I believe in Evolution and that God created life

by Crabby 154 Replies latest watchtower beliefs

  • OnTheWayOut
    Anyone else also hold this view (belief in evolution and that God created life)
    or understand it at least, or do you feel the need to argue that both can in no way coexist?

    You argue like Donald Trump. If I don't hold your view, I must "feel the need to argue."
    If I don't hold your view, I don't "understand it at least."


    And it's not a choice of two things. It's not either a single god (of your understanding) created life and evolution or did not.

    There are multiple possibilities. But Zeus has not shown himself, neither has Odin or Yahweh.
    Could a force of some type that has intelligence have created life? Sure. But as long as there is no evidence, I must live without making such a conclusion.

  • Crabby

    What does every parent want for their children?

    They want their children to be better than them.

    Why would God have wanted less from us?

    He didn't, he made us like him, and better, we just have to realize it, and accept that God is knowledge and that people with enough knowledge can cure diseases, just as Jesus showed us we should also do if we follow in his steps.


    What does every parent want for their children?

    They want their children to be better than them.

    Why would God have wanted less from us?.....Crabby

    It`s Not Much Of An Effort..


    Image result for God watching TV


    Image result for soup kitchen logo

    Image result for Soup kitchen

  • Hadriel

    Can we get @Crabby on the ballot? Just sayin....

  • Viviane
    I know that JW's do not study any sort of science, thus they have no rights to comment on such topics. Thus the JW World View is one of purposeful ignorance, but since ignorance is bliss you are quite happy.

    I'm not a JW, ShortRound.

    So, now that Viv's Law is proven correct again, here's what I predict. After repeated attempts to weasel out of showing how his statement is scientific, short stuff over there will call more names, get angry, amp up the personal attacks and declare it stupid and call names and say we wouldn't get it even if he did. Basically, he's going to go Full Trumptard.

    you heard it here first.

  • Vidqun
    Vidqun: So let me get this straight. DNA/RNA is not an information system and DNA doesn't qualify as code.
    Viv: Right.

    So, DNA/RNA complex is not an information system. DNA code does not qualify as “information.” Is that right? Follow with me:

    Ribonucleic acid, or RNA is one of the three major biological macromolecules that are essential for all known forms of life (along with DNA and proteins). A central tenet of molecular biology states that the flow of genetic information in a cell is from DNA through RNA to proteins: “DNA makes RNA makes protein”. Proteins are the workhorses of the cell; they play leading roles in the cell as enzymes, as structural components, and in cell signaling, to name just a few. DNA (deoxyribonucleic acid) is considered the “blueprint” of the cell; it carries all of the genetic information required for the cell to grow, to take in nutrients, and to propagate. RNA–in this role–is the “DNA photocopy” of the cell. When the cell needs to produce a certain protein, it activates the protein’s gene–the portion of DNA that codes for that protein–and produces multiple copies of that piece of DNA in the form of messenger RNA, or mRNA. The multiple copies of mRNA are then used to translate the genetic code into protein through the action of the cell’s protein manufacturing machinery, the ribosomes. Thus, RNA expands the quantity of a given protein that can be made at one time from one given gene, and it provides an important control point for regulating when and how much protein gets made. For many years RNA was believed to have only three major roles in the cell–as a DNA photocopy (mRNA), as a coupler between the genetic code and the protein building blocks (tRNA), and as a structural component of ribosomes (rRNA). In recent years, however, we have begun to realize that the roles adopted by RNA are much broader and much more interesting. We now know that RNA can also act as enzymes (called ribozomes) to speed chemical reactions. In a number of clinically important viruses RNA, rather than DNA, carries the viral genetic information. RNA also plays an important role in regulating cellular processes–from cell division, differentiation and growth to cell aging and death. Defects in certain RNAs or the regulation of RNAs have been implicated in a number of important human diseases, including heart disease, some cancers, stroke and many others (cursive script added).

    The RNA Society

    9650 Rockville

    Pike, Bethesda, MD20814

    (301) 634-7166

    From the above I discern some serious information flows back and forth. So it's not only one way traffic, the information flows both ways. Think of it as a factory. The sender of the information, the CEO, is the DNA, right? Next, we have the transcription process with the m-RNA, the workhorse. The first recipient benefitting from this process would be the cell because of the manufacture of structural proteins, amongst other things. The second recipient, benefitting from the information, would be the organism that are kept alive by these processes. To sum up: Genetic information is locked up in the nucleus. This is unlocked and transcribed by RNA, which in turn is responsible for the manufacture of proteins for a specific purpose (e.g., hormones). These are passed from the cell to the organism. If something goes wrong with these processes, the organism dies. The factory goes out of business.

    Vidqun: It developed spontaneously, by itself, from basic elements in solid and liquid form.
    Viv: Wrong.

    Would you care to elaborate. How do you think DNA developed? By accident? Perhaps a better answer would be, I don´t know.

    Viv, "it" is a mystery. I would love to know what "it" is, then I might also be able to understand the concept of evolution. No, jokes aside, “it” is referring to DNA. I thought that was obvious. Anyway, according to Cofty it's electrons driving the production and function of DNA and RNA. I call those "super intelligent" electrons. What would you call them?

    Orphan Crow, what happened here was a huge experiment. A lot of life forms have come and gone. All in preparation for the crown of creation, man, which was a massive failure in the end. The human race cannot even work out their origin. They came up with the theory of evolution to avoid taking responsibility for their actions. I would venture a guess that God would have been very disappointed. That's why he said the following:

    "The nations were enraged, but your wrath has come, and the time has come for the dead to be judged, and the time has come to give to your servants, the prophets, their reward, as well as to the saints and to those who revere your name, both small and great, and the time has come to destroy those who destroy the earth." (Rev. 11:18 NET)

  • cofty

    Vidqun - DNA is not information in the same sense of the word that this sentence is information.

    There is no sender or receiver. It is just a complex dance of electrons.

    How do you think DNA developed?

    Briefly - nucleotides formed in hydrothermal vents.

    The acetyl CoA pathway (to be exact a prebiotic equivalent) generated small reactive organic molecules from CO2 and H2 via a few short steps that generated enough energy to drive the formation of nucleotides and their polymerisation into long chains.

    These steps were catalysed by inorganic minerals that transferred electrons on to CO2 to form reactive acetyl groups. If you would like to understand the details and read about the work being done in labs to investigate this process get a copy of "The Vital Question" by Nick Lane.

  • notsurewheretogo
    Crabbya day agoAnyone else also hold this view or understand it at least, or do you feel the need to argue that both can in no way coexist?

    Is there anywhere on this thread where you explain why you believe such? Or is it just a "belief"?

  • Vidqun

    Cofty, for one, hydrothemal vents are very inhospitable places, perhaps some of the most inhospitable places on earth. I don't see anything developing from there. But I'll humor you. Lets say life did develop from these hydrothermal vents. Then we will be able to solve this enigma quite easily. A hydrothermal vent with all its chemical components (devoid of living organisms) could then be replicated in a laboratory environment.

    But I guarantee a similar result as with the "primordial soup" experiments. After manipulating their soupy concoction in all kinds of ways, they would send lightning bolts through it. However, it remained dead. They were successful in synthesizing interesting chemicals, including aminoacids, but that is still a long way from living cells.

    So what you are actually saying: With the heat energy from the hydrothermal vents, rocks, and seawater, amino acids and nucleotides would self-assemble. These would organize themselves into even more ordered molecules such as enzymes and proteins. From these the evolution process would build the first cells, and eventually redwoods and roses, honeybees and apple trees, hyenas and humans. Nope, I cannot go along with such a theory, even if you decorate it with rosy prose or complicated scientific jargon. As Pink Floyd said: "The pie in the sky is just too high."

  • cofty

    You are confusing your vents. Alkaline vents are not like black smokers. I will explain why you are wrong later

    Of course you could get the book if you were not so afraid of evidence.

Share this