ARE JEHOVAH’S WITNESSES CREATIONISTS OR EVOLUTIONISTS?

by Viva la Vida 28 Replies latest watchtower beliefs

• 

  Naoscillator

  I have pointed out to a few fellow JW's that "we" are, in fact, old-earth creationists. The type of creationism used as a straw man in the magazines is young earth creationism. Not that any of it matters.

  Somebody in the writing department is employing some advanced doublespeak to acknowledge the growing mountain of evidence for evolution while at the same time reiterating the perennial "evolution false, creation true" stance. For example: the March 2014 Awake said this:

  • The kinds of animals and plants created by God have obviously undergone changes and have produced variations within the kinds. In many cases, the resulting life-forms are remarkably different from one another.

  • The Bible account of creation does not conflict with the scientific observation that variations occur within a kind.

  Nevermind that a "kind" is no scientific classification and no one seems to agree what exactly a "kind" is.

  How is "evolution" defined by Webster's dictionary?

  biology : a theory that the differences between modern plants and animals are because of changes that happened by a natural process over a very long time

  : the process by which changes in plants and animals happen over time

  : a process of slow change and development

  The intellectual dishonesty of admitting to a fact by describing it but refusing to identify it by name is astounding.

  EDIT: As has been pointed out, we have the added bonus of all this evolution change having happened in the last 4000 years. So maybe God hasn't rested from his creative works?
• 

  poopsiecakes

  “Air baths are good for preventing colds. What you do is strip naked mornings and evenings and then bob up and down for a while.” Golden-Age Feb 1926 pg 310

  

  That just made my day!
• 

  THE GLADIATOR

  Jehovah's Witnesses are whatever they need to be in order to make sense of their contradictory, convoluted, crass, dysfunctional, deluded, destructive, egotistical, failed, god-fearing, hypocritical, incongruous, Jehovah-fearing, kingdom-on-earth, lamentable, make-believe, neurotic, obtuse, pretend, queer, reprehensible, spiritually-void, theocratic, unbelievable, vacant, witless, xenophobic, yesterday’s-story, zany USA publishing company that claims to be spirit appointed by the Hebrew desert god Jehovah to educate the world to walk in pastures of righteousness.

  Phew!
• 

  Island Man

  They are linguistic creationists, re-creating the meanings of words to suit their own agenda as their doctrines evolve throughout overlapping generations.
• 

  mohrb

  TL;DR- Yes, JWs are definitively Creationists in that we believe the universe and life therein was created by a creator per the bible. However yes, we believe with Evolution to the extent that it is scientifically observable and does not conflict with the bible account. As do many other denominations, including most recently Catholics, in case anyone hasn't heard about the pope's new decision to make evolution acceptable to catholicism. Anywho, JW's are not the only Christians who believe that there weren't Chihuahuas on the Ark.
  
  
  To clarify:  Evolution is readily observable to the extent that, within a species, traits can be selectively targeted.   Most breeds of Dog we have today are results of observable selection.   This process explains the famous finches Darwin saw with beaks of different shapes in different islands.   All finches... but natural selection definitively changed how the population looked in different areas.      For a more personal example... creationists and evolutionists believe in a common human ancestor... yet we have noticably different races.   Observable, undeniable evolution.
  
  However, most in the scientific community extend what we can observe to the concept that not only do all finches have a common finch ancestor... but farther back they share a common ancestor with all birds. Farther back, they share a common ancestor with all creatures that escaped the water. Far enough back, all life shares a common ancestor... this includes people and bacteria and apple trees and gold fish. All share a common ancestor. Science can not explain how the original common ancestor came into being, or describe anything about it, but that's OK, since Abiogenesis is a "different theory."
  
  Birds having a common bird ancestor is scientifically observable, and JWs believe it. Birds sharing a common ancestor with fish is neither readily observable nor biblically supported, so we don't buy into it. We definitively believe in Creation... and can observe in the diversity that's come since creation. Perhaps God has guided some of it. Perhaps some of it is simply the result of nature balancing itself naturally.
  
  It's not confusing or double speak or going back on anything... it's finding a common ground.
  
  As for an "Old Earth Creationism" vs. "YEC." ... That's a little more maliable. Most JWs I know lean heavily toward the idea of the earth being more than 6,000 literal years old. We agree with the bible's chronology setting human history at 6,000 years... however, the best talk I've heard on the subject simply pointed out that we know the order in which the creative events were recorded. First one thing happened, then another thing. If the universe was being created, why would God measure time based on the rotation of one specific rock? Each "Creative day" COULD have been one literal 24 hour period... or it could have been a period for which there was no accurate name a few thousand years ago. Perhaps each step took 10 billion years? Perhaps each step was instantaneous? Perhaps "in the beginning" God spent billions of years tinkering with the universe. The earth COULD have been around for billions of years, and then dinosaurs for millions of years before people were crafted 6,000 years ago. Or perhaps not. The bible isn't very specific on that time line, so we can only estimate. The universe sure LOOKS older than 6,000 years (particularly because we can see light from objects more than 6,000 light years away)... but, it's not a "central doctrine"... and if a JW believes each creative day was one revolution of our planet... the bible doesn't clearly disagree with that concept, so it's possible.
• 

  prologos

  Even the wt god's name implies he can be whatever he wants to be , does it not? so why is it surprising that WT writers and their readers vascillate the same way?

  talking snake et al.

  devolving quickly into leg-less slitherers
• 

  Phizzy

  The WT has stated that it has no argument with the present estimates for the age of the Universe, and the age of the Earth, 13.8 Billion for the U.and 4+ billion for the E, from memory.

  So any JW's that contest this are simply not keeping up with J's Chariot.

  The WT/JW Org admits that evolution takes place in the "kinds", which they do not define exactly as Science defines "Species", but the pertinent point is that they do not acknowledge that a new Species ever arose from a previous one.

  The biggest blunder they make is sticking to the 6,000 years for man's existence, Archeological proof blows that out of the water, as does Neanderthal DNA in us, when the Neanderthals died out around 35,000 year ago.

  It is a huge mistake to try to make Genesis' Creation and Flood stories anything close to literal.

  Jehovah's Witnesses are Evolutionary Creationists who ignore most of the facts upon the subject.
• 

  cofty

  Far enough back, all life shares a common ancestor... this includes people and bacteria and apple trees and gold fish. All share a common ancestor. Science can not explain how the original common ancestor came into being, or describe anything about it, but that's OK, since Abiogenesis is a "different theory." - mohrb

  Actually science knows a great deal about our Last Universal Common ancestor - LUCA and has a mountain of objective evidence for how it evolved into every species on earth - including humans. Science has even discovered some of the specific genes that it had.

  How many books by real scientists have you read about evolution? I used to think I knew all about it until it occurred to me that I was basing my knowledge on stuff wirtten by people who had rejected the science for reasons of faith. I have spent the past 10 years avidly reading all about the subject. It is fascinating.

  When science uses the word "theory" it has a particular meaning. Theories are the top of the tree of scientific knowledge. Graivity is a theory. So is germ theory. Evolution is as well established as the fact the earth is not flat.

  You should start by carefully reading these threads

  The Common Ancestry Thread...

  Tiktaalik - A Brief Introduction...

  The Greatest Show on Earth - Book Review..

  Now here are some excellent books that are very understandable for non-experts...

  "Endless Forms Most Beautiful" by Sean B. Carroll

  "The making of the fittest" by Sean B Carroll

  "Evolution, what the fossils say" by Donald Prothero

  "Why Evolution is true" by Jerry Coyne

  "Your Inner Fish" by Neil Shubin

  "The Blind Watchmaker" by Richard Dawkins

  "The Greatest Show on Earth" by Dawkins

  "Life Ascending" by Nick Lane
• 

  Band on the Run

  Thank you for the observation. I left before they became evolutionists, believing in an extremely short period for evolution. The author of the piece may have been kicked out. I have questions concerning their present teaching: 1. Do they believe the views held in the Insight book? Evolution of any sort was forbidden thought in my days with the Witnesses. Since they cnange everything so quickly, the WT should drop the six thousand year theory. Just as people here should acquaint themselves with basic legal terms before posting sex abuse threads, the WT authors should read books on evolution. I don't think it takes long to access Wikipedia. This vacillation in doctrine is a large reason why Witnesses cannot sustain themselves in any argument about doctrine.

  All I can say is that when I was very young, my JW family used to visit the Museum of Natural History, which is chock full of dinosaurs and fossils. There was a much smaller, dinkier museum in Newark, NJ. The planetarium was free. It was no big deal compared to NY. Finally, after years of walking past the NY planetarium and watching children go in, my father decided to pay the low admission fee. The narrator started with evolution. Everyone stared at us as we were forcibly trooped out by my father. Ideas and concepts do not kill. They free the mind or confirm your values. I wanted to stay and hear about evolution.

  Time moves. I am free. A college course in ecology sends me back to the Museum. Today I love to revisit the dinosaurs, the whale, and all other sorts of wonder. Margaret Mead, who was director of the museum for many years, taught a course I took as an undergraduate. I smile at all the children learning about science and anthropology. In fairness, the museum also has a dark history of racism and nonscience. Oh, I also learned a bit about Teddy Rooosevelt. Let the Witnesses try to keep me out of museums. One visit makes you think about their teachings.
• 

  Viva la Vida

  Mohrb - If that is the case with JWs they should stop presenting creation and evolution as two opposing views. Also, if evolution is " readily observable" it is fair to ask "Was it designed?", how do you know if that specific feature they are highlighting in an Awake's article evolved or was created?