Photosynthesis and the problem with the creation story

by purrpurr 17 Replies latest watchtower bible

  • prologos
    James Mixon
    Short-wave light includes ultraviolet light, x-rays and others.

    yeah, that is a good one, photosynthesis energized by decay of radioactive elements, x rays, gamma bursts?

    no wonder mutations brought forth all these species.

  • Heaven
    If a planet is not located within 'the habitable zone' of a star, life such as we have here on Earth will not be occurring on that planet.
  • punkofnice

    God did it with magic because he can do anything with magic. If we don't know how something happened or it seems totally illogical we can simply fall back on MAGIC.

    There, fixed it.

    (I don't believe in magic by the way.....just being ironic).

  • James Mixon
    James Mixon

    prologs:" gamma bursts", yes that would certainly light up things. The only

    problem with that kind of ray, it's the most powerful kind of explosion known in

    the universe, may have triggered a mass extinction on earth within the past billion

    years. But who knows, maybe he (GOD) scorched the earth (I screwed up) and decided

    to start all over again.

  • undercover
    This was dealt with by JW's in the 1969 book "Is the Bible really the word of God?" book. In chapter 2 it states that the Genesis account does not include the creation of the sun and planets.

    New publications say this as well. In trying to come to terms that the universe is billions of years old, they like to claim that the sun, stars, and even the planet earth rock were created well before the creative process on earth. This, they claims, means the Bible and science are compatible. However, they always conveniently forget this scripture:

    Exodus 20:11 - For in six days Jehovah made the heavens and the earth, the sea, and all that is in them, and he began to rest on the seventh day

  • undercover
    JWs resolve this issue by saying that what happened on day 4 isn't the literal creation of the sun moon and stars but only their being made discernible as distinct objects in the sky. Prior to that sunlight was already reaching the earth's surface from day one when God said let light come to be. Only, the sunlight was diffuse, shining through a haze and one could not make out the sun or any other heavenly body as distinct objects in the sky. They basically teach that what happened on day 4 is the clearing of the atmospheric clouds to allow heavenly objects to be distinctly discernible for the first time.

    I've seen that explanation. Unfortunately for them, it's BS. The scriptures don't say anything about haze lifting, or indiscernible objects. It says, Then God said: “Let there be luminaries in the expanse of the heavens to make a division between the day and the night, and they will serve as signs for seasons and for days and years. They will serve as luminaries in the expanse of the heavens to shine upon the earth.” And it was so. And God went on to make the two great luminaries, the greater luminary for dominating the day and the lesser luminary for dominating the night, and also the stars. Thus God put them in the expanse of the heavens to shine upon the earth and to dominate by day and by night and to make a division between the light and the darkness. Then God saw that it was good. And there was evening and there was morning, a fourth day.

    The NWT translation (the only translation endorsed by Jehovah, ya know) itself says, God 'went on to MAKE the ...luminaries, and 'put them in the expanse of the make a division between the light and the darkness'. Using the WT explanation, there was already a division between light and dark, you just couldn't 'see' the luminary bodies. That's in direct conflict with what the verse said. The scripture is pretty plain - god made em and hung em on the 4th day. (And even that doesn't make sense since it's the 4th 'day' already. What divided the day and night the first three days?)

  • Vidiot

    All this really does is lead one to the inescapable conclusion that the Genesis creation narrative(s) simply can't be viewed as anything more than allegory.

    The churches that officially acknowledge that are the most honest, IMO.

  • Simon

    This is the best explanation of the creation myth:

    JW's even get a side mention .... "imagine if I'd blown it just going door-to-door?")

Share this