The age of the Earth - Golden Age 1921

by undercover 16 Replies latest watchtower beliefs

  • undercover
    undercover

    From time to time a discussion will pop up about what the Society has taught in the past in regards to the age of the earth.

    Currently they teach the planet itself, as a mass, possibly existed for millions and millions of years, thus agreeing with science findings about the age of the Earth. Notice the following quote s from the Watchtower.org site:

    "Geologists estimate that the earth is approximately 4 billion years old, and astronomers calculate that the universe may be as much as 15 billion years old. Do these findings—or their potential future refinements—contradict Genesis 1:1? No. The Bible does not specify the actual age of “the heavens and the earth.” Science does not disprove the Biblical text."

    They have also quietly dropped the 7,000 year creative day. Under the subheading, "How Long Were the Creative Days", the Society says this:

    "What about the length of the creative days? Were they literally 24 hours long? Some claim that because Moses—the writer of Genesis—later referred to the day that followed the six creative days as a model for the weekly Sabbath, each of the creative days must be literally 24 hours long. (Exodus 20:11) Does the wording of Genesis support this conclusion?

    No, it does not. The fact is that the Hebrew word translated “day” can mean various lengths of time, not just a 24-hour period. For example, when summarizing God’s creative work, Moses refers to all six creative days as one day. (Genesis 2:4) In addition, on the first creative day, “God began calling the light Day, but the darkness he called Night.” (Genesis 1:5) Here, only a portion of a 24-hour period is defined by the term “day.” Certainly, there is no basis in Scripture for arbitrarily stating that each creative day was 24 hours long.

    How long, then, were the creative days? The wording of Genesis chapters 1 and 2 indicates that considerable lengths of time were involved."

    The Society even goes to lengths to distance itself from fundies and creationists:

    "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."

    http://www.watchtower.org/e/200609a/article_01.htm

    Of course, dubbies accept this new "version" of history as long held "truth" because the Society presents it as such.

    But compare the current teaching to what is noted in the Golden Age magazine #39/40, March 16&30, 1921 (combined issues - interestingly enough called the "Easter Number") under the heading, "Earth's Rings":

    "It is a generally accepted theory among students of cosmogony that during the 42,000 years in which the physical earth was in the process of creation..."

    Not a stupdendous find, I know, but it does show that the current teaching is yet another revision of teaching/belief that the Society has had to make in recent times.

    I wish I had time to locate references to the 7,000 year creative day teaching... Maybe we can use this thread to post those references and compare them to the current Watchtower.org info...

  • sir82
    sir82
    I wish I had time to locate references to the 7,000 year creative day teaching

    I'm pretty sure it's in the old Aid book.

    It is also indirectly referenced in the old green "dinosaur" Bibles. In the chart in the back showing the dates covered by the various books, the date for Genesis is given as "46,206 BCE - 1943 BCE" or something like that.

  • Awakened at Gilead
    Awakened at Gilead

    The original Green NWT Bibles (I saw them in Gilead) said Genesis was written from 42,000 years ago to .... or sth like that. I was surprised by that.

    Maybe someone has scans...

  • daniel-p
    daniel-p

    What they don't disclose is that geology is the foundation of evolution theory. Darwin was a geologist before he sailed on the Beagle. He based his research on the theories of Hutton, who turned the world upside down when he posited that the earth basically had no begining and will have no end, in the sense that the geologic timeline was beyond our comprehension. Once you understand a little about how mountains are created and destroyed, and what rock reveals about how various species developed over eons and then were completely wiped out by ever-present asteriods that threaten earth, what this fruity little religion thinks about the Bible is completely inconsequential. The earth has been transforming for eons before us and will continue to do so long after we have died out from our own behavior, or from some cataclysmic event. If there is a God, he is not the God of the human race.

  • alanv
    alanv

    As has been stated, the society seem to have quietly disgarded what they said in the past about each creative day being 7000 years long.

    For those that don't know, the reason this was said is because they believed 1975 would be the end of 6000 years of mankind's existance. Add on the 1000 year reign of christ and you get 7000 years, therefor they reasoned each creative day must have been 7000 years ago. They were certainly saying this in the 1980s but like so many things, they have had to change what they have said because they have been proved wrong by modern science.

  • daniel-p
    daniel-p

    This reminds me of one time when my wife and I went over to this family's house for dinner. The father was an elder, and they had a smart, inquisitive daughter who was about 9 years old. After dinner I was chatting with her and we were talking about this globe she had that showed relief of mountains and oceans, etc. I was explaining to her how various tectonic plates were moving and how you could tell in which direction some plates were moving based on hotspots on the sea floor, etc. Her father came over, incredulous. "Is that really true, Daniel?" he asked. I explained it breifly again and he just muttered something, his brow all furrowed, with this puzzled look. I knew he was trying to rationalize what I was saying with his knowledge of "Watchtower Society Science", which is pretty much limited to appealing to our sense of wonder and completely ignoring actual scientific explanations for things are understood to work.

  • alanv
    alanv

    Just found this quote from the Watchtower on another site. It didn't say when it was printed 'Thus we find the seventh “day” of the creative week to be seven thousand years long. On the basis of the length of the seventh “day” it is therefore reasonable to conclude that each of the other six “days” also was a period of 7,000 years. This length of time would be ample for all that the Bible tells us took place on each of the six days of creation'.

  • thomas15
    thomas15

    Na na na naaa na,

    My God is better than your god because my God is powerful enough to create everything by simply speaking the word and in six (24 hour) time blocks. Evening, morning-the first day. He is also able to instruct his inspired writers to use the right word and language that is very easy to understand. But you god is not able to instruct his gospel writers to use a word or words that convey the exact amount of time it took him to create everything.

    My Savior is also better than your savior because when my Savior wanted to feed 5000 people, he spoke the word and right then and there he created 5000+ fishes and loaves (MREs-meals ready to eat) that had the appearence of age that they didn't have.

    My God is an awsome God I want you to know.

  • VM44
    VM44

    Earth's Rings, by Ralph H. Leffler

    "It is a generally accepted theory among students of cosmogony that during the 42,000 years in which the physical earth was in process of creation, there existed around it a series of annular formations, or rings. These rings consisted of carbon, smoke, dust, gases, vapor, etc. As the earth cooled from its molten condition and as its peripheral speed decreased, these rings gradually contracted about the earth and finally fell, producing great deluges and changes in climatic conditions."

    FALSE! Even in 1921 it was NOT generally accepted that the physical earth had a series of annular formations or rings about it.

    That was the idea promoted by a single individual, Isaac Newton Vail.

    How did the author of this article, Ralph H. Leffler, get away with making this incorrect statement?

    For that matter, exactly who was this Ralph H. Leffler?

  • Atlantis
    Atlantis

    1961, Green New World Translation, p.1459-1460 Indicates, 46,025

Share this

Google+
Pinterest
Reddit