Critique of Mar 2014 Awake on Creation by Alan Feuerbacher

by jwfacts 43 Replies latest watchtower beliefs

  • KateWild


  • LostGeneration

    Great research from alanF and a few others located here:


    jwfacts, Thanks for posting. Looks like a good read!..Who is Alan Feuerbacher? What are his credentials?.....Oubliette

    AlanF is One of the Best Writers in exJW World..He`s an Intelligent Guy..

    I`m happy to see he`s writing again..


    Thanks Paul!..

    ................................................................  photo mutley-ani1.gif...OUTLAW

  • Vidiot

    Ah, jwfacts. Never mind.

  • leaving_quietly

    humans with relatively modern culture have existed for at least 200,000 years

    At least this somewhat agrees with the Battlestar Galactica version where they settled on earth 155,000 years prior to present day.

  • Phizzy

    Thanks JWfacts, for telling us that the great Alan F is still as sharp as ever ! And thanks Alan ! I am another who found your posts on JWD as it was then, just after I walked away from the WT/JW scam, and you helped me so, so much .

    For people who are new here, have a look at any of AlanF's old posts, they are pure gold !

  • undercover

    Thanks for this link. I had already developed my own critique of this horribly written WT article, but it was good to see good ole AlanF's in depth skewering of WT logic and doctrine.

    The biggest things that stick with me about this WT article are:

    The statement that each creative day could take "thousands of years". Not millions, but thousands, which keeps the WT 'official' doctrine of the 7,000 year creative day length intact... even though, as Alan pointed out, they haven't come right out and admitted it since the 80s.

    The WT ploy of trying to separate the creation of the heavens (universe) and earth (the planet) from the actual 6 day creative process. The WTS has really gone into full deception with that one. By pretending, or trying to convince its followers, that the earth/heavens could be billions of years old and still everything on earth was created later, it flies against what the Bible itself says in Exodus. It plainly states the 'in 6 days God created the heavens and earth'. If you get in a debate with a JW over that one, ask them if they accept the Bible as final authority and then watch em squirm as they realize that what this article says is in direct opposition to the Bible.

    And finally, what the fossil record vs the Bible record does to the teachings about Jesus death. The WTS says science and the Bible agree, yet still asserts that Adam was created 6000 years ago. Science says man has been on this planet much much longer. But the WTS can't deny that Adam is not real. When you go to the Memorial (if you go), notice that they'll spend a portion of it talking about how Adam lost perfection and that's why Jesus has to buy back what Adam lost. Now, if there was no Adam, then Jesus ransom sacrifice is moot. It means nothing. The WTS is in a corner thanks to creationism. They have to accept some verision of it, in order to accept Adam, in order to accept Jesus as ransom sacrifice. If creation is false, if Adam was not real, it all comes crashing down.

  • Slidin Fast
    Slidin Fast

    UC that is exactly the point. WT are on the horns of an impossible dilemma, a complete conundrum. They have to stick with 6000 years fo Adam's creation or the ransom is clap trap. It is the bible or science, even guided evolution doesn't cut it.

    This is one reason that the whole bible implodes to just interesting anecdotes and aphorisms.

  • Vidiot

    Okay, read it; and really liked it, but for one issue; the reason(s) why Biblical literalists reject evolution.

    Many seem to conclude that Creationists believe what they believe simply because they're unintelligent, uneducated, superstitious, or poorly informed, and in many instances that is the case, but I would argue that there's a stronger underlying cause at work, that I wish more critics of Creationism would understand and take into consideration.

    A significant reason most fundamentalists (and all creationists are; "young-Earth" or "old-Earth") are fundamentalists is because they are - at their core - strongly conservative in their outlook; a crucial but overlooked aspect of conservatism is the virutally set-in-stone assumption that humanity is irrevocably flawed (and, incidentally, needs to to be kept on a short leash for its and everybody else's own damn good, which goes a long way towards explaining their political inclinations); this attitude is common across the board.

    Virtually all forms Christian fundamentalism readily affirm this (with scriptural backing, I might add), but at the same time, this affirmation creates its own subtle internal paradox...

    ...if humans are inherently flawed, how could God - who is perfect ('cause he's God, duh) - create such imperfect beings? The only way to resolve this paradox is to conclude that humans were once a perfect creation, but through some error on their part (or a third party) became flawed, and, of course, the Eden account in Genesis provides the narrative framework used to explain it (I won't summarize why; as XJWs, we've all heard of "Adamic" sin).

    However, there's more, and (to expand on Slidin Fast's comment) it ties in with Jesus Christ.

    There are still many conservative Xtian religions (the WTS included) who hold to the concept of Jesus' "ransom sacrifice" or "substitutionary atonement", but most of us don't realize or have forgotten what that actually means. Since the Bible is viewed as a single narrative, Jesus is viewed by many as a "second Adam" (i.e. perfect), and the ultimate reason for his crucifixion/impalement/whatever was to correct the imbalance in the scales of cosmic justice that was created when Adam originally sinned in Eden (the fine points vary from denom to denom but the framework is pretty much the same across the board).

    It wasn't just about proving that a servant of God could keep his integrity even up to a horrible death, it was about rectifying Adamic Sin.

    Therefore, if biologists and paleontologists are right, and evolution is true, then Adam could not have been a literal historical figure (and sole progenitor of the human species), therefore no "Adamic" or "Original" sin took place, therefore, humans did not need to be "redeemed", therefore Jesus Christ's "ransom sacrifice" becomes - for all intents and purposes - meaningless.

    As Creationists define it, Christianity's ultimate purpose (and thusly, legitimacy) is irrevocably intertwined with Jesus' "ransom sacrifice"; therefore, it's not too far a stretch to conclude that if Jesus' death didn't "redeem" any inherent sin, then Christianity (as they define it) ultimately has no purpose or reason to exist.

    And that is completely unacceptable to them.

    The conservative worldview holds as a fundamental axiom that humans are irreparably bad, and therefore need Jesus' "redemption", therefore Jesus death had to have rectified Adamic Sin, therefore Adam had to have been real, therefore the Eden account has to have been literal history, therefore evolution must be false.

    Creationists reject evolution for ideological reasons, their worldview really gives them little choice in the matter.

  • gbrn

    Haven't read the essay yet, but does anyone know the specific reference from 1987 where 7,000 year creative days were last mentioned?

Share this