Creation, evolution, ???

by Freedom rocks 77 Replies latest watchtower beliefs

  • cofty
    accepting evolution and an atheist package with it,-- is not smart either, because it kind of negates looking for answers to the big, and open questions.

    Atheism only means being unconvinced by the lack of evidence for theism. Science IS the search for answers to the big questions.

  • waton

    Science IS the search for answers to the big questions.

    In the process more and more little questions come up and are being answered.

    The process of evolution is recognized as a tool of creation or natural development.

    Evolution contradicts the bible account, but so does deism. see Thomas Paine on "Age of --Reason" practically the deism credo.

    Applauding evolution research is not a monopoly of atheists. It should not be presented as such.

  • cofty
    Applauding evolution research is not a monopoly of atheists. It should not be presented as such

    I constantly remind creationists that the vast majority of christians have no problem accommodating the fact of evolution. It is only the cult of evangelical christianity and Islam that reject it.

  • Perry


    I didn't realize you were a Deist. Your previous comments on this thread gave no indication as such. Sorry for the mis-characterization of you as a materialist / naturalist.

    Freedom Rocks:

    Can I ask how many of you presently study or have studied both creation AND evolution theories to arrive at what you believe to be true now?

    Evolution is the standard paradigm that we have all been indoctrinated with. EVERY public nature TV show, school science-book, college biology course and even psychology/sociology classes have as their basic assumption - Darwinian evolution. The internet has changed this bottle-neck of information so that the creation model can be explored without ridicule and in privacy.

    I have not read a whole book on creation. I prefer common sense approaches that are meaningful to me and effect my life. I like discovering and unveiling deception. I am fascinated by man's limitations of perception especially in light of his intelligence. Seems really lopsided. Assumptions are a primary way in which deception occurs in the human mind. As you might have guessed, I have dabbled in sleight of hand and illusions (not anything occult) since childhood.

    Here is an example of an embedded assumption within a question:

    "Why would you want to leave Jehovah's Organization"?

    Examination: In order to answer this question, a person must first assume that God uses the WTBTS as His vehicle of Salvation from death. The actual question is just misdirection. The real theory gets posited just by attempting to answer the question. See how that works? Of course a little bible reading reveals that Jesus is the sole Mediator and Savior of man, not the Watchtower. But, once embedded, the assumption takes the place of the Word of God (truth).

    Assumptions are very powerful once embedded into our minds as they provide foundation for further (false) logic. As WRONG as these towers of logical structures are, they can seem absolutely rock solid to us. The Adelson Illusion aptly illustrates this phenomenon:

    Do squares A & B seem different shades to you? They are exactly the same shade of grey. Don't believe me? Put a sheet of paper up to your screen and mark where to make two cut-outs over the two subject squares. (You can also print it out first) Cut out and replace over your screen (or paper if you've printed it). You will now see the squares A & B as identical.

    Why can't we see the shades as they actually are? ASSUMPTION. We expect the cylinder to cast a shadow on the checkerboard, and because we are used to compensating for shadows in "real life" we perceive and compensate for the shadow we assume has been created by the cylinder.

    All assumptions are not deceptive or not useful. In things that we are unable to test empirically, like things really far away or in the past, assumptions help us to complete a theory.

    Again, assumptions are not science.

    Cofty, made the following announcement earlier on this thread:

    Every living thing from humans to oak trees to bacteria evolved from a common ancestor

    Cofty's assumptions lead him to believe that he is related to an oak tree. If he wants to believe this, that's his right to do so. But, its not science. It's is his religion.

    Here's a list of 3000 scientists who challenge the assumption of Darwinian evolution. (The font is very light.... may have to cut and paste)

    Here's another huge list of Phd's.

    And these are just the ones that are brave enough to come forward and put their names and jobs on the line to stand up for free speech. As is evident on this discussion board, those that question the standard Darwinian worldview are severely ridiculed.... and in the real word they get fired, miss promotions, etc.

    I am thankful for these brave souls.

    On the other hand, if some like Cofty choose to assume that they are related to oak trees, that's their business and I would fight to the death for their right to continue to practice their religion..... away from my children of course.

  • pale.emperor

    Cofty's assumptions lead him to believe that he is related to an oak tree. If he wants to believe this, that's his right to do so. But, its not science. It's is his religion.

    No, Cofty and oak trees share a common ancestor. This ancestor is neither human nor is it a tree, it's something we and the tree descended from.

    When it comes to evolution belief is optional, participation is not.

  • dubstepped

    How one can ridicule assumption based on observation while believing in a magic sky daddy from a book of fairy tales where so much of what is in it cannot ever be observed is the height of ridiculousness. Be sure that you apply your same criticisms to your own deeply held beliefs and not just that of others.

  • ttdtt

    Creationists are delusional. Just listen to Ken Hamm.

  • dubstepped

    Also, saying that science or evolution is Cofty's religion is silly too. You just can't get out of this made up religious mindset. I'm interested in football, spent last night going over some things to play fantasy football with some friends, will spend time studying and watching it. That doesn't make it my religion. Being interested in a thing doesn't make it your religion. Worshipping something, giving it supremacy in your life, that gets into religious territory, living your life accordingly. This is why it's hard to have honest conversations with religious people. Just like JWs, they see things only through the narrow lens given to them. They aren't open, they aren't exploring life, they're stuck worshiping an ideology that gives them blinders to anything not on their prescribed path.

    Cofty, and many here, took the blinders off and started exploring. Others are still stuck. It's okay, believe what you want, but you have to WANT to believe in the god of the bible, it's something you put on, something you choose, not something observed through real life on earth discovery. Some of us are exploring what can be uncomfortable truths with the strength to set down long held beliefs and walk away from what is often self serving. We don't seek to have our ears tickled anymore. I'd rather put my belief in things that can be observed or replicated and in the end, not worship it but approach it with curiosity, than to worship and give supremacy in my life to a belief structure that cannot be observed nor replicated. There's no religion for those of us interested in science, that's the construct of men with belief in tales of old, not something that those without it can be defined by.

  • Finkelstein

    Within the adherence and acceptance of intellectual honesty which comes closer, creationism which is rooted solely in ancient mythological expression (hearsay) or evolution which is based upon observable physical evidence supported in coherence to other sciences?

  • ttdtt

    I have no problem with people who believe in god.
    In fact, I wish I did again because it would make life easier (especially end of life).
    Having that blissful feeling that there is something after I die would be so nice.


    I abhor people like Perry (our own Ken Ham) who not only want to ignore all logic an evidence and reason but want to pass off their bullshit to you as if it were "gospel", and not just unsubstantiated bs that needs to be taken on "faith".

    It has been so saddening to see a good % of people here who won the lottery and escaped a cult, just to take on a different cult, even if its in their own mind.

Share this