Interesting WT Deluge Contradiction I just noticed.

by Jofi_Wofo 7 Replies latest watchtower beliefs

  • Jofi_Wofo
    Jofi_Wofo

    I was reviewing some of the evidence the WT proposes for their claim of the Bible's scientific accuracy, when I came across this interesting assertion.

    The mountains rise and fall, and today’s mountains were once under the ocean. (Psalm 104:​6, 8) In contrast, several myths say that the mountains were created in their current form by the gods.

    https://www.jw.org/en/bible-teachings/questions/science-and-the-bible/

    Interesting. Veeeeeery interesting. I'm not sure anyone involved with writing that article realized it, but this little piece of information debunks one of the WTs evidentiary claims in support of a global flood.

    In the days of Noah, the Bible says, a great flood covered earth’s highest mountains and destroyed all human life that was outside the huge ark that Noah built. (Genesis 7:1-24) Many have scoffed at this account. Yet seashells are found on high mountains.

    https://wol.jw.org/en/wol/d/r1/lp-e/1101985027

    ...some see in this, as well as in such other things as marine fossils found on high mountains, convincing evidence of a sudden, catastrophic global flood.

    https://wol.jw.org/en/wol/d/r1/lp-e/1200000758

    Men of science in times past held that the flood of Noah’s day was merely local in scope, but...“even on the tops of high mountains, whole trees sunk deep under ground, as also teeth and bones of animals, fishes entire, seashells, ears of corn, etc., petrified”; which could never have come there but by a world-wide deluge.—Encyclopedia of Religious Knowledge.

    https://wol.jw.org/en/wol/d/r1/lp-e/1953840

    The WT acknowledges in one part of its proposed evidences for biblical scientific accuracy an extremely important and relevant fact in debunking another of its proposed evidences for biblical scientific accuracy. The existence of marine fossils as well as other out-of-habitat fossils on the tops of mountains can be reasonably attributed to the fact that the earth's mountains used to be under water. Marine fossils weren't deposited upon mountains. Mountains were formed from lands that contained marine fossils.

  • steve2
    steve2

    Excellent find! It's the religious variant of 'having your cake and eating it too'. JW organization writers seem incapable of giving too much thought (or critical thinking) over what they've said elsewhere.

  • Anders Andersen
    Anders Andersen

    Another one:

    JW: "Evolution is false! Never happened!"

    Also JW: "It has been estimated by some that the hundreds of thousands of species of animals today could be reduced to a comparatively few family “kinds”​—the horse kind and the cow kind, to mention but two. The breeding boundaries according to “kind” established by Jehovah were not and could not be crossed. With this in mind some investigators have said that, had there been as few as 43 “kinds” of mammals, 74 “kinds” of birds, and 10 “kinds” of reptiles in the ark, they could have produced the variety of species known today. Others have been more liberal in estimating that 72 “kinds” of quadrupeds and less than 200 bird “kinds” were all that were required. That the great variety of animal life known today could have come from inbreeding within so few “kinds” following the Flood is proved by the endless variety of humankind​—short, tall, fat, thin, with countless variations in the color of hair, eyes, and skin—​all of whom sprang from the one family of Noah."

  • waton
    waton

    The wt claim was that the rising waters would press down on Everest, reduce it heights for the Ark to clear, and then rise again with the pressure gone.

    The trouble with that assertion is , that 10 km of water ~1000 more atmospheres, would press down on India's coastline than the Himalayas, squeezing them up even more.

    Heard recently too the defence, "it was only a small, local flood [legend}"

    good news, Armageddon too will be only local. ha ha.

  • TD
    TD

    I thought the JW's taught that the pressure of the water caused the mountains to rise to their current height (?)

  • Vidiot
    Vidiot

    Fred Franz was a fan of “Flood Geology”, and it clearly influenced his thinking and writing.

    Understandable, considering it sounded somewhat scholarly whilst allowing one to still subscribe to Genesis literalism.

    Given what’s taught about the planet in elementary-level science these days, though, it doesn’t obviously stand up, so the Org ends up looking kinda stupid when they touch on it.

  • Half banana
    Half banana

    I agree Vidiot the org not only looks stupid but actually is stupid by any modern evaluation.

    The flood is clearly fable, Earth sciences explicitly discount the possibility of a global flood, (there are for example uninterrupted sequences of annual lake sediment layers throughout the period in question) and since the Biblical account takes place during the historical period, i.e during the time of written documents, there is no record anywhere of such a flood.This evidence demonstrates that Genesis at least is clearly fable, allegory and myth.

    The Bible is also a couple of millennia out of date, written when its writers imagined the earth to be flat and covered with a starry dome holding reserves of rainwater. It was an understandable ignorance all those years ago but to perpetuate that ignorance calling it "God's word" and therefore literally true; is just madness.

    Science uses evidence but holding faith in the literal truth of the Bible in spite of knowing the scientific explanation to the contrary, is deliberate ignorance.

  • JoenB75
    JoenB75

    The nature of the biblical heavens and earth are revealed in forinstance Psalm 96:11 and Revelation 20:11. Rashi's Genesis 1 commentary speaks of the moon being shy, forinstance. I'm sorry somebody implied something else to you. If you dive into these texts, they obviously make many theological points. Jesuit astronomer George Coyne expressed well that the Hebrews were a people with no interest in natural science

Share this

Google+
Pinterest
Reddit