Posts by Disillusioned JW

86

Is most of the promotion of creationism, not just that by the WT, charlatanism?

by Disillusioned JW in

is most of the promotion of creationism, not just that by the wt, charlatanism?.

https://www.fullmoon.nu/sources.bak/chapter%2010/part%202/gish%20exposed.html [which has an article called "creationism: bad science or immoral pseudoscience?

- (an expose of creationist dr. duane gish)"] says the following.. 'a look at the "scientific" creationist movement and a close examination of the tactics of a well-known and influential creationist will reveal that the creation "science" movement gains much of its strength through the use of distortion and scientifically unethical tactics.. .... with the facts explained and the lawsuits won, scientists declared victory and returned to their labs and offices.

Disillusioned JW

jhine (Jan), if I recall correctly you live the United Kingdom. I am correct? The percentage of Christians in the USA who consider evolution (specifically that which is called macroevolution) to be a fact is far lower than that in the U.K. (the kingdom in which Charles Darwin lived in). In the USA it is much more than just the LDS, JWs, and and deep south Baptists which reject evolution. It is also the SDA, and theologically conservative baptists in other states of the USA besides those in the deep south, and it is theologically conservative Lutherans and theologically conservative Presbyterians.

Furthermore, in my area a number of the congregations identify as nondenominational and it seems that all of those churches make extensive use of the Bible in their Sunday sermons and in Bible study classes taught in their congregations. A number of those congregations also identify as Bible churches - even the word "Bible" is included in the name of those congregations. Such churches tend to read the Bible literally and thus teach that evolution is false.

I meet a number of Christians who identify their religion as simply Christian - namely people who claim to have no denominational name for their church (and often times they are people who classify the Catholic church as not Christian) [many times they don't even known the name of the specific congregation of which they attend]. When I ask them if they believe in evolution they say 'no, I believe in the Bible'. Sometimes they will also say 'I have no religion, I have a personal relationship with Christ'. To some of those who say such, Christianity is not a religion. In regards to saying that Christianity is not a religion, to me they sound like the JWs from the Rutherford area.

86

Is most of the promotion of creationism, not just that by the WT, charlatanism?

by Disillusioned JW in

is most of the promotion of creationism, not just that by the wt, charlatanism?.

https://www.fullmoon.nu/sources.bak/chapter%2010/part%202/gish%20exposed.html [which has an article called "creationism: bad science or immoral pseudoscience?

- (an expose of creationist dr. duane gish)"] says the following.. 'a look at the "scientific" creationist movement and a close examination of the tactics of a well-known and influential creationist will reveal that the creation "science" movement gains much of its strength through the use of distortion and scientifically unethical tactics.. .... with the facts explained and the lawsuits won, scientists declared victory and returned to their labs and offices.

Disillusioned JW

Correction; In my prior post when I said "... atom of any element can" I meant to say "... atom of any other element can".

86

Is most of the promotion of creationism, not just that by the WT, charlatanism?

by Disillusioned JW in

is most of the promotion of creationism, not just that by the wt, charlatanism?.

https://www.fullmoon.nu/sources.bak/chapter%2010/part%202/gish%20exposed.html [which has an article called "creationism: bad science or immoral pseudoscience?

- (an expose of creationist dr. duane gish)"] says the following.. 'a look at the "scientific" creationist movement and a close examination of the tactics of a well-known and influential creationist will reveal that the creation "science" movement gains much of its strength through the use of distortion and scientifically unethical tactics.. .... with the facts explained and the lawsuits won, scientists declared victory and returned to their labs and offices.

Disillusioned JW

Vidqun, in the lab nature has often been observed forming complexity out of simplicity - simply from a combination of the laws of nature (and it forces), randomness, and the presence of a little energy. For example, complex molecules have been observed coming into existence from very simple molecules under simple environmental conditions. This is largely due to the electric charges of the atoms of various elements, which only allow certain elements to bond in certain configurations with certain atoms. As an illustration of this concept, see the video from PBS show called "Genius by Stephen Hawking" at https://www.pbs.org/video/genius-stephen-hawking-how-atoms-are-created-magnet-experiment/ . The nature of the carbon atom allows it to form complex molecular chains - far more so than the atom of any element can. Scientists discovered that organic chemistry is the chemistry of carbon based molecules.

To me abiogenesis is a strong possibility, so much so I am convinced it happened more than 3.5 billion years ago. I am even surprised that scientists haven't yet seen it happen in their simulated environments of their labs.

86

Is most of the promotion of creationism, not just that by the WT, charlatanism?

by Disillusioned JW in

is most of the promotion of creationism, not just that by the wt, charlatanism?.

https://www.fullmoon.nu/sources.bak/chapter%2010/part%202/gish%20exposed.html [which has an article called "creationism: bad science or immoral pseudoscience?

- (an expose of creationist dr. duane gish)"] says the following.. 'a look at the "scientific" creationist movement and a close examination of the tactics of a well-known and influential creationist will reveal that the creation "science" movement gains much of its strength through the use of distortion and scientifically unethical tactics.. .... with the facts explained and the lawsuits won, scientists declared victory and returned to their labs and offices.

Disillusioned JW

waton, are you saying you believe a god exists and that the god is a female, or are you saying you believe in pantheism (of the kind which says that the universe/cosmos really is a god or is the God), or something else? I believe in scientific naturalism - no supernatural beings at all. I also believe that of everything which exists, and of everyone who exists, the universe/cosmos comes the closest to fitting the definition of the word "god". That is because it exists everywhere that something exists, and it contains within it all of the power and all of the knowledge that exists. As such, it comes the closest to being a 3 O (omnipresence, omnipotence, and omniscience) type of god.

In addition knowledge of the existence of quantum entanglement and of what is called the "fabric of the universe" adds support to the idea that universe is one entity (in some ways like a living organism/being) made up of many interconnected parts - even when the interconnections are invisible to us.

86

Is most of the promotion of creationism, not just that by the WT, charlatanism?

by Disillusioned JW in

is most of the promotion of creationism, not just that by the wt, charlatanism?.

https://www.fullmoon.nu/sources.bak/chapter%2010/part%202/gish%20exposed.html [which has an article called "creationism: bad science or immoral pseudoscience?

- (an expose of creationist dr. duane gish)"] says the following.. 'a look at the "scientific" creationist movement and a close examination of the tactics of a well-known and influential creationist will reveal that the creation "science" movement gains much of its strength through the use of distortion and scientifically unethical tactics.. .... with the facts explained and the lawsuits won, scientists declared victory and returned to their labs and offices.

Disillusioned JW

In an article from 2014 Bill Nye (see https://www.nytimes.com/2014/11/04/science/in-undeniable-bill-nye-speaks-evolution-directly-to-creationists.html) makes the following excellent point.

"My biggest concern about creationist kids is that they’re compelled to suppress their common sense, to suppress their critical thinking skills at a time in human history when we need them more than ever. By the time you’re 18, you’ve made up your mind. It’s going to be really hard for you, as they say in the Mormon tradition, to “lose your testimony.” But if you’re 7 or 8, we got a shot."

The WT literature definitely hindered my ability (by causing me to suppress my common sense in some areas) to draw the correction conclusion that evolution is a fact and that there is no Jehovah God and no heavenly Jesus Christ. If only I had become convinced of evolution during my preteens, then I would never had become a baptized JW and never a baptized Christian and my life would be better off as a result! Even now, despite being an atheist, I still study religion (though it is now from an atheistic mindset).

86

Is most of the promotion of creationism, not just that by the WT, charlatanism?

by Disillusioned JW in

is most of the promotion of creationism, not just that by the wt, charlatanism?.

https://www.fullmoon.nu/sources.bak/chapter%2010/part%202/gish%20exposed.html [which has an article called "creationism: bad science or immoral pseudoscience?

- (an expose of creationist dr. duane gish)"] says the following.. 'a look at the "scientific" creationist movement and a close examination of the tactics of a well-known and influential creationist will reveal that the creation "science" movement gains much of its strength through the use of distortion and scientifically unethical tactics.. .... with the facts explained and the lawsuits won, scientists declared victory and returned to their labs and offices.

Disillusioned JW

Anony Mous, had the word "created" in quote marks, suggesting it was not really created by humans but that humans merely created a favorable environment for nature (undirected by any intelligence) to bring into being the various chemicals.

24

From Paradise Lost To Paradise Regained: Is the WTS the sole promoter of this doctrine?

by Pallbearer in

howdy folks,.

i am interested in learning whether or not the watchtower society is the only religious entity that teaches the "from paradise lost to paradise regained" idea.. the "idea" is that god's original purpose for man and the earth has not changed.

god purposed for adam and eve and their offspring to reproduce and fill the earth and live forever upon it; but the problem of sin entered into the picture and temporarily interrupted that purpose from being completed.

Disillusioned JW

Pallbearer, those are excellent points you made. It would indeed be bizarre for the god (God), assuming he exists, to totally destroy the entire physical heavens and the entire supernatural/spiritual heavens, assuming the latter exists, especially in light of Genesis chapter one saying that Elohim's/God's creations were good.

86

Is most of the promotion of creationism, not just that by the WT, charlatanism?

by Disillusioned JW in

is most of the promotion of creationism, not just that by the wt, charlatanism?.

https://www.fullmoon.nu/sources.bak/chapter%2010/part%202/gish%20exposed.html [which has an article called "creationism: bad science or immoral pseudoscience?

- (an expose of creationist dr. duane gish)"] says the following.. 'a look at the "scientific" creationist movement and a close examination of the tactics of a well-known and influential creationist will reveal that the creation "science" movement gains much of its strength through the use of distortion and scientifically unethical tactics.. .... with the facts explained and the lawsuits won, scientists declared victory and returned to their labs and offices.

Disillusioned JW

Anony Mous, I also would like to see the science journal article or at least a science news article about RNA and DNA being created completely from scratch under simulations of early Earth-like conditions, for I am not aware of such having been accomplished. I am aware of scientists partially creating RNA under such conditions but I don't know if its specific code (that which was created under early Earth-like conditions) is biologically useful.

I know they have created genetic material using enzymes extracted from living organisms, but that is not the same as demonstrating an aspect of abiogenesis. I also have the impression they have not solved the protein folding problem. It also appears that they have not made a true cell membrane from scratch though they have made proteinoid microspheres. It also appears they have not made complete ribosomes from scratch.

What you said about a Turing-complete computer having been made is news to me.

24

From Paradise Lost To Paradise Regained: Is the WTS the sole promoter of this doctrine?

by Pallbearer in

howdy folks,.

i am interested in learning whether or not the watchtower society is the only religious entity that teaches the "from paradise lost to paradise regained" idea.. the "idea" is that god's original purpose for man and the earth has not changed.

god purposed for adam and eve and their offspring to reproduce and fill the earth and live forever upon it; but the problem of sin entered into the picture and temporarily interrupted that purpose from being completed.

Disillusioned JW

Regarding those mainstream non-JW churches that teach a literal 1,000 year reign of Christ, do they believe that Earth will become totally destroyed and later replaced with a totally different new Earth, or do they believe our Earth will become severely damaged and then fully restored/repaired (and made better than it ever was) and made new in that sense? Likewise do they believe the heavens (where they say God lives?) will be completely destroyed and replaced with a totally different new heavens, or do they mean some other kind of heavens will be destroyed?

Furthermore, if all faithful Christians go to heaven upon death and if they all later rule with Christ for 1,000 years in heaven, what point would there be for them to later return to Earth and live the rest of their lives on Earth in paradise instead of in heaven? Also, why does Revelation say that the God will literally dwell on Earth after the 1,000 years?

I really want answers to the above questions because I have been very puzzled by what the non-JW churches say about that topic and also by some of what the Bible (especially in Revelation) says on that topic.

86

Is most of the promotion of creationism, not just that by the WT, charlatanism?

by Disillusioned JW in

is most of the promotion of creationism, not just that by the wt, charlatanism?.

https://www.fullmoon.nu/sources.bak/chapter%2010/part%202/gish%20exposed.html [which has an article called "creationism: bad science or immoral pseudoscience?

- (an expose of creationist dr. duane gish)"] says the following.. 'a look at the "scientific" creationist movement and a close examination of the tactics of a well-known and influential creationist will reveal that the creation "science" movement gains much of its strength through the use of distortion and scientifically unethical tactics.. .... with the facts explained and the lawsuits won, scientists declared victory and returned to their labs and offices.

Disillusioned JW

Though Francis Hitching is convinced of biological evolution (but not of natural selection) the http://www.jwoolfden.com/procreat.html website gives criticism of his The Neck of the Giraffe book in addition to the books of various creationist authors, but I think that Hitching's book has a lot of informative accurate content. [To my surprise I haven't yet been able to find any online article written by an evolutionist (whether by a scientist or by a non-scientist) about Hitching's book which which says anything positive about the book. Granted Hitching's book promotes some incorrect ideas, but a lot of the content of the book is factual and important information.] In Hitching's book called The Neck of the Giraffe Hitching said that Bowden's book called Apemen - Fact of Fallacy? is the best of the creationist books, yet http://www.jwoolfden.com/procreat.html sharply criticizes that creationist book.