Evolution and Creation—both are stories!

by lsw1961 27 Replies latest watchtower beliefs

  • lsw1961
    lsw1961

    There are number of Nobel Laureates and other great scientists in both the camps defending their respective theories of Evolution and Creation, which means both are just stories, and both suffer from having no eye-witnesses. If either of them were true, all scientists would have accepted it unanimously as they do with rest of the Laws such as Law of Gravity.

    This does not mean that there is no God. There are two channels for the acquisition of knowledge—1) five senses, 2) intuitive knowledge—something that Einstein admitted that he used in the formulation of his theory of relativity. Now let us use our intuitive mind, along with on our experience:

    1) I came through my parents (not from them, because they did not create their sperms and eggs, and also they did nothing in the formation of me within the womb of my mother which happened with no conscious effort from my parents).

    2) My parents came through their parents (not from them)…..

    If we go back like this, where is that it is going to end? We humans know that we exist, and we also know that other beings inferior to human beings exist. Just because we know these much, can we say that there exist no other beings superior to humans? No one would say that he knows to count from 1 to 10, hence 10 is the highest number. Similarly, no one can authentically believe in his heart that humans are the highest of high and there are no superior beings, or no Supreme Being above us. It is not for no reason that remembrance of a Supreme Being appearing virtually in all cultures as one who gives a perfect start to human history. If humans continue to live by their conscience doing good to each other, they will prosper, otherwise they will decline in quality and will reach the climax state of affairs (as the Bible puts figuratively) as though in “mixture of clay and iron.” At this point, it is natural that the Supreme Being “will set up a kingdom” which “will crush all those kingdoms and bring them to an end, making everything new.” (Daniel 2:44; Rev 21:5). For anyone to benefit from this intervention of God, naturally he should have already lived kingdom-life manifesting kingdom qualities.

    Religions are supposed to lead people into the above awareness and into cultivating Kingdom qualities—especially compassion. (Mathew 9:13) Compassion is king of all good qualities, and it is not a dry quality which drains our savings or assents. Compassion primarily helps the giver himself (rather than the recipients) because helping others is in effect helping ourselves as it produces joy and brings cooperation from others in the long run. However, all religions start off well; then they turn into money-making through supplementary teachings like fence eating the crops. (Mathew 13:33) It is sad to say that JWs are also no exception. However ‘eagle-eyed ones’ (Mathew 24:28) are simply soaring above the supplementary teachings, focused on their own growth in Kingdom qualities so that they come into a worthy stage. Then it is God’s turn—He “will gather his elect from the four winds, from the ends of the earth to the ends of the heavens” (Mark 13:27) which means God’s people are found in “all nations” or religions. (Mathew 25:32)

  • Billyblobber
    Billyblobber

    What being is inferior to human beings? This whole premise is flawed, starting there.

    And what the heck does any of this have to do with evolution?

  • steve2
    steve2

    lsw1961, you are taken with your own belief-bound "reasoning". You remain locked in a religious frame of mind but remain intent on using reason to reason your way through the quagmire.

    That's likely as good as it will get. But I remain hopeful...so here goes:

    If the Creator is infinitely more complex than His "creation" - and you reason that "creation" could not have just happened by itself - you make a leap into ensnaring illogic by reasoning that the Creator was not created.

    So,in a way we have reached a commonly shared point (although we would use different words for it):

    The most complex phenomena in the universe was not created. How much less so the resulting "creation" which is less complex!

  • LoveUniHateExams
    LoveUniHateExams

    both [evolution and creation] suffer from having no eye-witnesses

    God has no eye-witnesses either. So, God's just a story, too ...

  • sparky1
  • OneEyedJoe
    OneEyedJoe
    There are number of Nobel Laureates and other great scientists in both the camps defending their respective theories of Evolution and Creation, which means both are just stories, and both suffer from having no eye-witnesses. If either of them were true, all scientists would have accepted it unanimously as they do with rest of the Laws such as Law of Gravity

    This is the logical fallacy of inflation of conflict. There is some disagreement in the field of evolutionary biology on certain details, but no disagreement on the fact of evolution. Furthermore you make the mistake of assuming that because someone is a "scientist" they automatically can make an educated decision on the subject of creation vs evolution, but this is simply not the case. A physicist does not necessarily have any more understanding of evolution than a baptist preacher. Interestingly enough there is a paper that was (mis)quoted by a recent awake article that goes into detail on this fact and explains why even educated people fail to understand the fact of evolution - the summary is that it's not intuitive and most people have a tenuous grasp (at best) on the timescales involved. It's an interesting read: http://www.nrcresearchpress.com/doi/pdf/10.1139/g11-046

    This does not mean that there is no God. There are two channels for the acquisition of knowledge—1) five senses, 2) intuitive knowledge—something that Einstein admitted that he used in the formulation of his theory of relativity. Now let us use our intuitive mind, along with on our experience:

    1) I came through my parents (not from them, because they did not create their sperms and eggs, and also they did nothing in the formation of me within the womb of my mother which happened with no conscious effort from my parents).

    2) My parents came through their parents (not from them)…..

    I'm not sure just what the point is that you're trying to make here. The argument of "Zebras only come from zebras, lions only come from lions and humans only come from humans" has been thoroughly debunked if you'd care to do a little investigation on the topic of evolution. Evolution of developed species that you're likely to come across in day-to-day life is so incredibly slow that even if your lifespan were 100 times the average for a human it would be barely perceptible at best in most cases. Lions give birth to two slightly different lions and when the populations get separated, they begin to diverge genetically until you have two populations of animals that no longer closely resemble one another and are sufficiently diverged to be considered different species. There's no point in there, though, that you can look at and say "Aha! That's a new species!" Each generation looks sufficiently similar to the previous generation that they appear to be the same species, but over long time spans the similarities diminish.

    After that, you seem to go on a completely unrelated tangent. I don't think that many people claim that the fact of evolution is proof that god does not exist simply because humans are the "best" species. Anyone who does make that claim is really lacking in their understanding of logical deduction. In fact, I think that few people truly make the claim that evolution disproves the existence of god. It simply proves that god is not necessary. At least not for the creation of an abundant variety of species that exist today. Other fields of study (cosmology, abiogenesis, astrophysics, etc) further prove that god is not a necessary component for any of our natural world to exist or function, but that's a different discussion altogether.

    Your assessment of the function of religion is somewhat noble and certainly compassion is a worthy thing for us to seek. If you agree that JWs have fallen to the point that they are no better than the money changers in the temple that Jesus chased away, what is your assessment of Revelation 18:4? Does it not apply to you, or are you comfortable sharing in their sins and receiving part of their coming plagues?

  • cappytan
    cappytan
    SMH
  • nicolaou
    nicolaou
    I refuse to waste time on the wilfully ignorant.
  • Cadellin
    Cadellin

    which means both are just stories, and both suffer from having no eye-witnesses. If either of them were true, all scientists would have accepted it unanimously as they do with rest of the Laws such as Law of Gravity.

    Um, no. To equate evolution with the various creation myths is to demonstrate a fairly profound lack of understanding of what evolution is and why virtually (almost) all biologists recognize it as at least as well supported as the heliocentric model of our solar system. As OneEyed Joe already noted, some biologists argue over variations in certain aspects of evolution (and this is normal in any field of science), but the vast, vast majority acknowledge that common descent as close to being proven as anything can be and that natural selection, while perhaps not the sole engine of change, is a significant design force.

    And who said an eyewitness is necessary for something to be true? There was no eyewitness to the Big Bang, or to numerous other historical phenomenon. Moreover, natural selection has been witnessed in person, both in the lab, in digital models and in the wild.

    Evolution is one of the those subjects that is, admittedly, complex. It takes time and effort to actually dig into credible, authoritative sources and learn about it, enough to separate what is factual from what is commony believed. Unfortunately, popular media doesn't help in this regard, especially when it uses misleading headlines bandying about terms like "missing link" or phrases suggesting that everything scientists used to believe needs to be changed.

  • slimboyfat
    slimboyfat

    Yes I've known this ever since I read Evolution as a Religion by the philosopher Mary Midgley. I met her in person, she's well over 90 and still going strong.

    http://www.amazon.co.uk/Evolution-as-Religion-Routledge-Classics/dp/0415278333

Share this

Google+
Pinterest
Reddit