My first anti-witness

by cheeseman 22 Replies latest jw friends

  • cheeseman
    cheeseman

    The bell went this morning at 10am. WTF is that? Lo and behold...two JW's at the door!!!

    It went roughly like this:

    Them: Do you know that the bible and science are in perfect harmony

    Me: No it isn't, science contradicts the bible.

    Them: In the bible the water cycle was explained long before men knew of it.

    Me: No it wasn't, it was written in the bible BECAUSE men knew of it.

    Them: Here, the bible says the earth is a circle...that means it is a sphere, this was written long before men knew that was true.

    Me: A circle is a 2D object...a sphere is 3D, not the same thing I'm afraid. Anyway, the ancient egyptians knew the earth was a sphere.

    Me: One question...why did a loving God create the dinosaurs who ripped each others heads off.

    Them: We're not sure but we think it was to clear the earth of vegetation before Adam and Eve came (hahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha!!!)

    Them: We do know however, that the animals were to be in mans subjection and eat straw.

    Me: How could the dinosaurs be under man's subjection when they were here before man was?

    Them: Well the dinosaurs weren't but the other animals were.

    Me: And what about the lions...do they look as if they were designed to eat straw?

    Them: Well, we believe they were (hahahahahahahahahahahahahaha!!!!)

    Them: Anyway, please have a look at this pamphlet (It's the "Why you can trust the bible" pamphlet)

    Me: OK, do come again...I'll read the pamphlet.

    I can't believe they are sending people out in the field claiming to know ANYTHING about science. I'm no scientist but it was so easy to make them look daft. I'm going to read the pamphlet. I want to shoot them down in flames severely next time.

    Does anyone have this pamphlet? If so, would you be willing to help me dissect it and highlight all the errors? I'm no good at scriptures. I wasn't a witness. I have no bible or any WTS material at all, so I need to be prepared. Cheers

  • cheeseman
    cheeseman

    Oh, I forgot the bit when she said Adam named all the animals. I told her man finds new animals all the time so Adam couldn't have named them all. I also added an example of how Adam couldn't have named the kangaroo because it was on the Australian continent at the time he was in the Middle East and he knew nothing about it. Pathetic.

  • ezekiel3
    ezekiel3

    The magazine you received was the Watchtower April 1, 2005 "Science and the Bible Do They Contradict Each Other?"

    Lest the date fool you, I have posted the article (pages 4-7) Let the dissection begin...


    SCIENCE AND THE BIBLE Do They Really Contradict Each Other?

    THE seeds of the clash between Galileo and the Catholic Church were sown centuries before Copernicus and Galileo were born. The earth-centered, or geocentric, view of the universe was adopted by the ancient Greeks and made famous by the philosopher Aristotle (384-322 B.C.E.) and the astronomer-astrologer Ptolemy (second century C.E.).* (* In the third century B.C.E., a Greek named Aristarchus of Samos put forth the hypothesis that the sun is at the center of the cosmos, but his ideas were dismissed in favor of Aristotle's.)

    Aristotle's concept of the universe was influenced by the thinking of Greek mathematician and philosopher Pythagoras (sixth century B.C.E.). Adopting Pythagoras' view that the circle and sphere were perfect shapes, Aristotle believed that the heavens were a series of spheres within spheres, like layers of an onion. Each layer was made of crystal, with the earth at the center. Stars moved in circles, deriving their motion from the outermost sphere, the seat of divine power. Aristotle also held that the sun and other celestial objects were perfect, free of any marks or blemishes and not subject to change.

    Aristotle's great scheme was a child of philosophy, not science. A moving earth, he felt, would violate common sense. He also rejected the idea of a void, or space, believing that a moving earth would be subject to friction and would grind to a halt without the application of constant force. Because Aristotle's concept seemed logical within the framework of existing knowledge, it endured in its basic form for almost 2,000 years. Even as late as the 16th century, French philosopher Jean Bodin expressed that popular view, stating: "No one in his senses, or imbued with the slightest knowledge of physics, will ever think that the earth, heavy and unwieldy.. ., staggers . .. around its own center and that of the sun; for at the slightest jar of the earth, we would see cities and fortresses, towns and mountains thrown down."

    Aristotle Adopted by the Church

    A further step leading to the confrontation between Galileo and the church occurred in the 13th century and involved Catholic authority Thomas Aquinas (1225-74). Aquinas had a profound respect for Aristotle, whom he referred to as The Philosopher. Aquinas struggled for five years to fuse Aristotle's philosophy with church teaching. By the time of Galileo, says Wade Rowland in his book Galileo's Mistake, "the hybridized Aristotle in the theology of Aquinas had become bedrock dogma of the Church of Rome." Keep in mind, too, that in those days there was no scientific community as such. Education was largely in the hands of the church. The authority on religion and science was often one and the same.

    The stage was now set for the confrontation between the church and Galileo. Even before his involvement with astronomy, Galileo had written a treatise on motion. It challenged many assumptions made by the revered Aristotle. However, it was Galileo's steadfast promotion of the heliocentric concept and his assertion that it harmonizes with Scripture that led to his trial by the Inquisition in 1633.

    In his defense, Galileo affirmed his strong faith in the Bible as the inspired Word of God. He also argued that the Scriptures were written for ordinary people and that Biblical references to the apparent movement of the sun were not to be interpreted literally. His arguments were futile. Because Galileo rejected an interpretation of Scripture based on Greek philosophy, he stood condemned! Not until 1992 did the Catholic Church officially admit to error in its judgment of Galileo.

    Lessons to Be Learned

    What can we learn from these events? For one thing, Galileo had no quarrel with the Bible. Instead, he questioned the teachings of the church. One religion writer observed: "The lesson to be learned from Galileo, it appears, is not that the Church held too tightly to biblical truths; but rather that it did not hold tightly enough." By allowing Greek philosophy to influence its theology, the church bowed to tradition rather than follow the teachings of the Bible.

    All of this calls to mind the Biblical warning: "Look out: perhaps there may be someone who will carry you off as his prey through the philosophy and empty deception according to the tradition of men, according to the elementary things of the world and not according to Christ."?Colossians 2:8.

    Even today, many in Christendom continue to embrace theories and philosophies that contradict the Bible. One example is Darwin's theory of evolution, which they have accepted in place of the Genesis account of creation. In making this substitution, the churches have, in effect, made Darwin a modern-day Aristotle and evolution an article of faith.* (* For an in-depth discussion on this topic, see chapter 15, "Why Do Many Accept Evolution?" in the book Life?How Did It Get Here? By Evolution or by Creation? published by Jehovah's Witnesses.)

    True Science Harmonizes With the Bible

    The foregoing should in no way discourage an interest in science. To be sure, the Bible itself invites us to learn from God's handiwork and to discern God's amazing qualities in what we see. (Isaiah 40:26; Romans 1:20) Of course, the Bible does not claim to teach science. Rather, it reveals God's standards, aspects of his personality that creation alone cannot teach, and his purpose for humans. (Psalm 19:7-11; 2 Timothy 3:16) Yet, when the Bible does refer to natural phenomena, it is consistently accurate. Galileo himself said: "Both the Holy Scriptures and nature proceed from the Divine Word . . . Two truths can never contradict one another." Consider the following examples. Even more fundamental than the movement of stars and planets is that all matter in the universe is governed by laws, such as the law of gravity. The earliest known non-Biblical reference to physical laws was made by Pythagoras, who believed that the universe could be explained by numbers. Two thousand years later, Galileo, Kepler, and Newton finally proved that matter is governed by rational laws.

    The earliest Biblical reference to natural law is contained in the book of Job. About 1600 B.C.E., God asked Job: "Have you come to know the statutes [or, laws] of the heavens?" (Job 38:33) Recorded in the seventh century B.C.E., the book of Jeremiah refers to Jehovah as the Creator of "the statutes of the moon and the stars" and "the statutes of heaven and earth." (Jeremiah 31:35; 33:25) In view of these statements, Bible commentator G. Rawlinson observed: "The general prevalence of law in the material world is quite as strongly asserted by the sacred writers as by modern science."

    If we use Pythagoras as a point of reference, the statement in Job was about a thousand years ahead of its time. Keep in mind that the Bible's objective is not simply to reveal physical facts but primarily to impress upon us that Jehovah is the Creator of all things?the one who can create physical laws.?Job 38:4, 12; 42:1,2.

    Another example we can consider is that the earth's waters undergo a cyclic motion called the water cycle, or the hydrologic cycle. Put simply, water evaporates from the sea, forms clouds, precipitates onto the land, and eventually returns to the sea. The oldest surviving non-Biblical references to this cycle are from the fourth century B.C.E. However, Biblical statements predate that by hundreds of years. For example, in the llth century B.C.E., King Solomon of Israel wrote: "All the rivers run into the sea, yet the sea is not full. To the place from which the rivers come, to there and from there they return again."?Ecclesiastes 1:7, The Amplified Bible.

    Likewise, about 800 B.C.E. the prophet Amos, a humble shepherd and farmworker, wrote that Jehovah is "the One calling for the waters of the sea, that he may pour them out upon the surface of the earth." (Amos 5:8) Without using complex, technical language, both Solomon and Amos accurately described the water cycle, each from a slightly different perspective.

    The Bible also speaks of God as "hanging the earth upon nothing," or he "suspends earth in the void," according to The New English Bible. (Job 26:7) In view of the knowledge available in 1600 B.C.E., roughly when those words were spoken, it would have taken a remarkable man to assert that a solid object can remain suspended in space without any physical support. As previously mentioned, Aristotle himself rejected the concept of a void, and he lived over 1,200 years later!

    Does it not strike you as amazing that the Bible makes such accurate statements-even in the face of the erroneous yet seemingly commonsense perceptions of the day? To thinking people, this is one more evidence of the Bible's divine inspiration. We are wise, therefore, not to be easily swayed by any teaching or theory that contradicts God's Word. As history has repeatedly shown, human philosophies, even those of towering intellects, come and go, whereas "the saying of Jehovah endures forever."
    -1 Peter 1:25.

  • Crumpet
    Crumpet

    Cheeseman - brilliant! I wish I could have been there! Next time I am in Perth I must buy you a pint!

  • cheeseman
    cheeseman

    Ezekiel, thanks for getting things started. However, I wasn't given that brochure. I need to go through the "Why you can trust the bible" pamphlet with a fine tooth comb. They are coming back expecting me to have read it. Points raised in the pamphlet are.

    1) Does the bible contradict itself?

    2) History and Science (shape of the earth blah blah)

    3) Foretelling the future

    I just need a couple of good examples to refute them on each of the points. What's the best contradictions in the bible? Is the bible totally historically accurate? I'm not a scholar so I have no idea what I'm talking about. Did all the prophesies in the bible come true? Best to keep things REAL simple for me, I wasn't blessed in the brains department. Thanks

  • ezekiel3
    ezekiel3

    Basically the article completely ignors the glaring conflicts between science and the Bible, such as the following believed by JWs:

    1. Noah's Flood
    • All surviving animals on this planet (sans fish) decend from those contained on an ark for over a year
    • All earth's human population is derived from Noah beginning 4300 years ago
  • Humans have been in existance for only 6000 years
  • Human's lived to be almost 1000 years old as recently as 4300 years ago (Methuselah aged 969, died 2370 BC)
  • And that's just for starters.

    The article does tout the Bible's "scientific" claim to a spherical earth, the water cycle, and that the Earth does not stand on something else.

    Whop-de-doo.

    Now notice the cultic statements couched in between the psuedo-science:

    "True Science Harmonizes With the Bible" (in other words, if the Bible disagrees then science is wrong)

    "Yet, when the Bible does refer to natural phenomena, it is consistently accurate." (see creation account??)

    "To thinking people, this is one more evidence of the Bible's divine inspiration." (if you disagree, you are not a thinking person)

    "We are wise, therefore, not to be easily swayed by any teaching or theory that contradicts God's Word." (so now you can stop thinking)

    Now notice this little gem:

    "What can we learn from these events? For one thing, Galileo had no quarrel with the Bible. Instead, he questioned the teachings of the church."

    You might ask if it is wrong to question the "church" of Jehovah's Witnesses as a JW member. JWs believe that the Bible has to be explained through the "Faithful and Discreet Slave", a group of men at JW headquaters in New York.

    Would JWs tolerate a "Galileo" in their midst? I think not.

  • cheeseman
    cheeseman
    Cheeseman - brilliant! I wish I could have been there! Next time I am in Perth I must buy you a pint!

    I'm so happy right now crumpet, I'll really push the boat out and buy everyone on JWD a pint. It's on me!

  • ezekiel3
    ezekiel3

    Sorry to assume Cheeseman. Is what you received a small folding tract perchance?

    Regardless, the explanation of science vs bible is always the same with JWs:

    Focus on round-earth, water cycle, etc to the exclusion of the glaring conflicts.

    This is done to say: "See, if this is true then you can have faith that anything else is bunk"

    Other items to question JWs about:

    • What is their view of radiocarbon dating? (they do not accept that system)
    • Do they believe in evolution during the last 4300 years since the still uncounted BILLIONS of species of animals and insects must have evolved from the relative few on the ark?
    • Why did God create blood sucking bats and insects if 1) all animals were herbivores at the beginning and 2) God forbids the consumption of blood (the reason JWs refuse blood transfusions)
    • Did the spider originally catch straw in it's web??
  • El blanko
    El blanko
    One question...why did a loving God create the dinosaurs who ripped each others heads off.

    - thats very funny

  • steve2
    steve2

    I may be mistaken, but I thought the dinosaurs appeared on earth after Adam's creation and that their descendents were the two Jws at your door.

  • Share this

    Google+
    Pinterest
    Reddit