Why has the 'Creation' book fallen out of favour with the WTBTS!!!

by Gill 19 Replies latest watchtower beliefs

  • Gill

    Why has the 'Creation' book, the light blue one, fallen out of favour? When it came out it was called 'the final nail in the coffin of evolution theory'.

    I've heard a bit about there being 'problems' with the book but would like to know if there are specifics and whether the WTBTS find the book an embarrassment, which is why they may no longer be using it.

  • badboy


  • Gill

    Hi Badboy!

    It seems to be a book that they don't use or 'push' any more. I can't remember the full title of the book, so what was it called. exactly?

    I've seen posts discussing that it was full of BS and holes and selected partial quotes, but no specifics.

    Since this was one of the last hardback books that the Society published, I wondered why they no longer study it, unlike that bloody Revelation book!!

  • Moomin

    Was it called: "LIFE HOW DID IT GET HERE - by evolution or creation?" ? I know it was a hardback light blue book with gold or silver embossed title.

  • Leolaia

    Maybe because of the well-known problems with the book discussed for instance here:



    I remember a ministerial servant brother in our cong placed the Creation book with a householder in field service back in the mid-'80s. When he returned for an RV, the householder told him that he checked up some of the references and discovered how "intellectually dishonest" the book was and in anger, he tore the book right up in front of him.

    Probably because of things like that.

  • headmath

    Some of the problem is the WTS discredits carbon 14 dating. This is simply because they do not understand the math behind carbon 14 dating

    If more JW went to college or university then they might understand it. I happened to examine some 357 million year old dinosaur eggs about a month ago and there is no question that these eggs are the age stated. This conlficts with the 42,000 years that the WTS says it took god to create the world (6*7000) Folks, the earth is a very old planet but it does seem man's existencce is somewhat shorter than the dinosaurs.

  • Gill

    Moomin - That's the one!!!

    Leolaia - Thanks for the links. I'll look them up. As for the experience with the 'book ripping', that's priceless!!

    headmath - I had previously, when a JW, believed their crap about Carbon 14 dating. Only recently did I realise that the real problem with Carbon 14 dating may be that things are even older than they appear or than we expect.

  • Gill

    I wonder why those 'mis quoted' writers didn't take action against the WTBTS/

    Could it be that the Society is just too insignificant to bother with?

  • fullofdoubtnow

    They tried the usual wts trick of using out of context quotes, and got found out this time. Of course, you don't find out about that while you're a dub, but I guess the gb did, and they never made as much of this book as we all thought they would when it came out. From the links Leolaia posted, it's obvious why.

  • Leolaia

    AlanF actually confronted the author of the Creation book over its dishonesty. So the Society knows about the problem.

    In 1996, after talking with several former Bethelites, I discovered who was the author of the Creation book. While visiting relatives in New York, I went into Brooklyn Bethel and managed to get him to come down to the lobby of the main headquarters building at 25 Columbia Heights. He's one Harry Peloyan, a long time Bethelite who for many years was/is the editor-in-chief of the Awake! magazine. He apparently farmed out the writing of the book to a number of JWs, so he was really the compiler and editor of the book. We talked for about 45 minutes. He became hostile when he found that I wanted to discuss some of my criticisms with him, and kept threatening to walk away. But he always wanted to have the last word, and so, after walking a few steps away, he kept coming back at me with what he thought were good rejoinders. I finally nailed him down on one point, though: I asked him about the misrepresentation of Richard Lewontin. He said, "Was the quote correct?" Of course, the quote did repeat the quoted words exactly. I said, "But the point is that you made Lewontin appear to say exactly the opposite of what he did say." Peloyan refused to admit of a problem with this. I said, "Think of it this way. Suppose that a Watchtower article talking about evolution said, 'Evolutionists claim that evolution is true.' Suppose that I then wrote an article about the Society's abandoning creation and wrote, 'The Society now says that "evolution is true"!' Even though I quoted the Society's exact words, would I have told the truth?" Peloyan just stared at me and refused to answer. I said, "See, you DO understand why your quoting practices are dishonest." At that point he did walk away about ten feet, then returned and had more hostile words for me. I thoroughly enjoyed putting that dishonest man on the spot.


Share this