drink, for tomorrow we are to die.”

First, I appreciate your candor.

Second, I hope you appreciate my broader point about the futility of discussing evolution with Jehovah's Witnesses. As I noted earlier, if you all truly believe that if evolution is true then life has no lasting purpose, that makes you about as biased as a group of people can possibly be on a subject.

I sometimes liken this to offering an Orthodox Jew a ham sandwich (the person is fundamentally opposed to what you're offering), but this is even more profound. The Jewish person will just wave the sandwich away and maybe chuckle a bit at me for trying, but I doubt they're equating eating ham with a loss of purpose in life!

Finally, I have to wonder what @nPeace thinks of this. I'm assuming he agrees with you, which makes me wonder why he's been so reluctant to discuss this. I won't speculate, but I do find it quite interesting.

 

[Hockeycowboy]

First, I appreciate your candor.

Second, I hope you appreciate my broader point about the futility of discussing evolution with Jehovah's Witnesses. As I noted earlier, if you all truly believe that if evolution is true then life has no lasting purpose, that makes you about as biased as a group of people can possibly be on a subject.

I sometimes liken this to offering an Orthodox Jew a ham sandwich (the person is fundamentally opposed to what you're offering), but this is even more profound. The Jewish person will just wave the sandwich away and maybe chuckle a bit at me for trying, but I doubt they're equating eating ham with a loss of purpose in life!

Finally, I have to wonder what @nPeace thinks of this. I'm assuming he agrees with you, which makes me wonder why he's been so reluctant to discuss this. I won't speculate, but I do find it quite interesting.

Well, let’s discuss it amicably. We can disagree and still be civil.

As I said before (but I think only once), that evolution has effected change in every phylum, in the sense that these life forms have experienced some mutational changes making them different from their ancestors, over time.
I can see how species have multiplied within their Family taxon.

You may laugh at my next statement (and that’s ok), but there’s way more land-based species now than were on the Ark!

But if you don’t want to further this discussion, that’s fine with me too.

Have a good evening.

 

[Hockeycowboy]

…false dichotomy, where it's either evolution (atheism) or creation, with no middle ground.

i think I just showed that, to me, this doesn’t apply.
Evolution has its place.
Jehovah had that in mind — small changes among creatures over time — when He created A&E and offspring to live forever: we’d always experience variety — “the spice of life” — with new species to discover.

That is still His purpose, for Earth & mankind on it. — Matthew 6:10; Revelation 21:3-4

IMO

 

[YoursTrue]

You are Exactly right!
Science has made the rupture, the incompatibility.
Someday soon, it’ll be remedied.
IMO.

As far as evolution goes, things happpen. Meaning By that I mean genetics plays a big part in differences, colors, sizes of similar animals and humans, and so far no research has discovered what happened regarding the DNA gap between gorillas and humans, be it ever so slight. Yet gorillas and humans do not interbreed with one another. And while some scientists claim there is an "Unknown Common Ancestor," they have not yet discovered it but insist it exist(ed).
Ants and humans are rather different but the Bible says that God created kinds. It is not a science textbook yet Moses knew that the earth did not always have life on it. As I kept reading about evolution (here and elsewhere), I realize so much of it is guesswork. The Bible makes it clear that God is the Creator and Designer of life.

The order of creation is according to the Bible this way: In Genesis 1:

• Creation of heavens and earth (1, 2)
  
  
• Six days of preparing the earth (3-31)
  
  • Day 1: light; day and night (3-5)
    
    
  • Day 2: expanse (6-8)
    
    
  • Day 3: dry land and vegetation (9-13)
    
    
  • Day 4: heavenly luminaries (14-19)
    
    
  • Day 5: fish and birds (20-23)
    
    
  • Day 6: land animals and humans (24-31)

 

[Jose Fly]

Well, let’s discuss it amicably. We can disagree and still be civil.

As I said before (but I think only once), that evolution has effected change in every phylum, in the sense that these life forms have experienced some mutational changes making them different from their ancestors, over time.
I can see how species have multiplied within their Family taxon.

You may laugh at my next statement (and that’s ok), but there’s way more land-based species now than were on the Ark!

But if you don’t want to further this discussion, that’s fine with me too.

Have a good evening.

I'm not really sure what the point would be though, given that you have some very important "lines in the sand" and are, as I noted earlier, about as biased as a person can be on the subject. I mean, if a person's view is "I cannot accept X as true under any circumstances", what's to be gained by trying to discuss/debate X with them?

I tend to not discuss/debate dating methods with young-earthers for the same sort of reasons.

 

[YoursTrue]

So to Jehovah's Witnesses, becoming an "evolutionist" is akin to committing adultery or stealing. And if you did, you could no longer be a Jehovah's Witness (either by voluntarily leaving or being kicked out).

I'm also going to assume that you agree with JW.org in that "if evolution is true, life has no lasting purpose".


I honestly have no interest in that.


Of course.


I see absolutely no point in trying to discuss evolutionary biology with a person who, if they became an "evolutionist" would see it as no different than committing adultery or stealing, would have to leave their church and faith, would feel they've ruined their relationship with God, and would have to conclude that life has no lasting purpose.

You (and the other Witnesses here) are about as biased as can be on this subject, which guarantees any attempt to discuss the science with you will be pointless. You have far too much at stake.


Given the above, I've lost interest in that. So please accept my apologies if I've mischaracterized things.

The Bible does not detail with molecules and DNA transfer how things were done. The theory of evolution as described by Darwin and others similar, does not add up. Anymore to me. Obviously this is not everybody's view. Conjectures are made, of course, as to the sequence and origin (not speaking of abiogenesis here) but no one on this earth knows. I am not speaking of fossils. Looking at the actual beings, including the birth process, do not show to be in harmony with evolution. I am not discounting changes due to.DNA or possible interbreeding. Gorillas, for instance, do not make automobiles, gas statiins, or have medical schools. Or tv. Ants have remarkable qualities but simply do not advance the theory of evolution, rather they bespeak creative power far above the theory of Darwinian model of evolution.
Proverbs 6:6 "Go to the ant, you lazy one;
Observe its ways and become wise."

 

[YoursTrue]

I'm not really sure what the point would be though, given that you have some very important "lines in the sand" and are, as I noted earlier, about as biased as a person can be on the subject. I mean, if a person's view is "I cannot accept X as true under any circumstances", what's to be gained by trying to discuss/debate X with them?

I tend to not discuss/debate dating methods with young-earthers for the same sort of reasons.

Not sure what you mean by " young earther." Each day of creation could have been thousands and thousands of years. The word 'day' from the Hebrew can mean a period of time, not necessarily.24 hours.

 

[Hockeycowboy]

@YoursTrue , @nPeace, wasn’t that a great explanation in our Christian Life and Ministry meeting of the Bible’s so-called ‘contradiction’ of the 3 1/2 -yr drought/famine in Elijah’s day? That article in the April 1st, ‘08 WT, tying in the dry season to explain 1 Kings 18:1 and Jesus’ & James’ mention of the drought, really helps you appreciate the Discreet Slave’s efforts, doesn’t it? They really strengthen our faith in God’s Word!

Anything else from our last CLM meeting that y’all enjoyed?

 

[nPeace]

i think I just showed that, to me, this doesn’t apply.
Evolution has its place.
Jehovah had that in mind — small changes among creatures over time — when He created A&E and offspring to live forever: we’d always experience variety — “the spice of life” — with new species to discover.

That is still His purpose, for Earth & mankind on it. — Matthew 6:10; Revelation 21:3-4

IMO

Are they even sure how to define species... yet?

 

[nPeace]

@YoursTrue , @nPeace, wasn’t that a great explanation in our Christian Life and Ministry meeting of the Bible’s so-called ‘contradiction’ of the 3 1/2 -yr drought/famine in Elijah’s day? That article in the April 1st, ‘08 WT, tying in the dry season to explain 1 Kings 18:1 and Jesus’ & James’ mention of the drought, really helps you appreciate the Discreet Slave’s efforts, doesn’t it? They really strengthen our faith in God’s Word!

Anything else from our last CLM meeting that y’all enjoyed?

Hey Hockeycowboy. Maybe you can start a thread on this in the JW Dir. I think that's where we can talk about things like this.
Take care, brother.

 

[YoursTrue]

@YoursTrue , @nPeace, wasn’t that a great explanation in our Christian Life and Ministry meeting of the Bible’s so-called ‘contradiction’ of the 3 1/2 -yr drought/famine in Elijah’s day? That article in the April 1st, ‘08 WT, tying in the dry season to explain 1 Kings 18:1 and Jesus’ & James’ mention of the drought, really helps you appreciate the Discreet Slave’s efforts, doesn’t it? They really strengthen our faith in God’s Word!

Anything else from our last CLM meeting that y’all enjoyed?

I am always appreciative of the research that has been done and published by those with that responsibility. When I was studying, just to make sure -- I went to the library to check references and found the references to be correct. Plus I knew quite a bit from my own experience with religion.
I agree about the 3-1/2 years, someone gave a comment on that at the meeting and I found it very interesting. Today I had the opportunity to express the Bible's hope to someone I met during the course of the day, sharing with her the hope of a beautiful future -- no more sickness and death or unhappiness. (Revelation 21:1-5)

 

[YoursTrue]

Are they even sure how to define species... yet?

It seems it's kind of out there about what constitutes a species or 'kind.' The more I think about it, @nPeace, the less believable evolution per the Darwinian model works out to be.

 

[nPeace]

It seems it's kind of out there about what constitutes a species or 'kind.' The more I think about it, @nPeace, the less believable evolution per the Darwinian model works out to be.

You're still thinking about it?
Darwin is history. Neo-Darwinian and the Modern Synthesis is the in game.
I'll think about it if they ever find strong evidence to support it, rather than philosophical ideas.

 

[YoursTrue]

You're still thinking about it?
Darwin is history. Neo-Darwinian and the Modern Synthesis is the in game.
I'll think about it if they ever find strong evidence to support it, rather than philosophical ideas.

I read what some posters have presented about the theory. As well as researching as much as I could about it. As I have said, @nPeace, I did well in school and, despite visiting different religions as well as being raised in a religion, I believed what I was taught in school about evolution. That is, until I began studying the Bible in earnest and also read some about why it is not logical to really accept the idea of evolution. I have also read, interestingly enough, the condemnations also here by believers in evolution of those believing in a Creator rather than sheer natural forces. There's more, but I leave it at that.

 

[YoursTrue]

If evolutionary processes have formed all living organisms, which would include humans, as you believe, then Jesus’ sacrifice has no value to “redeem” mankind! There’s nothing that was lost (i.e., everlasting life), nothing to be redeemed!
So, yes of course! What *lasting* purpose for any of us could there be?

“Let us eat and drink, for tomorrow we are to die.”

Also @Jose Fly: the end of any life re: evolution is death. But the Bible speaks (1) of resurrection, and (2) everlasting life. So yes, evolution in theory leads to death. The life around us tells me that the theory of evolution is not possible. Death is a sure end for much. But not everything.

 

[nPeace]

I read what some posters have presented about the theory. As well as researching as much as I could about it. As I have said, @nPeace, I did well in school and, despite visiting different religions as well as being raised in a religion, I believed what I was taught in school about evolution. That is, until I began studying the Bible in earnest and also read some about why it is not logical to really accept the idea of evolution. I have also read, interestingly enough, the condemnations also here by believers in evolution of those believing in a Creator rather than sheer natural forces. There's more, but I leave it at that.

So let me try to understand you.

You did not reject evolution ideas because you belonged to some fanatical religion, right?

So, that being the case, it would be quite foolish of me, to say that religion is what drove you to not accept the theory, or it's because of not wanting to lose your religious friends, that you reject the theory of evolution, right?