Origin of Life (page 19)

Mephis

The quotes I gave you above say otherwise.

You'll find I summarised the direct quote very correctly.

cofty

You said - 'Spirit' is just another way of saying 'alive'.

JW Org says - “Spirit” thus refers to an invisible force (the spark of life) that animates all living creatures.... Similarly, the spirit is the force that brings our body to life. Also, like electricity, the spirit has no feeling and cannot think. It is an impersonal force.

Mephis

Correct. Where would you like to pretend there's a contradiction?

cofty

Once somebody dies only god can restore that force. Scientists can never conduct a resurrection unless god sends that life force back into that person.

The hurdle to resurrection is theological not technical - just like making life in the lab.

Mephis

I know what you're saying Cofty. But if only God can give spirit, explain the Angel babies pre-Flood. It's not a slam dunk like you think. Their teachings are an unholy globular mess because they're trying to duck the 'soul'.

cofty

explain the Angel babies pre-Flood. It's not a slam dunk like you think

Yes it might be a very good objection to WT theology. I am not arguing that they are rational or in any way correct. Everything they believe is irrational and frequently self-contradictory.

I am making a very simple assertion. According to WT theology the obstacle to making new life in the lab is theological - Pneuma

Exactly the same reason doctors will never perform a resurrection.

Mephis

Appreciate that Cofty. Long thread. I think doctors bringing someone back to life really would hit the button you're wanting to hit there. That's definitely not possible under JW theology. Although there's some obvious get outs you know they'd use.

Just personally, I think there's sufficient noose there for them to dangle on 'creating life' without it causing too many theological issues. We both know that they've done it with other stuff. I'm not even certain it requires too much shifting here on their part. But we obviously are going to differ so no point pushing further for me :)

cofty

Thank you for a useful on-topic conversation Memphis

Refreshing change!

prologos

Mephis: :"(Because if he is, oops on the angels, women and Flood thing!).

In that mythological example, New life was not created from rocks, merely modified and passed on. Even in the Mary the virgin thing, (technically a kind of cloning), new life was not created, so: the original spark kept being alive and unwell. does not wt imply that the original force can not be captured, as it becomes inoperative at death of a living entity? How about the cryo-preserved bodies, --saving the deity the trouble of remaking the body, just: psssst breathing life again? IMHO' everybody would swallow hard if or when a second line of organic life is made.

Mephis

In that mythological example, New life was not created from rocks, merely modified and passed on.

My contention is that JW theology on this would allow them to argue that life created by humans is of the same order of angels collecting dust (or whichever inanimate materials are supposedly required) and making their own bodies to impregnate women.

There is nothing really in their teachings which dictates how life should be transmitted. Do 'test tube' babies have 'spirit' in JW theology? But sperm isn't 'alive' (every sperm is not sacred), nor are eggs.

Cofty, and others, obviously disagree. But as we're dealing in hypotheticals based on utter gibberish masquerading as teachings there's little point me pursuing this. :)

Origin of Life

Share this