Do JWs take Genesis literally?

by undercover 40 Replies latest watchtower bible

  • RodentBoy

    The problem then becomes the bizarre dichotomy. If scientific evidence is to be accepted that the Earth is billions of years old, then it requires a heavy dose of cognitive dissonance to reject evolution. This is the problem with JWs and all such Creationist sects, they are forced to cherry pick the science they like, and basically cast dispersions on the rest; which amount ultimately to little more than out of context quotes, inaccurate information and out-and-out lies.

  • RodentBoy

    That is Kent Hovind, and he's so far off the nut that even Creationist organizations like Answers in Genesis have disowned him. His challenge is a loaded. See

  • RodentBoy

    Judging by Hovind's legal problems of late, I'll wager he doesn't have $250,000.

  • IMustBreakAway

    They do take a lot of it literally. I remember my grandmother getting mad at me for telling her that i thought the tree might be symbolic. But many claim that gen is actually a book of stories that was floating around before moses and that he just took it and made it his own. I think that is believable, esp with the whole elohim thing. When i was "stronger" spiritually i convinced myself that the "days" were in fact massive mathmatical calculations that were issued to pure energy. (not really a countable period of time at all but possibly spanning billions of years). Considering the age of the universe and it's complexity it is hard to believe that god could say hang the luminaries and thus all the universes and galaxies came to be.

  • Inquisitor
    the poles froze because "without the protective water layer, all the cold from space was sucked down like in a vacuum" (His words)

    - Muffinman

    Hmmm does anyone else think that that idea was "borrowed" from "The Day After Tomorrow"?

    An elder uses sci-fi to support theology. And still they sniff at college education. lol.


  • RichieRich

    Remember, according to Genesis 1:30, all organisms before the flood were vegetrarian.

    Now, explain all the fossils of carnivorous dinosaurs.

    And why in the hell was Abel a shepherd?

  • Heisenberg

    Awake 2003 - 22 Sept - Pages 18-21

    Science Was My Religion

    "Furthermore, a creative day as understood by the ancients can mean an epoch of extended duration, in much the same way as the terms “period” and “era” are used by science in describing earth history. Thus, the Bible is not at odds with scientific findings. It indicates that the creative days lasted aeons. It does not support the conclusion of creationists who believe that those days were each 24 hours in length"

    Awake 2006 - September - Pages 18-20

    Does Science Contradict the Genesis Account?

    "Contrary to the claims of some Fundamentalists, Genesis does not teach that the universe, including the earth and all living things on it, was created in a short period of time in the relatively recent past. Rather, the description in Genesis of the creation of the universe and the appearance of life on earth harmonizes with many recent scientific discoveries."

  • galaxie 2
    galaxie 2
    The serpent in the genesis account,was more truthful than the jw proper food suppliers . It seems they speak with forked tongues...aka....bullsh..t!!
  • St George of England
    St George of England

    For as long as I can remember the WT taught that each creative day was 7,000 years long.  This was based on Paul's word of "enter into God's rest" so the seventh day was still going then. It is still going today so it would be logical if the 1,000 year reign formed the last 1,000 years of God's rest day.  Post 1975 that got a bit awkward.  So now they just say each creative day is "thousands of years long".

    As far as I am aware they have never believed in 24 hr creative day and the recent quotes to distance themselves from such creationists is to take attention from what they always preached, 7,000 years per creative day.


  • sowhatnow

     nearly born in [age 4] ,  and never personally accepted genisis. its the most stupid pointless story, and reasoning  especially about adam and eve , that ive ever read.

    as for creation,  i never put faith in that story, but its a fun read, i always knew ancient peoples knew little about the world around them, so I figured it doesn't matter to me what they wrote, Im living here now, and that's what matters.

Share this